|
Author
|
Comment
|
Kerrie
Moderator
(2/20/03 1:38:12 pm)
|
SF and Fairy Tales...
I'm writing an article for 201mass.com (one in a series based
off this past weekend's Boskone 40) on the similarities and differences
between science fiction and fairy tales (may or may not include
folktales and legends, not sure yet). Here are some of my notes
so far:
Science Fiction/Fantasy:
Scientific fact
Probability
World
Adults
Fairy Tale/Folktale/Legend:
Village
Kingdom
Individual
Youth
Both:
Cautionary tales
Accounts of heroism
Hero’s journey
Anthropology
Sociology
And the panels I was thinking of pulling into it:
Morality, SF,
and Positive Futures
Whose morality is it, anyway? And how does it relate to what kind
of future might be in the works? The panel will examine the interplay
of morality and the future, consider why so many SF futures are
negative, and why a strong moral underpinning (but -- beware the
first question!) might change the way the future unfolds in SF
(and in reality?) .
Moderator: Paul Levinson
Participants: Judith Berman, David Brin, Hal Clement, Daniel Hatch
Recasting Fairy
Tales
What are the rewards.....and the pitfalls?
Participants: Gregory Frost
Savage Humanism
Learn more about this subgenre (characterized by, among other
things, 'an awareness of the history and evolution of SF that
often reveals itself as allusion' and 'a hell of a lot of anger').
Two exemplars of Savage Humanism discuss the necessary and sufficient
characteristics of it, and share examples of central texts.
Participants: Gregory Frost, James Patrick Kelly
Guest of Honor
Talk: Will SF Die Out?
How will we keep the tradition going into a hopeful future? Why
is education so important?
Participants: David Brin
Privacy
A look at why we need a more 'Transparent Society.'
Participants: David Brin
Creating an Alternate
History for Your Roleplaying Game
Participants: Lee Gold
What do others think about the relationships between these two
seemingly disparate literary forms?
Sugarplum dreams,
Kerrie
Edited by: Kerrie at: 2/20/03 3:23:56 pm
|
Kevin
Smith
Registered User
(2/21/03 12:51:30 am)
|
I'm a bit wary over point 1
Hi,
I'm just a bit wary over your point 1 for sci-fi, "scientific fact". It seems to me that in most cases the science is there as what Roland Barthes would call for "the reality effect". Our society as a whole believes in the power of science therefore sci fi calls upon this model of discourse in order to help create suspension of disbelief.
I'm reminded of that phrase of Arthur C Clarke's "sufficiently complex technology is indistinguishable from magic", and the fact that, for all i know, a whole variety of little imps work my remote control. It's a cliché, i know, but remember the Disney version of Mark Twain's _A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's court_? Where the locals think the spaceman is a witch because he uses a match? It seems to me that's what science fiction is. Its a way we explain the fantastic, rather than using the older explanations like "witchcraft" and "magic".
That's why I much prefer the Russian term, "Science Fantasy". I think that both sci-fi and fantasy do the same thing, but their explanatory paradigms are different.
To continue this whole distinction, I also believe that the contemporary idea of "fantasy" is flawed. Those critics who follow Tzvetan Todorov's distinction between the uncanny, the marvelous and the literary fantastic forget that western rationalism has only become the standard belief system in the last hundred years or so. The idea of fantasy he puts forward suppresses the fact that the fantasy genre pre-dates any form of realism.
To my mind, the fairy tale is a form that shows just how problematic this distinction of realism/ fantasy is. Fairy tales do not take place in a secondary world of faery, as Tolkien would have us think, but in a liminal space between the real world and the imagination. Whereas contemporary readers know that Middle Earth is not *our* world, folkloric audiences would not see such a distinction between worlds.
I could go on for ages about this topic, sorry. I'll stop rambling. My advice is, try to see the difference between Sci/Fi and fantasy as fluid, and not as a binary opposition which is (always i think) tempting, but questionable.
Good Luck,
K
|
Kerrie
Moderator
(2/21/03 6:20:11 am)
|
I am too...
Thanks for your wariness- I am now wary as well. Speaking with my fiance last night- who knows more about SF that I do and should be a teacher, but that's another story- got me thinking about my angle and how skewed it now seems. I think I may just take the similarity approach and not the compare-and-contrast, which could probably go on for ages (but may make an interesting article in the future). Similarites to think about, then:
Cautionary tales (FT seem to be more about the individual, whereas SF seems to be more about a society, which could also be seen as 1 unit)
Accounts of heroism
Hero’s journey
Anthropology
Sociology
Rules that must be followed- ex. Laws of Robotics and Bluebeard’s Key.
