Escape Artists
Escape Pod => Science Fiction Discussion => Topic started by: matweller on April 10, 2013, 04:36:58 PM
-
I'm not asking this to be snotty or defensive, I'm really seeking for my personal clarification. Science fiction is supposed to be fun? It's been paired with horror for as long as there have been names for the genres.
-
I'm not asking this to be snotty or defensive, I'm really seeking for my personal clarification. Science fiction is supposed to be fun? It's been paired with horror for as long as there have been names for the genres.
I don't think anyone is saying the Science Fiction is supposed to be fun. But Escape Pod's original mission statement was to be a venue of fun speculative fiction, and while the emphasis on fun as the primary criteria for story selection has decreased, I don't know that EP ever really gave it up completely - the submission guidelines still express a preference for fun stories.
So I don't think Kaa (and others) were arguing that this story is not SF because it's not fun, they were saying it's not the SF that EP used to publish.
-
So I don't think Kaa (and others) were arguing that this story is not SF because it's not fun, they were saying it's not the SF that EP used to publish.
Yes, exactly that. I forget that not everyone has been around since the Days of Yore™. Why, some of you whippersnappers have only been listening since 2006! Back in my day, we had to download the stories using homing pigeons! And we liked it!
</oldandcrotchety>
-
You had homing pigeons? Luxury!
-
Back in my day, we had to download the stories using homing pigeons! And we liked it!
I'm just picturing these huge carrier pigeons, bred for strength and endurance, carting sacks of data punch cards to and fro.
Aren't you glad we finally devised these convenient floppy discs?
-
Back in my day, we had to download the stories using homing pigeons! And we liked it!
I'm just picturing these huge carrier pigeons, bred for strength and endurance, carting sacks of data punch cards to and fro.
Aren't you glad we finally devised these convenient floppy discs?
And then AOL sent them to everybody. Eighty times.
-
So I don't think Kaa (and others) were arguing that this story is not SF because it's not fun, they were saying it's not the SF that EP used to publish.
Yes, exactly that. I forget that not everyone has been around since the Days of Yore™. Why, some of you whippersnappers have only been listening since 2006! Back in my day, we had to download the stories using homing pigeons! And we liked it!
</oldandcrotchety>
I guess I would argue that there are different degrees and kinds of 'fun.' We do lighthearted a lot, we do cyberpunk and steampunk, we do military and spaceships and pulp -- all of them 'fun', not all of them including pudding monsters and aliens that fart flowers.
-
So I don't think Kaa (and others) were arguing that this story is not SF because it's not fun, they were saying it's not the SF that EP used to publish.
Yes, exactly that. I forget that not everyone has been around since the Days of Yore™. Why, some of you whippersnappers have only been listening since 2006! Back in my day, we had to download the stories using homing pigeons! And we liked it!
</oldandcrotchety>
I guess I would argue that there are different degrees and kinds of 'fun.' We do lighthearted a lot, we do cyberpunk and steampunk, we do military and spaceships and pulp -- all of them 'fun', not all of them including pudding monsters and aliens that fart flowers.
Well yeah, but who said anything like that? People were saying that this story isn't fun, not that there's only a narrow definition of fun that all stories must meet.
-
I'm not asking this to be snotty or defensive, I'm really seeking for my personal clarification. Science fiction is supposed to be fun? It's been paired with horror for as long as there have been names for the genres.
Ridiculous. The two got sorta-kinda related in the 50s with monster and alien invasion movies, but that's after the first golden age of the genre, which had nothing much to do with horror. And even then, many of those movies weren't SF as much as they were Red Scare paranoia wearing a shiny suit.
Science fiction doesn't have to be fun, but it certainly shouldn't be horror with spaceships, which is all this was. And it wasn't even GOOD horror - it played every cheap card in the deck to make you uncomfortable. After listening to it, I felt dirty and manipulated to feel dirty. I do not appreciate that.
-
I'm not asking this to be snotty or defensive, I'm really seeking for my personal clarification. Science fiction is supposed to be fun? It's been paired with horror for as long as there have been names for the genres.
