The Sword and Laser discussion

I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of each other or indispensable to each other.

I read a mix of both, but the last few years I am leaning heavily to the Science Fiction side much more. I still read occasional fantasy, but lots of Science Fiction. If there are two anthologies one Science Fiction and the other Fantasy, I am buying the Science Fiction.

I see the two genres as siblings, growing up together spawned from the same parent, but matured and moved out of their house and living their own lives.

Except for Terry Pratchett and Stephen Donaldson, I do not tend to read long series. I usually go no more than four books and fantasy seems to be all long series. Yes, yes, yes, I know, there are plenty of short series and stand alones, but you get my drift.

I write Fantasy on an alien world, which the humans arrived on in spacecraft. So while I don't write SciFi, SciFi is interwoven into the backstory and lore of my world and its people.

Papaphilly wrote: "I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of each other or indispensable t..."

I like the best books of both genres but while I'll find something to enjoy in an adequate fantasy novel, I have no patience for an adequate science fiction novel.

Anja wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of each other..."

Oddly enough, I can live with an adequate Science Fiction novel, but not an adequate Fantasy novel.

Joe wrote: "I write Fantasy on an alien world, which the humans arrived on in spacecraft. So while I don't write SciFi, SciFi is interwoven into the backstory and lore of my world and its people."

I have read a few mixed genre books and some of them are very good.

I prefer SF but have been reading as much Fantasy for the last few years since I've been following a book list and this group.

I work in a sci-fi-ish industry (I design/build/fly satellites) so tend to prefer non-space/science things for my reading. This makes me strongly lean fantasy, but I've definitely enjoyed reading sci-fi, too.

Fan of both, but I prefer SF. I think I burned myself out on fantasy a few years ago after reading a lot of it.

SF over Fantasy. SF simply has more variety, while Fantasy just feels the same over and over again. Once you read a couple books in each subgenre, you pretty much get the drift. That said, a well-written (or just plain fun) story in Fantasy will get my attention, because the particular elements of that tale will pique my interest. But at the end of the day, sciencey stuff is just cooler to me.

Although SF started as an offshoot of Fantasy, they've grown to represent diametrically opposed viewpoints of the universe, generally speaking.

Science Fiction says that the world is knowable, that we can understand what's happening if we simply apply ourselves and devote the time and effort to figuring it out. For me, SF is at its best when smart people are solving problems.

Fantasy, on the other hand, tells us no matter how hard we try, the world is ultimately unknowable and inexplicable things just happen. Even in the new, popular sub-genre of "Hard Fantasy" where the magic has specific, learnable rules, there's often no real explanation for why the magic exists. It just *is*, like the natural law of an alternate universe.

That's fun to visit from time to time, but I prefer our universe and stories we can tell in it.

I read mainly SF but have the occasional binge on fantasy every couple of years but I tend to get bored after a while and go back to SF. It used to be the other way around when I was younger but as I got older its swung the other way.

As a teen I was 100% sci-fi (of the 2 genres)
That changed after I read Lord of the Rings. I would be about 75% Sword now. It was higher until S&L pulled me back in to the Laser genre.

sci-fi a little more than fantasy. I agree there seems to be more variety. I have gotten a little tired of the "gritty" fantasy novels that seem to permeate my friends reading lists. I would love a well written adventure fantasy. I mean, name of the wind was fun, well written, and not gritty. but I would like more plot. no offense fans of rothfuss.

This year: 12 sci-fi books and 12 fantasy, with 2 "sword and planet" books that could go in either.

So, the most even of splits.

SporadicReviews.com wrote: "Fan of both, but I prefer SF. I think I burned myself out on fantasy a few years ago after reading a lot of it."

That may be me too with fantasy.

About equal for me. But a lot of what I read that may be called SF (Verne) or F (Haggard) I'd call more adventure or maybe even travel. LotR appeals to me not because of the battles or even magic but mostly because of the places. I can easily picture The House on the Borderland. The books of Madeleine L'Engle have a real sense of place. I would know the Star-gazing rock if I ever saw it.

I definitely both read and write mostly Sci-Fi, but do read occasional fantasy and have written a few fantasy stories.

One book I've written, The Princess of Panchala: A TerraMythos Novel could be taken as a cross-over into fantasy because half the action/story takes place in an MMORPG world based on Hindu mythology, but strictly speaking it's Sci-Fi.

P.S. - would that make me a lightsaber? Not one or the other, but both at the same time? :-)

I lean toward scifi but love both. I am much more picky about fantasy. I'll give a scifi book the benefit of the doubt for several chapters before giving up, but at the most 1 chapter for fantasy before lemming it. This is not to say I lemmit all the time, just that it seems to go like that when I do.

I love Sci Fi, but I can enjoy Fantasy. Recently I've been enjoying self-aware campy fantasy like Gail Simone's run on Red Sonja. And also Rat Queens.

