What elements are common to all great science-fiction novels?

[Martin]

The reason I ask is that I’m working on a sci-fi thriller. Your thoughts are therefore most valuable.

[Greg]

Morality is a big one. These are often new and separate worlds with their own definitions of what's right and what's wrong.

Psychology of the characters is important. No matter where you are in the universe, the human condition appears to remain unchanged.

And the Future, usually.

[Paul]

Some threat to the protagonist or something he/she cares about.

[John]

I would say it's about the technologies or aliens. Something completely foreign to the current world, but that was so significant that society is demonstrably different because of its discovery.

[Brenda]

Plot. If there is no story, it's just a travelogue. (This is what Paul is talking about)
Character. Without them the work is just dummies walking through the story. (Greg's point.)
Setting. This actually is key for F&SF, and there are works we can point to that are nearly all setting, with vestigial plot and character. RENDEZVOUS WITH RAMA is a prime example. (What John is saying.)

If you get these three in line then the two other key points -- tone, and theme -- will come right of themselves.

[Charles]

* An original plot that's not just some rehashed SF trope.

* Interesting and believable characters for whom I want to know what is going to happen, and preferably some indication of change in them, at least in the most important ones.

* Good writing with an appropriate and consistent style that effectively tells the story without overwhelming it with "look how pretty I can write".

But there is no simple answer such as "Use lots of zombies," or "Make sure virtual reality plays a big part."

[[deleted user]]

What's your flavor of science fiction?

The requirements for "sci-fi thriller" and "hard science fiction" are vastly different. Do you want to have a brave starship captain kicking alien ass or have linguist explore the difficulties communicating with non-humans?

As said before, there are no easy answers. That said, I think great science fiction needs to give to something to think about, not just a "fun" story. Others will disagree.

[Jennifer]

No, I think you're right. The greatest sci fi books make you stop and consider your humanity, and to reevaluate your opinion of the state of affairs of the world in general. To make you wonder if that is the real direction of humanity... And is it worth it? Is it really better or how can we prevent it? Weighing morality, ethics, and real world applications.

Some of the best sci fi evaluates real current events, ideologies, or populations, and runs with it in an extreme, to portray where this line of thought can take humanity or an alien populace.

Religion is one of my personal favorite topics. I loved the way Frank Herbert meshed religions in Dune (Zen-Sunni? Really?). I thought it was interesting that both Dune and Dan Simmons in Hyperion predict that Judaism will survive the millennia intact. Both the religion and the culture.

Overpopulation can lead to some interesting theories of how we will cope, and what effect it will have on the human psyche. Stand on Zanzibar is a classic because it so thoroughly dissected the topic. And David Brin had a wonderful description of over population, pollution, and green house effect in his book, Earth (the silent man-made forests echoed my suburban environment too well!). And Asimov's descriptions in Caves Of Steel and the two sequels are riveting because it feels so plausible.

But none of those books are really thrillers. I'm not sure that I've read many sci-fi thrillers. But I suppose the other key I'm trying to explain is a well thought-out universe which has been thoroughly explored by the writer's imagination. The web of causes that created the current state of affairs, and an understanding or working theory on where the next step is for the characters and the universe at large. Don't flounder or contradict, don't point me one way and then screw the plot by making it feel unrealistic in the world/universe you created for me. You don't even have to give me all the background information in your universe, I just need you to have a strong grasp of what got you where you are so you can keep it feeling real.

I'll reference Asimov here again, with his interconnected books. I don't have to read Pebble In The Sky to understand Caves of Steel, or I,Robot to fully understand Foundation. Each book stands independently. But Asimov explored his universe so thoroughly that it gives each story, on an independent level, stability and strength.

[Chas]

Surely the purpose of any novel is to examine an aspect of the human condition? For SF, often by re-examining part of humanity's history through a different moral filter (such as The Forever War/ Joe Halderman).

