Anyway the attempt to build a hard barrier between "science fiction" and "horror" came from within the SF community, a lot of whom were really ideological and snobbish This was a whole theme of Joseph Campbell's deliberate push to change the genre during his career at Astounding
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @ToccoTrevor and
He was a chauvinist who wanted to harshly sever the ties between science fiction and fantasy (no more "planetary romances" and "space operas" with space swordfights and space castles and space princesses), even though that kind of shit is how the genre started
2 replies 2 retweets 38 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @ToccoTrevor and
People internalized his baleful gatekeeping glare at any and all corny, commercialized celebration of obsolete feudal values and aesthetics in "what SHOULD be a genre about the FUTURE" that you get people straightfacedly arguing *Star Wars* isn't science fiction
1 reply 2 retweets 32 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @ToccoTrevor and
"You should be calling it science FANTASY" Okay bitch then literally every single fucking thing they printed in "science fiction" magazines in the first half of the "Golden Age of Science Fiction" in the '30s was "actually science FANTASY" It all had swords and magic and shit
3 replies 4 retweets 38 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @ToccoTrevor and
I used to be one of those Science Fiction vs Science Fantasy guys. Honestly it only works if your familiarity with the genre is limited. Once you take in the breadth of it, there's no clear place to draw the line, and the distinction is worthless.
1 reply 4 retweets 22 likes -
Replying to @keeltyc @arthur_affect and
There was a time, I think, when American media tried to draw a hard line. You'd have, like, Ben Bova and Asimov on one side, and George Lucas and Gene Roddenberry on the other. Mostly that was from about the 1970s through the 1990s, as far as I can tell.
2 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @keeltyc @arthur_affect and
The issue is really about whether the writers are interested in primarily the aesthetics or primarily the legit dynamics that can’t be “ported” elsewhere, between “hard” and “soft” sf. This is a highly subjective assessment.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @mssilverstein @BootlegGirl and
The thing is, the "hard sci-fi" of yore had telepaths! And FTL! Asimov, known for his "hard sci-fi" had a telepathic robot secretly guiding humanity. Nowadays nobody has telepaths or teleporters in their sci-fi and I think that's annoying.
4 replies 2 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @ftmshepard @mssilverstein and
George Lucas had Luke yell at C-3PO about things that he believed to be impossible in this universe ("alter time or teleport me off this rock") to establish Star Wars wouldn't have time travel or teleportation, unlike Star Trek, despite being the "softer" franchise
4 replies 1 retweet 13 likes
Since then both concepts have technically been officially added in, although to be fair they aren't "scientific" teleportation or time travel, but happen via the Force, which was established by Yoda to be all about the supernatural and doing the seemingly impossible
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @mssilverstein and
This is where I admit a preference for star trek more broadly and the star trek novels, given half of them are authors being given permission to go nuts and half of them are canon to each other; star trek went "yeah, sure, people gaining god like esp powers seems neat" early on!
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.