So I'm sitting here writing this morning but also distracting myself a little, and came across this list on ew.com of
20 Low-Budget Sci-Fi Classics. Now, this may well be the fault of the list, or EW, or what is usually low-budget, or whatever, but a lot of these films are horror movies, or if not, post-apocalyptic or dystopic-future kinds of
(
Read more... )
Comments 12
I have a post in me about this, about sci-fi as social commentary and how it is that the personal/political bullshit that people carry around is more transparent in sci-fi than it is in some other literary genres; I'm not convinced, at this moment, that there is something inherent to sci-fi that makes people more hateful, and right now I think it more likely that it's just easier to see in that genre than in others. This week I'm discouraged and feel less sure of that; we'll see.
Since we're chiming in on this here - hate horror, mostly ambivalent about dystopia, happy to eat post-apocalypse with a spoon. :D
Reply
Reply
Lots of SF books don't fit any of those three. Iain M. Banks' Culture novels deal with a far-future utopian society in space, Michael Marshall Smith's books are about far-future Earths (not a series, so, different Earths in each). His far-future Earths can be pretty bizarre, but insofar as human happiness and human corruption goes, on a similar level with our own. No hint of horror or chosen ones in any of them.
I could go on, but that's just naming my favourite two SF authors.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I think some of David Brin's books (specifically Kiln People and some of his Uplift books) would count.
The Culture books from Iain M. Banks don't meet any of those criteria as far as I can tell. A lot of Asimov's stories don't either.
Oh, and how about the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy?
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment