That makes Star Wars science fiction, despite the notable lack of science.
Pretty much what I've always considered it. And most people I know if you asked them "what genre of story is Star Wars?" the answer would be "Sci-fi". It's only when I get into discussions like this that I ever hear someone call it anything else.
These are, to some extent, pseudo-academic distinctions, but I have also read science fiction authors who stated that this was their view. They aren't necessarily agreed by everyone.
Not surprised.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just don't think "serious science" is a hard requirement for science fiction.
Seconded.
You could argue that the Force is basically magic and that's what pushes it into the science fantasy category.
That was what I was thinking, yes. But sci-fantasy isn't as well-known a genre. My own experience with it is pretty much summed up by Final Fantasy, Star Wars, D&D/Pathfinder, and maybe one or two other things I can't think of at the moment.
Mention "sci-fantasy" (or even abbreviated "science fantasy") to most people on the street and you'll probably get a funny look, at least for the first few seconds until their brain processes that it's clearly a portmanteau of "sci-fi" and "fantasy", even though people are starting to become more familiar with the component genres themselves combining them is still not exactly commonplace. And I'm still willing to bet a fair number will ask "Do you mean sci-fi?" first.
More generally, the basic problem lies in the distinction between Science fiction as setting and science fiction as genre.
I can agree to this.
Steampunks just not for everyone, if you don't like it thats fine. I am revving up to start my Steampunk homebrew and told the players to read the setting before committing. A player who had been with me for 2 campaigns now said he didn't like the setting so dipped. No hard feelings, I knew it wasn't for everyone, though I setting/system swap a lot so am constantly loosing and regaining players. I dig the genre most the time, but even I don't like every variation I've seen. Luckily, its a big world and lots of people can have lots of tastes.
Agreed. If my group wanted to give it a go, I wouldn't leave the group. I had a devil of time finding a group I fit in with fairly well. the setting is not a big problem compared to finding personalities that mesh together even a bit. I wouldn't agree to GM it, but I'd give it a try as a player.
But the little bit I've read or when I talked to the players that are into it, it just doesn't seem like something I would pursue either.
However, some of these posts sound like some people's steampunk is pretty different from other people's steampunk. So maybe I just need to find some different peoples to give it a try.
However, some of these posts sound like some people's steampunk is pretty different from other people's steampunk. So maybe I just need to find some different peoples to give it a try.
Pretty much, yeah. Much like any genre, really.
...
When Sci-Fi blatantly ignores physics as Star Trek, and most of the others frequently do, it becomes magic.If anyone ever tries to argue that Trek is serious science, I will simply reply with the two words "Heisenberg Compensator", and see if they get the joke.
I remember it coming up as a point to be made fun of, but afraid I don't really remember the context.
..
...
See, that's not the definition I'm used to seeing used for sci-fi. Maybe I just hang out in the wrong crowds.What's always defined "sci-fi" for me or anyone I have discussed the subject with is "fiction with modern or futuristic setting". If it has computers and/or robots, it's probably sci-fi, unless there's blatantly magic or other supernatural stuff, in which case it's sci-fantasy. If it lacks that stuff and is just straight up supernatural, it's fantasy. And if it lacks the supernatural, it's historical fiction.
Beyond that is just the sliding scale of hardness. Hard sci-fi is the more realistic, the more complex, and the more rules-intensive; soft sci-fi is the "it's technology, it just works, don't gotta explain jack".
That's not the definition I use. At least the few time I've read some author's definition it has matched mine. But I am quite sure their are plenty of people on your end of the curve that use a different definition. It happens.
I have read books I would call sci-fi set in ancient Greece-Egypt like settings. They set up the physical rules for their world then followed them. No spaceships or lasers involved.
I've read books in a way-off futuristic setting that I will just call fantasy.
Which I've already supplied. :)While the term was coined for Difference Engine, it doesn't limit the genre quite that much. Modern steampunk is more about the trappings, the retro-tech, than it's about analytical engines and the manipulation of society with information.
If you stuck with that, there would really only be a few works of steampunk and we'd need another name for the rest.:).
It is not uncommon for early works in a field, or the works that coin a term, to not fit into what that term eventually means.
