For some reason which I cannot fathom yet -- but I hope this blog post and subsequent discussions will be able to shed some light on -- some people in the sci-fi community have been gently mocking the cli fi genre term in ways similar to way the ways in which sci fi itself was mocked once upon a time, say 50 years ago when sci fi first emerged on the cultural scene.
Now we have good people like sci fi writer Niall Harrison at Twitter @niallharrison writing in an Aug 23 tweet: "Nooooo "Cli-Fi" kill it with fire! #SFFNow"
And a friend of Niall's tweets to @sraets @TiemenZwaan @niallharrison @bees_ja @bibliolicious that "I use "eco-SF" want of a better term. Occasionally also ecopunk, sheepishly." ''Ecopunk or greenpunk or eco-SF, sure. But cli-fi... yuck.''
@Squirrelpunkd Aug 23 > > @kiplet @thefuturefire @sraets @TiemenZwaan @niallharrison @bees_ja @bibliolicious There's a decent Brazilian anthology that's named CLI FI.
Unrevealed @PrinceofRazors Aug 23@thefuturefire @sraets @TiemenZwaan @niallharrison @bees_ja @bibliolicious ''Out of curiosity, you read that CS Monitor piece on "cli-fi"?
Tiemen Zwaan @TiemenZwaan Aug 23 > > @niallharrison @sraets @bees_ja @bibliolicious
A bit like what Atwood did with calling her books speculative fiction?
@PrinceofRazors Aug 23 > > @thefuturefire @sraets @TiemenZwaan @niallharrison @bees_ja @bibliolicious I think from last year. Claimed "cli-fi" isn't science fiction..
Said it's *lit* fiction. I guess because SF can't be serious?
@bees_ja @bibliolicious Didn't see that. Don't understd need to deny SF 4 respectability
''But I find most discourses about/around "literariness" suspect... '' says another Tweet
Dan Bloom to @niallharrison Hi Nial,
''RSVP if time and inclined re your strange cli fi mockery/hatred ''
-----------
COMMENTS:
1. ''I didn't read everything, but it sounds in part like a knee-jerk allergy to the term "cli fi", rooted in part in the older hatred for the term "sci fi" which became popular in the 70s (though coined in the 50s and patterned on "hi fi") and which was hated in part because it was associated with the kind of popular science fiction the traditional fans of written SF did not appreciate.''
2. ''I'm saying that if you hate the abbreviation "sci fi", you're probably going to hate "cli fi"... ''
3. ''Unfortunately, a lot of people have knee-jerk reactions to new terms and concepts. If they're reasonable, they will listen to reasonable discussion on the matter. If they're not reasonable, there's no point in debating it with them. You may as well debate with a stone.
I haven't been following the objections to "cli-fi" too closely, but it seems to be a mix of a few things.
Some people just don't like the word itself on a stylistic level. They may also not like sci-fi, Hi-Fi, Wi-Fi, and any number of abbreviations, neologisms, etc. that they consider somehow odd, undignified, cheesy, etc. Hopefully these people will learn to "get over it" and use the term climate fiction if they'd rather not use the term cli-fi.
And then there are the people who pride themselves on being "apolitical" (whatever that means) or who are politically opposed to discussion of climate change for various reasons. They make fun of cli-fi just as much as they will make fun of any fiction that they consider to be political, preachy, didactic, etc.
Honestly, none of these should be barriers to understanding and respecting cli-fi as an emerging genre. Even if it's something that they personally don't write, they should be able to see the literary value, as with sci-fi. ''
4. 'Yes, i meant "does NOT aim to supplant sci fi" -- thanks for catching this typing mistake, yes DOES NOT AIM TO SUPPLANT, of course. I will let you know if any of Niall's friends reply by tweet. I think they will. I just chanced upon their cli fi HATE conversation yesterday and had no idea people felt so strongly. WOW. But I am sure once they hear me out, they will change their minds and see the light. CLI FI is not the enemy of SCI FI and does not aim to supplant SF and is a separate genre but if they want to call it subgenre of sci fi, they can do that too. although i do not call it a subgenre. and if sci fi writers tackle climate issues then BRAVO. we are on the same TEAM!''