Creatures from the Other
Possibly also the ideas of Distopia and Utopia.
Am I seeming too far reaching for a short article? I think the strongest points (in my mind's world) are that of cautionary tales and Hero's Journey. More thoughts?
I suppose, then, that as Tolkien divided up what is and is not a
"fairy story," then perhaps for the sake of this article,
I should state what is and is not SF? Oh my, that sounds like a
daunting task! I'm not even sure the parameters currently exist,
there seems to be such a variety out there! More research! :)
Sugarplum dreams,
Kerrie
Edited by: Kerrie at: 2/21/03 6:50:12 am
|
Kevin
Smith
Registered User
(2/21/03 6:53:01 am)
|
society
I think you could probably get a short article out of each and every
one of those points :)
If you're most interested in the cautionary tales and hero's journey then I'd make that your focus. I think you're right about Sci-fi being more focused on society, one need think only of 1984 or The Handmaid's Tale (which I've got to teach on Wednesday, so I guess I should think about it). The thing about science fiction that concentrates on the interrelation between the individual and the state is that the state often wins. Offred, Wilson Smith and Decker in Blade Runner all come out badly from their experiences. Where in the fairy tale the hero exemplifies the possibility of utopian transformations (Puss in Boots, Dick Whittington, all the boys and girls who inherit kingdoms), Science Fiction often seems relatively pessimistic about the power of the individual to affect society. Perhaps thats due to living in a post-industrial society rather than a pre-industrial one.
What do you take as an example of the cautionary tale in Sci Fi? I'm trying to think of one at the moment, but I'm a little stumped (perhaps because I've never tried to think this aspect through before). Maybe a few examples could help me engage constructively with possible fault lines and points of continuity.
|
Kerrie
Moderator
(2/21/03 7:52:04 am)
|
Examples and direct relationships...
Now that I'm making lists of works I consider to be "cautionary
tales" in SF, I find I'm being biased towards the more dystopian
end of the spectrum within classic SF. Perhaps
that is ok in this instance, to simply make the point that there
are similarities, and they are not so disparate as one may think?
Stories I have listed so far include:
SF
1984
The Time Machine
Brave New World
Flatland
The Machine Stops
Metropolis
FT
Bluebeard
Little Red Riding Hood
Donkeyskin
Snow Queen
Hansel and Gretel
The Goose Girl
I am not sure if there are directly relating SF and FT works in existence. Perhaps "The Machine Stops" relates to "Bluebeard" in that they are both warn about what happens when one ventures through the forbidden door? Or maybe "1984" relates to "Little Red Riding Hood" in that they both warn about those who may seem to be people we can trust, when in the end they will betray us? I think I'm starting to grasp at straws, but some of it makes sense, somehow. Thoughts?
I think I need to sit down with all of these notes and write down every word and work that comes to mind. Maybe I'll write the interview first and return to this over the weekend.
Sugarplum dreams,
Kerrie
Edited by: Kerrie at: 2/21/03 8:37:57 am
|
Gregor9
Registered User
(2/21/03 9:00:42 am)
|
Re: Examples and direct relationships...
Kerrie,
A couple things come to mind. The first is from a panel I was on at Boskone with George R.R. Martin about creating fantasy worlds. We, the panel, were arguing that if one looks at history, there are simply no cases of "young stablehand overcomes incredible odds to become king". The only close approximation George could think of was Joan of Arc--and that didn't turn out all that well for her. Regarding this, I stated, and he concurred, that there's really no difference between a Luke Skywalker character in a science fiction context and one in a fantasy context--and in fact I don't think science fiction is any more about society than fantasy is. They both have to incorporate world building on a massive scale that you won't find in, say, contemporary fiction, the result being that the world and the societies within it take on a heightened importance, like extra characters. Like George, I tend strongly to disbelieve those characters who climb the strata of society to get to the top, simply because in most fantasy and sf the writer has underrealized the real limits imposed on people just from social standing.
This is, of course, with regard to novels and series. I think it might be unwise to try and forge links between sf novels and fairy tale stories. The differences are going to outweigh any similarities, save that there may be sf novels which incorporate aspects of fairy tales, as there are sf works which incorporate aspects of Shakespearean plays.
