SFF Hot from Printers: New Releases discussion

15 views
General > Is SFF a correct combination?

Comments Showing 1-13 of 13 (13 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Oleksandr (new)

Oleksandr Zholud | 3006 comments Mod
Just to start a discussion: we even in the group name unite SF and fantasy. This has quite long history. At the same time the genres are different. We usually don't combine SF and mystery or fantasy and chic lit, even if novels that unite these genres exist.

So, why we see SFF as a 'natural' combination?


message 2: by Bishop (new)

Bishop (notesurfer) | 1 comments I think the main reason we see these genres paired is that they both operate under the general umbrella of "speculative fiction." Both genres ask how people would respond and society would be altered if *futuristic/fantastical element* existed. Whether science has massively extended the human lifespan a la Altered Carbon or people can be magically resurrected like in Dungeons & Dragons, the fundamental question being asked is: how does immortality change people?


message 3: by Oleksandr (new)

Oleksandr Zholud | 3006 comments Mod
Bishop wrote: "I think the main reason we see these genres paired is that they both operate under the general umbrella of "speculative fiction." ."

Maybe you're correct. However some genres like Latin American magic realism are also clearly speculative fiction, but less often assumed a part of SFF. And elements in SF are often fully different from fantasy, chiefly what can be (SF) and what cannot be (magic, fantasy).


message 4: by Kristenelle (new)

Kristenelle | 641 comments Bishop wrote: "I think the main reason we see these genres paired is that they both operate under the general umbrella of "speculative fiction." Both genres ask how people would respond and society would be alter..."

Was basically going to say exactly this. I think within both scifi and fantasy you can either go the route of escapism or speculative inquiry. You know? Writing a story in world different from reality can be just pure escapist fun whether it's with dragons or spaceships, but you can also use both types of settings to really challenge or speculate too. That's why I tend to go more literal with my definitions. Is it science/tech setting? Scfi. Is it magic? Fantasy. Magical realism does muddy the waters for sure. I think a lot of genres can at times borrow magical realism mechanics, but it can also be its own genre. idk.


message 5: by Antti (last edited Jul 14, 2020 02:56PM) (new)

Antti Värtö (andekn) | 347 comments Mod
Is magical realism really "speculative", though? It doesn't really ask "what-if" questions: weird, magical things simply happen and are accepted as normal. MR doesn't explore how the magic affects the world, nor does it build a consistent world with understandable rules.

"New Weird" is closer in tone to MR than fantasy, IMO.


message 6: by Oleksandr (new)

Oleksandr Zholud | 3006 comments Mod
Kristen wrote: "I think within both scifi and fantasy you can either go the route of escapism or speculative inquiry"

While true, the problem is that say mystery or horror are also escapism, I guess the majority of fiction is. And say mysteries often have highly unlikely (fantastic?) settings, but we don't usually add them to SFF


message 7: by Gabi (new)

Gabi | 433 comments I must admit I never thought about why it fits, it just does. I'm an old school person who got attached to SFF in a time when there wasn't so much genre distinction as there is nowadays. I was "living" on the German editions of "The best of magazine of fantasy and science fiction" where I bought every edition of that was released in Germany. So for me SFF always belonged together cause of those anthologies.


message 8: by Kateblue (last edited Jul 15, 2020 06:27AM) (new)

Kateblue | 1096 comments Mod
And what do you do with books like Polaris Rising? Touted as SF, it's just a romance with spaceships. It was OK. Characterization not very good. Also, kinda slow.

Then there's the Alternative History stuff. They are, of course, speculative because, duh, Alternative, but still . . . . Many of them are just some other form entirely. There's one we read here that I ended up not finishing, about Jews settling in Alaska after WWII? I DNFed it because 1) TMB,TLT and 2) as far as I read, it was just a mystery, and I have read many better mysteries.


message 9: by Oleksandr (new)

Oleksandr Zholud | 3006 comments Mod
I wander, maybe SFF merger "just happened", maybe because there were quite a few author that wrote both - Heinlein, Zelazny, Le Guin, S.C. Lewis in the 40s-50s. At the same time early fantasy predates them, from the mid to late 30s, often in pulp magazines. Maybe the later joined these two genres in our mind.

It was different in the USSR, where fantasy hasn't been recognized as a specific genre up to the late 80s, so only SF was present


message 10: by Antti (new)

Antti Värtö (andekn) | 347 comments Mod
In the early days of the pulp, the line between fantasy and SF is much blurrier than later: take Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom stuff, for instance. They take place on Mars and have aliens - but the hero didn't arrive there by spaceship, but via... I don't even know, some sort of magic, I guess? And at least the first story is pretty fantasy-like,with princess in distress and everything.

So I would speculate that in the beginning there were simply "fantastical" stories and the division into fantasy and SF came later.


message 11: by Kristenelle (new)

Kristenelle | 641 comments Oleksandr wrote: "Kristen wrote: "I think within both scifi and fantasy you can either go the route of escapism or speculative inquiry"

While true, the problem is that say mystery or horror are also escapism, I gue..."


Right, that's why I go more literal and just judge by the setting.

Antti wrote: So I would speculate that in the beginning there were simply "fantastical" stories and the division into fantasy and SF came later.

That sounds right to me.


message 12: by Oleksandr (new)

Oleksandr Zholud | 3006 comments Mod
Antti wrote: "So I would speculate that in the beginning there were simply "fantastical" stories and the division into fantasy and SF came later.."

Maybe I'm splitting the hairs, but I'd say at the beginning (Frankenstein: The 1818 Text, From the Earth to the Moon and up to H.G. Wells) we had 'pure' SF, which gets mixed with adventures (A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, A Princess of Mars) and a bit later 'true' fantasy appears (The Fellowship of the Ring, Conan the Barbarian, The Chronicles of Narnia and Swords and Ice Magic) in the 30s. So, not exactly the beginning but definitely during popularity of pulp


message 13: by Kateblue (last edited Jul 15, 2020 09:22AM) (new)

Kateblue | 1096 comments Mod
There was a movement that didn't prevail to call them all speculative fiction. I've read about it at some point, and it is why we have the term today.

As I was writing this, I did a search for "origins of the term 'speculative fiction'" and according to this first link RAH coined the term.
https://www.masterclass.com/articles/...

And here's the Wikipedia link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specula...


back to top