Search for the alternative viewpoint, I don't want to read "Tom Clancy in Space" (tm).

[Greg]

Charles wrote: "* An original plot that's not just some rehashed SF trope.

* Interesting and believable characters for whom I want to know what is going to happen, and preferably some indication of change in them..."

Sci-fi raises the tough philosophical questions that you don't see brought up too much in other genres, in my opinion. My favorite novels can be way out in space with crazy characters and amazing aliens, but I find the plot threads that pull me in the most have to do with the internal struggles the characters have.

I particularly remember the daughter aging backwards in Hyperion, and the father's struggle to come to terms with this. Or the fierce debates over 'brainwashing' people so as to end war in Forever Peace. Even something like the scientist's compelling need to travel back and get his student in Doomsday book have stuck with me.

It seems that these struggles are what pulls my eye toward the sci-fi books on my shelf when it's time for a new read.

[Clay]

Some of the better SF I have read have had one thing in common...they dare to explore human evolution! Not just physically, but socially. Greg hits on this with his comment about morality.

All to often, sf novels tend to transplant current social/moral standards into the future....giving no thought to what changes might occur between now and then.

Some examples of authors that tackle this would be Robert A. Heinlein, Michael Z. Williamson, Ian Douglass, L. Neil Smith.

In many cases, those differences are not blatant, in your face changes, but rather subtle mentions in character backgrounds.

[Cecily]

Clay wrote: "Some of the better SF I have read have had one thing in common...they dare to explore human evolution! Not just physically, but socially..."

That's a good point. I've nearly finished le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness, which does that. On a wintery planet settled by humans, they are not only well adapted to cold, but ambisexual: most of the time they have no specific sex, other than when they are, effectively, on heat, at which time they temporarily become male or female. An interesting idea, though I have to say, I don't think le Guin really explores it adequately.

[Jim]

Clay wrote: "Some of the better SF I have read have had one thing in common...they dare to explore human evolution! Not just physically, but socially. Greg hits on this with his comment about morality.

All ..."

A very good point. One reason for liking Jack Vance is that he does this openly, looking at bizarre little communities which have evolved away from 'mainstream' humanity.

[John]

This might be a longer post that I intended.

A few years ago, when I was still trying to get published, I read a book about writing in general. The author was correct that you had to have several parts to be successful. One of them was conflict. There always has to be conflict. Whether it is survival of the protagonists against aliens, or a hostile environment, or themselves, there has to be conflict.

But even with conflict, an author has to be a true artist when it comes to the characters that they develop. They shouldn't be cookie cutter and they must remain true to how they are written with minor deviations explained in a believable manner. A super bad ass evil character can't just deviate from his normal behavior without a compelling reason or you lose credibility with the reader. If you take a vile character who kills anyone he sees, you can't have him being a softie without a compelling reason.

Let's say that Dirk the merciless walks into a village school and starts killing all of the children as part of the plot but comes across little Betty with red hair and blues eyes. As he raises his sword to kill her, he flashes back to when he was taken from his parents and remembers the look that he saw in his younger sisters eyes as she peered out from under the bed. He now has sufficient reason to yell at her to leave.

Description of people and places is also important, but it can be overdone. This is a fine line to follow sometimes. An author has to learn to leave out enough detail to allow the readers imagination to fluff up the reading experience. Take the shower scene in Psycho. There was enough detail to create the scene for the viewer to allow them to create their own imagery of what was happening without actually viewing what was happening. I read a couple of chapters of a book a year ago (gave it a 1 star review and was crucified by the F&F reviewers) where the author had to describe every action in minute detail. After reading those paragraphs, I am certain that even I could do the pre-flight on a Mark4 rocket. Paragraphs of detailed explanation could have been condensed into "Bob quickly slipped into the pilots seat and punched in orbital variables sufficient for a sustainable orbit. After scanning the displays to make sure that all systems were go, he engaged the main drive. After several minutes under high G, the purple look of the atmosphere faded the black and the main drive disengaged giving him the slight disorientation consistent with transitioning to zero gee flight."