Sherlock Holmes is a good example. It is generally credited with inventing the Mystery genre, but by modern standards would not fit in. It doesn't really follow any of the conventions that make up the genre. - most notably by the fact that the reader is not given critical information to be able to solve the mystery before the big reveal.
I have read books I would call sci-fi set in ancient Greece-Egypt like settings. They set up the physical rules for their world then followed them. No spaceships or lasers involved.
I've read books in a way-off futuristic setting that I will just call fantasy.
Alright, but if you handed either of those to someone not entrenched in literary analysis as yourself, what would you expect them to call them? Likely the average "guy on the street" would call the former fantasy (because it's set in a more historical or medieval or old-fashioned setting) and the latter sci-fi (because it is more futuristic).
Consider it a layman's definition if nothing else, perhaps.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Science-fiction doesn't need hard, working science. It just mean that the "fiction" part applies to element of science as well, not only to the plot.
"fictive-science" might have been a better word?
Star Wars is a strange beast, but it can be coined as science fiction because much of what is fictive about it concerns "science". It could be argued that this fictive science is not the main focus of the story and therefore should be another literature genre, but since science fiction and fantasy are often grouped together in libraries / merchandised together / publicized and aimed at the same general public, the marriage of the two genres in Star Wars is a natural one IMO.
I think the funniest revelation in this entire conversation is that, at least according to Elter and Aubrey's definitions, I'm apparently not a sci-fi fan at all, or at least a very minimal one. Everything I enjoy about sci-fi apparently falls better under sci-fantasy or futuristic fantasy genres. I guess that means I learned something today?
Granted, that still doesn't stop most bookstores and libraries from stocking those books in a sci-fi section.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As mush as wikipedia can be trusted as a reference, the wiki page on science fiction is an interesting read, nothing among other things the difficulty to state what science-fiction means.
So let's see what it has to say on the Steampunk subgenre...
Steampunk is based on the idea of futuristic technology existing in the past, usually the 19th century, and often set in Victorian era England—but with prominent elements of either science fiction or fantasy, such as fictional technological inventions like those found in the works of H. G. Wells and Jules Verne, or real technological developments like the computer occurring at an earlier date. Popular examples include The Difference Engine by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling, Leviathan series by Scott Westerfeld, Bas-Lag series by China Miéville, as well as Girl Genius web comic by Phil and Kaja Foglio, although seeds of the subgenre may be seen in certain works of Michael Moorcock, Philip José Farmer and Steve Stiles, and in such games as Space: 1889 and Marcus Rowland's Forgotten Futures. Machines are most often powered by steam in this genre (hence the name). Terry Gilliam's 1985 film Brazil is seen as inspiration for writers and artists of the steampunk sub-culture.
[edit] Brazil and Girl Genius; interesting. They seem to broaden the definition to "science in the past" over than "super steam-powered engine", up to Dieselpunk or alternate history when gas-powered engines replace steam.
treknobabble
*slow clap*
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When I think of steampunk, I think of it as a world of "What if". What if all of the ideas of the past that were eventually proven to be impossible actually did work. What if electricity could bring back the dead. What if you could shoot someone out of a cannon all of the way to Mars? What if giant land battleships were in fact feasible?
Perhaps it is because in this alternate world the laws of nature are slightly different from ours, or perhaps the people are just able to make scientific leaps that we are not.
How it happens is not as important for me as the result, a world where semi-archaic tech can produce effects the same as or even superior to modern tech. That is steampunk to me.
Though most bookstores and libraries don't actually have separate science fiction and fantasy sections anyway, so hard sf winds up next to swords and sorcery.I think the funniest revelation in this entire conversation is that, at least according to Elter and Aubrey's definitions, I'm apparently not a sci-fi fan at all, or at least a very minimal one. Everything I enjoy about sci-fi apparently falls better under sci-fantasy or futuristic fantasy genres. I guess that means I learned something today?
Granted, that still doesn't stop most bookstores and libraries from stocking those books in a sci-fi section.
Really? Man, I've been living in the odd place out all my life, then. Almost every bookstore I can recall had a separate section for fantasy and for sci-fi, with different signs for each.
