Tweet
Star Wars isn't supposed to take place in the future. Remember "A long time ago, in a galaxy far away...."
-
"The French caused the war [Persian Gulf war, 1991]" - Ned
"you people who bash Bush have no appreciation for one of the great presidents in our history." - Ned
"I wish I had gay sex in the boy scouts" - Dissident -
They all happened in the author's present, but they all had science as a central theme. They weren't far-future weirdo tech SciFi. Journey to the Centre of the Earth could have happended! (Certain large lumps of molten iron and rock notwithstanding) - but they were SciFi.
But required some stunning breakthrough in technology. Thus futuristic. The tech did not yet exist.
Restricting your view of fantasy to solely stuff with magic and orcs in is somewhat narrow-minded Imran
Well... that's basically what it is.
"The Force" is a nat's bollock away from magic anyway.
And yet you have spacecraft with blasters and light speed. You have mechanical moons that can blow up planets. You have holographic images in the world of Star Wars. All futuristic technology.
Star Wars is Sci-Fi because it takes basic elements of science and expands them into areas that current science says is impossible.
Exactly!“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)Comment
-
Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
I happen to agree with you. But Saving Private Ryan is still FICTION because it did not in fact happen.
of course its fiction, this thread is about science fiction though.While there might be a physics engine that applies to the jugs, I doubt that an entire engine was written specifically for the funbags. - Cyclotron - debating the pressing issue of boobies in games.Comment
-
sorry if i was harsh with my previous posts...i got a little emotional there...
apologiesWhile there might be a physics engine that applies to the jugs, I doubt that an entire engine was written specifically for the funbags. - Cyclotron - debating the pressing issue of boobies in games.Comment
-
Nothing at all futuristic in JttCotE.The tech did not yet exist.
And do Hutts and so forth not make passable "orcs" and does the force not convey a form of "magic"? It's sci-fantasy.Well... that's basically what it is.
The central story to Star Wars could have taken place at any place, any time given the existance of the force, and an empire, which yes, might well need a super-destructive weapon. But this could be a Mongol Hoard which developed bio-warfare, or Nazis with nukes, or indeed a galactic empire with a moon-sized space station. The point is, the only non-reality thing you cannot take away from Star Wars is the Force.
The future tech may be there as a background, but it is in no way integral to the storyline. There is no attempt to explain any of the concepts, such as faster-than-light travel, holograms, sentient 'droids, and the science doesn't matter to the story. The fantasy does.Concrete, Abstract, or Squoingy?
"I don't believe in giving scripting languages because the only additional power they give users is the power to create bugs." - Mike Breitkreutz, FiraxisComment
-
time setting has nothing to do with sci-fi
star wars uses space ships and ambitious laser technology to tell a story.
the story is about how good defeats evil in a grand way, the little guy beats the big guy.
star wars DOES use advanced science to convey that story.
Many movies have the same storyline of the underdog overcoming seemingly impossible odds. And they aren't sci-fi.
in other words, it isn't the story that either makes it sci-fi or doesn't make it sci-fi.
It's the overall setting of the story.
If the Terminator was replaced with a mob hit man that wanted to kill the girl because she new too much, it wouldn't have been sci-fi, but they integrated science like robotics into the backdrop to the story and added experimental science like time travel to the mix and you got a classic sci-fi flick.While there might be a physics engine that applies to the jugs, I doubt that an entire engine was written specifically for the funbags. - Cyclotron - debating the pressing issue of boobies in games.Comment
-
No, you've got a shoot-em-up with some crappy cybernetics.Concrete, Abstract, or Squoingy?
"I don't believe in giving scripting languages because the only additional power they give users is the power to create bugs." - Mike Breitkreutz, FiraxisComment
-
still sci-fi because it took current robotics and elevated it to sci-fi by making it indestructable.
i think you have some good points wombat. the force does put star wars into the fantasy realm.
no hard feelings in this debate?While there might be a physics engine that applies to the jugs, I doubt that an entire engine was written specifically for the funbags. - Cyclotron - debating the pressing issue of boobies in games.Comment
-
Wait just a friggin' minute!!!!!
Let's get some terms down....
SF (Speculative Fiction) is generally considered to have two subgenres: science fiction and fantasy.
Science ficition is fiction based upon the extrapolation of the laws of science.
Fantasy is fiction which ignores the laws of science.
Sci-Fi (at least until the introduction of the Sci-Fi Channel) was considered to be a perjoritive phrase directed at pulp works of science fiction...stories which focused more on ray guns and space ships than on their effects upon the human condition. Under this definition Star Wars is sci-fi--indeed it is classic sci-fi. However, as a literary work, Star Wars falls far below the high standards set out in Frankenstein, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, and "Flowers for Algernon" -- made into the movie Charlie, in which Cliff Robertson won an academy award for best actor.
For the record, their was a short-lived attempt to create a hybrid subgenre called science fantasy, in which the laws of magic are explained by the laws of science. It's best example is Fred Saberhagen's "Empire of the East." I know of no example of this subgenre written in the last few decades.Comment
-
Science ficition is fiction based upon the extrapolation of the laws of science.
Fantasy is fiction which ignores the laws of science.
Spaceships != Sci-FiConcrete, Abstract, or Squoingy?
"I don't believe in giving scripting languages because the only additional power they give users is the power to create bugs." - Mike Breitkreutz, FiraxisComment
-
that doesn't seem right...i mean traveling at light speed is scientifically impossible according to current knowledge, so it should be sci-fantasy because it ignores the laws of science?Originally posted by Zkribbler
[SIZE=3]
Fantasy is fiction which ignores the laws of science.
fantasy has nothing to do with science, like ESP and orcs and wizards and magic.While there might be a physics engine that applies to the jugs, I doubt that an entire engine was written specifically for the funbags. - Cyclotron - debating the pressing issue of boobies in games.Comment
-
high standards?
However, as a literary work, Star Wars falls far below the high standards set out in Frankenstein,While there might be a physics engine that applies to the jugs, I doubt that an entire engine was written specifically for the funbags. - Cyclotron - debating the pressing issue of boobies in games.Comment
-
Oops, you're right, I was confusing Science Fantasy with Speculative Fiction.Originally posted by Zkribbler
Wait just a friggin' minute!!!!!
Let's get some terms down....
SF (Speculative Fiction) is generally considered to have two subgenres: science fiction and fantasy.
I would say that Star Wars has a combination of Sci Fi (ie, Spaceships and Laser Guns) as well as Fantasy ("the force", ghosts, etc, things which aren't even implied to to have some sort of (pseudo) scientific explanation), which is why I wouldn't want to place it neatly into either one."I read a book twice as fast as anybody else. First, I read the beginning, and then I read the ending, and then I start in the middle and read toward whatever end I like best." - Gracie AllenComment
-
Well, these days no one bothers to make the distinction between science fiction and fantasy. Go down to your local Barnes and Noble's or Waldenbooks and you'll see lots of books about dragons, magicians, and fairies in the same section as the science fiction.
Personally I've always thought that this trend was somewhat obscene."I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!Comment
-
Well, "ESP" is often used in science Fiction, but when it is, it's usually implied to have some sort of scientific explanation (ie, it's not magic but biological).Originally posted by vee4473
fantasy has nothing to do with science, like ESP and orcs and wizards and magic.
Of course, in many cases, the difference between some fantasy and some scifi is pretty thin and probably debatable. After all, "Any Science sufficently advanced enough is indistinguisable with magic" and vice versa."I read a book twice as fast as anybody else. First, I read the beginning, and then I read the ending, and then I start in the middle and read toward whatever end I like best." - Gracie AllenComment
Comment