As I’m sure some of you noticed, my last few columns have taken the form of general musings, pondering the philosophical–heck, given how devout most of us are as fans, one could almost say theological–underpinnings and traditions of genre fiction and gaming. So I figured I’d continue to embrace that this time around and talk (and ask) about something I’ve been wondering for a while.
Where do you draw the line (assuming there even is such a line for you) between science-fiction and fantasy?
It’s not nearly as clear-cut as it might seem on first glance, or at least, it’s not for me. Sure, sometimes it’s obvious: The Lord of the Rings and A Song of Ice and Fire are fantasy, full stop. The Foundation series and Star Trek are sci-fi (though some are “harder” sci-fi than others).
But then, sometimes it’s not nearly that blatant. Where does Star Wars fit in, for example? Sure, if you judge by the visuals or by the setting, it’s sci-fi, and obviously so. But is it, really? As a lifelong fan of the series, I’m willing put my money on an absolute “No.” Star Wars is fantasy dressed up in sci-fi’s wardrobe. Yes, it involves starships and hyperdrive and lasers. But when you boil it down to its core, to what’s important, you have a series that revolves around ancient wizards, black knights with superhuman powers, a mystical force (or Force), and the rise of a prophesied “Chosen One.”
And sometimes, a property that’s primarily one includes aspects of the other. I don’t think anyone would argue that Babylon 5 was a sci-fi series. But certain aspects of the Vorlons, the First Ones, and especially the character of Lorien don’t mesh in a “pure” sci-fi identity. Oh, they were dressed in the garb of sci-fi–ancient technologies and energy transfers and whatnot–but ultimately, they include “magics” that are very fantasy in nature. (And again, I say this as a fan; I’m explaining what I see, not drawing any sort of positive or negative conclusions from it.)
I should point out that I’m familiar with Clarke’s third law, which states that “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” But I’m not talking about that here; a lot of the tricks Lorien pulls in B5 aren’t technologically based at all, but are effectively “powers” that he simply has. So again, it’s an element of fantasy in sci-fi clothes.
And of course, it goes the other way as well. Several of Moorcock’s Elric books include devices (such as ornithopters) that come across as science-fiction elements in what is otherwise a pure fantasy series. (Or I should say “sub-series,” since other books in the larger Eternal Champion series are very much science-fiction.)
So which of these are “properly” sci-fi, and which fantasy? Or is there even a distinction? After all, the early writers of the genre combined them freely, as did properties inspired by the early writers. Jack Vance and Clark Ashton Smith both wrote “fantasies” set in the far future of Earth, with sci-fi elements rearing their heads throughout. The very first Dungeons & Dragons setting, created by Dave Arneson, was a fantasy setting–with a crashed flying saucer in a nearby chasm. It wasn’t until later that the notion of sci-fi and fantasy being distinct was even codified.
The really odd part of this, for me personally, is my personal reactions to mixing the two. When it’s one in the guise of the other–Star Wars, or the more “piecemeal” examples I mentioned later–I have no problem with it at all, so long as it’s done well. But when it’s a more blatant clash between the two, I tend to balk.
What do I mean? I mean, for instance, that while I really like Blackmoor (the D&D setting I just mentioned), I’m not crazy about the flying saucer angle. Some years ago, I began reading Children of Amarid by David B. Coe. It was well written. I was enjoying it. And then I got to the point where I realized that the continuing story was going to involve a clash between a magic society and a technological one. And I stopped reading, because I just don’t tend to care for that sort of juxtaposition. (I’d still recommend the book to any of you who do; it really was well done, and I didn’t put it down through any fault of the book itself.)
I’m not adamantly opposed to such a mix. I occasionally get in the mood for it, and heck, one of the books I’d like to write someday includes that sort of mix. But it’s very rare that I’m in that mood; 19 times out of 20, I’m not.
What’s my point? Only that
A) I find it odd that I have no objection to mixing the two when they’re “cloaked” as one or the other, but I object when the mixture is blatant, and
B) I’m interested in trying to figure out where other people draw the line between sci-fi and fantasy, since I’m still not even certain where I do myself.