Lastly, imho, you have to get the reader to have an emotional link to your characters. Emotional doesn't necessarily mean good. If you create an antagonist well enough, your reader should despise them. Likewise if you create a main character well enough, other lesser characters should be able to draw off of them. A good example of this was Rue in the Hunger Games. Her character wasn't as highly defined as many others in the book, but how many people read the scene where she died without feeling emotion? There are certainly many other good examples out there. This is probably one of the most difficult tasks for an author. You have to lead the reader to want to like or dislike your characters and it can't be forced. Actually dislike is much easier. But for like, it is the subtleties that usually make the difference.

Sorry for the long post. Hope it helps to open the eyes of learning authors.

[Jim]

<< Description of people and places is also important, but it can be overdone. This is a fine line to follow sometimes. An author has to learn to leave out enough detail to allow the readers imagination to fluff up the reading experience. >>

Absolutely.
I think part of the 'magic' is including enough 'little' details in the general description to allow the readers imagination enough to work on.

An 'off the top of my head' example based on yours

"Bob quickly slipped into the pilots seat which silently conformed to fit him "

It hints at a far more comprehensive level of technology than a three page description :-)

[Charles]

Or...I love unexpected yet apt verbs: "The pilot's seat cuddled Bob in its protective grasp the moment he sat down."

[Jim]

Charles wrote: "Or...I love unexpected yet apt verbs: "The pilot's seat cuddled Bob in its protective grasp the moment he sat down.""

works for me :-)

[D.J.]

I like this quote from Sheila Williams, editor of Asimov's Science Fiction:

"...all fiction is written to examine or illuminate some aspect of human existence, but...in science fiction the backdrop you work against is the size of the Universe."

[[deleted user]]

I think Charles may have hit on the next BIG thing: Furniture Romance. Bella the lovelorn teen fails madly in love with a chair because only it will cuddle with her. But an evil bean bag has its eyes on her. What's a poor girl going to do!

[Charles]

Greg wrote: "I think Charles may have hit on the next BIG thing: Furniture Romance. Bella the lovelorn teen fails madly in love with a chair because only it will cuddle with her. But an evil bean bag has its ..."

Does her chair sparkle? ;-)

[Jim]

Charles wrote: "Does her chair sparkle? ;-) ..."

Because if it does, I've got a box of matches with its name on it :-)

[Jack]

Well, it has to be mostly fictiony. It should have a plot, for example, better arranged than real reality. The plot should involve characters more interesting than random people off the street (please, please?). Third in the fictiony category, it should have a setting that's interesting, worked out enough to be reasonable, and which you don't natter on about, you imply (as a prior poster implied) what the setting is about.

Then it should be sort of sciency. Make it about or strongly influenced by science and/or technology. You can set it off in space, or in the future, or in some secret history, or even in the present if you're very, very good.

Finally, you need to be at least as skilled at writing as someone with a really good high school education. All that grammar, vocabulary and sentence/paragraph construction stuff were actually important.

As you can tell, I set fairly low minimum standards. The better you are in all of the above areas, the better your basic book.

Now comes the hard part. You have to have something to say. (ISFDB Ref.: Title: Something To Say, Author: John Berryman, Year: 1966)

Given all that, you should be able to write a readable sci-fi story of appropriate length.

Good Luck. I never was able to. :)

[Brenda]

I will add one more thing. It had better be interesting. In fact that is the ONLY requisite. We can all find books that are badly written, that have dull characters, no plot, weak setting, and so on. (Although usually not all the SAME book.) But if the book is interesting, then you can carry on through.

Boredom. It's fatal. Avoid it.

[Clay]

Brenda wrote: "I will add one more thing. It had better be interesting. In fact that is the ONLY requisite. We can all find books that are badly written, that have dull characters, no plot, weak setting, and so o..."