Eric, have you tried Gail Carriger? The Parasol Protectorate is nominally a steampunk paranormal romance, but is among the funniest and best fantasy I have read.

I'm streaky. I'll binge on one and then get in the mood for the other. I've been on a sci-fi binge lately. Uprooted was the first fantasy I read in a long time. It felt good. I feel the shift back coming along soon. Overall, I think I read more sci-fi, but I can't be sure. I'd have to count.

Ronald wrote: "I'm streaky. I'll binge on one and then get in the mood for the other. I've been on a sci-fi binge lately. Uprooted was the first fantasy I read in a long time. It felt good. I feel..."

I have to admit I don't read a great deal of fantasy, and enjoyed Uprooted a lot more than I expected as well. Another one I read some time back that I liked was The Girl of Fire and Thorns.

Thane wrote: "I lean toward scifi but love both. I am much more picky about fantasy. I'll give a scifi book the benefit of the doubt for several chapters before giving up, but at the most 1 chapter for fantasy b..."

I agree with you that Science Fiction gets the benefit of the doubt and I am harder with Fantasy. I am not sure why. However, I finish every book I start. In my entire life, I think that I put one book down forever and I am thinking about picking it up again because I do not like admitting defeat. I wish I could put books down because I have tortured myself with many bad books.

Papaphilly wrote: "In my entire life, I think that I put one book down forever and I am thinking about picking it up again because I do not like admitting defeat. I wish I could put books down because I have tortured myself with many bad books. "

I understand! Crossroads of Twilight still vexes me.

Yeah, I could count on the fingers of one hand the books I've put down and never finished. I say "could" because if they're that bad, I really don't remember the title.

" I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of each other or indispensable to each other. "

How can the mix be regarded as HEALTHY? LOL

I think the "Intellectual" and "Entertainment" aspects should be analysed separately. Fantasy can be entertaining but isn't likely to have much intellectual interest to it. A good science fiction story can be either or both. It is up to the readers personality.

I have seen people claiming to be science fiction fans discussing a novel and getting the science wrong even though it was correct in the book.

Like Clarke said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

SF and Fantasy can be mixed. I call it techno-fantasy. The Warlock in Spite of Himself is an example.

Karl wrote: "" I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of each other or indispensable to ..."

I would say they are far more similar to each other than not. We can draw borders around the two genres, but really, they are more semantic than real.

Both are speculative; both use established, consistent rules; both deal with created worlds. One uses more fantasy than science, the other uses more science than fantasy, but there is inevitably a mix of both...except maybe in the hardest of hard SF.

I think of the two as generally exclusive of each other, though there are many examples where the two have been successfully blended together. The same could be said of Sci-fi Horror, or Fantasy Romance, or Mystery or Humor. Some people tend to stay strictly between the lines, but I think the fact that there are so many sub-genres within the genres support the notion that many readers like to expand their boundaries.

John (Taloni) wrote: "Eric, have you tried Gail Carriger? The Parasol Protectorate is nominally a steampunk paranormal romance, but is among the funniest and best fantasy I have read."

No, but I'll have to check it out.

I like both genres, but I think the main reason the two often get lumped together is that that is the way they are shelved in most bookstores. The tendency seems to have continued in the online world, too. *shrug*

Gaines wrote: "I like both genres, but I think the main reason the two often get lumped together is that that is the way they are shelved in most bookstores. The tendency seems to have continued in the online wor..."

Not only that, but there's a LOT of science fantasy out there. ***cough, Star Wars***

p.s. I go to Amazon to browse and every page has three or four Star Wars THINGS on it. Man, okay, I'm geeked about the upcoming movie, too, but for the love of God...It's starting to feel like watching TV two weeks before the elections. Every few seconds, BAM!

p.p.s. I did pick up a really cool Star wars keychain, so...there's that.

Karl wrote: "" I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of each other or indispensable to ..."

I do not agree with the intellectual comment at all. There is plenty of intellectual fantasy out there and plenty of cheesy entertaining science fiction.

Papaphilly wrote: "Karl wrote: "" I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of each other or indi..."

Hmm, trying to get my head wrapped around that one. I definitely see the popcorn sci-fi part. But I'm trying to imagine what intellectual fantasy, especially epic, would be like. I mean, I always though sophisticated urban fantasy like Charles de Lint's was intellectual (though I can't point to anything specific that makes it intellectual). You really can't use the sciences to present evidence of intellectualism (unless you count Terry Brooks' druids). So you're basically left with sociological intellectualism, and I'm having a hard time coming up with an example. (not saying it doesn't exist)

Ronald wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Karl wrote: "" I have a question. Do you lean to Science Fiction more or Fantasy More. Do you read a healthy mix of both? Why? Do you think the two genres a mutually exclusive of..."

