It's no secret that I have always loved science-fiction. From the Chronicles to Lord of the Rings to The Space Trilogy to Star Trek to Star Wars, I have always been intrigued by forays into a realm or world or universe like and un-like our own. However, I'm discerning in my taste for sci-fi fantasy. I'm particular. Snobbish even. I don't do campy. I don't do unrealistic, if that's even possible as a prerequisite for science fiction. It's as difficult for me to explain my taste in science fiction as it is my enjoyment of science fiction.
There is an element to good science fiction, to the Asimov's out there. It consists of the same stuff of a good western movie. It entails part imagination, part familiarity, part possibility, part impossibility, part morality. It should inspire or stir or intrigue a part of us so that we can sense a bond with a story or character even though our worlds have nothing in common. A sensibility about it that allows for the individual in us to see ourselves in this world making the same decisions and mistakes even though we can't begin to imagine ourselves in a world like theirs. Good science fiction should insist upon and instill a hope in humanity. One reason for the difficulty in ascertaining my enjoyment of it is because I don't think it's taken as a serious genre; not recognized in literature or in film. It's often stereotyped by the "nerds" and with good reason. I am not deluded in this sense -- I don't go dressing up to conventions for example. Of course, the stereotypes associated with the genre belie any credence to it and keep the enthusiasts in the closet for fear of being grouped in with the groupies. Star Trek: TNG is philosophical? Yeah, whatever. But it is. From Mills, to Kant to Plato to Sartre it's there and obvious. Also obvious: pointy ears and phasers and funny shaped beings. And for that reason you probably don't believe me.
Another confession/apology is due. To Eric: I'm sorry I made fun of you back in college when we first met and you were reading that fantasy novel series. Though it was probably campy, I shouldn't have mocked you for reading it! However, it's not like you've read another one since, so...
All this said, I've recently stumbled across a book I feel I should read (to be explained in a later post): Dune. So I'm reading it. And we'll see. Next will be the series my Dad's said I should read for forever: Foundations.
Anyway, I'd like to be able to hash out my sentiment a little better for this genre so feel free interject some thoughts into this post.
3 comments:
No worries. I had totally forgotten about that book until you mentioned it here. By the way, the book was Robert Jordan's "The Wheel of Time" series. I only read about 1/4 of the first book (of a 10+ book series) and decided it was too campy for me - whatever that means.
Isaac Asimov's Foundation Series, written over many years, is, in my mind, the best Science Fiction ever written. I do not read Star Trek Novels, not now, though I did when they first started to come out. The best: My Enemy, My Friend (or something like that). But after awhile they all read the same just like the TV series though they are better than the books. Aaron and I have had a debate rating the ST Movies. Here are mine, in descending order:
IV,VII,VI, II, III, VIII, I, IX, V
The Movie 'I Robot' is very loosely based on Asimov [the law of Robotics, etc]. What captured my interest in the Foundation Series was the characters (a lot), space travel, passing of time, and a whole lot more.
Hmm, I may pick them up this summer as an easy read...along with the commentaries, Daniel and Revelation [the last two not easy read}.
Don't discount the sci-fi book novels. Early first editions are highly sought after by collectors.
Post a Comment