Comments on: BACK TO SCIENCE FICTION

By: Leah Zeldes Smith

Leah Zeldes Smith — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:03:48 +0000

“Thus, for example, “Stef” became the name of Leah Zeldes Smith and Dick Smith’s mildly well-known fanzine a couple of decades or so ago.”

Our Hugo-nominated fanzine is much better known by its actual name, “Stet.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STET_(fanzine)

By: Making the Case | The Crotchety Old Fan

Making the Case | The Crotchety Old Fan — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:03:47 +0000

[...] (Check out the new version here [...]

By: Gary Farber

Gary Farber — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:38:04 +0000

Well, crap. Okay, I know it’s a work in progress. Meanwhile, a warning that people can’t use tags, while you don’t have them working, would be helpful. Heck, now I have to go back and see if my links came out in previous comment on other thread.

By: Gary Farber

Gary Farber — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:37:09 +0000

Hey, HTML tags aren't working.

By: Gary Farber

Gary Farber — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:36:31 +0000

“Still, some bad stuff was SF first, as well. Orwell’s ‘1984′ springs to mind for some reason.”

It’s entirely unclear from this statement whether the author means “bad” stuff to be a statement about the quality of 1984, or merely descriptively that it’s a novel whose purpose is to create a horrifying dystopia.

“When you picked up a book that had that rocket and saturn on the spine, you knew it was ‘SF’, but not what you were going to get.”

And there was a hundred times less of it than nowadays, and the number of well-written books was far lower, and the average of quality amongst the best-written books was lower.

Otherwise, Sturgeon’s Law (or “second law,” if you prefer) applied then and now.

By: The Crotchety Old Fan

The Crotchety Old Fan — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:44:18 +0000

Morva,

I actually think that the sub-genre thing is a negative. Fractionalizing leads to dissipation of effort and focus. When you picked up a book that had that rocket and saturn on the spine, you knew it was “SF”, but not what you were going to get.

Now you are shoveled into one niche or another – and many folks never explore beyond the first one they liked.

By: Morva Shepley

Morva Shepley — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 07:34:32 +0000

I’ll vote for, “It was science fiction first.” It does have that positive spin.

Still, some bad stuff was SF first, as well. Orwell’s “1984″ springs to mind for some reason.

Also, I don’t think SF is in demise. It’s shifting a little, but look at that long list of sub-genres you’ve got, and that doesn’t even cover them all.

Cheers
Morva Shepley

By: Gary Farber

Gary Farber — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 02:28:38 +0000

“It was science fiction first” is stronger, because it puts the emphasis on “science fiction,” rather than “first.”

Richard, in similar fashion to the mutation of “sci-fi” into “sky-fi” into “skiffy,” the shortened version of “scientifiction,” “stf,” wound up being jokingly altered to “stef” by some back in the Seventies. Thus, for example, “Stef” became the name of Leah Zeldes Smith and Dick Smith’s mildly well-known fanzine a couple of decades or so ago.

By: Richard Robinson

Richard Robinson — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:57:41 +0000

Yeah. Science Fiction is reality… BEFORE it’s real. Or something like that? I dunno, the Science Fiction First, either way round, doesn’t quite work for me, though I’m not sure why. This probably corny.

By the way, in your listing of keywords, I don’t see scientifiction or sci-fi. Heh.