This is another installment of my series of remarks and
observations directed at the clouds, which is to say, just my
opinions. I have resigned myself to the fact that I am never going to
be king of the world, and be in a position to put things to right.
Never the less, I feel it is my duty to at least spell out what the
world is doing wrong. In this episode, I intend to spell what should
be done with the genre of science fiction.
Using the term
“science fiction” to describe what is a very broad genre of
fiction is both misleading and often divisive. It needs to be
replaced with a more accurate label. Calling a book “science
fiction” is like labeling a can “food.” It doesn’t really
tell you much of anything about it, and indeed, in the case of
the can, it could be a can of dog food, baked beans, or little wieners.
About all the term science fiction tells a reader, is that the book
is genre rather than literary fiction, and that it is likely to be
set either in the future, or in some make believe place and/or time.
Actual science, as advertised on the label, even that of the hand
waving, magic behind a “science” mask sort, may or may not be a
feature of the story. It is entirely optional.
Compare this state
to fantasy, or, for this comparison, “Fantasy Fiction.” (Fiction,
in this case, being redundant, because fantasy is always fiction,
science, is usually not.) One fantasy fan site on the web lists 64
different subgenres of fantasy, from allegorical fantasy to wuxia
(Chinese or Chinese inspired) fantasy. But even with so many
variations, most readers understand the type of story they can expect
to find, since almost all fantasies share a set of common elements,
though their importance and treatment will be vary by subgenre and
author. The same can not be said of science fiction.
The fact that
science fiction both lacks a set of common elements, and is a more
diverse genre than fantasy, can not be blamed on the label “science
fiction.” However, there should be some truth in labeling, and
calling a whole genre “science” when stories using science in
some way is not a requirement of the label, makes a lie of the label.
If a genre, currently labeled “science fiction,” is going to be
used by publishers as a catch-all for every sorts of unconventional,
experimental, or weird story that does not comfortably fit other,
more defined categories, like literary, horror, thriller, etc., then
the label should be broad enough to reflect that fact. And if actual
science has little or nothing to do with the vast majority of stories
in the genre, then a better descriptive adjective should be found.
And the thing is, you don’t have to look very far to find it. But
I’ll get to that in a moment.
I should add that it
is not just publishers who sow confusion in the genre. It’s its
readers and scholars, as well. Not only can science fiction fans not
agree on what is science fiction, but they bring into the genre all
sorts of stories that were never intended to be science fiction,
simply because they use some common science fiction motif or another.
For example, science fiction claims as its own, at least some of the
works of such authors as, Mark Twain, Edgar Allan Poe, L Frank Baum,
Jack London, Mary Shelley, Jules Vern, H. G. Wells, Arthur Conan
Doyle, and Rudyard Kipling who were not, at the time, writing science
fiction, if only because the term did not exist when they wrote their
work. The term only came into use in the mid-1920’s, originally as
“scientifiction” in Hugo Gernsback’s pulp magazine Amazing
Stories. And yet, some fans and scholars will push the date of
‘science fiction” back even further, into ancient times. Looking
in the opposite direction, we see the same thing happening. SF fans
claiming George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Kurt Vonnegut, and other
literary writers as science fiction writers, whether they like it or
not.
There is nothing
wrong with being inclusive, but this loosey-goosey description of
what constituents, science fiction leads to disagreements and
conflicts within the science fiction fandom. Everyone has their own
definition of what constitutes the “true” or “real” science
fiction. And what doesn’t. Often, especially in the silly season of
science fiction, when the PR extravaganza of awards time rolls
around, these arguments spring up, and complaints are aired about the
lack of “true” science fiction being honored. And what actually is “true”
science fiction. Plus the fact that it seems that, these days,
fantasy dominates what were once science fiction awards, annoys
science fiction purists as well.