Ridiculous. The two got sorta-kinda related in the 50s with monster and alien invasion movies, but that's after the first golden age of the genre, which had nothing much to do with horror. And even then, many of those movies weren't SF as much as they were Red Scare paranoia wearing a shiny suit.
I would have to disagree. Alien wasn't exactly Red Scare paranoia wearing a shiny suit. Nor was Leviathan Wakes, or the short-story biological SF horror of Octavia Butler or George R.R. Martin ("Sandkings" scared the hell out of me so effectively that I didn't read anything of his until two years ago when it became nearly impossible to avoid his fantasy).
-
I apologize. I've been getting overwhelmed by some common themes I've been seeing in most/all of these story threads for the past year and more, and I need to back off again for a while.
I'm someone who pretty much immerses completely to a story's universe and am willing to accept that there isn't time to explain every detail, and that some things, while distasteful, are also beautiful. So when I walk out of the mental theater into a gathering of my fellow "viewers" and find out nobody had the same experience, it makes me sad.
It's funny, but critiques about the technical aspects that I control don't bother me, but when the validity of the art (for which I am really just another audience member) is called into question on a completely subjective basis, I get itchy.
I'm not asking this to be snotty or defensive, I'm really seeking for my personal clarification. Science fiction is supposed to be fun? It's been paired with horror for as long as there have been names for the genres.
Ridiculous. The two got sorta-kinda related in the 50s with monster and alien invasion movies, but that's after the first golden age of the genre, which had nothing much to do with horror. And even then, many of those movies weren't SF as much as they were Red Scare paranoia wearing a shiny suit.
You think Sci-fi has only been around since the 50s and I'm ridiculous? I didn't mean that sci fi is only ever paired with horror. I meant that the genres have often been overlapped within stories for time immemorial. Arguably, the ancient myths, in their time, were sci-fi stories and almost all of those contain horror on levels ranging from passive to friggin' gruesome.
-
You think Sci-fi has only been around since the 50s and I'm ridiculous?
WHAT?! Maybe that sentence wasn't entirely clear. What I said was that Horror and SF got a bit connected to each other starting in the 50s, but the 50s was already after the first golden age of SF.
I didn't mean that sci fi is only ever paired with horror. I meant that the genres have often been overlapped within stories for time immemorial. Arguably, the ancient myths, in their time, were sci-fi stories and almost all of those contain horror on levels ranging from passive to friggin' gruesome.
Just cause it's got monsters, doesn't mean it's SF, unless you're lumping fantasy into SF. If that's what you're doing, OK, I can accept that's a difficult distinction, but then I don't think this story belongs on podcastle, either.
I have to say, I don't think there would be anything wrong with having this story on pseudopod, or maybe a better flat-out warning that it's "deadly dark" horror. There's nothing wrong with dark - my favorite fantasy series are the Thomas Covenant books, and rape plays a scene front and center in that series (in fact, that rape is the one thing that Covenant can never get away from, even 9 books later. The whole series springs from that one horrible moment). And that's my major complaint with this story - that the rape doesn't have any consequences, it's just another check box in the "bad guy is bad" column.
--
Note to moderator - I wasn't arguing the difference between horror and SF, just disputing the claim that the two are intimately tied together as a reason why this story flies on Escape Pod. I don't think we have an actual dispute here, just an honest misunderstanding about what the other is saying. Group hug?
-
Note to moderator - I wasn't arguing the difference between horror and SF, just disputing the claim that the two are intimately tied together as a reason why this story flies on Escape Pod. I don't think we have an actual dispute here, just an honest misunderstanding about what the other is saying. Group hug?
I understand your aims, but your post still mostly discusses genre and your expectations of it, and responds to a post that I requested not be responded to in that thread. To be honest, the question of "why was this particular episode on Escape Pod?" is one that is never an interesting one - the episode was on Escape Pod because the editors chose it. If you were an editor, you may have chosen differently, but it is not reasonable to expect the editors to always make the decisions you'd agree with. If you don't think a specific episode belonged, well, another one will come for the same low price of free the next week. If you think that the editors are consistently making decisions you dislike, perhaps EP is not the podcast for you. The episode threads are for feedback about the content of the episodes, not about the editorial policies or decisions of Escape Pod - those topics belong in the "about EP" board and you'll find threads to discuss both there. (Note: although this answer started out in response to Peevester, when I say "you" I'm talking to all forum members, not a specific one).
