[–] [deleted] 0 points 28 points (+28|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
13

[–] libby 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

I was gonna just say "Nerds!".

You put it more eloquently and less offensively though.

0
8

[–] tcp 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Is it offensive? What does a real nerd do nowadays? The mainstream has already adopted computers, STEM, Harry Potter, Twilight, and a watered-down version of everything from nerd culture. Not even Star Trek nor Star Wars are hard SF/Fantasy anymore. Everyone finding dates on Tinder or match.com also puts the anti-social behavior in a new light.

0
1

[–] revofire 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

This. I adore sci-fi AND fantasy genres alike. I love them both. And for this, I appreciate the overlap. I just wish there was more content for both departments.

1
19

[–] DerpExpress 1 points 19 points (+20|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Star Trek -> Syfy

LoTR -> Fantasy

Star Wars-> Science Fantasy

0
3

[–] Doomking_Grimlock 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Gods but I do love me some good ol' Science Fantasy.

0
1

[–] Krieger_IRL 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I usually tell people Star Wars is space fantasy, but close enough. I'm just happy I'm not alone in this differentiation.

0
0

[–] thepizzaelemental 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Eh, Star Wars is more of a Space Opera. Kinda like Captain Harlock.

0
16

[–] ssjheero 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago 

Science Fiction is Fantasy. Very, very few science fiction stories have the science and the mechanics behind them actually mattering (after all, few writers are also scientists); the science is just a means to an end to tell the stories with the powers of teleportation, telepathy, etc. Do the specific scientific breakthroughs behind the transporter in Star Trek really matter? No, all that matters is that it allows the subject to (almost) instantly move from one location to another, and the mechanics of how it works is largely ignored until a story specifically calls to it. In a Fantasy story, the transporter can easily be replaced with teleportation spells and runes and such, with no difference in effect on the story.

Fantasy should be the correct catch-all term. Nothing about "Fantasy" means it must be swords-and-sorcery, stuck in the medieval age. Consider Star Wars. There is absolutely no science in Star Wars. Space is a setting for a Fantasy story about good and evil, with absolute morality being a major theme. The genres of Fantasy are about a fantastic world where abilities not present in the current world set the stage for stories, maybe about good and evil, maybe about politics. This can apply whether the setting is the Tolkien-land (Heroic Fantasy), the current age (Urban Fantasy), or the future (Science Fiction).

0
2

[–] ghotioninabarrel 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Of course, there's also "hard fantasy" where the magic system gets fleshed out in extreme detail with similar results.

0
1

[–] ChanceofRain 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Closest I got to that was reading the Dragonlance series, or perhaps some of the Elric stories.

0
1

[–] ChanceofRain 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Check out Camelot 30k by Robert Forward, probably the most in-depth science fiction I've ever read.

0
1

[–] ssjheero 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I've never read it, but yes, there's a scale to how "hard" the science is in a story. Since few writers are knowledgeable in scientific subjects, the "hard" stories tend to be much fewer than the "soft" stories, where you can entirely replace the "science" with "magic" and nothing about the story would change.

0
0

[–] Yohbro 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Is it really Star Trek and Star Wars that are your examples of why science fiction should be within the fantasy genre and browsing category?

0
0

[–] ssjheero 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

No, there are other sci-fi stories which can be repurposed as fantasy stories. Mass Effect is a version of a Cthulhu-lite storyline in space. Guardians of the Galaxy is a generic fantasy story where a group of differing races (all humanoid, naturally) come together to keep a MacGuffin away from the villain. There are many others, but those are the ones that come to mind right away.

0
0

[–] 3807656? 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

You've said that few sci-fi writers are actually knowledgeable scientifically. Asimov was a biochemist and self-educated astronomer, and Robert A. Heinlein was an engineer. Then you have writers like Dan Simmons who, I believe, consult with scientists for practically every sci-fi work they produce, or writers like Carl Sagan (who was of course not known primarily for his sci-fi, but it's out there).

I would agree that sci-fi has overlap with fantasy in that many of the principles good works explore do not presently exist, but the point is they could, which is untrue of fantasy (at least as the stories are told). Sci-fi asks questions such as what if?, and develops stories based on the writers' responses. Sci-fi extends on present science to reach levels that could theoretically be reached. Consider how many devices in Star Trek were "fantastic" when they first appeared. Several of such devices are now parts of our everyday lives. Fiction to reality. You don't get that often in fantasy.

0
1

[–] ssjheero 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I know there are writers who were knowledgeable about science. The vast majority aren't, simply because the skills required to learn science is not required to be a good writer, or even a good sci-fi writer. You can be a great sci-fi writer without any scientific knowledge, so long as it sounds plausible or you put enough technobabble that's internally consistent.

While it is true that science fiction does ask that question, I posit that that's not a big enough difference to make it a distinct genre from fantasy. It is a superficial difference that doesn't change the overall story structure, character archetypes, and story hooks. Both genres use the same fantastic tools, such as instantaneous long-range communication (using communicators in sci-fi, but telepathy in fantasy), teleportation (using transporters or magic), and flight (using hoverboards and such, or wings), to establish that the setting's heroes has many more abilities than we of Earth have.

While many genres share tools and settings, sci-fi and fantasy blends together all the time because they both deal with fantastic elements that can't happen in the world, past, present, or future. Faster-than-light travel is completely impossible. Time travel (to the past) is completely impossible. Yet both happens in both sci-fi and fantasy all the time. I believe just dressing one up in technobabble and technology doesn't make it any less fantasy than if it were magic. It is for this reason I believe they are in the same basic genre. If you want to argue semantics, then I'll start using Speculative Fiction for the shared genre instead of just calling it all Fantasy.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] SilverBanana 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

That is true, but I would call hard sci-fi and future-fantasy to be on the opposite end of literary spectrum.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

1
5

[–] INTERNET_TRASHCAN 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago  (edited ago)

They all typically require entire universes, for consistency. You can't have a period-fiction book about a WWII merchant that can throw fireballs (I may have just unintentionally described teen lit.)

0
3

[–] Devieus 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Fantasy is sci-fi, but from the super duper future, like 3 apocalypses after the sci-fi.

0
3

[–] Forbin 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

To answer your question you have to go back a bit in time, because the "Sci-Fi/Fantasy" category isn't one that was adopted recently. Going back to the earlier part of the 20th Century, genres like Sci-Fi and Fantasy were mostly found in pulp magazines and aimed at youth. There was really no division between "speculative science fiction" and sci-fi that was rooted more in fantasy. It was pretty much all considered made-up stuff, not rooted in reality. That's how both the industry and readers perceived that kind of writing, and therefore it was easy to either conflate or associate Sci-Fi and Fantasy together. One took place in the future (generally) with fantastical machines that allowed all sorts of stuff to happen, and the other didn't focus on pseudo-science, but instead explored exotic fantasy worlds & creatures.

TL:DR Grouping Sci-Fi/Fantasy together stems from an earlier era where the two genres shared more similarities than they currently do.

0
3

[–] NedTaggart 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Its all a subset of Speculative Fiction. Sci Fi and Fantasy, Horror is usually grouped separately, but is also in that class.

load more comments ▼ (14 remaining)