Second, I think the cautionary tale aspect might be your best connection between the fairy tale and the sf tale, especially, within the latter, of the "if this goes on" category.
Like Kevin, I also think the "scientific fact" aspect of sf is overrated. But we could get into a long and eeven more off-topic discussion of sf's predictive qualities or lack thereof.
Greg
|
Kerrie
Moderator
(2/21/03 9:38:42 am)
|
Focus...
Thanks, Greg. I wish I could have gone to that panel as well- there were so many I wanted to go to that overlapped!
I think the cautionary tale focus is indeed the best angle- I tend to brainstorm too much sometimes and lose my focus, or find a new focus that I can't very well follow-up on without years of research.
History, as you mentioned, has no real "rags to riches" examples- the only modern examples I can think of would be the "discovery of new talent" in music and theater. But I digress- again.
I'll try to do a more focused brainstorm- is that an oxymoron?-
on the cautionary tale classification. If it doesn't seem to pan
out, I still have the interview, and maybe I could scrape something
else up inspired by the weekend- like youth programming in SF. ;)
(They drafted me for next year.)
Or maybe I'll email you and some others for your favorite parts
of the weekend. ;)
Sugarplum dreams,
Kerrie
|
Judith
Berman
Registered User
(2/21/03 10:20:08 am)
|
sf & f & ft
Kerrie,
I'm another one of those who thinks that the distinctions between sf and fantasy are overrated (but nevertheless important on the ground). With regard to fairy tales, I always need to be sure of whether the subject is literary versions of tales or folk-narrative versions, because I think the degree to which audience and narrator embrace the narrative world as in some fashion the "real" world or at least abuttng it differs; also the ethnoliterary and ethnopoetic conventions differ considerably.
Someone said (I'm paraphrasing badly) that the difference between sf and fantasy worlds is that at the core of an sf world there is assumed to be an explanation, while at the core of a fantasy world is ultimately Mystery. I've always liked that distinction best of all the ones I've seen. Beyond that there are different literary conventions, but these can always be violated to great effect, viz., Walter Jon Williams' METROPOLITAN books, which were flat-out fantasy (based on feng shui, for goodness' sake) but many readers assumed them to be sf. And how about PERDIDO STREET STATION, which again mixes conventions from each sub-genre?
There are some who'd state that sf is REALLY about REALITY while fantasy is explicitly not. I'd put this in the realm of literary conventions. The conventions of sf are that it is based on "empirical" reality as that is understood at the moment, while fantasy draws on "symbolic" reality (I'm drawing here on distinctions that have their roots in the history of anthropological study of myth and religion.) But of course each draws on both to some degree.
Another of the conventions, which is also frequently violated, is that fantasy tends to be "romantic" and sf "ironic" -- in Northrop Frye's use of the terms, which has to do with the "size" of the hero in relation to the universe in which s/he acts. He also talks about the range of possible semiotic relationships (not his term) in lterary metaphor and that I think that is also relevant here -- in fantasy, the metaphor is more deeply embedded, metaphoric identification is usually more absolute, the hero IS a lion (e.g., Aslan), or IS a sorceror, while sf usually keeps more semiotic distance -- the hero has the courage of a lion, has magic-like powers, simile rather than (NF's term) anagogic metaphor.
These are all thoughts on the fly -- a great topic and one I think about a lot, since I write both and have strong opinions about what makes one or the other "good."
Judith
|
Kerrie
Moderator
(2/24/03 7:41:54 am)
|
My own cautionary tale...
Well, it seems as though this is too largeof a topic to tackle in such a short time, but I think I will continue researching it for future use. Thanks for all of the feedback so far! Let's continue...
Judith, you wrote:
Quote:
Someone said (I'm paraphrasing badly) that the difference between sf and fantasy worlds is that at the core of an sf world there is assumed to be an explanation, while at the core of a fantasy world is ultimately Mystery.
Quote:
There are some who'd state that sf is REALLY about REALITY while fantasy is explicitly not. I'd put this in the realm of literary conventions. The conventions of sf are that it is based on "empirical" reality as that is understood at the moment, while fantasy draws on "symbolic" reality (I'm drawing here on distinctions that have their roots in the history of anthropological study of myth and religion.) But of course each draws on both to some degree.