The general discussion about the relationship between SF and horror is an interesting one; the question about where to draw the genre lines as far as the podcasts go is not, and this has been both the forum and the podcast's stance since the early days of both.
-
I'm curious how much overlap we'd get in responses if we asked members of the forum to list ten things they thought were great science fiction and five things they thought had been labeled science fiction even though they weren't.
-
I find vicious, cynical, dark stories to be tremendous 'fun', personally. I remember when my cineaste roommate insisted on showing us "The Godfather." I kept chuckling, and then at the end, remarked, "Well, that was fun." He gave me such a look...
Horror is a metagenre in that its primary defining feature is its ability to engender strong negative feelings in a controlled manner. It's like "draconic." You can have a lich or a draco-lich, a mage or a draco-mage, etc. Darn shapeshifting dragons get all up in everything's business.
-
I find vicious, cynical, dark stories to be tremendous 'fun', personally. I remember when my cineaste roommate insisted on showing us "The Godfather." I kept chuckling, and then at the end, remarked, "Well, that was fun." He gave me such a look...
Are you able to identify what it is, specifically, about such stories that brings you enjoyment?
-
I'm curious how much overlap we'd get in responses if we asked members of the forum to list ten things they thought were great science fiction and five things they thought had been labeled science fiction even though they weren't.
Let's do it. Are you referring to categories (i.e. time travel, robots, etc.) or the names of actual books/movies?
-
I'm curious how much overlap we'd get in responses if we asked members of the forum to list ten things they thought were great science fiction and five things they thought had been labeled science fiction even though they weren't.
Let's do it. Are you referring to categories (i.e. time travel, robots, etc.) or the names of actual books/movies?
Should this threadjack get broken off into its own separate thread? I'm gonna have to think about my response...
-
I find vicious, cynical, dark stories to be tremendous 'fun', personally. I remember when my cineaste roommate insisted on showing us "The Godfather." I kept chuckling, and then at the end, remarked, "Well, that was fun." He gave me such a look...
Are you able to identify what it is, specifically, about such stories that brings you enjoyment?
Indeed I am!
For one thing, I am extremely cynical. I trust people to choose the stupid option unless there is a greedy option, and the greedy option unless there is a stupid AND greedy option. So dark stories let me go, "Yup, pretty much."
Secondly, I enjoy good thematic architecture. "The Godfather" has a lovely cyclical structure. Feel-good stories and whiz-bang adventures tend to not have that quite so much. (And obviously dark doesn't mean good theme building; look at the hilariously stupid thematic structure of the Saw films, for instance.)
-
Horror is a metagenre in that its primary defining feature is its ability to engender strong negative feelings in a controlled manner.
I agree with you here. Asking if SF should be fun is kind of a silly question. Horror is perhaps an inappropriate term to signify a darkness vs. lightness continuum inherent within all writing.
Labeling a story as horror might entail staying on the dark side of the spectrum, but at its core can be fantasy, sf or anything else. And there is no quantifiable data we can call on to differentiate between the two. I really don't think its even a linear scale!
Anyway people, feel free to argue otherwise. I hope to have some intelligent discourse here. I stopped posting on the thread that spawned this one simply because of people making troll-like comments. I found it difficult to take many of the outbursts seriously. Really, if some of you don't want emotional involvement, go read a math book.
[/rant]
-
I agree that asking if SF should be fun is a silly question. Actually the comment that sparked this was asking "should SF run on Escape Pod be fun."
After all, that was the stated mission that started the whole thing. Of course, we are now several editors later and yet it seems that the "fun factor" is still at least one part of the equation when stories are chosen. Personally, I expect that in any given month we will hear some "fun" SF stories, but that there might also be some thought-provoking, introspective, or even slightly disturbing stories as well. And I wouldn't have it any other way, because only having "fun" stories would be awfully limiting.
-
Labeling a story as horror might entail staying on the dark side of the spectrum, but at its core can be fantasy, sf or anything else. And there is no quantifiable data we can call on to differentiate between the two. I really don't think its even a linear scale!