Actually, there are a couple of pretty straight forward ways to draw the line:
first, you can always ask someone like me who reads/has read a ton of SF but very little fantasy (generally can’t deal with all the make-believe, lol). I’ll be happy to render a judgment.
Next, you can just consult the strange/alien creatures list:
Orc, elf, fairy, troll, halfling balrog = fantasy (a good rule of thumb is – if the species name is five or fewer letters, ends in a ‘y’ or an ‘ing’, it’s a fantasy creature)
Named for a planet, punctuation marks are included or there are too many consonants strung together for the human mouth to pronounce = science fiction
Failing that, you could try and consult the front/back cover or the imprint on the spine.
See, if you eliminate the question concerning genre identification, there IS no issue over whether the “mixing” is good or not. Once identified, everything in the story IS whatever genre has been selected. If you see “SF” on the spine and read about ‘Orc’ inside, they are obviously Space Orcs and therefore science fictional. No genre mixing, no huhu.
Glad to have had the opportunity to straighten all of this out!
Oh, I had always though they were lumped together in bookstores and on Amazon.com because they were indistinguishable
But some books I’ve read really do mix it all up. Traci Harding’s books for example. Her first two books, The Ancient Future and An Echo In Time, are fairly straight up time slip fantasies. But her other books get progresively more SF but retain their fantasy elements. Basically all I’m saying is that she has aliens and fairies. It’s all as blatant as hell and it doesn’t seem awkward in any way.
Also, I don’t draw a line. Not really. To me, they’re one genre.
I tend to draw the line of demarcation by the inherent magic vs. developed technology rule, thought in recent years I have found I enjoy seeing that line blurred (in The Dresden Files Simon R. Green’s Nightside and Deathstalker books, and certain of Terry Brooks’ Shannara series, for example). But I think I can clarify the separation a bit by changing the terms I used above thusly: “inherent magic” becomes “unbelievable” and “developed technology” becomes “unbelieving.”
Here’s what I mean. Fantasy tends to feature or focus on powers, abilities, and skills that are inherent, unexplained, and not typically subject to physical laws–parameters a typical modern-day human would find impossible in the real world, hence the “unbelievable” moniker. Sci-fi, meanwhile, tends to feature or focus on things that, while highly advanced and developed, are fundamentally man-made, external to man’s natural state, and subject to the laws of physics and reality as the modern reader knows it. These parameters automatically reject the thought of anything above or beyond mankind’s intellectual and technological capability, thereby implying a clear lack of belief in the possibility or power of such things, hence the “unbelieving” label.
That’s how it makes sense to me, at any rate. Maybe it will help you guys, too.
I’d argue that the difference between Sci-Fi and Fantasy is entirely aesthetic, and comes down to whether the source tries to explain the ‘fantastic’ as magical or scientific. Certainly in the literal sense of the word, it’s all “fantasy.”
Psionics are sci-fi because they’re explained in [pseudo-]scientific terms. The Force is fantasy in the original trilogy because, AFAIK, it’s presumed to be a mystic power. In the new trilogy (eps. 1-3), it becomes sci-fi because they try to explain it in scientific terms (midichlorians).
Now certainly, there are tropes and themes which are thought of as specific to either. Elves, for example, are common fantasy… But it’s not much of a stretch to put them as an alien race (e.g. Warhammer 40k’s Eldar). On the flip side, Sci-Fi is frequently used as a framework for an allegory on modern society, but there’s no reason you couldn’t for example right a fantasy novel where the dread lich king is a thinly-veiled reference to George W. Bush, Obamacare, or Osama bin Laden.
Personally, my distinction between the two is exactly like the title of the article; two different flavors of the same brand of “ice cream,” and the best way to tell the difference is pure taste.
Most of the time the distiction is easy, but I admit, sometimes the chocolate kinda tastes nutty and visa versa. I.e the saucer in Blackmoor. nevertheless, if it’s marketed as chocolate or PB, that’s what it’s intended to be, and generally there’s no way around it.
However, some makers of ice cream are very good at mixing flavors, and the popularity of “Reeses Cups” shows that in some cases, the two sub-genres can both coexist quite capably.