Proper sf explores the edges of reality and then goes beyond.
Popular “sf” is old tropes and popular ideas rendered in terms of spaceships and robots.
The first is a real live alien. The second is cosplay.
Proper sf explores the edges of reality and then goes beyond.
Popular “sf” is old tropes and popular ideas rendered in terms of spaceships and robots.
The first is a real live alien. The second is cosplay.
Your point is merely semantic then.
Username appropriate.
That fruit hangs so low that it’s practically dragging on the ground. That fruit is so obvious that it may as well be glowing in neon. Are you a half-blind caterpillar?
I’m not the one who decided to create a post in a science fiction community claiming a huge portion of science fiction isn’t “true science fiction” based on my own tastes.
Of course the point is semantic, do you want me to base it on what? Your favorite novels?
We already agreed that it’s a big difference.
2 completely different things that have the same name. Superficially similar but actually not.
What’s the issue?
Margaret Atwood uses the term “speculative fiction”, I think partly to get at the difference you are describing. But also partly because she doesn’t think it needs to be “science-y”.
That’s how grouping works, yes. You and I are clearly different, yet we are both called “human”. In fact, you and a giant panda are both “mammals” despite being radically different.
Semantics really is the smallest possible point. Mine is better.
Fortunately for the genre, you’re not the one who gets to define “legitimate”