In OSC's book, Science Fiction and Fantasy, he says Sci-Fi is a big tent with infinite boundaries, then sort of slams "light adventures." Somewhere in one of this site's topics, someone mentioned that some publishers won't even consider a manuscript if it hints of tv/movie commercialization (unless I read that wrong). Chronicles of Empire referred to "market-oriented sci-fi."

So by "market orientated" I mean for that aim:

* First chapter short and punchy, and with a hook [specifically to catch busy editors],
* First 50 pages having good pace and movement [to keep said editors reading],
* Aim of under 100,000 words [see srhowen's important post on the subject]
* Mainstream writing style [ie, no particular pretension]

I don't know OSC's writing - sorry - but the statement quoted doesn't seem too contestable.

Tolkien defined the fantasy genre, and it seems that most fantasy writers aspire to be nothing more than poor clones.

Sci-fi is different, though - there is no single master. Instead there is a range of different names with a far wider remit: Clarke, Asimov, Aldiss, for example.

When the fantasy market seems generally constrained and formulated, the sci-fi genre has been left wide open, with no defining iconic moment the rest must pivot around.

As for what constitutes "true" sci-fi - that really is one for the idealists to worry about.

As a new author, the main concern is simply to interest editors and agents.

And because the sci-fi market is so broad, it is perhaps less constrictive on a persons' creativity. The market is based on ideas and vision, rather than a need to be a strait-jacketed sell-out.

quote:

---

In OSC's book, Science Fiction and Fantasy, he says Sci-Fi is a big tent with infinite boundaries, then sort of slams "light adventures." – Kolona

---

The big tent is infinite in that, so long as there is some hint of the things pushing the boundary of the norm, you can do anything you want in a speculative fiction story (Science fiction/fantasy/etc.). Push a lot, push a little. Focus in on a family, or span a solar system. A mystery, romance, strange places, new ideas can all be the drive behind the story.

Compare that to the limitations on a mystery or romance writer. The mystery must have a mystery as its main focus; a romance must focus in on a relationship. Sure they can have other elements as well, but there is a specific plot element that makes them part of the mystery or romance genre.

I think the slam you feel is just OSC pushing for people to look beyond simple answers. To go beyond a simple black and white standoff in a situation, and probe the gray between for a richer, more thought provoking story.

As far as the comment about commercial fiction… well, you can’t write in other people worlds (Star Trek, Star Wars, etc.) and expect to get published unless you’ve got specific permission from the world’s owner, if that’s what you mean.

Many a Science fiction work has been made into movies (of varying quality – but that is another discussion entirely) – Dune, 2001:A Space Odyssey, The Postman, Minority Report are just a few that come to mind. So I don’t know that there is anything particularly noncommercial about a particular piece of fiction, other than that some can be more easily told through the available technology and lengths allowed by film/TV.

This idea that that if the general public likes something, then it’s no good … phooey on that, I say! I think that sounds like a pretty snobby and elitist attitude to take, which totally slams the very people that most enjoy a good SF tale. I know there are literary types out there that hold to such ideas, but I don’t think there are that many people out there supporting them.

<Done with ranting now, which is in no way directed at you Kolona. The that last idea just bugs me >

(There are those who do sneer at what they call "generic" or "lowest common denominator" fantasy or science fiction--the kind of stuff that has a lot of appeal to a lot of readers, but you'll find such sneerers in every kind of fiction.)

There are also those who will argue that the fantasy that imitates Tolkien's fantasy is only one kind of fantasy (and I'd agree with them). He defined what is sometimes called "high fantasy" perhaps, but what he wrote could also be called "sword and sorcery." There are many different kinds of fantasy, just as there are many different kinds of science fiction.

TV/movie commercialization is something else entirely. Fiction that is based on something someone else has created and sold (not just on TV or in the movies--there are game-related stories, for example), basically infringes on the copyright of the original creator. As long as such "fan fiction" is not used for profit, and is a way of spreading the interest in the original, then most copyright owners (STAR TREK, STAR WARS, etc) don't bother to try to stop it, but it is, technically, copyright infringement, and that's one reason why we don't want such stories critiqued here at
Hatrack.

quote:

---

No, I understand about copyright infringement, but the comment somewhere in the archives--oh, I don't want to go through them all again--was that some editors at some sci-fi publishing houses immediately discounted anything that smacked of the big screen.

---

Since most publishing contracts have the publisher in charge of selling movie rights (and getting 50% for doing so), it doesn't make sense that they'd discount anything that has movie potential.

Perhaps we're all misunderstanding. I can only think of those two interpretations for "smacked of the big screen" (ie, movie potential and copyright infringement).