Sci-Fi or SF?

[Valka D'Ur]

You know, the guy who originally formulated the truism that 90% of everything is crap was a science fiction author.

And an excellent author he was, too - Theodore Sturgeon. In fact, this truism is known as "Sturgeon's Law."

I'm a "science fiction" man, and the term "speculative fiction" really gets on my nerves, mainly because I usually see it being associated with authors too pretentious to consider themselves science fiction writers. Would you please grow up.

Indeed. Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale is every bit as good an example of dystopian science fiction as 1984 or Brave New World. But she utterly refuses to let anybody call it science fiction, and you won't find it in the science fiction section of any bookstore - you have to go to either general fiction or Canadiana.

How does one pronounce "Sci-fi"?

Most people pronounce it "sigh-fi." Other people pronounce it "skiffy."

One year at a science fiction convention I went to, there was a whole panel dedicated to the question of "Sci-fi or Skiffy?".

To me, any SF that utterly ignores the known scientific principles is "sci-f" (or "skiffy" as I prefer to call it). This would include Star Wars and any Dune book written by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson.

 

[Traitorfish]

...and you won't find it in the science fiction section of any bookstore - you have to go to either general fiction or Canadiana.

In all fairness, that might just be down to the bookstore- they like to put all of an author's work in one place, so if the majority of the work she's written is "mainstream" literature, for want of a better term, it'll end up alongside that. In fact, you'll sometimes find that publishers have to push for that, because if, as in this case, one of the most mainstream works is sci-fi, there's a risk that it'll all get sucked into the "Sci-Fi Ghetto", which can be very bad news business-wise.

Of course, you could take the Ian Banks/Ian M Banks route, but I don't think most people skip back and forth so frequently as to demand it.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I have no objection whatsoever if Atwood's science fiction novels (she's written several) are all put in the general fiction section alongside her mainstream novels. But it wouldn't hurt to put a few copies in the science fiction section as well, for the benefit of customers who would enjoy them, but who don't tend to browse the general fiction stuff.

It should be noted that Margaret Atwood is one of Canada's literary legends, and she has the clout to request that her books be put anywhere she wants. And I've heard/read interviews she's given where she states most emphatically that yes, some of her stories take place in the future. Yes, they involve extrapolating current trends in sociology, psychology, medicine, and other sciences. But that does not mean they're science fiction!

*sigh* Margaret Atwood is an author I respect tremendously. But in this case, she's got her nose a little too high in the air...

 

[MobBoss]

Well, you could just check both boxes.

Aha! I am so used to polls usually being single choice I didnt catch that. Thus I have now indeed voted along those lines. Thanks.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Aha! I am so used to polls usually being single choice I didnt catch that. Thus I have now indeed voted along those lines. Thanks.

I tend to use "science fiction" with other people and "SF" in my head, so I left it open for weird cases like me...and for people who wanted to vote for the Giant Killer Robot option alongside their actual choice.

 

[MobBoss]

I tend to use "science fiction" with other people and "SF" in my head, so I left it open for weird cases like me...and for people who wanted to vote for the Giant Killer Robot option alongside their actual choice.

Well, the way I see it old school SF fans from the 60s, 70s, etc (i.e. Star Trek Era) largely referred to it as SF....however, since cable and the advent of the Sci-Fi channel, a lot of younger people today refer to it as Sci-Fi.

I really dont have any problems with referring to the genre either way.

 

[sophie]

Well, the way I see it old school SF fans from the 60s, 70s, etc (i.e. Star Trek Era) largely referred to it as SF....however, since cable and the advent of the Sci-Fi channel, a lot of younger people today refer to it as Sci-Fi.

I really dont have any problems with referring to the genre either way.

gosh durrnit Mobby. When you say SF fans from the 60s, 70s, I think you're referring to the Giants. This is why it needs to be Sci-Fi.

 

[MobBoss]

gosh durrnit Mobby. When you say SF fans from the 60s, 70s, I think you're referring to the Giants. This is why it needs to be Sci-Fi.

Well, if it werent for the fact that Star Trek was more huge than the Giants you might have a point.

Sadly, you dont.

 

[sophie]

Well, if it werent for the fact that Star Trek was more huge than the Giants you might have a point.

Sadly, you dont.

YOU TAKE THAT BACK!

 

[Glassfan]

... after reading a great deal by Isaac Asimov, who preferred "SF"

"He's dead, Jim."

In any case OG, as an easterner, he would not have been interested much in the jargon of the Left Coast.

I do remember he wrote an essay in the 70's on how "computer books" would never replace "real books". He didn't anticipate miniaturization, Moore's Law or wireless.

SciFi is correct.

 

[sophie]

"He's dead, Jim."

In any case OG, as an easterner, he would not have been interested much in the jargon of the Left Coast.

I do remember he wrote an essay in the 70's on how "computer books" would never replace "real books". He didn't anticipate miniaturization, Moore's Law or wireless.

SciFi is correct.

1.) Dude, everything is all about California, as loathe as the East Coast bias is to admit it .

2.) Just call me Owen, dawg. I get really, really confuzzled when people call me OG.

 

[ZeletDude]

Sometimes I call it SciFi and sometimes Science Fictions.. Depends on the moment.

 

[_random_]

I'll use all three interchangeably, depending on how terse I feel like being. I'll generally say "SF" only if my audience is particularly nerdy.

 

[Lillefix]

*sigh* Margaret Atwood is an author I respect tremendously. But in this case, she's got her nose a little too high in the air...

You forgot to mention she once said that science fiction was about "talking squids in outer space".

 

[Airstrike92]

science fiction

 

[Cheetah]

You forgot to mention she once said that science fiction was about "talking squids in outer space".

What's wrong with talking squids in outer space?!

 

[BuckyRea]

One reason the designation "speculative fiction" doesn't work for me is that just about all fiction is speculative.

How does one pronounce "Sci-fi"?

It's pronounced "skih - fee", with the accent on the first syllable, like the peanut butter

What's wrong with talking squids in outer space?!

Duh. In outer space you can't talk.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

You forgot to mention she once said that science fiction was about "talking squids in outer space".

Obviously Margaret Atwood never read any good quality science fiction. Or even any decent space opera, since most of the people writing that stuff have some notion of what is scientifically possible and not possible.

 

[Dachs]

But let's not forget that he added "but the remaining 10% is worth dying for."

Oh, I'm not putting down science fiction or anything, I'm just talking about what warpus said about most of the stuff coming out of Hollywood is crap.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

If you want to be archaic, you could refer to it as "science romance". Spotted that term in a collection of H.G. Wells' stuff today.

Well if we're going to get technical about it everything called a novel is properly termed a "romance", mainly due to meidieval French balladeers going around the place and making soppy, love filled stories for the wimmen.