I don't want anyone (and especially MDG) to feel crowded in by strange scifi fans, but I just couldn't not say anything to this. And since t_eyla made it public, I hope this will be taken in the right way. :-)
I grew up loving scifi (I basically knew how to say "hi" in Klingon before I was able to tell my mother I'm hungry.) and the genre has always held a fascination for me that never gets old or can be reduced by a crappily produced german show (Raumschiff Orion).
For me scifi is all about HOPE. Because it usually shows us a version of how the future of mankind could be. And mostly this is a good version (except for Dystopias of course) and even if it is a negative version (like end of humanity etc.) it usually ends with the fact that mankind does survive. Mankind adjusts and moves on. And that's a good thing.
Like t_eyla said, scifi is about the BIG QUESTIONS of Life, the Universe and Everything. And it tries to give some answers. We (audience) might not agree with it, or might find it a little silly sometimes, or even wonder what
( ... )
In defence of science fictiontliJanuary 14 2008, 22:05:02 UTC
From a comment left by MDG: All sci-fi dialogue comes across as overblown and cringey. I disagree. I disagree so much with that statement. Science fiction, by virtue of its very name, is removed from the world we know, can inhabit a whole new universe in some cases, and the very best of the genre manages to do this while also proffering strong parallels and insights into our world. Arguably this can’t not be done at all - we must have something to relate to within the science fiction medium, otherwise it becomes irrelevant. While I admit that yes, there is sci-fi that is dated and cringe-inducing (see Star Trek: The Original Series and the earliest episodes of The Next Generation), there are also products of the genre that are nothing short of mind-blowing
( ... )
Re: In defence of science fictiont_eylaJanuary 14 2008, 22:34:00 UTC
This is where the science fiction aspect stops. But why does it have to stop?
Hee. I think this is why I don't like BSG. I don't argue with anything you said above, except with the statement about it being the most intelligent of its genre around. Because, quite honestly, I don't consider BSG a real science fiction show. Sure, it has a science fiction setting, and science fiction characters, and science fiction bad guys. But what does the show do with these things? It cannibalizes them to turn itself into a show with the classic sort of meaning while mostly discarding what science fiction is all about (I say mostly, because I know there are science fictional aspects in there, which are, however, mostly left-overs from the old show
( ... )
Re: In defence of science fictiontliJanuary 14 2008, 22:46:30 UTC
But why does it have to stop?That's not quite what I meant. And while I try to think of what I meant ;)... yeah, what I was trying to say is that that is where the traditional definition of science fiction, so to speak, stops. It's not to say BSG's any better than any other science fiction show out there; it was to some extent created to reflect modern society, which limits its scope somewhat. And yes, it is pessimistic and dark, which also goes back to its nature as a mirror of sorts
( ... )
Re: In defence of science fictiont_eylaJanuary 14 2008, 22:54:41 UTC
That's exactly what I meant. BSG is trying to be a mirror, while science fiction is trying to be a telescope.
But, yeah. As I said. Not saying it's a bad show. It's surely interesting, for people who like that sort of thing. Just not the science fiction show I'd pick if someone asked me to tell them a good sci-fi show.
And TOS is awesome. From the bouncing cardboard rocks to the tunnels made out of tin foil. Bubblewrap aliens ftw! xD
Tl;dr again... sorry, lol ;)t_eylaJanuary 15 2008, 19:37:15 UTC
thanks, t-eyla, for putting all this a) eloquently and b) without the venom I had been nervously anticipating I don't believe in spouting vitriol when I don't agree with someone. Well-founded arguments work so much better to convince other people of your opinion ;).
this is a personal flaw of my own characterI don't consider it a flaw. It's simply a matter of preference. Me, I could never get into the whole idea of watching/reading something only so I could find out how it relates to the real world. Actually, I have a deep aversion to doing so. As I said, matter of preference
( ... )
Re: Tl;dr again... sorry, lol ;)maddoggirlJanuary 15 2008, 19:59:42 UTC
Erm ... yes, basically. By production, by the way, I meant general slickness of appearance rather than literal producers. But anyway, yeah. I see what you mean about everything.
I've never watched the X Files (bit before my time). I think I'd like it. Mulder and Scully seem sassy in a way that appeals to me. And I like the mystery element. Anyhoo, thanks for taking the time to politely explain why I'm not approaching the show in the right way, because you're right. It'll help me be more understanding next time I clash with my friend Mark over Dr Who (he HAS the sonic screwdriver. And a sonic bottle-opener, but I'm guessing that doesn't feature in the show ;D)
Re: Tl;dr again... sorry, lol ;)t_eylaJanuary 15 2008, 20:19:12 UTC
Oh, the X Files are awesome. It might be a way for you to find your way into the horror/sci-fi genre, if you're interested. X Files isn't quite as hard core as DW xD.
Yay for having convinced you, lol xD. Btw, I wasn't trying to tell you you have to love DW. If you want to, you should go right on hating the show, because there's never going to be a show everybody loves. I just couldn't keep my mouth shut, since I got the feeling that you were missing out on the exact factor that I think makes DW as awesome as I think it is.
I was thinking about buying the sonic screwdriver on ebay, to go with my cosplay Doctor costume. But the December budget didn't cover it D:.
I might not have time to read all of this and the comments line by line, but I skimmed closely (LOL, is that possible?) and I think I agree with what you're saying
( ... )
Oh, and it occurs to me that I ignored that you've mostly discussed television here. I sort of went off on my own little lit tangent, because while I do think sci-fi translates wonderfully well to the screen, I also think it has more impact as written word.
Hah, I was thinking of 1984 as well! Even Frankenstein is considered science fiction - actually, it's considered the first sci-fi novel ever.
