NS 310 Science in Science Fiction Spring 2008
SUMMARY AND HIGHLIGHTS ON SCIENCE FICTION
My approach: Descriptive (how “science fiction” is actually used) not
prescriptive (“how it ought to be used”)
Genre: A distinctive class or category of literary composition.
(Alt definition): A bundle of conventions (tropes).
Trope: A familiar and repeated image, theme, setting, or event; a convention. (Note: must be shared among many authors.)
Function of tropes:
• Shorthand in story; familiarity for reader “Activate the hyperdrive”
• Intrinsic appeal: orphans; poor but worthy woman; tough but chivalrous detective
Central problem in a description: how to accurately differentiate SF from fantasy
Definition from Kim Stanley Robinson
“Science fiction is the history that we cannot know”
“Mainstream” literature (present-day and historical fiction): factually possible-- could be happening/have happened, is connected to our present world
Fantasy is counterfactual and impossible; disconnected from our present world
SF is counterfactual but potentially possible; contiguously connected to present world
through plausible history
SF only requires change of history;
Fantasy requires change of history AND change in laws of physics, etc.
Sense of potential historical change is important
Science and technology are “markers” of historical change
SF readers actively engage in constructing narrative world and deciphering the story
Furthermore, SF readers invited to question plausibility/possibility of the narrative world
“Mainstream” fiction: no work to do, nothing to question
Fantasy: no rules, nothing to question
HISTORY OF LITERATURE
Classical/romantic: “traditional” plots.
Protagonists encounters obstacles, either overcomes or fails. Cultural narratives frame stories (social class vs. merit). Emphasis on plot and character.
Modernism: Themes of alienation from society and the self.
Cultural narratives are corrupt and irrelevant; replaced by existential paradigms.
Emphasis on mood, style, disruptive narrative techniques.
Postmodernism: Skepticism towards metanarratives; nothing means anything. Fragmentation of society and self. Emphasis and celebration of incongruities, sense of play.
The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry (Harold Bloom, 1973)
Psychocriticism: psychological tension (with self, family)
Social criticism (Marxist, feminist, etc.): tensions for and against social structures.
Bloom: tension for and against previous poets (precursors).
Two basic strategies: Extension and correction or Reversals and subversions
History of SF
Proto-SF: Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus, Mary Shelley (1818). Transition from alchemy to modern natural philosophy (science).
Jules Verne (1828-1905), Set up genre expectations of technical accuracy + long didactic explanations Books largely travelogues with scientist-heroes
H. G. (Herbert George) Wells (1866-1946). Tightly plotted novels + significant social commentaries, particularly on class structure. Main concerns: anxieties about class, biology, and their boundaries
The Pulp Age (1920s-1930s): Sloppy science, sloppy stories, glorious
adventures, often space operas. Low-grade technofetishism.
The Golden Age (1940s) Conscious emphasis on consequences of science and technology, not just adventures. High-quality technofetishism and debate about science and technology. More coherent stories, though deliberately not “literary.”
“Classical” narratives (overcome obstacles to success)
The Golden Age Giants: Heinlein, Asimov, Clark.
1950’s. Introspection New emphasis on character and social commentary, on style and mood in writing. Beginning of modernist themes. Subversion of Golden Age.
1960s-’70s: The New Wave More sophisticated modernism. De-emphasis of technofetishism and science, emphasis on character, writing. social effects. Experimental writing techniques. Rise in feminist, sexual themes.
1980s: Cyberpunk Computers and information age. Asian culture. Postmodern themes: fragmentation, tribalism, doubt of meaning. Simultaneously more cynical, more playful.
Late 1990s – early 2000 Resurgence of hard SF,
especially in
SF subgenres
Hard SF : Narratives in which detailed or “rigorous” arguments about science and/or technology are central to plot and/or theme. Space opera : Fast-paced galactic adventure stories. Derivative of hard SF, but science and technology often gobbledygook.
(Soft SF): Narratives which downplay arguments about science
and / or technology. Emphasis on psychology, sociology, and
character.
New Wave : Downplayed science, frequently subverted standard tropes. Strong influence of “modernism” in literature. Experimental techniques.
Feminist SF:
Cyberpunk :
Utopia/dystopia : Utopia (“good place”) = desirable social order;
dystopia (“bad place”) = undesirable social order. Utopias difficult to make interesting;
Alternate history : Narrative set in present day or in past, but with changes to “our” history.
How to analyze science in SF stories
(1) Ask: how is the reader introduced to science in the story? What is the “change” from here-and-now? Pay particular attention to beginnings.
(2) Note throughout the story the “science talk.” Not just facts, but metaphors, analogies, and so on. Ask: what strategies used by author to talk about science?
(3) What role does science and technology play in the story?
(4) What larger narratives about science (if any) are there?
Part 1: How to read SF (I use useful strategies from Samuel R. Delaney)
(A) Language functions differently in SF than in “mainstream” literature. Statements metaphorical in “mainstream” can be literal in SF.
The SF reader must more actively question: what is real (in the context of the story)?
(B) The reader has to fill in more gaps than usual. This is part of the enjoyment of SF.
Fiction draws us in by setting up mysteries.
In mainstream fiction the mystery is plot and character (even in modernist and postmodern fiction). In SF there is another dimension—the mystery of setting.
(C) The SF reader tries to answer to question: “How did we get there from here?”
Part 2: Rhetorical strategies in talking about science
There a number of rhetorical tools SF authors use to discuss or incorporate science and technology. (Note: these are neither rigid nor complete)
(1) Technobabble/gobbedygoo). Technical and scientific words used randomly or without context.
(2) Skating fast over thin ice. Don’t go into detail. Don’t justify. Just assume it works.
(3) Extrapolation or reversal. Of current scientific trends or ideas. (Also of cultural trends and ideas)
(4) Argument by analogy. Arguing from known scientific facts and principles to hypothetical science. One of the main tools used in SF.
(5) Combining two existing fields into a new one
(6) The Gadget. (Related to skating over thin ice) Use it without asking questions.
(7) Miracles and limitations. Standard practice in SF: limit story to one (or a very few) “miracles” or bending of known science. Stories more believable if you include rules or limitations
Part 3: How is science used in SF?
(0) “Exotic” setting = a long time ago/in the future, in a galaxy far, far away
Frequently fallback to technobabble.
(1) As “marker” of change, but not a central change itself. Science and technology do not play significant role. Weakly symbolic.
(2) Science or technology as symbol. Many SF symbols deal with either anxieties (technology, the Other) or boundaries or limitations.
(3) Science or technology as theme.
(4) Science as point of view, as a way to know the world.
(5) Science as plot. A central issue or puzzle: how do we solve this problem? Hard SF.
Accuracy of science in SF
Science in SF is usually wrong. How does it matter?
* verisimilitude enhances willing suspension of disbelief
* functions as allusions in “literary” fiction: rewards to knowledgeable reader
the more integral science is to the story, the more important the verisimilitude.
--For a space opera (simple adventure) not very important
--If story has strong narrative about science, more important
--If more detailed narrative about science, more important