Quote:
Another of the conventions, which is also frequently violated, is that fantasy tends to be "romantic" and sf "ironic"
Quote:
in fantasy, the metaphor is more deeply embedded, metaphoric identification is usually more absolute, the hero IS a lion (e.g., Aslan), or IS a sorceror, while sf usually keeps more semiotic distance -- the hero has the courage of a lion, has magic-like powers, simile rather than (NF's term) anagogic metaphor.
I think this is the angle I have been coming from, and I'm seeing
now how biased my reading experience has been. I've been trying
to classify what is in reality another interstitial literary form.
Science fiction and fantasy are near interchangeable, it just depends
on some of the constructs that are present. For me, sf
has often been:
1) technological
2) dystopian
3) trapping (as in the characters are in a world, society, etc that they feel trapped in and are trying to overcome)
4) political
5) relating to the hard sciences (biology, chemistry, communications, engineering, neurology, physics, mathematics, etc.)
and fantasy has been:
1) magical
2) utopian
3) protective (as in the characters are in a world, society, etc that they feel is in danger and are trying to protect)
4) communal
5) relating to the soft sciences (philosophy, psychology, sociology, anthropology, etc.)
I can see that these are far too black-and-white, and not allowing
for gray or any colors. I can see that while "The Snow Queen"
is a fairy tale, with lots of fantastic qualities, it is also about
logic and mathematics, among other things. I guess I had the wrong
color glasses on, and need to clean them before continuing in this
research. :)
Please, let's continue this, as I have lots to learn, and I would love to hear everyone's opinions on the matter.
Sugarplum dreams,
Kerrie
Edited by: Kerrie at: 2/24/03 7:43:12 am
|
MarkS
Unregistered User
(2/25/03 7:57:32 pm)
|
Young overcome incredible odds to become king
...There are exceptions, like The Old Testament, where Yaweh selects shepard boy David (among others) as the leader of the Hebrew people. He is tested, both by God and his people (as are the others, like Saul before him) before finally becoming king. Seems like classic myth to me. I believe there are similar stories in other religions. This is assuming one is looking at faith as myth.
|
Kerrie
Moderator
(2/26/03 7:58:53 am)
|
History vs. Myth...
Well, it also depends on if you believe the OT stories are historical accounts or myth. I'd say the argument is 50/50 on that, and that goes the same for other cultures. Some would say those are perfect examples of historical persons overcoming odds.
Here's the article that I ended up writing:
What
Are Little Girls Made Of? Or Arts and Sciences Make the Muse
Hopefully my eyes will forgive me for hurting them while writing
it. ;) Please feel free to vote and/or leave comments for others
to read.
Sugarplum dreams,
Kerrie
Edited by: Kerrie at: 2/27/03 12:33:56 pm
|
briggsw
Unregistered User
(3/3/03 8:49:08 pm)
|
-
Another distinction: fantasy, being about the internal world, has one person represented by many characters; sf doesn't.
Too black and white, like all this, but think: in the brother-and-sister fairy tales, bro & sis can be thought of as 2 sides to one psyche. 3 brothers, the youngest one wins; the 2 elder can be the self-assured part and the youngest the naive creative part. Arguably you could include all the characters in one psyche, but certainly often all in one family! And in LoTR, Frodo, Sam, and Smeagol/Gollum were called 1 character by LeGuin.
In SF, you've got separate people in a "real" world interacting. E.g., Mote in God's Eye: Blaine, Sally Fowler, Whitbread, Whitbread's Fyunch(click), etc. ... hard to argue they're one psyche. I think you could have an SF story done the fantasy way (I'm going to try it), but we're looking for broad strokes I think.
By this definition, Larry Niven's "logical fantasy" is SF; but it sure reads like it. Star Wars is fantasy; but I already didn't want to call it SF.
(But I like the Mystery/Explanation distinction best. Imagine if at the end of an SF novel, we found that the central point was fundamentally unexplainable. Wouldn't it feel like the story had turned into fantasy? Cool.)
|
Kevin Smith
Unregistered User
(3/4/03 2:22:27 am)
|
but
The mystery thing is a nice phrase, and I like it very much but I simply don't think that it works.
Read Philip K Dick - magical things happen, but noone tells you how time travel (for example) is scientifically possible. Aliens operating as deus ex machina at the end of Close Encounters isn't that different from the effect of Elves in a Midsummer Night's Dream.
