»
Main Forums
»
English Workshop
»
Defining a term
| English Workshop |
|
Defining a term |
|
|
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-08-02
Posts 8296Purgatorial Incarceration 
|
"Science fiction does not come after the fact of a scientific discovery or development. It is the herald of possibility." -L. Ron Hubbard I'd read this statement many years before, but only now after delving deeper into that world that I wonder about it. Can one not still write "Science Fiction" based on something existant? By this statement, it would seem that he is indicating that one has to be a veritable prophet in order to legitemately write Science Fiction. Opinions? |
||
| © Copyright 2000 C.G. Ward - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Romy Senior Member
since 2000-05-28
Posts 1170Plantation, Florida |
I think it can be based on a fact but still created from imagination. What do you think? |
||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
Is 'Science Fiction' the opposite of 'Science Fact'? If so, then therein lies the answer....anything that can't be explained factually in science!!! (or not! LOL) |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Hubbard was wrong, plain and simple. Much of the most innovative science fiction has always come from known facts. Indeed, that is almost the definition of what most editors call "hard" SF. SF does not invent new science (that's the job of fantasy). SF, rather, takes known scientific principles and projects their impact on humanity. Those who have both a deep understanding of scientific principle and of human nature can, indeed, often seem like prophets. Over fifty years, a writer took the work of mathematicians, who had shown there were certain points around Earth where an orbiting body would remain stationary relative to the ground, and wrote a story about a geosynchronous satellite system used for global communications. Neither the science nor the math was new, only the use to which this writer predicted human nature would put it. Arthur C. Clarke knew his stuff!  As another example, here's one everyone missed. It would have been relatively easy to look at the advent of the automobile and make some predictions about what it would mean to personal freedom and mobility. (Easy, yea, but no one did it.) It would have shown much more insight, however, to write a story about teenagers and the inevitable use to which they would put that back seat. Take existing or probable technology, mix in human motivations, and there is always a story to tell! |
||
|
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-08-02
Posts 8296Purgatorial Incarceration |
See, now I agree with you 100% ROn. It's my belief (and what I enjoy) that good fiction is about people. The details are what makes it sci-fi, fantasy, horror, whathaveyou. I was just curious if there were anyoen who agreed with his theory, because I'd like to hear more about it... |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
