[ SECRET POST #3281 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3281 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Sam Smith, Duran Duran, a-ha, Madonna, Alicia Keys and Jack White]


__________________________________________________



03.
[The DCU]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Star Trek: The Next Generation]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Jojo's Bizarre Adventure]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Paladin Danse - Fallout 4]


__________________________________________________



07.
[A Song of Ice and Fire]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Candy Candy]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Agent Carter, Jessica Jones and others]















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 043 secrets from Secret Submission Post #469.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

none of those things are actually science fiction, though, whereas Frankenstein actually is, in a really central, important sense. Certainly, True History never fucking met science fiction.

going to the moon or being about planets or whatever does not, in fact, suffice to make something science fiction

[(Anonymous)]

Somnium was written by an actual scientist and was partially fiction, partially scientific treatise. How is that NOT science fiction?

[(Anonymous)]

because science fiction is not a "partly fiction, partly scientific treatise"

that said, it's closer than some of the others

[(Anonymous)]

because science fiction is not a "partly fiction, partly scientific treatise"

Then...what is science fiction?

[dancingmouse]

Star Trek, of course!

[(Anonymous)]

Isaac Asimov has referred to Somnium as the first science fiction novel. ISAAC FUCKING ASIMOV. If anyone knows SF, it's him.

[(Anonymous)]

Er. Wrong.

"Mary Shelley was the first to make use of a new finding of science which she advanced further to a logical extreme, and it is that which makes Frankenstein the first true science fiction story." - "The First Science Fiction Novel," Material for Frankenstein, recording, Caedmon, 1977, Asimov on Science Fiction, pg. 97

[(Anonymous)]

Isaac Asimov said a lot of shit

[(Anonymous)]

The point I'm making is that they're wrong so they can't use him.

[(Anonymous)]

I suspect you could also probably find a quote of him saying that about Somnium.

Because Isaac Asimov said a lot of shit.

[(Anonymous)]

You are aware that science-fantasy and soft science fiction are things that exist, right?

[(Anonymous)]

Actually a harder definition of science fiction would be more likely to include some of these things

That said you probably have a point re: science fantasy, but I would argue that - from the point of view of a historical treatment of science fiction as a genre - science fantasy is extremely marginal

[philstar22]

This. Science fiction is an extremely broad genre that can mean a lot of different things (same with fantasy for that matter).

[(Anonymous)]

I feel it should also be noted that social science fiction (like Fahrenheit 451, Brave New World, 1984, etc.) is a thing too.

Many of the works OP listed would fall under that category, due to being social satires with what we would now consider SF/F elements.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, the Blazing World is far more fantasy, I'd say (unlucky protagonist gets swept aside to frozen mystical land where she ends up queen!)

[(Anonymous)]

Do you also object to the Barsoom series and other planetary romances along those lines being called science fiction? Because honestly, most of those aren't that different from The Blazing World.

What about Star Wars? There's no real science anywhere in those movies, but they're still widely acknowledged as science fiction.

[(Anonymous)]

If someone tried to claim that Barsoom and other planetary romances were hugely significant for the development of science fiction as a coherent genre, and that they were core members of the class, then yes, I would disagree with that argument.

I'm not that interested in just saying "What year was this made, and is it, according to some rubric, within the boundaries of science fiction?" I don't think that's a useful question to ask, at all. The reason that I think Frankenstein is important is because there's a throughline - both thematically and historically - with what I think of as the central, basic functions and works and themes of science fiction. And I just don't think that's true for planetary romance or science fantasy or whatever.

[(Anonymous)]

If your argument hinges solely on "Is this important to the history or the development of science fiction as a genre?" then I must continue to wonder what your thoughts are on how Star Wars fits into all this. You can argue until you're blue in the face that Star Wars is really fantasy, or that it's science-fantasy rather than "pure" science fiction (which I would agree with, btw), but that doesn't change how influential it's been to the science fiction genre, especially in the context of film and television.

[(Anonymous)]

No, I'd agree Star Wars has been pretty important to those things, although I tend to think much, much more about SF literature rather than movies or TV. And also I think, you know, it's mostly become important only in the last 40 or so years - for obvious reasons.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, if you're going to /space/ with /spaceships/ I pretty much give you a sci-fi ticket, just not to be pedantic. If you go to a magic realm, you get fantasy.

[(Anonymous)]

Does SW count as scifi in retrospect what with all the science it's inspired? Everything from advances in artificial limbs to robotics will generally owe something to people being inspired by something in Star Wars. Though yeah, the plots are far more fantasy.