In class, it seemed that the issue of what is science fiction and what is fantasy was not completely resolved for us. I talked to Jeff a bit, thought about it a bit, and here’s the start of what I think. See if you gel with this sketchy explanation I made up.
Image from http://blastr.com/assets_c
/2010/03/TimeMachineTardis-thumb-330x250-35931.jpg
So taking it from our readings, the difference between science fiction and fantasy is the formal strategy of “cognitive effect.” Okay… fine. Cognitive effect (to me) seems like it is an intentional effort to try to explain the make-believe (not realistic) stuff in whatever way sounds believable. I’m focusing on the idea that it’s an attempt to explain. So, apply cognitive effect, you have science fiction. Don’t apply cognitive effect, you have fantasy.
Taking an example from class discussion, the wardrobe in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe was ruled fantasy because the idea of entering another world via a wardrobe was too far into the realm of implausibility. I’m arguing here that it is not because the idea of entering another world from a wooden box is too implausible, it is fantasy because how the wardrobe works was not explained to the reader/viewer. I support that idea with Dr. Who (retro and current TV series). Dr. Who enters alternate worlds, dimensions, etc. via his wooden box (an old British police call box) and it does some VERY implausible things. But on Dr. Who, there are frequent and varied attempts to explain how it works when it does something weird. The explanations are crappy and sometimes quick and unbelievable, but the attempt is recognized enough by viewers to create a “cognitive effect” thereby making Dr. Who a science fiction work.
Image from http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily
/2005/0509/narnia0929a.jpg
Also I want to add a note about the allegorical nature of The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. I personally do not think that it has much to do with the classification of what is science fiction and what is fantasy. There are documented, famous, classic science fiction works known for being riddled with lots of religious allegory. A viewer unaware of the source for allegory would most likely miss the symbols, commentary, and references intended as allegory, and that viewer would only see it as a narrative (either science fiction or fantasy, depending on the presence–or absence–of cognitive effect).
Is the formal strategy of cognitive effect enough to categorize a work as science fiction or fantasy?
Are there more examples of religious allegory in science fiction (or in fantasy)?
Should we even bother to categorize works? (Sometimes I feel like, “what’s the point!?”)
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
October 14, 2010 at 9:32 pm
M G Kizzia
Science fiction is the improbable made possible. Fantasy is the impossible made probable. And no, I don’t know who said that first, but it always seemed to me a good if imprecise guide.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
October 15, 2010 at 1:12 pm
sftheory1
I’m not entirely sure that a strategy of “cognitive effect,” of explanation or lack thereof is any indicator of science fiction or fantasy. An example of fantasy where much of the magic is explained in almost scientific terms would be The Steel Remains (where the Elf equivalent are technologically advanced aliens).
My personal favorite theory of the difference between science fiction and fantasy comes from Hal Duncan.
October 15, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Sean O'Hara
Narnia is not an allegory; it’s Christian fanfic. Aslan does not symbolize Jesus — Aslan is the form Jesus takes when he visits the world of Narnia.
October 15, 2010 at 7:22 pm
jeffreybardzell
@Sam According to Freedman’s reworking of Suvin’s definition, I think allegorical SF would also be called “fantasy.” Just because it has spaceships instead of elves does not, on Freedman’s account, make something science fiction rather than fantasy. In other words, we need not to conflate Freedman’s distinction between SF vs. fantasy and our everyday notions of SF vs. fantasy.
@Commenters not in the Interaction Culture class. Welcome to the class blog! Your comments and participation are welcome here. As the instructor, I just want to note that this blog is connected with another conversation–a graduate seminar, grounded in a bunch of readings–to which obviously you aren’t privy. Some of the definitions alluded to here are very specific (e.g., Carl Freedman’s reworking of Darko Suvin’s definition of SF as “cognitive estrangement”). One consequence of this is that notions of “science fiction” versus “fantasy” that we are using don’t map onto our everyday use of those terms (e.g., spaceships and technology versus elves and horse-based travel).
October 15, 2010 at 7:27 pm
jeffreybardzell
@Sean O’Hara. Thanks for contributing. I’m pretty sure C.S. Lewis had never heard of fan fiction, but I know for a fact he wrote a very influential book on allegory http://www.amazon.com/Allegory-Love-Medieval-Tradition-Paperbacks/dp/0192812203/. Incidentally, I have also written a book about allegorical literature. I stand by the claim that Narnia is allegorical.
October 15, 2010 at 7:29 pm
jeffreybardzell
@sftheory1 I also have reservations about Freedman’s reworking of Suvin’s “cognitive estrangement.” I think his shift from “cognitive” to “cognitive effect” may cost more than he realizes. That said, examples of cognitive fantasy would, on Freedman’s theory, not be fantasy at all, but rather (and counterintuitively) science fiction.
October 17, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Nina Mehta
@Sam thanks for breaking down your thoughts on Science Fiction and Fantasy. I feel like what I’m hearing is: if there is a plausible, believable, somewhat realistic (even if far in the future) description of how the fantastical thing is possible that could possibly cohabitate in the world in which we live, it has cognitive effect and is Science Fiction. And otherwise, if something is fanatastical, nearly impossible and full of wonder, it is fantasy. That to me is very subjective.
I’m comfortable with that being subjective, but it seems that in class and these conversations, there is something less subjective that separates the two.
To me, I still see the breakdown at the bookstore like this Fiction< Fantasy <Science Fiction. I'm open to seeing it some other way but I really feel roadblocked. Science Fiction is fantasy, it has been made up, no matter how reasonable the explanation is, or how close it is to something that could be.
All that being said, I do think fiction writers (fantasy, science fiction and otherwise) and HCI designers must use many of the same thinking tools.
October 17, 2010 at 4:20 pm
margaretfritz
To me
The main difference between science fiction and fantasy is that one is science fiction and the other fantasy, meaning that works of science fiction describe the world and its workings through the perspective of scientific philosophies, interests, and beliefs; whereas, works of fantasy tend to describe their worlds through the perspective of religious, folk, and occult beliefs.
So the greatest difference between the two is a difference of culture. The science fiction novel is written from the scientific, cultural perspective and the fantasy novel is written from cultural perspectives outside of scientific traditions.
For example, in science fiction the hero often gains power from scientific discoveries. The hero in fantasy gains powers from practicing magical practices. In science fiction when the order of the world is threatened, a scientific invention or methodology is the hero/saver of all, and in fantasy novels an incarnation of a divine power is often the restorer of the earth.