After blatantly trolling my blog readers this week for a rebuttal, a tour de force response was posted by Rose of Charon today.

News of SF's death may be a bit premature, like CNN's advance obituaries.

Thanks for posting these links. I especially liked Rose's analysis. The first novel I ever read was Robert A. Heinlein's Citizen of the Galaxy, and I haven't stopped reading SF since.

By far my favorite SF are the novels written during the sixties and early seventies. The authors I enjoyed the most were writing adventure stories set in alien or futurisitic environments; mostly they were about survival, warfare, or solving mysteries. The emphasis was on the physical--whether that meant action or taking the time to create highly detailed and intriguing environments and technologies.

The later stuff (I think of William Gibson's Neuromancer, Philip Dick's The Man in the High Castle, or Ursula Le Guin's Dispossed) as turning points. Specifically, there began a tradition of "literary SF" or "heady SF" or whatever you want to call it that was drifting far away from the physical-focused tradition. I think these authors were trying to do more with SF than they had before, but they were, paradoxically, doing less (i.e., the less concrete references in their novels, the more 'work' they leave to the reader). I.e., there is a certain subterfuge in abstraction.

The problem with modern SF is the same problem with any creative sphere these days; namely, the corporate invasion has reduced an artform to shabby, look-alike products. Once a certain author or style makes a splash on the market, the publishers all strive to produce 100 near-duplicates of the hit.

I subscribe to Asimov's, Analog, and F&SF, and these mags always feature non-fiction articles written about the state of the art, so to speak. I've lost track of the times I've read diatribes against the corporate-control of the industry; authors love to bemoan the syndicated Star Trek, Star Wars hackwork (the same way fantasy authors deride TSR's near strangle-hold on that market). Most new readers of science fiction are introduced to the field via television; that is, STar Trek, STar Wars, or some movie with a novelization, and when they visit bookstores they want to buy something they are already familiar with.

When I was young, I visited the local library every week and brought home a new science fiction novel. I didn't care what it was as long as it was science fiction. I think there are precious few people like that today.

Same here; I read everything I could get my hands on as a kid, from books culled by the dozens each week from the library to my parents' professional magazines. Imagine what regular doses of current medical techniques and engineering methodology can do to a young mind when mixed with romance and political intrigue...

Right now I would simply be happy to see young people going to the library and reading books every week, regardless of genre.

That is the real threat to SF, that the young forget to read and to write. They would discover SF if only they read.

Having an adult populace which votes for action-figure leaders versus leaders with intellect doesn't encourage confidence that this trend will change soon.

there's no doubt that there is a problem. what about Farscape :(

Right now I would simply be happy to see young people going to the library and reading books every week, regardless of genre. That is the real threat to SF, that the young forget to read and to write. They would discover SF if only they read. Having an adult populace which votes for action-figure leaders versus leaders with intellect doesn't encourage confidence that this trend will change soon.

Well, I'd be happy enough if we had great SF movies to watch. The latest big-budget SF films have been disasters; there's even a website setup to mention all of the bad astronomy in them...

I think that good SF requires a certain amount of scientific knowledge and a firm belief in logical positivism (foundationalism, etc.) I will also posit that SF fans are colonial or even imperialistically minded.

Going to the moon was really an imperialist impulse. We've been questioning this impulse for so long now that I don't think we'll be going back until America falls and some new power comes along with something to prove.

I've been asking around about farscape, but apparently none of my friends have seen it. Is there a DVD floating around?

many dvd's. i think they may only be up to the third season on dvd, though.

What season would you recommend?

well, you need to watch the first couple episodes definitely. so season 1 is the best place to start.

I agree. A few years ago I assigned what I thought would be a successful selection -- Fahrenheit 451. But when I told my students about it, they said, "In the future they burn books? Good. Let's go there."

I also wonder what is the role of race. The misconception that Sci-Fi/Fantasy (and even Mystery) genres are only for weirdo white kids denies us some really valuable stuff.
Tricia, USF