As I see it, these
problems arise out of the fact that “science” is used in the
genre label, when it was never a requirement. It has always been
quite optional since the invention of the term. Sixty years ago,
Judith Merril wrote in a forward to one of her “SF: The Years
Greatest Science Fiction and Fantasy anthologies:
“SF is an
abbreviation for Science Fiction (or Science Fantasy). Science
Fiction (or Science Fantasy) is really an abbreviation too. Here are
some of the things it stands for... S is for Science, Space,
Satellites, Starships, and Solar exploring; also for Semantics and
Sociology, Satire, Spoofing, Suspense and good old Serendipity… F
is for Fantasy, Fiction, Fable, Folklore, Fairy-tale and Farce; also
for Fission, and Fusion, for Firmament, Fireball, Future and
Forecast; for Fate and Free-will, Figuring, Fact-seeking and
Fancy-free. Mix well. The result is SF, or Speculative Fun.”
So it would seem
that nothing much changes, even in a genre that is future focused.
And back then, as today, this definition of science fiction would be
challenged by a significant section of the science fiction community
as being too broad, to be the “true” science fiction. Which is
the second major problem with science fiction as a genre. The term
brings with it too much baggage. Too much of the mythology of science
fiction is tied up – at least in the minds of readers and writers
of a certain age – in the short story, pulp era, gadget fiction, of
80 years ago. The genre has evolved, as any viable genre should. The
genre name, however, has not, and simply cannot. And that must be
fixed.
The solution as I
see it, is to reduce the label, “science fiction,” to a
description of its core meaning; fiction built around known science,
or a reasonable extrapolation of known science. Replace it as the
broader genre label with the far more inclusive, and accurate label:
“Speculative Fiction.” “Science Fiction” would become one of
Speculative Fiction’s subgenre, essentially replacing “Hard
Science Fiction” on the list. In this way, science fiction would
have a definite meaning and the old purest would have a safe haven
for the stories they like, while writers of speculative fiction could
continue to push the envelope, without some old guard grousing about
how they don’t understand what science fiction is, even though it
was never, ever, what they claim it to have been.
The beauty of just
renaming the genre Speculative Fiction is that it would not involve a
massive sea change in the field. The term “speculative fiction”
is already commonly used to describe science fiction in its broadest
sense, so that it simply makes sense to officially give the broad
genre the label that more accurately describes it. And since the term
is commonly used already, making the change would mostly involve
getting used to using it as the formal label of the genre. Some
organizations would have to change their names – but not their
initials. And, finally, SF would always be SF, no matter what the “S”
stands for in the mind of the reader.
Of course there is
no governing body that can make this change. It must come from the
grass roots up. Still, a journey of a thousand miles starts with a
single step. I, for one, have changed the genre label to speculative
fiction. Going forward, I will only use “science fiction” when I
am discussing the former subgenre of “Hard Science Fiction,”
which I can’t imagine me needing to do, or when describing
something with that label, to avoid confusion. So I say to you, join
me in this crusade to free speculative fiction of its pulp origins.
Speculative fiction existed before “science fiction,” so let’s
free ourselves of that confusing and restrictive label. Let’s
continue to read and write inclusive, imaginative stories.
I’ve read a number of other Glen Cook books, some of this speculative fiction, Passage at Arms, and The Dragon Never Sleeps, which were interesting. I also have read one or two of his Instrumentalities of the Night series, but they were closer to the type of fantasy that that doesn’t appeal to me, so I haven’t read them all. And as I’ve read a Black Company story, which isn’t my thing, though I seem to recall that it’s been optioned for a TV series.
I’m an author orientated reader. If I like the way an author writes, I’ll usually give all his or her books at least a try, and collect the ones I like. So my library shelves are often devoted to the works of one author. Glen Cook has his shelf, and I’m sure I’ll get around to highlighting my other favorite authors with their own shelves in future installments.
Keiree, my newest story, a 34,000 word novella, is scheduled to be released on Apple, B & N Kobo, and Smashwords for free on 17 Sept 2020. It will be released on Amazon for $.99 on 17 September 2020.
