(no subject)
Mar. 11th, 2010 02:46 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
darchildreAnd then I had a patron come in and ask me to put the dvd of 2001 on hold for her. "All these years, I thought that was science fiction," she said.
Not wanting her to get the dvd while thinking it was something other than it was, I said, "It is science fiction."
She smiled and said, "Well, yes, but my friend told me that it was more of an exploration of human nature and the human condition."
And I blinked a couple of times and said, "That's what science fiction is."
My god, but that bugs me. Yes, some sci-fi is Star Trek and spaceships and explosions, sure. And those things are a hell of lot of fun. But they're just stage dressing things. Any good story is an exploration of human nature and the human condition in one way or another*, whether that story is told with spaceships or wizards or monsters or middle-aged housewives. And of course people can have preferences as to what kind of trappings they like best, but the trappings do not negate the importance of the story.
A story doesn't suddenly stop being sci-fi (or horror, or fantasy, or whatever) simply because it's a good story. The Sparrow is a good story and science fiction. House of Leaves is a good story and a horror novel. Et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum. And is the important word here.
I don't mind people not liking sci-fi. That's perfectly fine. I don't tend to like books about middle-aged housewives, no matter how popular they are with bookclubs. But I don't dismiss the genre as a whole - I'm sure that there are some good and important stories being told about those middle-aged housewives, even as there are good and important stories being told about my spaceships and wizards and monsters. Dismissing entire genres is stupid and lazy.
Hopefully, our patron will like 2001, if only so that she won't dismiss the whole genre next time.
*Even if that exploration is only "What are humans like when they live on spaceships?"
Not wanting her to get the dvd while thinking it was something other than it was, I said, "It is science fiction."
She smiled and said, "Well, yes, but my friend told me that it was more of an exploration of human nature and the human condition."
And I blinked a couple of times and said, "That's what science fiction is."
My god, but that bugs me. Yes, some sci-fi is Star Trek and spaceships and explosions, sure. And those things are a hell of lot of fun. But they're just stage dressing things. Any good story is an exploration of human nature and the human condition in one way or another*, whether that story is told with spaceships or wizards or monsters or middle-aged housewives. And of course people can have preferences as to what kind of trappings they like best, but the trappings do not negate the importance of the story.
A story doesn't suddenly stop being sci-fi (or horror, or fantasy, or whatever) simply because it's a good story. The Sparrow is a good story and science fiction. House of Leaves is a good story and a horror novel. Et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum. And is the important word here.
I don't mind people not liking sci-fi. That's perfectly fine. I don't tend to like books about middle-aged housewives, no matter how popular they are with bookclubs. But I don't dismiss the genre as a whole - I'm sure that there are some good and important stories being told about those middle-aged housewives, even as there are good and important stories being told about my spaceships and wizards and monsters. Dismissing entire genres is stupid and lazy.
Hopefully, our patron will like 2001, if only so that she won't dismiss the whole genre next time.
*Even if that exploration is only "What are humans like when they live on spaceships?"
