Sci-Fi minimizing research and details?

Discussion in 'Research' started by Videodrome, Jul 15, 2010.

  1. w176

    w176 Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,064
    Likes Received:
    52
    Location:
    LuleƄ, Sweden
    Or you just go space opera and skip the science part. Because it a nice concept.
     
  2. Cogito

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    36,161
    Likes Received:
    2,827
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    Which is when you end up with space fantasy, and not science fiction.

    Not every story with spaceships and lasers is science fiction. I personally think the rise of space fantasy has eroded interest in science fiction as a genre.
     
  3. Wreybies

    Wreybies Thrice Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    23,826
    Likes Received:
    20,815
    Location:
    El Tembloroso Caribe
    Agreed.

    And I agree because science fiction has an unfortunate way of getting stuck in the wardrobe department and to fall prey to its own reputation of being fluff roll playing.

    Pulp fiction, so to speak.

    So (steps down from soap box) I think that when writing a science fiction story, the writer has to ask the same fundamental questions that any writer asks when s/he sets pen to paper.

    To revisit the example I gave of Frank Herbert's Dune (I can hear the eye-rolls already) Mr. Herbert glossed much of the "science" in his fiction. So why is this work considered by so many to be the seminal tome of science fiction? How does a book that makes worm crap the most wanted commodity in the universe become a legend within the genre? A commodity that makes space travel possible, and alters human consciousness to the point where they become super human, godlike?

    It happens because Herbert's choice of worm crap as plot tool is in no way random or an afterthought. The entire book is centered around the concept of resource allocation. A well known fact. Frank spoke at length on the subject and dedicated to complete series (the Dune series and the Destination Void series) to the subject.

    So how is all of this not a derail of this thread? It's not a derail because the question, the real question, is not whether the science should be fact or fiction, but why either choice is relevant to the story?

    Frank made worm poop a mode of space travel and more valuable than diamonds because he was making a point about the arbitrary nature of the value of commodities and how any commodity can have a value with the right pressures. It works brilliantly because there is a purpose to the device.

    If Frank were a member of the forum as a young man and had asked, "Can I make worm poop work as a valid form of space travel?" he would have been ignored at best, and more probably ridiculed. And this would have happened because the question is pointless. You can make anything work if you put your mind to it. The real question to be asked is, "What point are you making with this worm poop space ship ship stuff?"

    And.... yeah, I'm done now.
     
  4. Cogito

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    36,161
    Likes Received:
    2,827
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    Frank Herbert's science was well-considered, even though many aspects were obviously contrived to constrain the story. An example is the explosive interaction of lasguns with the highly-popular personal shields. That allowed shields to serve as a reason projectile weapons such as rifles were not part of the culture, and why laser guns were not used either. He then contrived that shields attracted sandworms, so shields would not be used in the deserts of Arrakis. So the tech was well thought out for the purposes of the story.

    His primary science was ecology, and the interactions between apparently disparate elements. Water was both essential to spice production and potentially ruinous to it. An entire planet's ecology pivoted on exactly the right amount of water in the ecosystem.

    Also, Dune explores the impact of a single essential but limited commodity on a galaxy-wide civilization.

    In many old Westerns, water was that commodity. Turf wars often erupted over water rights. In Larry Niven's Destiny Road, the commodity was called "speckles", a trade good supplying a vital nutritional elemssnt absent from the environment at large, and without which the colonists would grow feebleminded and die.

    These may not be as flashy as lasguns and personal shields, but they are science, and the authors researched those sciences in depth.
     
  5. Islander

    Islander Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Messages:
    1,539
    Likes Received:
    59
    Location:
    Sweden
    It's called "suspension of disbelief". Everybody knows that people can't fly, but they can still enjoy a Superman movie without getting hung up on how unrealistic it is. As long as the premises are clearly explained to the reader early on in the story, they are likely to accept them. Strict realism is mostly needed when it belongs to the setting, for example contemporary espionage.

    IMO that worked much better than the way they handled it in the later series. Trying to explain what they couldn't explain just made it sound more ridiculous.

    Episodes in the old Star Trek series were often about ideas, like morality or the human psyche, not about the specifics, and then realism doesn't matter so much. (Admittedly, I've only watched the best of the old series.)
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice