But, I don't like Science Fiction
Lessons in genre confusion
I was standing in my local Waterstones the other day. Staring at a block of shelves that looked very similar to this.
Tolkien was next to Bradbury who was next to King. Not actually alphabetically, as that would have been ridiculous, but I thought, how strange that a bookshop would encompass three entirely different genres ; Horror, Fantasy and Science Fiction under one banner. You wouldn’t see crime mixed with cookery books, even though that would be a good summary of my culinary skills.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s probably just a lack of shelf space and me being completely over the top, but maybe not selling so many cards, toys and random knick-knacks might help free up some space. It is a book shop after all. The area given over to these three genres, at the best of times, also seems to be forever shrinking.
However, it could also be my never ending obsession with railing against fantastical fiction snobbery.
I read an article the other day with Simon Pegg promoting the new Mission Impossible movie :-
When discussing the current obsession with super hero movies and why everyone needs to grow up he said :-
“I’ve aged out of a lot of what people assume I’m about. I don’t feel like I’m that geeky guy any more, particularly. I’d much rather watch Succession than some sci-fi.”
Pegg has history with these kind of comments. Speaking to the Radio Times in 2015 he said something similar : -
“I’ve become the poster child for that generation, and it’s not necessarily something I want to be. I’d quite like to go off and do some serious acting.”
This is his opinion, and he’s entitled to it, but it speaks to a continual down playing of the cultural or literary value of this genre, which I find infuriating.
I’ve just finished watching the Apple TV series, Silo with Pegg’s MI co-star, Rebecca Ferguson.
This is an excellent show and Ferguson is brilliant. She plays the sheriff in what seems a post apocalyptic world, where the last of humanity survive in a vast underground silo hundreds of stories deep.
The show reflects everything that I find great about science fiction. A small, but crucial, main story that is surrounded by, and has a bearing on, the overarching futuristic narrative.
It’s wonderfully played by all the cast including Tim Robbins, Common, David Oyelowo and Will Patton but Ferguson is the heart of the tale that encompasses what makes us human, how we should never allow ourselves to be subjected to totalitarian rule and why, if we keep asking, the right questions will finally bring answers. Hardly childish nonsense.
With this and Dune 2, Ferguson is going to have a stellar year. I wonder if Pegg has asked her when she’s going to start doing serious work?
The show also continues my fascination with all things sci-fi on TV. From Blakes 7, Buck Rogers, Quantum Leap to V, The X Files and Lost, I have consumed anything like this for the last forty odd years.
The other great thing about Silo is I’ve never read the books that the series is based on, so I don’t know how it’s going to end. You see, that’s because, I didn’t read science fiction.
OK. Hear me out.
I did try. Being a fan of Stephen Donaldson, I tried his Gap series and couldn’t get past the first book. Same with Saga of the Exiles by Julian May, which had a really interesting concept of time travel and dinosaurs but, again, I stopped at The Many Coloured Land.
I thought that my reading started with fantasy, moved onto horror and thereafter bounced between the two. When I would go to a book shop I would look for Tolkien, Donaldson, Eddings, King or Barker and the likes. I did not look for Asimov, Herbert or Vonnegut.
The funny thing is, I was kidding myself the whole time.
Back in my early high school days when my English teacher was giving us their sneeringly, dismissive verdict on The Hobbit, we were also being taught some of the most celebrated science fiction stories of the twentieth century.
The post apocalyptic horror of The Death of Grass by John Christopher, of which Tolkien was a big fan, and Lord of the Flies by William Golding along with the heart breaking Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes, were all covered as part of our curriculum.
I remember loving all of these, and still do, but, at the time, they remained books I read in school and not a genre that I sought out in my day to day reading.
However, even then, maybe I was just missing the point.
Death of Grass and Lord of the Flies, as well as being science fiction, are also horror stories of normal society breaking down once a cataclysmic event has opened the door for humanity to return to its base form due to either the threat of hunger or savagery. These ideas continue in modern interpretations like The Walking Dead and the Last of Us.
And the same theory works in reverse for the books I was reading religiously.
Famously, in 1936, C.S. Lewis and JRR Tolkien set each other a challenge to write either a space or time travel story. For Lewis, the result was Out of the Silent Planet. Tolkien, who tried to write about the fall of Atlantis, never completed his tale. However, the main points of the plot soon became the basis for the fall of Numenor. The two greatest fantasists of their time were already looking to science fiction for inspiration.
It’s an even more straight forward for King and Barker.
King’s The Stand is a post apocalyptic story with the horror coming from the demonic Flagg, and IT is a version of The Thing, but having the creature mimic fears rather than humanity. Science Fiction can be found in a lot of his books with the most straightforward being, ironically, two of his worst in The Tommyknockers and Dreamcatcher.
With Barker, it’s about portals to, and creatures from, different dimensions and how rather than what we would see as dangerous and unknown beings, it is, in fact, humanity that are the monsters.
So, it appears I was already reading science fiction. It was just being blended with other genres that I was more familiar with.
King talks about this genre mixing in Danse Macabre. He reckons that there isn’t a defined difference between the two genre’s at work here : -
“The dividing line between fantasy and science fiction (for properly speaking, fantasy is what it is; the horror genre is only a subset of the larger genre) …is a boring academic subject ….I’ll content myself with … both are works of the imagination, and both try to create worlds which do not exist, cannot exist, or do not exist yet.”
Now, not to disagree with the great man but it’s interesting that he defines only two genre’s but mentions three sub categories ; “do not”, “cannot” and “do not exist yet”. I see the first as fantasy, the second as horror and the third as science fiction.
What I find about the first two is that, most of the time, there is a defined end game. Defeat the monster or demon and the heroes save the day. The bleaker the horror, the less likely that is to happen these days, but it’s the main purpose of the protagonists. Fantasy is also moving away from easily identified good and evil sides, which is something, and I know I’m probably in the minority here, that I miss but it is, historically, how these stories have played out. However, I am interested to hear other peoples thoughts on these points to see if I am getting this completely wrong. Either way, I still think there should be room for all three to have their own space in your local bookshop!
As well as watching it on TV my fascination with sci-fi continued onto the big screen where the genre blending was even clearer.
The Thing and Alien are horror movies that just so happen to also deal with creatures from other planets. Aliens is a war film. Blade Runner is a detective story.
It should be no surprise that I loved these films so much, as I grew up in a town that, every night, resembled the dystopian nightmare from the start of Blade Runner.
However, what really set these apart as some of the greatest films ever made, is that they are all waltzing with the infinite. A story without end.
John Carpenter’s The Thing, with MacReady and Childs sitting in the snow and not knowing if one of them is the monster. Deckard and Rachael rushing to escape from the other Blade Runners, as the lift door slams shut and the screen fades to black with us not knowing if they make it and, even if they do, how long will they have together. Ripley, the last survivor of the Nostromo, blasting the alien out the air lock before making it to the escape pod and floating off into space.
These are stories that do not spoon feed you the answers. It’s not neat and tied up with a bow in the end. You have to use your imagination to consider what might have happened. These are the tales that linger in the mind long after the titles have run. To me that should be the goal of all great science fiction.
The dictionary definition of science fiction is as follows : -
“fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advance and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets”
It’s funny, because I don’t see that as being a sufficient explanation to even cover what limited exposure I’ve had to the genre.
Some of the great authors have actually struggled to pin down exactly what the term means
“Science Fiction can be defined as that branch of literature which deals with the reaction of human beings to changes in science or technology.” - Issac Asimov
“A handy short definition of almost all science fiction might read : realistic speculation about possible future events, based solidly on adequate knowledge of the real world, past and present, and on a thorough understanding of the nature and significance of the scientific method” - Robert A. Heinlein
However, the one that struck me is from Ray Bradbury in 1974 which I guess you could say is the least “scientific” in outlook and is probably why I like it the most : -
“Science fiction is the one field that reached out and embraced every sector of the human imagination, every endeavour, every idea, every technological development and every dream.”
Anything that harks back to dreaming and imagination is a story that I want to read, but in all fiction characterisation is key. The plot and story are, of course, important, but if I care for the characters that I am going to spend 400-500 pages with, then that could even be worth me taking the step into a genre I have been reluctant to return to until now.
Ironically, coming back to what I mentioned at the start of this article, it was probably down to my own snobbery and not fully understanding what science fiction novels are trying to achieve, or are actually capable of, that stopped me from reading them. I know that was probably my loss over the years but I just couldn’t find a way in that grabbed my interest.
Then I joined Substack and found a wonderful array of not only fantasy and horror authors like
and , but also some great science fiction writing that immediately got my attention with that mix of the fantastical being grounded in the mundane.I’ve just started reading “Tales from the Triverse” by
which is set in three different dimensions but focusing initially on some weary cops in an alternative 1970’s London as they try to solve a crime whilst, at the same time, the reader is given glimpses into the wider story as their investigations proceed. It has the blending of fantasy and science fiction that I have mentioned, but also mirrors a lot of the issues we are seeing in our own time, with regards to immigration and displacement. But, mostly, it just a cracking urban fantasy science fiction version of The Wire with the twist being anything is possible and nothing is as it seems.
The characters have already got under my skin which, as I mentioned above, is a sign I’m in it for the long haul. These detectives may be down in the gutter but they’re looking at the stars for answers. To paraphrase the best Star Wars character, I’d taken my first step into a larger world. Wonderful stuff.
Strangely, my reading had completely tailed off recently, and I was finding it a real struggle, but just through the few authors I am now following, I already feel that rekindling of excitement as I look forward to what will land in my inbox next.
So, maybe I should finish off with a quote from one of the famous science fiction characters of the last 50 years. He doesn’t mean it as a compliment at the time, but I’m taking it that way :-
“All his life has he looked away… to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was.” - Yoda - Jedi Master
This sums me up perfectly, but it is also the journey that we have to all be on. No matter what age we are, or how people want us to put away such childish things, we should always be looking to the horizon and wondering what is to come, what challenges might await us and how we rise to them. Continue dreaming that anything is possible. And, if good science fiction helps us along the way, then all the better. Because that, and only that, is how we will answer those infinite questions.
I think I'd like this article even if it didn't dramatically segue at the end into a mini review of Triverse. As it is, though, I'm clearly slightly biased in declaring this the best post on Substack.
Seriously, though - thank you, Daniel! That's the most thoughtful review I've had of Triverse as a whole (outside of individual chapter comments, which are also lovely), and it sounds like it's doing what I hoped it would for readers.
Honoured to be mentioned alongside all those other amazing writers.
On the subject of Pegg's comments, I always lean towards a (slightly lengthy) CS Lewis quote that perfectly sums up my attitude to most things in life, and especially entertainment:
“Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.”
Lots of reading in common here. Found it esp. interesting you mention MI7 (I have not seen Silo, might watch it though, having read this), I saw MI7 yesterday and found it far too long, albeit a good action flic with a nonsense story. My son liked it and his critique was that the movie ended with a cliffhanger, he wanted to see part 2. I don't. Maybe it is a question of age or simply absorption/saturation, MI7 could be 90mins and be far better for it.
BTW, did you ever read any Sword and Planet SF/F?