I tend to think of science fiction and fantasy as a brother and a sister. They're very different, but they're still family. In literature, there have been many periods and styles of writing. Each movement had a period of intense popularity, where everybody wrote that way. Books during those periods were read around the fire and passed along from friend to friend. But they didn't achieve scholarly acclaim until much later. While these styles were popular, they were considered as mere fluff by the scholars.

It wasn't until years later that these new styles were embraced. Think of romanticism, victorianism, modernism, and post-modernism. Post-modernism is what gets talked about now in college classes. It's what's "new" to them. They love it, they read it, they write it. They breathe it. It's so fresh and new.

But it isn't, is it? As fantasy and science fiction readers, we know about something that really is fresh and new. Sure, it's been around for many years, but it's never achieved real scholarly acclaim. Well, I shouldn't say never. I think we're in the end of the catch-up period for those who dictate the literary canon. We already have professors who occassionally teach a science fiction class. We have short stories which professors eagerly proclaim to be fantasy stories (but usually are postmodernist stories with one fantastic element) and teach them with enthusiasm. I predict that in the next 50 years, as more sci-fi and fantasy fans become professors, that science fiction and fantasy will emerge from its reputation (by non-fans, of course) as popular, indulgent fluff to take its proper place within the literary canon. When that happens, the "good" stories will rise above the bad. The stories that you find derivitive now, will hopefully, fall into the dark abyss that claimed the penny novels of old.

We talk in literature classes now about how the novel is a dead institution. Not all believe it, but it is a common theme. We've done all there is to the novel, and now we must write metafiction and other weird stories that play with the genre and with writing itself. We must be artsy and the novel that simply tells a story is yesterday's news.

But they're wrong, aren't they? They'll see. But to have sci-fi and fantasy accepted into the literary canon is not necessarily an all good thing, is it? Despite my optimism above, they don't always pick the best books of the era, do they? Can you imagine any canonical list of the best sci-fi/fantasy authors that didn't include Orson Scott Card? And when it is accepted, does that mean innovation in the genre is dead? Do they begin teaching it in classrooms, neatly defining it, restraining it with their definitions? Do they turn it into dry reading, spoiling it with too much discussion?

Right now, fantasy and science fiction have already begun moving into the literary canon. They at once occupy the space at the edge and also outside of the canon. They have incredible room to breathe and flex and do anything we can imagine as authors. We're not constrained by the literary vogue and what a bunch of stuffy professors deem is "literature." We're out here on the edge, doing whatever we want all the time. And sure, we have some hack writers. But in allowing them, we also allow new writers--people with fresh ideas and amazing talent.

It is a very exciting time to be a writer and reader of sci-fi and fantasy. There is no need for a war between the two. There is good science fiction. There is good fantasy. And there's a whole lot more bad of both.

Personally, I probably read more science fiction than fantasy. But I write fantasy. And to me, it is about a good story. The fantasy setting allows me the freedom to tell whatever stories I want. I have no constraints except the drive and desire to ask myself "What else?" over and over again, to escape the cliches of the genre. Just because there are bad writers out there who make a few bucks off the cliches doesn't mean that the good writers have put away their pens. I would propose that if you are tired of either fantasy or science fiction that you simply aren't reading the right books. Find friends whose recommendations you can actually trust.

-Siena

So I write only to please myself. If one other person likes my writing, then that is twice as many people as before that like my writing. If you don't like your own writing though, then it is pretty hard to multiply the other people that like your story by the zero that you contribute. (I am no mathematician, just an aspiring physicist, so don't take those words as mathematical and keep at literal.)

quote:

---

Now I did mention Harry Potter, but for good reason. These books are good because Rowling took a chance on creating a book that would fail because it would be scorn by the hardcore fantasy fans and ignored by the casual reading public or succeed because it brought magic away from Dungeuns and Dragons and Tolkien and to a level of understanding for everyone. I do however hate the child wizard books that have spawned from it.

---

Now, see, I have to disagree with this. There were tons of child wizard/witch books before Harry Potter. I should know, because I devoured those stories when I was a kid. Rowlings merely popularized a type of story that already existed. Granted, they were in the YA/children's section...but then so is Harry Potter.

Unfortunately, I don't remember any titles. But I definitely remember reading them.

quote:

---

I will never write a story to please another person because that is how most people get in the rut of writing cliches. They fear the disapproval...

---

But it is possible to write to your audience without fearing their disapproval. I know that for any story in my head there is a natural audience. So I strive to present my story on paper in a readable and enjoyable way. I'm trying to connect to that audience. That's the whole point of having my work critiqued. If it is just for me, then I always know what I'm trying to say so it doesn't matter if anyone else does too.

Everyone has comfort zones. I went out with a friend Saturday night and found out that several years ago he thought of writing a novel. He had detailed notes on his world and an introduction written. I asked him why he never actually wrote it and he had two reasons. First, he found out how much work it was to write a novel. Understandable. But also, eh found out that many of the "original" elements he had put in his work had been done before.

People writing for themselves write whatever they want, and often we want a bit of the familiar, some wish fulfillment that touches our own lives and experiences.

Still, I don't see the correlation. I think you can get this effect either from writing for yourself or others.

I would pull out the following factors as reasons that writers write hopeless cliches:
1. They have not read enough to know what is cliche and what is not. (I think this happens a LOT.)
2. They have a comfort zone and like to write there.
3. They want to sell a novel and think they can sell this because historically, those types of boks have sold.

On Harry Potter, I will say this, "I never stated that Harry Potter was the first child wizard book, I just hate that a hundred books about children and teen wizard only came into WIDESPREAD popularity because of that book and not because of their own merit.

On writing to please others, I meant writing outside your genre (this is where my mind out-thought my hands). People, like myself, have a habit of writing a science fiction and then reading a romance novel and looking at their own story and wondering if their story needs a something from there. However, because that person doesn't write romance, that person will more than likely take a cliche from romance because they don't realize it is one due to lack of experience.

I grew up playing D&D. I read hundreds of fantasy novels and the first 20+ books of the Xanth series. I'm a HUGE fan of the Middle Ages and the Crusades - from a truly historical viewpoint. I enjoy the Arthurian legends. I've read The Hobbit and LOTR at least 4 or 5 times. I love the Harry Potter movies (probably one of the few people in the world that hasn't read any of the books). I recently ended a 7 month addiction to World of Warcraft (which finally "cured" me of Ultima Online). Half of the PC and Xbox games I own are fantasy based. I enjoy playing Fantasy because I have control over the character's development. Sure it's the same "plot" to acquire the 'Pickle of Dragon Slaying' and to save the beautiful Hamster Princess. But it's mostly hours of senseless killing that's less mind-numbing than watching TV (and they have a better story than the many Kung-Fu fighting games).

But I stopped reading fantasy years ago (fairy tales being the exception). The problem with fantasy writing that I saw, like some other posters, is that most fantasy is either a quest for a magical item and/or conquer the evil <insert title/occupation>. I like to be mentally stimulated when I read and Sci-Fi does that for me (especially Hard Sci-Fi like Gregory Benford).

#

Plot Coupons

The basic building blocks of the quest-type fantasy plot. The "hero" collects sufficient plot coupons (magic sword, magic book, magic cat) to send off to the author for the ending. Note that "the author" can be substituted for "the Gods" in such a work: "The Gods decreed he would pursue this quest." Right, mate. The author decreed he would pursue this quest until sufficient pages were filled to procure an advance. (Dave Langford)

But seriously, as for games, my favorite genre is the RPG and just like speculative fiction, that encompasses everything from sci-fi to fantasy to sci-fi/fantasy hybrids, as I like to call them. My favorite tends to be the sci-fi/fantasy hybrids. Why? Because they combine the best elements of both worlds together. You have people using magic, but you also have people using technology. It's an interesting combination and creates often intriguing story lines. One of my favorite games that falls into this category is "Tales of Symphonia." IMO, it had a great complex plot that combined the quest element of fantasy with the politcal intrigue (I'd guess that's what you'd call it) of sci-fi.

quote:

---

Anyone know of any books that combine sci-fi with fantasy?

---