Really? Man, I've been living in the odd place out all my life, then. Almost every bookstore I can recall had a separate section for fantasy and for sci-fi, with different signs for each.Granted, that still doesn't stop most bookstores and libraries from stocking those books in a sci-fi section.Though most bookstores and libraries don't actually have separate science fiction and fantasy sections anyway, so hard sf winds up next to swords and sorcery.
They are more and more recognized and cataloged as different, but they were (are) equally snob-ed by the literary community for a long time and thrown in the same basket. Many libraries have a bigger spirituality/esoterism section than sci-fi/fantasy combined.
Writers of fantasy and sci-fi are still under the same association if I'm not mistaken.
|
I think the funniest revelation in this entire conversation is that, at least according to Elter and Aubrey's definitions, I'm apparently not a sci-fi fan at all, or at least a very minimal one. Everything I enjoy about sci-fi apparently falls better under sci-fantasy or futuristic fantasy genres. I guess that means I learned something today?
By your own admission you said you don't know much about science (pretty obvious, since LazarX's comments are actually schoolboy physics, not treknobabble - the Heisenberg principle is one of the prime objections to teleportation a la the energisers). You like the trappings of science fiction, but you don't have the background to recognise what is and isn't. Like 90% of the readers, probably, to be fair. I don't think it's a problem either. But rather than get annoyed, you might consider this an opportunity to consider the genre a bit more deeply, rather than just go, "Cool! A ray gun!" If you feel so inclined.
|
|
Just remember kids, when it comes to steampunk, there's nothing less punk than British imperialism and colonialism.
The British were hardly the only imperialists of the era. Belgium, France, Germany... And during the period, America was busy dealing with its "problems" with the natives in the West. It is a period with an ugly side - like every period in history. Doesn't mean we have to wallow in it though.
I think the funniest revelation in this entire conversation is that, at least according to Elter and Aubrey's definitions, I'm apparently not a sci-fi fan at all, or at least a very minimal one. Everything I enjoy about sci-fi apparently falls better under sci-fantasy or futuristic fantasy genres. I guess that means I learned something today?By your own admission you said you don't know much about science (pretty obvious, since LazarX's comments are actually schoolboy physics, not treknobabble - the Heisenberg principle is one of the prime objections to teleportation a la the energisers). You like the trappings of science fiction, but you don't have the background to recognise what is and isn't. Like 90% of the readers, probably, to be fair. I don't think it's a problem either. But rather than get annoyed, you might consider this an opportunity to consider the genre a bit more deeply, rather than just go, "Cool! A ray gun!" If you feel so inclined.
Hah, I'm not annoyed, really. I'm 100% okay with that. Deep scientific analysis and mathematics are far from my range of interests. Fiction that is too close to the Hard end of the hardness scale is a turn-off for me.
I'm just commenting that I'm more amused about it. If you'd asked me this time yesterday if I was a sci-fi fan, I would have replied "yes" without hesitation, then maybe added "well, not hard sci-fi" after a moment's thought. Now I'll have to amend that to "yes, but only using the casual definition".
And LazarX used "treknobabble" to describe Trek's use of "science".
That's what Orthos was referencing.
What can I say, I have a weakness for puns.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Just remember kids, when it comes to steampunk, there's nothing less punk than British imperialism and colonialism.The British were hardly the only imperialists of the era. Belgium, France, Germany... And during the period, America was busy dealing with its "problems" with the natives in the West. It is a period with an ugly side - like every period in history. Doesn't mean we have to wallow in it though.
I mean, the current world we live in is still influenced by and heavily built on the imperialism and industrialization of the empire that the sun never set on. But yeah, I guess you don't have to "wallow" in it. You also don't have to be punk.
Since we're on the subject anyway, what exactly does "punk" mean in this context? I never really paid much attention to that part of the setting/genre name, admittedly. I was always more interested in the steam mechanisms and the Victorian-style setting aesthetics.
Ah. Learned something new again, apparently the punk part of it was another thing I was never particularly interested in.
This thread's educational in that regard, if nothing else.
Just remember kids, when it comes to steampunk, there's nothing less punk than British imperialism and colonialism.Except for whinging self flagellation over it.
I don't know what records you kids have been listening to but both whining self-flagellation AND wallowing in the heritage of Britishiznoid imperialism are both wicked punk.
