How do You Read Science Fiction?

[[deleted user]]

Trike wrote: "Someone once said -- don't bother looking this up because the only real reference comes from me 20-some years ago, so maybe I'm the one who said it originally -- that a good science fiction writer ..."

Well then, Here's to traffic jams!

[Aaron]

I'm personally in love with the current state of Sci-fi and Fantasy and think in many ways we have entered a golden age of writing in general, though self-publishing and webfiction. The genre right now is huge and exploding fast, faster than anyone can keep track of and it's splintering. There is something for everyone out there right now and lots of it.

Lara Amber wrote: "I love the fact that sci-fi and fantasy have exploded and has bled over into other genres. Young Adult Sci-Fi/Fantasy has a huge selection and draws many authors who normally write adult fare. Ther..."

I feel there is a lot of confusion on what makes readers frustrated in inaccuracy of science. Such as the premise you put forward that it's like the modern day but zombies are suddenly real, personally I don't care what mumbo jumbo or even need it explained why zombies are real. What I want is everything outside of that in the story to be accurate and consistent.

[Papaphilly]

Marianne wrote: "I pressed return too soon, so to continue. . . I'm not a big fan of zombie stories, but Grant's books are an exception. I like her characters and her plots are more intelligent than some, and her i..."

I too agree that her ideas are original and I read the Newsflesh Trilogy Boxed Set and enjoyed them. However, I thought that the third book was running out of gas gas fast and barely crossed the finish line. I loved the idea that the look at me generation really expanded to vainglorious levels.

[Papaphilly]

Aaron wrote: "I'm personally in love with the current state of Sci-fi and Fantasy and think in many ways we have entered a golden age of writing in general, though self-publishing and webfiction. The genre right..."

I wonder when zombies passed from horror to science fiction. I wonder if it really started with 28 Days Later.

[David]

I agree that the genre is saturated with so many authors and so many books that it's hard to even make a dent, but I love trying. I'm an immersive reader, so for me, it's like being there right beside the protagonists, facing whatever challenges they face.

In selecting reads, I look at what's hot in discussions, ratings and rankings, and, to a lesser extent, Amazon reviews. The first chapter from the "Look Inside" usually gives me enough to know whether or not it will end up on my want to read list.

I'm most attracted to post-apocalyptic, time travel, first contact, and futuristic thrillers.

For many years, I preferred to read (and own) hardcovers; never really could do paperbacks...don't know why. Now, with the advent of eBooks and the portability of my Kindle, I read from that format almost exclusively. If I love the book, then I still buy the hardback for the shelf; it's just comforting to see it there.

[Trike]

Papaphilly wrote: "I wonder when zombies passed from horror to science fiction. I wonder if it really started with 28 Days Later. "

Although no examples come immediately to mind, I believe there were some precedents in novels and short stories before 28 Days Later came out.

The various alien invasion stories feature similar zombified humans, if not actual zombies as we've come to know them. Invasion of the Body Snatchers and The Puppet Masters for instance, which certainly planted the seed for SFnal zombies.

[Lara Amber]

Papaphilly wrote: "I wonder when zombies passed from horror to science fiction. I wonder if it really started with 28 Days Later. "

I think it goes back to that thread we had last year about when is it Science Fiction and when is it Fantasy. When the Zombies have a scientific explanation for existence, live in a science based world, and follow consistent logic, it's science fiction. When they were caused by magic, it's fantasy.

Slightly spoilerish about the zombies in Mira Grant's Feed:
(view spoiler)[ In the Newsflesh books the Zombie are caused by two different created viruses-as-medicine meeting in the real world and combining in a way that scientists didn't foresee. It also caused an explosion in anti-zombie scientific research and product development: sensors, security systems, attempts for a cure, etc. There were even people with "reservoir conditions" who had other medical conditions caused by the zombie virus but weren't zombies. (hide spoiler)]

[Aaron]

Papaphilly wrote: "I wonder when zombies passed from horror to science fiction. I wonder if it really started with 28 Days Later. "

1818?...sorta Frakenstein is a lot of the way there with making undead creatures sci-fi.