5. ''my response in CAPS to your very good post above: re ''Dan, you're going to have to very carefully define what makes fiction CliFi and not another genre. I HAVE VERY CAREFULLY DEFINED WHAT CLI FI IS FOR MORE THAN A YEAR BUT I CANNOT CONTROL WHAT NPR OR THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR OR THE NYT SAY ABOUT CLI FI IS THOSE REPORTERS DO NOT CONTACT ME. ! SIGH ......If it's fiction about the present day world using only present day technology, you have a solid case. NO CLI FI CAN TAKE PLACE IN THE PAST, THE PRESENT, THE NEAR FUTURE AND THE DISTANT FUTURE AND IT CAN EVEN USE FUTURE TECHNOLOGY IS WRITERS WANT TO GO THERE BUT THE MAIN STORY IS BASED ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND AGW. AND IT IS STILL CLI FI. SURE. If it uses future technology or takes place in the future, then you are moving into the realm of science fiction. NO NO CLI FI CAN TAKE PLACE IN IMAGINED FUTURE FOR SURE. BUT IT DIFFERS, IMHO, FROM SCI FI IN THAT SCI FI IS WELL, A DIFFERENT KIND OF GENRE WITH DIFFERENT KINDS OF GOALS AND READERS...THAT'S ALL. SOM SCI FI NOVELS CAN BE CONSIDERED CLI FI SURE. AND SOME CLI FI NOVELS CAN BE CONSIDERED SCI FI SURE. BUT THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT AND DISTINCT GENRES. ASK ME MORE OFFLINE AT danbloom@gmail.com - i have files and files of quotes to show you.
So, is the intent to define CliFi as fiction about climate issues (1) in the present day with present technology, YES (2) in the present day and projected future with present technologies, YES (3) in the present day and projected future with present and projected technologies, YES or (4) in any time with both real and imagined technologies? YES ......There would be no issue with defining group (1) fiction as CliFi. Group (4) is squarely science fiction genre. Groups (2) and (3) may overlap the science fiction genre and should be labeled SF if any significant part of the story is set in the future, but may be removed from the SF genre if the story is squarely set in the present world and any views into the future or about future technologies are presented as projections by characters within the story.
In the end it will likely be the mainstream media who defines what is called CliFi -- THIS IS TRUE AND I AM MONITORING THE MSM TO MAKE SURE THEY GET IT RIGHT....BUT OFTEN THEY DO NOT CONSULT ME OR EVEN CONTACT ME FIRST THEY JUST WRITE WHA THE WANT AS DID NPR AND CSM AND NYT ROOM FOR DEBATE FORUM....I CANNOT CONTROL THE MEDIA. THEY WRITE WHAT THEY WANT AND ARE OFTEN WRONG!.....SIGH..... the term is certainly catchy enough to make it adoptable I AGREE AND THANKS FOR YOUR VOTE OF CONFIDENCE SMILE.....-- but you should at least start out trying to give it a unique and coherent definition. PAUL I HAVE BEEN GIVING A UNIQUE AND COHERENT DEFINTION FOR OVER TWO YEARS BUT I CANNOT CONTROL MEDIA HEADLINE WRITERS OR REPORTERS OR TWITTER HATES. SMILE......BUT ALL THIS WILL SORT ITSELF OUT BY AND BY. I AM NOT WORRIED. AND I AM NOT UPSET. IT WILL TAKE 20 YEARS FOR CLI FI TO DEFINE ITSELF. JUST AS SCI FI TOOK A LONG TIME AT THIS TOO. So ALL GOOD AND ALL IS WELL.''
6. ''My main point that I didn't have time to talk about earlier was related to genre overlap. This may be a somewhat unconventional view, but as far as I'm concerned, genre overlap is fine. In some cases, a work of fiction may be influenced by several genres. It may even be unclear which (if any) is the dominant one.