No future for you, indeed.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Just remember kids, when it comes to steampunk, there's nothing less punk than British imperialism and colonialism.Except for whinging self flagellation over it.I don't know what records you kids have been listening to but both whining self-flagellation AND wallowing in the heritage of Britishiznoid imperialism are both wicked punk.
No future for you, indeed.
*Glues spare gears to a skateboard and does a kickflip over Queen Victoria's grave*
|
|
I mean, the current world we live in is still influenced by and heavily built on the imperialism and industrialization of the empire that the sun never set on. But yeah, I guess you don't have to "wallow" in it. You also don't have to be punk.Just remember kids, when it comes to steampunk, there's nothing less punk than British imperialism and colonialism.The British were hardly the only imperialists of the era. Belgium, France, Germany... And during the period, America was busy dealing with its "problems" with the natives in the West. It is a period with an ugly side - like every period in history. Doesn't mean we have to wallow in it though.
If you say so. I think it's probably a lot more influenced by WW2 and the conflict between two superpowers right now. But then it's porobably also influenced by the Roman Empire. Or the Carolingian. Or the Khmer. Depends on your perspective. But you're just trying to make some sort of point to yourself, so I'll let you get on with it.
I dont know what it is, but, apparently, in my posts, steampunk goes with The Kinks.
|
|
Why? I'm a computer geek with a physics background. I'm perfectly capable of recognizing and laughing at much of the bad science and technobabble. I still think it's science fiction and enjoy it for what it is without demanding strict scientific accuracy. It's fiction. Story is the important part.
None of my comments are about it being wrong to to like the less rigorous (for want of a better term) science fiction. And frankly, it's not like I go around going, "Hmmm, it's good, but is it really science fiction." Science fiction is a shorthand for all of this stuff, from Star Wasrs to Star trek to Philip K Hamilton to Arthur C Clark to Isaac Asimov. I've enjoyed it all. I think the subject arose because the OP was questioning some science in a book, and whether that translated into genre-specific issues or not. Which it does. At some level, writing science fiction with bad science in it, or indeed a blithe disregard for science, sort-of invalidates the term. Which is why some people have tried to find alternative terms for it, like technofantasy. But definitional issues don't translate necessarily into enjoyability issues. That is where story comes in.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think what mechaPoet means is:
In (insert Campaign Setting year) ("Victoriana Reckoning" or similar) to St. George's Hill (proletariat district AF5, topographic feature 12b, Smokedarque Quarter)
A ragged band they called the Diggers (1d20 commoners) came to show the people's will
They defied the landlords (,inquisitors and warburghers), they defied the laws
They were the dispossessed (steampunk subculture reference akin to Planescape use of "berks") reclaiming what was theirs.
"We come in peace", they said, "to dig and sow
We come to work the lands in common and make the waste ground grow
This earth divided we will make whole
So it may be a common treasury (decanter of endless water, permanent mythic global sanctuary spell) for all"
"The sin of property we do disdain
No man has any right to buy or sell the earth for private gain
By theft and murder (and steam powered zeppelins) they took the land
Now everywhere the (steam turreted ballista mounted) walls (and fierce geargolems) spring up at their command"
"They make the laws (and pneumatic harpoon firing cogbows) to chain us well
The clergy dazzle us with heaven, or they damn us into hell
We will not worship the God they serve,
a God of greed (and maybe clerics unless this is a no-magic/Godless setting) who feeds the rich(rich parents or friends in high places trait) while poor folk (friends in low places, poverty stricken traits) starve (gaining the starving condition)"
"We work (full round action, fatigued condition) and eat together, we need no swords
We will not bow to masters, nor pay rent (or give haemotax) to the lords (and other assorted metaplot BBEGs)
Still we are free, though we are poor
Ye Diggers all, stand up for glory, stand up (from prone, incurring AoO) now!"