When Zombies are portrayed as a what if question then it's sci-fi. While a strick definition would be a lot longer you can use common sense. Is it a non-magical event that everyone knows about that caused an outbreak of zombies then it's sci-fi. Is it about some witch who summoned some zombies to haunt some college kids on vacation then it's horror.

[Trike]

Aaron wrote: "Is it about some witch who summoned some zombies to haunt some college kids on vacation then it's horror. "

It doesn't necessarily have to be horror. It could easily be comedy or romance, or even romantic comedy.

[Papaphilly]

Aaron wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "I wonder when zombies passed from horror to science fiction. I wonder if it really started with 28 Days Later. "

1818?...sorta Frakenstein is a lot of the way there with making ..."

Frankenstein is certainly an early proto science fiction and maybe a true first science fiction. I do not agree with you on the zombie bit though because the monster was very articulate and could converse, which is belied by the more famous movie. As for the horror science fiction zombie debate, I think it may be along the lines I know it when I see it. As for your definition, Night of the living dead is certainly one of the genres classic horror films, but they came back due to a comet, which gives it a science fiction slant. Their bites could also turn you into a zombie, but then so did dying.

Maybe a better example for science fiction zombies was with RE-Animator or Lifeforce.

[Kateb]

David wrote: "I agree that the genre is saturated with so many authors and so many books that it's hard to even make a dent, but I love trying. I'm an immersive reader, so for me, it's like being there right bes..."

so agree. I even buy the books if I like the kindle version. However I have taken to buying paperback as I can fit more in the cupboard.
I really don't care what genre they fall into a long as I like the story after the first two chapters.
I become so immersed in the story my children know to "get my attention" before talking to me.

[CS]

Papaphilly wrote: "I wonder when zombies passed from horror to science fiction...."

I had an interesting conversation with a staff guy at my local B&N. He's been in the bookstore biz a long time and used to work at an independent bookstore. I mentioned how much I like the fantasy genre, but so much of it is dark now. It could be classified as horror/paranormal. He thought about 75% of current fantasy fiction fits that description.

I speculate that Anne Rice's vampire chronicles and the huge success of the Twilight series have tilted fantasy publishing into the horror and paranormal genres. Then the taste for apocalyptic or dystopic fiction kicks in, and fantasy fiction becomes quite dark indeed.

I have nothing against dark, sad books. I recently read On the Beach and I thought it was superb. But I don't need any more violence, terror, or horror in my life. Not unless the book has something worthwhile to say about the human condition--and most of these books don't. I read the news in the NY Times everyday. That scares me enough.

I'll read anything that's intelligent and well-written, whether it's sci-fi/fantasy, literary fiction, popular fiction, or nonfiction. I pay attention to book reviews and buzz about new books, but half the time the books don't interest me when I check them out. So more often than not I rely on my reader's radar that I've developed over my lifetime. It's surprising how often I'm attracted to a certain book cover. Then if the story idea and the writer's voice align, I'm in.

I've been a longtime fan of Ursula LeGuin's books, based on science and/or anthropology, and Patricia A. McKillip's books, which show a background in English literature and folklore. For a long time I liked Naomi Novik's Temeraire series, because of its solid basis in Napoleonic history. Like so many series, though, the Temeraire series has deteriorated as it progressed. The author runs out of ideas and brings down the quality of the whole series. Or as I like to say, if you keep at it long enough, you sh-t on yourself.

For years I ignored Seanan McGuire's October Daye series because the premise seemed too farfetched (a fairy detective??). But McGuire knows how to tell a story, and unlike many series, every book in her series delivers value to the reader. I think that's worth noting. In YA books, I've enjoyed Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson/Olympians series, another strong set of books. The author has a deep understanding of Greek and Roman mythology. His translation of traditional myths into modern times is spot-on, and that keeps me reading.