For example, some "pulp sci-fi" lies at the intersection between the science fiction genre and the romance genre. These works are set in a sci-fi setting but the plot is more reminiscent of a romance novel. If I were forced to choose, I would classify some of these as romance rather than sci-fi.
To use a much more nuanced example, let's consider Barbara Kingsolver's "Flight Behavior". Arguably, it could be considered a slightly "sci-fi" plot because real butterflies have not yet exhibited the exact behavior that they do in the novel. It could also be considered "romance" because it explores relationships quite thoroughly and one of the main plot arcs has to do with a relationship. But personally, I would place it solidly in the "cli-fi" genre with aspects of the other genres. As I see it, the main thrust of the book is using a slightly quirky occurrence and a very personal narrative to explore the issue of climate change (and certain related themes of gender, class, the nature of science, urban vs rural, etc.).''
7. ''I am a long time science fiction fan. I have no problem with there being a "CliFi" genre -- whether it's a separate fiction genre or a sub-genre of something else. But you're going to have to very carefully define what makes fiction CliFi and not another genre. If it's fiction about the present day world using only present day technology, you have a solid case. If it uses future technology or takes place in the future, then you are moving into the realm of science fiction.
So, is the intent to define CliFi as fiction about climate issues (1) in the present day with present technology, (2) in the present day and projected future with present technologies, (3) in the present day and projected future with present and projected technologies, or (4) in any time with both real and imagined technologies? There would be no issue with defining group (1) fiction as CliFi. Group (4) is squarely science fiction genre. Groups (2) and (3) may overlap the science fiction genre and should be labeled SF if any significant part of the story is set in the future, but may be removed from the SF genre if the story is squarely set in the present world and any views into the future or about future technologies are presented as projections by characters within the story.
In the end it will likely be the mainstream media who defines what is called CliFi -- the term is certainly catchy enough to make it adoptable -- but you should at least start out trying to give it a unique and coherent definition.''
So, is the intent to define CliFi as fiction about climate issues (1) in the present day with present technology, (2) in the present day and projected future with present technologies, (3) in the present day and projected future with present and projected technologies, or (4) in any time with both real and imagined technologies? There would be no issue with defining group (1) fiction as CliFi. Group (4) is squarely science fiction genre. Groups (2) and (3) may overlap the science fiction genre and should be labeled SF if any significant part of the story is set in the future, but may be removed from the SF genre if the story is squarely set in the present world and any views into the future or about future technologies are presented as projections by characters within the story.
In the end it will likely be the mainstream media who defines what is called CliFi -- the term is certainly catchy enough to make it adoptable -- but you should at least start out trying to give it a unique and coherent definition.''
8. My main point that I didn't have time to talk about earlier was related to genre overlap. This may be a somewhat unconventional view, but as far as I'm concerned, genre overlap is fine. In some cases, a work of fiction may be influenced by several genres. It may even be unclear which (if any) is the dominant one.
For example, some "pulp sci-fi" lies at the intersection between the science fiction genre and the romance genre. These works are set in a sci-fi setting but the plot is more reminiscent of a romance novel. If I were forced to choose, I would classify some of these as romance rather than sci-fi.
To use a much more nuanced example, let's consider Barbara Kingsolver's "Flight Behavior". Arguably, it could be considered a slightly "sci-fi" plot because real butterflies have not yet exhibited the exact behavior that they do in the novel. It could also be considered "romance" because it explores relationships quite thoroughly and one of the main plot arcs has to do with a relationship. But personally, I would place it solidly in the "cli-fi" genre with aspects of the other genres. As I ....As I see it, the main thrust of the book is using a slightly quirky occurrence and a very personal narrative to explore the issue of climate change (and certain related themes of gender, class, the nature of science, urban vs rural, etc.).''