I absolutely agree. In my book, horror has nothing to do with the setting/scene trappings and everything to do with the response the author is attempting to provoke. As such, the setting might be SF, fantasy, or mundane, or anything in between.
-
decisions you'd agree with. If you don't think a specific episode belonged, well, another one will come for the same low price of free the next week.
Wait, what? I am talking about this story, singular, and in fact I defended the casts for playing it in the other thread (just that I hated it). Also, I am a contributor, so that last line is rather tacky. What's with the attitude?
-
As I stated in the message itself, even though I was using a reply to your post as my starting point, my actual post was aimed at the discussion in general, not at you personally. The sentence you post was part of my general response to things people said in this thread, not to you.
As for whether or not the post was on topic - it started out with a discussion of SF and horror in general, a topic I explicitly said, as moderator, should not be continued in that thread. It then proceeds to mention the episode several times, but in the context of arguing where it belongs relative to other stories - to me it still felt more like a discussion of genre using the particular story as an example, not a discussion of the story. That was a judgment call on my behalf, but when I split a thread I can't split posts in half or duplicate them, so I had to make a decision, and frankly, since the beginning of the post specifically did something I said shouldn't be done in that thread, the rest of the content was not particularly important in making that decision.
-
Labeling a story as horror might entail staying on the dark side of the spectrum, but at its core can be fantasy, sf or anything else.
For my money the most horrifying horror story I have read was NON-fiction, Preston's The Hot Zone.
-
I agree that asking if SF should be fun is a silly question. Actually the comment that sparked this was asking "should SF run on Escape Pod be fun."
After all, that was the stated mission that started the whole thing. Of course, we are now several editors later and yet it seems that the "fun factor" is still at least one part of the equation when stories are chosen. Personally, I expect that in any given month we will hear some "fun" SF stories, but that there might also be some thought-provoking, introspective, or even slightly disturbing stories as well. And I wouldn't have it any other way, because only having "fun" stories would be awfully limiting.
That is a different matter, although I'm glad EP editors have chosen not to limit their choices to lighter fare.
For my money the most horrifying horror story I have read was NON-fiction, Preston's The Hot Zone.
Afterwards, I considered how wrong I was not to have included non-fiction as a potential source of horror.
-
Should Escape Pod be fun?
I suspect that's up to the editor, and I seriously doubt any of the editors chosen to sit in the EP captain's chair don't get that Escape Pod should "Have Fun."
That said, I agree with Scattercat that fun is incredibly subjective. I'm perfectly fine with EP not presenting light fare every week, and I think running darker stuff occasionally will make the lighter stuff stand out. Mind the warnings at the beginning, if the darker stuff bothers you - that's why they're there :).
Running darker stuff at EP is also not a new thing. Steve did it back in the day (the Neal Asher story is the first to jump to mind, but I'm sure there were others if I went and looked), and every other editor since has as well.
-
Mind the warnings at the beginning, if the darker stuff bothers you - that's why they're there :).
Indeed. We are not inclined to run warnings at all. So if they are there, even if they are veiled in light comedy, they are very real. And in this particular case, it was very serious and not done by the usual voice so it should have stood out even more.
-
Mind the warnings at the beginning, if the darker stuff bothers you - that's why they're there :).
Indeed. We are not inclined to run warnings at all. So if they are there, even if they are veiled in light comedy, they are very real. And in this particular case, it was very serious and not done by the usual voice so it should have stood out even more.
It absolutely did stand out. Especially coming from Norm, I took it very seriously. As I said in the other thread, I really appreciated it, and thank you for including it!
-
I would say that Devour was one of the best episodes I've heard on EP, and that was far from lighthearted. I tend to think that one type of fun is the story that provokes you to think about something new or in a different way, sometimes that requires what I'd call "mental violence," which the times when sci-fi and horror directly mix often occurs!
-
I would have to say that 70-80% of my favorite EP episodes have been either morose or dark or at least darkly sarcastic. Pretty much every episode involving a robot assistant leaves me in tears and I love it. I can't think of Steve Eley without thinking of that early story abut the reverend (or some church official) and the robot and that's a near Braveheart-level tearjerker.
-
I apologize. I've been getting overwhelmed by some common themes I've been seeing in most/all of these story threads for the past year and more, and I need to back off again for a while.