I agree. It's really annoying that science fiction is only considered literature worth reading when the author has been dead for at least ten years - and even then it usually doesn't get the respect it deserves. I'm thinking of Stephen King here, too. He's the best author I have ever read, and yet his books are still considered junk literature by far too many people.
Yay for the Big Questions, though. I must say, ever since I discovered this genre, anything else mostly bores me to death. Why should I think about the small stuff if there's the universe to consider? Lol xD.
No, I didn't like Adam's style. I thought it was sloppy. I can deal with a fast narration, but I can't deal with it if an author writes a plot summary with half the information missing and then sells it as a book.
YAYs, you brought the literary side into this! Fantastic!
I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with you, even though I've as yet to manage to read Asimov. It is pretty high on my list, though. :-)
And I've always tried to find out why a lot of people don't like D. Adams, and I think (that's just my theory) that the biggest problem is that he seems to use a different theory to explain the universe in each part of his book(s). I've read them all and I had to take a long time to do so, because otherwise it would have blown my brain to try and wrap it all together. It's the sort of book that needs to stew a little in your head.
Comments 31
I grew up loving scifi (I basically knew how to say "hi" in Klingon before I was able to tell my mother I'm hungry.) and the genre has always held a fascination for me that never gets old or can be reduced by a crappily produced german show (Raumschiff Orion).
For me scifi is all about HOPE. Because it usually shows us a version of how the future of mankind could be. And mostly this is a good version (except for Dystopias of course) and even if it is a negative version (like end of humanity etc.) it usually ends with the fact that mankind does survive. Mankind adjusts and moves on. And that's a good thing.
Like t_eyla said, scifi is about the BIG QUESTIONS of Life, the Universe and Everything. And it tries to give some answers. We (audience) might not agree with it, or might find it a little silly sometimes, or even wonder what ( ... )
Reply
I disagree. I disagree so much with that statement. Science fiction, by virtue of its very name, is removed from the world we know, can inhabit a whole new universe in some cases, and the very best of the genre manages to do this while also proffering strong parallels and insights into our world. Arguably this can’t not be done at all - we must have something to relate to within the science fiction medium, otherwise it becomes irrelevant. While I admit that yes, there is sci-fi that is dated and cringe-inducing (see Star Trek: The Original Series and the earliest episodes of The Next Generation), there are also products of the genre that are nothing short of mind-blowing ( ... )
Reply
But why does it have to stop?
Hee. I think this is why I don't like BSG. I don't argue with anything you said above, except with the statement about it being the most intelligent of its genre around. Because, quite honestly, I don't consider BSG a real science fiction show. Sure, it has a science fiction setting, and science fiction characters, and science fiction bad guys. But what does the show do with these things? It cannibalizes them to turn itself into a show with the classic sort of meaning while mostly discarding what science fiction is all about (I say mostly, because I know there are science fictional aspects in there, which are, however, mostly left-overs from the old show ( ... )
Reply
Reply
But, yeah. As I said. Not saying it's a bad show. It's surely interesting, for people who like that sort of thing. Just not the science fiction show I'd pick if someone asked me to tell them a good sci-fi show.
And TOS is awesome. From the bouncing cardboard rocks to the tunnels made out of tin foil. Bubblewrap aliens ftw! xD
Reply
Reply
I don't believe in spouting vitriol when I don't agree with someone. Well-founded arguments work so much better to convince other people of your opinion ;).
this is a personal flaw of my own characterI don't consider it a flaw. It's simply a matter of preference. Me, I could never get into the whole idea of watching/reading something only so I could find out how it relates to the real world. Actually, I have a deep aversion to doing so. As I said, matter of preference ( ... )
Reply
I've never watched the X Files (bit before my time). I think I'd like it. Mulder and Scully seem sassy in a way that appeals to me. And I like the mystery element. Anyhoo, thanks for taking the time to politely explain why I'm not approaching the show in the right way, because you're right. It'll help me be more understanding next time I clash with my friend Mark over Dr Who (he HAS the sonic screwdriver. And a sonic bottle-opener, but I'm guessing that doesn't feature in the show ;D)
Reply
Yay for having convinced you, lol xD. Btw, I wasn't trying to tell you you have to love DW. If you want to, you should go right on hating the show, because there's never going to be a show everybody loves. I just couldn't keep my mouth shut, since I got the feeling that you were missing out on the exact factor that I think makes DW as awesome as I think it is.
I was thinking about buying the sonic screwdriver on ebay, to go with my cosplay Doctor costume. But the December budget didn't cover it D:.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I agree. It's really annoying that science fiction is only considered literature worth reading when the author has been dead for at least ten years - and even then it usually doesn't get the respect it deserves. I'm thinking of Stephen King here, too. He's the best author I have ever read, and yet his books are still considered junk literature by far too many people.
Yay for the Big Questions, though. I must say, ever since I discovered this genre, anything else mostly bores me to death. Why should I think about the small stuff if there's the universe to consider? Lol xD.
No, I didn't like Adam's style. I thought it was sloppy. I can deal with a fast narration, but I can't deal with it if an author writes a plot summary with half the information missing and then sells it as a book.
I love his ideas, though :).
Reply
I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with you, even though I've as yet to manage to read Asimov. It is pretty high on my list, though. :-)
And I've always tried to find out why a lot of people don't like D. Adams, and I think (that's just my theory) that the biggest problem is that he seems to use a different theory to explain the universe in each part of his book(s). I've read them all and I had to take a long time to do so, because otherwise it would have blown my brain to try and wrap it all together. It's the sort of book that needs to stew a little in your head.
Reply
Leave a comment