8 comments:
The history of science fiction films parallels that of the motion picture industry as a whole, *****although it took several decades before the genre was taken seriously. SEE? SCI FI ALSO FACED CRITICISM AND MOCKING AT FIRST SO WHY ARE SCI FI PEOPLE LIKE NIALL NOW DOING THE SAME TO CLI FI? IT DOES NOT COMPUTE! THERE IS A DISCONNECT IN NIALL'S MIND.... re The history of science fiction films parallels that of the motion picture industry as a whole, although it took several decades before the genre was taken seriously.
science fiction, abbreviation SF or sci-fi, a form of fiction that deals principally with the impact of actual or imagined science upon society or individuals. The term science fiction was popularized, if not invented, in the 1920s by one of the genre’s principal advocates, the American publisher Hugo Gernsback.
1920s! and faced much criticism then....
The genre debate: Science fiction travels farther than literary fiction ...
www.theguardian.com/.../genre-debate-science-fiction-speculative-literary頁庫存檔
18 Apr 2014 ... Juliet McKenna argues that far from being inferior to literary fiction, science ... and
sub-genres such as urban fantasy, alternate history and steampunk which ...
Mocking that passion is missing a key aspect of speculative fiction. ... It's also very
amusing to watch the contortions of literary critics faced with ...
The genre debate:
Science fiction travels farther than literary fictionIn the second of our series on literary definitions, novelist Juliet McKenna argues that far from being inferior to literary fiction, science fiction and fantasy can create debate around the most complex political
Friday 18 April 2014 London. Photograph: David Giles/PA
As a writer of science fiction and fantasy, and on behalf of all the variations and sub-genres such as urban fantasy, alternate history and steampunk which collectively make up "speculative fiction", I'd argue that genre fiction is different from literary fiction.
Whether it's dealing with rayguns and rocket ships, swords, sorcery or fur and fangbangers, speculative fiction's unifying, identifying characteristic is that it doesn't attempt to mimic real life in the way that literary fiction does. It stands apart from the world we know. It takes us away to an entirely secondary realm, be that Middle Earth or Westeros, or to an alternate present where vampires and werewolves really do exist and you ring 666 to report a supernatural crime.
Read science fiction and you can visit a near-future United Kingdom where advances in bio-sciences see mega-corporations using genetic engineering to exploit the human genome for corporate profit. You can see mankind terraforming Mars or can step into a far future where humanity has colonised the stars, leaving an excluded, remnant population on Earth trying to understand their place in this expanded universe.
I've read all those stories recently and as it always has, that distinctive unfamiliarity made me read with closer attention. I wouldn't go so far as saying "familiarity breeds contempt" with literary fiction, but familiarity can certainly breed speed-reading. The reader's unconscious mind latches on to familiar elements and fills in the rest. If you're reading a novel set in Manchester, even if you've never been there, you have a mental image of "Manchesterness" from other cities you've visited and what you've seen on the television.
Peter Jackson's best efforts notwithstanding, no one's ever been to Middle Earth. Speculative fiction prompts the reader to pay so much more attention, looking for the details that make sense of this strange world. Reading speculative fiction isn't arriving in Manchester. It's finding yourself in Outer Mongolia with no help from Lonely Planet or a Rough Guide.
Which is why, done well, speculative fiction can be considerably harder to write than literary fiction. I can tell you from experience, as an author, as a reviewer, and after spending two years as a judge for the Arthur C Clarke Award and reading around 150 novels, that when readers are paying that much close attention to every hint and clue, the writer needs to have their internal logic, consistency of character and scene-setting absolutely nailed down. Readers have to be convinced that this unfamiliar world is solidly real if they're ever going to suspend disbelief and accept the unreal, whether that's magic and dragons or faster-than-light travel.
You absolutely cannot obscure underlying weakness with waffle. Otherwise the emails will arrive, picking up on discrepancies. Not just for the sake of point-scoring or nitpicking but because fans become so engaged with imaginary worlds and so passionate about their characters.