[Lara]

I tend to read more fantasy than SF, but I sample all kinds of things. I tend to read a lot of trilogies and series, but lately have found myself bogged down waiting for the latest installment to be released and having to go back and reread the previous books because it took too long and I've forgotten the details. I also like to read all of the offerings of my favorite authors. I think I'm willing to try lots of styles, but I don't like zombies, unicorns, or time travel very much. I do really like the dystopia genre, but find myself in the teen section too much lately reading knock offs that are pale copies of the Hunger Games. In general I get recommendations from friends and co-workers and have resorted to "if you like this, read that" lists on the internet. Actually, this site has become my go-to as I've found people with similar taste to mine.

[Aaron]

CS wrote: "He thought about 75% of current fantasy fiction fits that description. "

I feel like this is true if you include PNR, which is fantasy but it has a different target demo and is often marketed separately as a part of romance. Kind of like how the mystery section is divided. You have the thriller mysteries which deal with things like murder, and you have the warm and fuzzy mysteries that deal with things like quilts and kittens.

Without PNR in the adult fantasy section, I would say it's maybe 50%, which is still a huge margin but less so.

[Pierre]

One page at a time.

[Papaphilly]

Pierre wrote: "One page at a time."

That is the best answer yet :^)

[Papaphilly]

CS wrote: "I have nothing against dark, sad books. I recently read On the Beach and I thought it was superb... I pay attention to book reviews and buzz about new books, but half the time the books don't interest me when I check them out. So more often than not I rely on my reader's radar that I've developed over my lifetime. It's surprising how often I'm attracted to a certain book cover. Then if the story idea and the writer's voice align, I'm in...."

I agree that On the Beach is melancholy, but I never saw it as dark. I was very depressed when I was finished. To me it was like watching a loved one die with their last breaths in the hospital. Slowing down until it is over.

I just love your description of reader radar. I might have to appropriate that description for myself because it is accurate to me too.

[CS]

Aaron wrote: "...Without PNR in the adult fantasy section, I would say it's maybe 50%, which is still a huge margin but less so."

I thought the staff guy's estimate was plausible. I had been browsing the shelves and couldn't find any palatable fantasy that I hadn't read yet. He did come up with a few suggestions that didn't feature werewolves, zombies, vampires, other miscellaneous horrors, the end of the world or a world you wouldn't want to live in. That's pretty slim pickin's for three aisles of sci fi/fantasy in a well-stocked bookstore.

BTW, these monstrous creatures can be the subject of wonderful stories when the author has some awareness of their folkloric and/or psychological roots. But most horror/paranormal fantasy feels like Halloween dress-up to me, very shallow in what it's trying to do (i.e., scare you and arouse sentimentality).

Papaphilly wrote: "I agree that On the Beach is melancholy, but I never saw it as dark..."

I thought the outcome was pretty dark. The low-key tone of OTB disguised the terrible story it was telling. BTW, North Korea tested a nuclear bomb yesterday, and China was not happy about it. I tell you, nothing is scarier than the daily news.

I just love your description of reader radar. I might have to appropriate that description for myself because it is accurate to me too.
You're welcome to it.

[Papaphilly]

CS wrote: "I thought the outcome was pretty dark. The low-key tone of OTB disguised the terrible story it was telling. ..."

The death of the planet is certainly dark. However, I see it more as watching a toy winding down instead of a sudden stop. The intervening factor happened prior to the story and while it is certainly on the mind, it is in the background. What depressed me is that the word did not end in fire, but slowly extinguished after the fire and how normal it all was when it ended.

[Pierre]

Papaphilly wrote: "Pierre wrote: "One page at a time."

That is the best answer yet :^)"

^-^

[Micah]

Aaron wrote: " 1818?...sorta Frakenstein is a lot of the way there with making ..."

Interesting to note that the first recorded use of the word 'zombie' was in 1819.

In movies, I think the first possible SF zombie was in the 1977 aquatic Nazi zombie flick Shock Wave (aka Almost Human, aka Death Corps). It's the first film I can find where a science experiment created zombies rather than voodoo (or some non-disclosed cause).

It's still really horror in my mind but horror with a scientific explanation could still be called SF.