That one, however, is a bit subjective. We have prime examples here in our own group. Simply look at our polls or discussions. Several people will put forth a book that is, in their opinion, fantastic, that others have found to be extremely boring.

[Greg]

A theme that I don't think has been mentioned yet is alternate timelines.

Naomi Novik has some kind of fantasy/sci-fi series that takes place during the Napoleonic wars with dragons. I'm not sure if this has happened much before, or if it's a growing trend/theme.

[Jim]

Greg wrote: "A theme that I don't think has been mentioned yet is alternate timelines.

Naomi Novik has some kind of fantasy/sci-fi series that takes place during the Napoleonic wars with dragons. I'm not sure..."

If you look at the wargaming and roleplaying scenes you'll find an awful lot of 'alternative timelines' out there. An example is at http://www.ifelix.co.uk/phoflint.html where you'll see stuff for Flintloque, the fantasy Napoleonic wargame. There's also 'A very British Civil War' http://solwaycraftsandminiatures.webs...

I wouldn't like to say whether these are producing 'fan fiction' or they're being inspired by the books, but I think they are part of the growing trend you mention

[[deleted user]]

There is a fine tradition of alternate timelines in Science Fiction ranging in quality and in realism ... Not all are necessarily war based, but there are quite a few to choose from ... Turtledove's Great War novels set in a WWI with the Confederacy on the side of England and the US on the side of Germany is a great example as is Eric Flint's 1632 series ...

[Warneke]

I think the best and foremost ability of a good Science Fiction story is to shed light on a present issue. To help us to see the issue in a different way, possibly changing our opinion. Science Fiction is a wonderful platform for social criticism. It's one thing to be entertaining, but to also broaden minds and teach a lesson? This is what Science Fiction does best. It lets us see the potential in ourselves and our society, both good and bad. It works as both a warning and a model. Just look at Star Trek.

[Greg]

Warneke wrote: "I think the best and foremost ability of a good Science Fiction story is to shed light on a present issue. To help us to see the issue in a different way, possibly changing our opinion. Science Fi..."

I think you're really getting to the heart of what SF should be about, Warneke. No one wants to read boring philosophy tomes, but we all like those ideas. SF is a way to grapple with these philosophical issues in an entertaining way.

I might not want to hear about morality, justice, and what's right or wrong, but throw in some spaceships, tasers, and three-to-four-to-five legged creatures and I'm all for it!

[Warneke]

Bingo Greg!

[Brenda]

What SF is primo at is carrying a premise to a conclusion. What would it be like if the upper classes continue to oppress the lower, for millennia? (Wells, THE TIME MACHINE) What would happen if overpopulation ran amok? (Ballard, Brunner.) What would happen if there were no men? (Joanna Russ) Heinlein said that the watchword of the genre is, "If this goes on..."

[Judy]

The heart of science fiction is the juxtaposition of technology and/or science and the human condition. You look at many of the greats in science fiction and they tend to take either an issue or a trend or a technology and they push it to the limit to see what effect it would have on humans. Artificial intelligence? Meet HAL 1000. Robots? See Isaac Asimov. Time Travel? The implications of trying to fix past mistakes or play with things beyond our understanding . . . and the dangers of that.

For every science fiction book or movie out there, you'll find a theme of humanity vs. science. Genentics--Gattica. Aliens? More books than I can count. (What happens when we meet someone who is not like us?)

It all comes back to exploring who we are as humans.

[Victoria]

Just scanning quickly through this comment thread, and I think I am writing a sci-fi novel. I had't really seen it in that way before, but it seems to have most of the elements here :~)

[Jim]

Victoria wrote: "Just scanning quickly through this comment thread, and I think I am writing a sci-fi novel. I had't really seen it in that way before, but it seems to have most of the elements here :~)"

Struck me the same way, I think Warneke, Greg and Brenda have sort of bracketed the answer between them :-)