Setting a story in another place or another time enables speculative fiction to explore ideas that literary fiction might really struggle with. I'm interested in divided societies; my father's Irish, my mother's English and the versions of Irish history I learned at my Granny McKenna's knee and at a girls' grammar school in Dorset in the 1970s were pretty radically different. I have friends who've lived and worked in Yugoslavia, as it was, and later in Croatia and Bosnia. I know diplomats who've had dealings with Israelis and Palestinians. A literary novelist dealing with any of those intractable, complex conflicts faces countless challenges and pitfalls.
Write a fantasy novel centered on a fractious, fractured country, where arrogant aristocrats pursue their ambition heedless of ordinary people's suffering and you can explore the rights and responsibilities of power, the uses and abuses of privilege and the importance of people of every class getting involved in managing their own destiny. With turnout at elections steadily dropping and abuses by the rich and powerful going unpunished because they're financing the political classes, getting people to think about the world around them is important.
Inspiring the next generation of voters to engage with the political process is vital. Science fiction and fantasy can do this because speculative fiction gets young people reading. It's been the mainstay of children's literature from Edith Nesbit through CS Lewis to Diana Wynne Jones, Philip Pullman and Francis Hardinge. It's become a dominant force in popular culture from Battlestar Galactica and Game of Thrones on TV to the Hunger Games films and the new Captain America.
However, this is a double-edged sword. The common assumption that "kids' stuff" or "commercially popular" means simplistic or inferior helps perpetuate the prejudice against science fiction and fantasy. It's no wonder that writers like Margaret Atwood put so much effort into distancing themselves from what they see as a damaging association. I wish she didn't do it – but I can see why she does.
It's also very amusing to watch the contortions of literary critics faced with talented writers like the late lamented Iain Banks and Joanne Harris, who are equally adept in literary and speculative fiction and refuse to apologise for or justify what they write. And if the definitive characteristic of literary fiction is sublime prose, then at his peak Terry Pratchett is surely the finest prose stylist writing today. So this is where we get terms like counter-factual and magical realism, to save reviewers from sullying their copy with words like SF and fantasy.
Challenge people to justify that disdain and you'll almost always find out they don't actually read current speculative fiction. They read The Lord of the Rings at school and lost the will to live somewhere around Tom Bombadil. Frankly, that's understandable and I say that as a Tolkien fan. But to reject an entire genre on that basis? That's like reading Murder on the Orient Express as a teenager, deciding the solution is preposterous and dismissing all crime fiction. Such prejudice makes no sense. And worse, it cuts a reader off from some of the most challenging, most immersive contemporary fiction.
So yes, as far as I am concerned, the speculative fiction genre is different to literary fiction. By celebrating its distinctive strengths we will come to recognise the weakness of knee-jerk prejudice against it.
Of course, accepting this difference doesn't mean is we need to choose between reading one style of writing or the other. A fully rounded literary life means reading across the full spectrum of fiction.
• Juliet McKenna's works include the fantasy series The Hadrumal Crisis, The Chronicles of the Lescari Revolution, and The Tales of Einarinn
Robert A. Heinlein's early pulp fiction has dated badly, but, if you can ... each
ended up being dismissed by a chorus of mockery, exasperation, ... Five decades
on, it remains the most bitterly divisive book in the history of sci-fi.
But then things went weirdly wrong. Heinlein's next novel, "I Will Fear No Evil," was an uncharacteristically talky and meandering fantasy. (It's about a dying zillionaire who has his brain transplanted into the body of a beautiful young woman.) It was generally regarded as a disaster; a prominent sci-fi fan group derisively presented it with a parody award—an "Elron," a plastic lemon nailed to a piece of plywood—as the worst novel of 1970. Heinlein wrote six more novels before his death in 1988: Each was snapped up eagerly by fans hoping for a return to form; each ended up being dismissed by a chorus of mockery, exasperation, boredom and contempt. The best sci-fi writer of all time had mysteriously morphed into the worst.
What happened? Patterson doesn't answer the question, because the possibility of a creative decline is never seriously considered. He can't bring himself to admit that his hero had flaws.
Post a Comment