Michael oddly classifies things as sci-fi that I would consider fantasy - things like vampires and werewolves. And, he argues that my ability to distinguish between the two means I'm more sci-fi than the average (robotic) bear. Because as a decidedly "non-sci-fi" person, it's all the same to him.
So, I'm going to offer my understanding of the genres, and I'd love your feedback:
Sci-fi = subject matter that a scientist could create, discover, or study - now or in the future; things such as:
- aliens
- mutants (cells mutate - that's science!)
- time or space travel
- other planets/galaxies
- viruses/ biological and chemical warfare
- nuclear energy/meltdowns
- etc.
Some examples of sci-fi would be the X-Men series, Spiderman (radioactive spider), Star Trek, and Back to the Future (hello, hover boards).
Fantasy - subject matter based in imagination with no necessary ties to reality (All fiction, sci-fi included, requires imagination, but even sci-fi is usually rooted in reality and then exaggerated. )To me, fantasy deals with imaginary species and worlds.
Things that I think fall in to the fantasy category are:- witches/warlocks
- vampires
- werewolves
- zombies (though if the zombies are created by some kind of virus they could also be sci-fi)
- gnomes, unicorns, centaurs, fauns, hobbits, etc.
Examples would be Harry Potter, Narnia, Lord of the Rings, the Golden Compass, etc.
Though there is some overlap, I hope I'm making the difference between the two (as I see it) clear. Scientists can't study or create vampires. They don't exist. I guess the same could be said of aliens. Some people hold the opinion aliens exist; others don't believe. However, 99% of people agree that it's a fact that vampires don't exist. If you belong to the other 1%, please stay away from me. LOL.
Anyway, I think my understanding of these genres is a pretty commonly held one. I don't think I've invented a new definition of either Sci-fi or fantasy. I just wanted to write a nerdy vent about it, because my boyfriend is "too cool" to even acknowledge that there is a difference between the two!What do you think? Does this post officially make me "SCI-FI"?!?!
P.S. - Michael just walked in. When I told him about this post, he said, "The real question is 'Which genre is the most lame?'" <---- Do you see what I have to contend with?
I love this post^^
ReplyDeleteI was recently accused of the same thing and I follow your logic completely.
I define the two terms much the same way but have trouble figuring out where to put Frankenstein. Monster created by scientist but in a world where "science" involves reanimation. The same could be said for Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde.
Oh the dilemma of being "into sci-fi".
lol! this cracked me up. you are right on. and neither genre is lame!
ReplyDeleteMostly I am fantasy. And your definitions are fine. Thanks - heaps.
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein is totally a perfect example of the overlap!! I didn't enjoy that book as much as I thought I wiuld though. Dr. Frankenstien was such a passive character when it came to dealing with his monster!
ReplyDeleteAgreed:)
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your definitions and though I laughed at, "And, he argues that my ability to distinguish between the two means I'm more sci-fi than the average (robotic) bear," I feel your ability to distinguish between sci-fi and fantasy is not so much the fact that you are sci-fi as it is the fact that you have a MASTER'S IN ENGLISH and know the differences between various genres of literature. Sorry Michael. :-)
ReplyDeleteNice post by the way, very funny.
ReplyDelete