From the men of property (landed royals and other landless noble scions, retired lawful evil adventurers; more frequently merchants and men of business) the orders came
They sent the hired men, (steamtanks) and (gadget)troopers to wipe out the Diggers' claim
"Tear (gas them and) tear down their cottages, destroy their corn "
They were dispersed - only the vision lingers on (the wireless punch-screen)
Ye poor take courage, ye rich take care
This earth was made a common treasury for everyone to share
All things in common, all (adventures and) people one
They came in peace - the order came to cut them down (via a dazzling array of baroquely stylized, mahogany paneled, velvet breeche'd, steamgel coiffured inventions involving but not limited to magnets, springs, cogs, steam, pneumatics, gears; often powered but not exclusively lo-hitek solar, wind, hydro, thermal, pressure, psionic, personpower, nuclear, non-real physics or periodic elements; and last but not least lets not forget the unleashed hordes of exotic steam-bent bicycles ridden by crazed drugged Amazonian slave-auxiliaries wielding spirit-driven warpipe-spearswords. Coz nothing says oppression like conquering a people and then using them to conquer other peoples, or better yet, Mother England, yuir own) ;)
Vive le Galt!
(I wonder if we can hook the Final Blades up to steampower?...)
|
|
I think what mechaPoet means is:
In (insert Campaign Setting year) ("Victoriana Reckoning" or similar) to St. George's Hill (proletariat district AF5, topographic feature 12b, Smokedarque Quarter)
A ragged band they called the Diggers (1d20 commoners) came to show the people's will
They defied the landlords (,inquisitors and warburghers), they defied the laws
They were the dispossessed (steampunk subculture reference akin to Planescape use of "berks") reclaiming what was theirs."We come in peace", they said, "to dig and sow
We come to work the lands in common and make the waste ground grow
This earth divided we will make whole
So it may be a common treasury (decanter of endless water, permanent mythic global sanctuary spell) for all""The sin of property we do disdain
No man has any right to buy or sell the earth for private gain
By theft and murder (and steam powered zeppelins) they took the land
Now everywhere the (steam turreted ballista mounted) walls (and fierce geargolems) spring up at their command""They make the laws (and pneumatic harpoon firing cogbows) to chain us well
The clergy dazzle us with heaven, or they damn us into hell
We will not worship the God they serve,
a God of greed (and maybe clerics unless this is a no-magic/Godless setting) who feeds the rich(rich parents or friends in high places trait) while poor folk (friends in low places, poverty stricken traits) starve (gaining the starving condition)""We work (full round action, fatigued condition) and eat together, we need no swords
We will not bow to masters, nor pay rent (or give haemotax) to the lords (and other assorted metaplot BBEGs)
Still we are free, though we are poor
Ye Diggers all, stand up for glory, stand up (from prone, incurring AoO) now!"From the men of property...
Well, I doubt that's precisely mP's point, to be honest. None of that has much to do with British imperialism, it's more to do with movements such as Chartism and the Tolpuddle Martyrs which largely pre-date the actual period typically associated with steampunk, which is normally more around the 1890s (a lot of it is barely in the Victorian period at all). mP's point seems to be more around colonialism and its perceived impacts on post-colonial states (which conveniently forgets the fact that the main reason they are poor is because their native rulers pursued stupid economic policies (e.g. India) or presided over kleptocracies (e.g. most bits of Africa) post-independence).
But the thing is, we all play a game which is set in a predominately medieval world. Do we have to endure lectures about how terrible it was in the feudal period - arbitrary justice, constant wars, disease, childhood mortality, suppression of women, unaccountable rulers, serfdom, relgious perscution, brutal punishments - every time someone wants to talk about that? Every time someone wants to talk about the Wild West, does that mean I'm honour-bound to start going on about the treatment of native peoples - reservations, massacres and military actions, deliberate infection with smallpox, and so on? Or do I just want to get a life and enjoy some escapist fun? History is full of people being sh1tty to one another - people need to get over it without trying to score points. Every period is full of this - we have ISIS, child abuse scandals, and much more in the modern day. If I'm going to play some sort of modern day thing, do I need to go on about that too?
Hee hee! First time I've ever seen playing rpgs considered "get[ting] a life."
I'll just say I enjoy what I enjoy regardless of what "label" it happens to have today.
Sci-fi, science fantasy, high fantasy, low fantasy, blah blah blah ITS GOOD!
I love literature I hate literature school people. Same for art my wife's art teacher hated anything but clasical art and considered modern art(using modern art for manga/comic/etc) but thought the girl who could do nothing but photocopy old art was amazing. Art is art to be enjoyed same as stories. Does it matter if the thingamabob doesn't actually work when "real science" is applied? No! If at the emd of the story you are loath to turn the last page because you want more it was good.