The Mathematics of Tone - Downbeat SF Stories

[bluetyson]

I have read all of Year's Best SF type volumes so far for this year, and it seems like what people have been complaining about may well be right. Not that it has anything to do with whether the stories are good or not, but as rough counts from memory

Comments

[ccfinlay]

I think funny tends to get short shrift in general, in part because too many stories are funny and nothing more, but more generally because funny is, by definition, "not serious"; this is compounded by the fact that nearly every writer believes that they're funny, and so there's not as much regard for the writing of it.

[bluetyson]

Don't they say comedy is hard? Or is that only for acting?

Lots of work doesn't set out to be deliberately (or slyly) funny or satirical, in general though?

[ccfinlay]

Yes, but for comedy to work, it has to look easy. Comedy that obviously labors -- like Feghoots, for example -- tends to be pretty minor and/or not so good.

I'm not sure how to answer your final question. F&SF publishes humor in every issue, but much of it is fantasy and not SF. However, Analog publishes a humorous piece in almost every issue (their "Probability Zero" feature) and that is always SF. I think most magazines publish good humor when they can find it; it's just harder to find than we think.

[bluetyson]

Sure. Just from feel (I haven't tracked it), it is Asimov's that is the humourless cousin, of the three (or 4, counting JBU, which clearly likes some funny, too.)

I could go back and look at 2007 from however rough memory I suppose.

The latest Analog has 3 I would put in that class, some of the Probability Zero as you say.

[squirrel_monkey]

Plus, one person's funny is another person's annoying.

[bluetyson]

Sure, but, say, in the case of Barry Longyear's animal cop capers in Analog, it is clearly intended as comedy/farce, as opposed to Ian Watson as Rich mentioned.

[ccfinlay]

Yep, and that's just as true for editors as for any other group of readers.