[ SECRET POST #2557 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2557 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.



__________________________________________________


11.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 013 secrets from Secret Submission Post #364.
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)]

Now, I'll admit it's been probably 15 years since I read any sci-fi at all, so I may be generalizing via missing out on a huge chunk of writing that I never bothered to read because it didn't appeal to me.

But the real problem? Our modern lives have become sci-fi reality. The things that authors dreamed up in fiction in the early days aren't fiction anymore. Space travel, talking computers, hell, half of Star Trek TNG-era gadgets are real things we use in our every day lives. Additionally, the more boundaries science itself has pushed (outside of technology), the less mystery there is about the universe - that is, you can't just go "lol science!" to explain human migration on ark ships to new galaxies, people know too much about the truth of how that would/wouldn't work that you can't just wave a magic wand to gloss over the meta. So, it's going to be a while before authors can think a step ahead of science and technology, and find new, unexplored territory that would make an engaging story.

I mean, think about it. In the 1950's people still fervently believed there was life on the moon and Mars, and they they could be visited by peaceful aliens from Saturn who could give them guiding inspiration. We now know none of that is possible - there is no point in imagining any different when we know too much. Imagination has to move beyond knowledge in order to craft an engaging story.

[(Anonymous)]

I think that's a reasonable explanation for why cyberpunk has gone into massive decline (and why attempts to make it nowadays can barely be classified as science fiction, cf William Gibson's recent work among others). And I accept that stuff about plausibility makes it more difficult to write really hard science fiction, especially if you want to combine that with a broad, space-operatic sensibility.

But I don't think the explanation holds for science fiction in general - space travel isn't really everyday technology, especially passenger space travel. Terraforming isn't everyday technology. And there's nothing stopping people from just being a little implausible. I do think there probably has been a bit of a narrowing of the field, and the grounds for being really optimistic and still plausible has been pretty restricted. But I don't accept that science fiction in general has been outmoded or left behind by the times. It still has just as much use as ever and just as much appeal, IMO at least.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with all of this.

I'll admit to not reading terribly much hard sci-fi, so I'm not sure about the actual state of the genre, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's been a shift in subject matter, that might also be throwing the OP off. Old-school hard SF was all about robots and spaceships and very *mechanical* advances, as well as an off-world theme. Whereas modern hard SF could be focusing more on the biological and medical advances to come, and be more likely to be set here on Earth rather than in space. That might seem more "soft" to people used to Asimov and Niven. Doesn't make it any less hard if the research and plausibility is there.

Hell, thinking about it, some of the near-future thriller stuff sounds pretty hard to me, where the authors put in the time to actually come up with a plausible biological agent or rogue drone or whatever.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

This anon sums up exactly my problem. We're on the freaking ISS, for crying out loud! Pros think it's "too boring" to extrapolate from THAT, fifty years into the future? Or Mars? Or the (alleged) Chinese moon base? These are all things that are happening that would still make good hard SF. Write 15 minutes into the future? No problem! There's plenty of space stuff to write 15 minutes into the future about!

But no, it's all about body-mods and extra-longevity and always, always, being Earth-bound. :-(

Thank you to the anon above who recommended Jack Campbell, I will look him up.

Re: OP

[bringreligiontothewamwams]

Those stories about Chinese Mars and Moonbases (and they will all be Chinese, as will any future space stations) have all been written back in the 1950s. There is no new mileage in them. There is no new mileage in hard sf because the future of space exploration is Chinese and the future of Western readers is grubbing for welfare checks, or cardboard boxes to sleep in, in the ruins of symbols of 80s and 90s prosperity.

Frankly it'll be amazing if there are any realistic attempts to reach other planets even within our solar system from even China. We don't have the oil reserves to support the energy requirements a society capable of reaching them would need any longer. We missed out on space travel because we cut back in the 80s with a damn truck instead of pressing outwards. Now we're groundbound into a slow extinction.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

I disagree, I think there's definitely mileage in other countries conquering space...if for no other than reason than because they will. And don't forget, all those stories written in the 1950s were, er, less than optimistic/positive towards the occupants of said bases and colonies (because of the Cold War / red scare stuff).

Even we are groundbound, that doesn't mean the fiction has to be. :-(

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

Yep, if you want science and spaceships Campbell is a good bet. Timothy Zahn also writes pretty regularly, although his recent 'space train' series is less 'hard' than many of his others.

[ketita]

I agree to a certain extent, but this isn't taking into account that a lot of stuff that was written into science fiction is still quite far from reality, especially concerning space travel. Larry Niven was amazing at building intriguing worlds that pushed boundaries, for example. But we've fallen into some tropes, recently, and I think that science fiction nowadays is often more "gritty" and less speculative, which is a shame.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

So what, if it's "far from reality?" That's your problem? As I stated below, Hard SF used to be set hundreds, thousands, even millions of years into the future. Why is this not the standard anymore, I wonder?

Re: OP

[ketita]

I guess I didn't state myself clearly, but my point was that I don't think that "us living science fiction" today is an explanation, since we're still very far from most sci-fi realities....

Re: OP

[ketita]

I have no idea how you even got that from my comment, tbh, I read all the old-school sci-fi and mentioned Larry Niven positively, and that's pretty straight-up hard sci-fi.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

So, you're going to enlighten us with an ignorant analysis of a genre you admit that you don't currently read, and clearly didn't quite understand when you did read it?