It ultimately works to preserve an aspect of the fact/ fiction divide, and as I've noted above, that divide is often illusory.
|
Kevin
Smith
Registered User
(3/4/03 2:24:14 am)
|
but
The mystery thing is a nice phrase, and I like it very much but I simply don't think that it works.
Read Philip K Dick - magical things happen, but noone tells you how time travel (for example) is scientifically possible. Aliens operating as deus ex machina at the end of Close Encounters isn't that different from the effect of Elves in a Midsummer Night's Dream.
It ultimately works to preserve an aspect of the fact/ fiction divide, and as I've noted above, that divide is often illusory.
p.s. the "multiple parts of one psyche" argument is also rather tenuous. If you can argue that all the characters in a 1000 page novel are the same, you could also surely argue that Othello and Iago are the same person. If you didn't take for granted that the genre of fantasy is a psychological (i.e. not physical) realm, such generalisations would be a lot harder to make.
|
Kerrie
Moderator
(3/4/03 7:24:14 am)
|
Re: but
Quote:
Aliens operating as deus ex machina at the end of Close Encounters isn't that different from the effect of Elves in a Midsummer Night's Dream.
Is it just me, or does it seemthat anything with an alien abduction is branded SF, while anything with a faery abduction is branded Fantasy? I wonder why the distinction?
Just waking up, so maybe I'll figure this out in a bit.
Sugarplum dreams,
Kerrie
|
Kevin
Smith
Registered User
(3/4/03 7:44:12 am)
|
Yes that seems to be the case
Kerrie. I think you're absolutely correct about alien abduction = sci fi, elves = fantasy.
I have a theory about this, which goes something like the following: Contemporary folklore is irretrievably based upon our consumption patterns. So we now tell stories about mass murderers on the highways and campuses when in a storytelling situation rather than ogres dwelling in woods. (Note the liminal spaces that these encounters appear on by the way; both woods and highways are places on the limits of our civilisation). So, the horror genre has affected the way we tell stories around campfires. But, I'd argue that sci-fi has changed the way we account for unusual events. Crop circles, the bermuda triangle, and anything else slightly weird is told according to this genre. Where people once explained things with magic we try to explain them with science. Look at how Don Quixote explains everything . . "it was sorcerers!", and look at how contemporary Quixotes use the same explanation but with aliens taking on the role of magician.
This leads me to wonder how much the medieval romance affected fairy tale collections in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. The haxhausens and other well-to-do families who contributed to the Grimms would certainly have read chivalric romance, which could perhaps explain the similarities between romance and fairy tale.
By the way, this is a very inchoate and half baked theory, so I'd appreciate any books or feedback that anyone can suggest.
(Sorry for the rambling everyone!)
|
MarkS
Unregistered User
(3/4/03 9:31:53 pm)
|
See my thread
on aliens and faeries. It's header is "Everyone here should read this book." It refers to Jaques Vallee's "Dimensions."
|
bielie
Registered User
(3/7/03 10:21:41 am)
|
SF & Fantasy
My penny's worth.
I believe that any distinction between SF and fantasy is bound to fail, since they are on the same spectrum.
Both create an alternate reality as a backdrop to a human tale. (What makes the tale is not the backdrop but the human story).
Some fantasy is difficult to spot. I am a fan of PG Wodehouse. Many would crucify me for labelling his work as fantasy, but his reality is so subtly and deliciously different from ours that as far as I am concerned it cannot happen in our universe. Therefore fantasy.
SF can be difficult to spot too. 007 is "almost SF", because of the just-not-yet-invented gadgets he uses, but his reality is also different from the one we live in (fantasy).
The further you displace the tale's reality from our reality, the more easily it is genrerised.
Would you say Anne McCaffrey writes SF or Fantasy? Or Andre Norton? They write tales of far away planets, but where "fantasy" elements abound. Does Dianne Wynne Jones write two different genres?
I hated Piers Anthony's "Split infinity" because he insisted on labeling every chapter either SF or Fantasy, when there was no real difference after all.
What is the difference between a laser gun and a wizard's staff that strikes D20 fireballs?
So I propose a "new" genre: The slightly-streched/ stretched/completely-displaced reality spectrum genre.
And the proof: SF and Fantasy fans (and I know a lot) devour both genres without any discrimination, as long as there is a good story in it.
The only problem is that booksellers and librarians insist on putting them on different shelves...
|
|