I'm someone who pretty much immerses completely to a story's universe and am willing to accept that there isn't time to explain every detail, and that some things, while distasteful, are also beautiful. So when I walk out of the mental theater into a gathering of my fellow "viewers" and find out nobody had the same experience, it makes me sad.
It's funny, but critiques about the technical aspects that I control don't bother me, but when the validity of the art (for which I am really just another audience member) is called into question on a completely subjective basis, I get itchy.
:) I try to comment on every story - often late to party as I am since I often get a weeks behind on my listening. My comment is along the lines of I liked it" or "I didn't like" and I try to explain why. It seems other commentors spend a lot of time giving detailed critiques really try to delve into the technique of story telling that I just can't get into. I'm not a writer, though, so I'm not coming to this from a peer review perspective.
-
I'm not a writer, though, so I'm not coming to this from a peer review perspective.
So I'm not the only one? Yay!
-
I think Sci-Fi should be extremely thought provoking (and based upon the observable universe... and all the mysteries that exist based upon our current understanding). Believe me, there's PLENTY of stuff that can fall into that category.
-
I think Sci-Fi should be extremely thought provoking (and based upon the observable universe... and all the mysteries that exist based upon our current understanding).
Does it stop being science fiction if our understanding of a "mystery of the known world" moves past what is presented in the story?
-
I think Sci-Fi should be extremely thought provoking (and based upon the observable universe... and all the mysteries that exist based upon our current understanding).
Does it stop being science fiction if our understanding of a "mystery of the known world" moves past what is presented in the story?
Example?
-
Like science fiction from Verne's day in which people flew to the moon and found an atmosphere and thriving life.
-
I think Sci-Fi should be extremely thought provoking (and based upon the observable universe... and all the mysteries that exist based upon our current understanding).
Does it stop being science fiction if our understanding of a "mystery of the known world" moves past what is presented in the story?
It becomes outdated science fiction, but it still remains fun IMPO. The bulk of what I read falls into that category. There's a vast mountain of free ebooks out there for the downloading and another equally vast mountain of free audiobooks. I enjoyed stuff like "Tumithak of the Corridors" when I was a kid and I still do.
-
Oh, if that's what you're talking about, then it just becomes dated. That has little to do with "fun" unless it's (IMHO) really, REALLY stupid.
Example: Our bookclub recently read the reprinted omnibus edition of the Sector General series by James White (the first three are reprinted in "Beginning Operations"). Now, in one of the stories, White describes all the scientific information for a Brontosaurus - current as of 1962 or so. Ok. He was accurate for the science *of the time*, and completely inaccurate for 2012, but that didn't make the story any less fun.
(small) Counterexample - social change that has outstripped the writing - the most harmless example I can think of are the ubiquitous (female) secretaries for police detectives in the future of "Do Androids Dream of the Electric Sheep?" Ok, that's not a science thing, and it's not that much of a thing in the story, but it's an example of how that sort of dating can make things Not Fun.
-
An even better counterexample (IMHO), also from Philip K. Dick, is A Scanner Darkly, in which the entire future is an extrapolation of the drug culture of the early 70s. For me, at least, this makes it an extremely difficult read, not at all fun, and frankly just annoying on a lot of levels.
-
I personally find it useful to think about how the characters view their world and let them determine how I view it. Do they consider their world to be one driven by science or magic? Therefore, if Verne's characters think they are using science to achieve spaceflight, then it is still science fiction in my book. Likewise, if the narrator of Wells' The Time Machine believes that the time machine uses technology (as opposed to magic) to travel through time, then I say The Time Machine is science fiction.
-
It becomes outdated science fiction, but it still remains fun IMPO. The bulk of what I read falls into that category. There's a vast mountain of free ebooks out there for the downloading and another equally vast mountain of free audiobooks. I enjoyed stuff like "Tumithak of the Corridors" when I was a kid and I still do.
Out of curiosity, how would you react to someone doing a story today, but setting it in the universe as it was understood in an earlier era?
Specifically, I'm wondering how you would react to a new story set in the "consensus SF solar system" of the late 40's and early 50's, before the start of the planetary program -- Venus as a planet-wide swamp, Mars as the ancient remains of a dead or dying civilization, tidally-locked Mercury, warm and earth-like Jovian moons (albiet with lower gravity), etc. Somewhat like Steampunk stories that have the Victorian cosmology turn out to the true. Or are the 50's too close in time?
-
It becomes outdated science fiction, but it still remains fun IMPO. The bulk of what I read falls into that category. There's a vast mountain of free ebooks out there for the downloading and another equally vast mountain of free audiobooks. I enjoyed stuff like "Tumithak of the Corridors" when I was a kid and I still do.
Out of curiosity, how would you react to someone doing a story today, but setting it in the universe as it was understood in an earlier era?
Specifically, I'm wondering how you would react to a new story set in the "consensus SF solar system" of the late 40's and early 50's, before the start of the planetary program -- Venus as a planet-wide swamp, Mars as the ancient remains of a dead or dying civilization, tidally-locked Mercury, warm and earth-like Jovian moons (albiet with lower gravity), etc. Somewhat like Steampunk stories that have the Victorian cosmology turn out to the true. Or are the 50's too close in time?
I've never read anything matching that description. The closest thing I have experienced is playing the Fallout games with their retro-future SCIENCE! theme. I love the games but they have an entirely different vibe than actual vintage science fiction. It would take a skillful author to avoid a nodding-and-winking tone.
-
I've never read anything matching that description. The closest thing I have experienced is playing the Fallout games with their retro-future SCIENCE! theme. I love the games but they have an entirely different vibe than actual vintage science fiction. It would take a skillful author to avoid a nodding-and-winking tone.
I think it would take an even more skillful author to not avoid the nodding and winking tone, yet work it in, in such a way that it makes the story that much more fun. I picture it as a task for Vonnegut or Adams.
I would also desperately love to read that story.
-
They're not quite as rare as you may think they are :)
Here's one from Escape Pod - one of my all time faves: Hesperia and Glory, by Ann Leckie (http://escapepod.org/2007/11/08/ep131-hesperia-and-glory/).
Cat Valente has done a couple of them as well.
-
Have a look for Atomic Tales, a radio series which is all about capturing that 1950s essence.
Not quite Adamsian, but good fun.
-
There's no doubt that a story being scientifically accurate "for it's time" qualifies it as Sci-Fi (in my book)... it just means it isn't the 'best' Sci-Fi. Still, some of those books are just great. But when there's NO scientific basis for what's going on, I don't know why the word 'Science' is used at all when describing a story.
BTW....
A REALLY FANTASTIC SHORT READ: THE FUTUROLOGICAL CONGRESS by Stanislav Lem. Holy Crap! This book was written in Polish, and, for our purposes, translated into English. Now, one might think something would be lost in translation (and probably something is... But, WOW! What a translation it is. So very clever.
-
I've never read anything matching that description. The closest thing I have experienced is playing the Fallout games with their retro-future SCIENCE! theme. I love the games but they have an entirely different vibe than actual vintage science fiction. It would take a skillful author to avoid a nodding-and-winking tone.
I think it would take an even more skillful author to not avoid the nodding and winking tone, yet work it in, in such a way that it makes the story that much more fun. I picture it as a task for Vonnegut or Adams.
I would also desperately love to read that story.
Oh, um. I feel like an idiot for not mentioning this story earlier - Barsoom in June (http://www.castofwonders.org/2013/02/15/ep-67-barsoom-in-june-by-brian-l-hurrel/).
I recorded it with Graeme Dunlop for Cast of Wonders and it was a blast. Fun and funny and short.
-
Oh, um. I feel like an idiot for not mentioning this story earlier - Barsoom in June (http://www.castofwonders.org/2013/02/15/ep-67-barsoom-in-june-by-brian-l-hurrel/).
I recorded it with Graeme Dunlop for Cast of Wonders and it was a blast. Fun and funny and short.
Gee, Dave, what could have POSSIBLY taken up your attention ahead of this? ;)
-
:D
Martians, probably. And sexy Venusians, no doubt! Lots of sexy - bzzzzzzt!
I mean...I'm fine. And it wasn't the Martians or Venusians, because there aren't any such thing!