Remember, not all intellectualism is science. Many fantasy books include philosophy or sociological studies.

I think it is easier to use Sci-Fi to make points and ask questions about current society, either Stranger in a Strange Land style, or even more subtlety. But fantasy can be used for that as well, I think a bit of ASoIaF does that.

I like the logic (and sometimes science) of more "Hard" Sci-FI, but recently fantasy has been doing more of that as well with "Hard Fantasy" becoming a more important sub-genre with the works of Brandon Sanderson and the like.

Also Fantasy doesn't have to be all "High Fantasy", although a majority of it is. The land of imagination and make believe is ripe with stories of all types. Heck there is a comic and kids cartoon about an "Axe Cop".

All that being said, I tend to lean more towards Sci-Fi then Fantasy, but still very much enjoy both.

John (Nevets) wrote: "I think it is easier to use Sci-Fi to make points and ask questions about current society, either Stranger in a Strange Land style, or even more subtlety. But fantasy can be used for th..."

Really, I think what it comes down to is that a well-told story makes you forget about genre if it sweeps you into it's world.

Sci-fi and the whole snobbery around "Hard Sci-fi" has generally turned me off towards the genre. I will occasionally read it if it is recommended or I have read the author before but I will pick up a Fantasy book otherwise.

Nathan wrote: "Sci-fi and the whole snobbery around "Hard Sci-fi" has generally turned me off towards the genre. I will occasionally read it if it is recommended or I have read the author before but I will pick u..."

I'd say that the snobbishness is typically directed at books which pass themselves off as hard sci-fi, when in fact they're not. There's an element of snobbishness in romance as well. THAT sends readers off the deep end if there's no HEA. It's rare that you'll find hard sci-fi readers flaming a book that is properly labeled as sci-fi fantasy or space opera. The problem comes when a book is clearly tucked into the hard sci-fi genre, and you have characters using the force or FTL travel with no plausible explanation. The reader gets ticked off because they may be halfway through a book before they realize they were duped.

Ronald wrote: "The problem comes when a book is clearly tucked into the hard sci-fi genre, and you have characters using the force or FTL travel with no plausible explanation."

Can you give an example of this? I'm trying to think of one and coming up empty.

Brendan wrote: "Ronald wrote: "The problem comes when a book is clearly tucked into the hard sci-fi genre, and you have characters using the force or FTL travel with no plausible explanation."

Can you give an exa..."

Fluency was in hard sci-fi, and the author had to pull it out because she was getting reviews that were complaining about it on Amazon (you can surf the 1 and 2 star reviews to find the people complaining about it). The more well-known books are all categorized properly by now. But it happens more often that you'd think.

I see. I didn't realize amazon sub-genres was a thing.

I have had plenty of conversations with folks on the Hard Sci-fi side of things where they maintain the only sci-fi is hard sci-fi, which apparently includes none of the sci-fi I like.

That might just be particular to me though.

What "The only real sci-fi is hard sci-fi" really means is "The only real sci-fi is sci-fi that does not upset my rudimentary understanding of physics and/or computer science." So, generally not very adventurous readers and uncomfortable with novelty.

Nathan wrote: "I have had plenty of conversations with folks on the Hard Sci-fi side of things where they maintain the only sci-fi is hard sci-fi, which apparently includes none of the sci-fi I like.

That might ..."

I've spoken to a couple people who feel like that, that unless everything can be backed by plausible science, it should fall into the category of fantasy, but that didn't stop them from enjoying the "fantasy" like Alien and Star Wars. Those are just debates over genre definitions. I would define snobbery as someone who can't watch anything that isn't backed up by science because it's too childish to consider someone might use the force or go FTL without an Alcubierre drive of some kind and anyone who likes that sort of stuff is a child who believes in Santa. And I don't know too many people like that.

Nathan wrote: "I have had plenty of conversations with folks on the Hard Sci-fi side of things where they maintain the only sci-fi is hard sci-fi, which apparently includes none of the sci-fi I like.

That might ..."

There are zealots in every genre and they end up ruining more than they help. Science Fiction has many sub-genres including Hard Science Fiction (which I read). while I understand how it can be frustrating to read a book and not get what you expect, it does no one good to burn it to the ground because it does not meet someones definition.

I was once told by a twenty something I was not a real fan of Star Trek because I never attended a convention. I pointed out that I watched the show for thirty years before he was born and still enjoy it. By-the-way, what is a real fan?

Enjoy your slice of science fiction and ignore the purists. They just do not get it.

I tend to think of the hard-SF snobbery as a thing from 30 or 40 years ago. Is it still significantly around?

Ronald wrote: "... Hmm, trying to get my head wrapped around that one. I definitely see the popcorn sci-fi part. But I'm trying to imagine what intellectual fantasy, especially epic, would be like. I mean, I always though sophisticated urban fantasy like Charles de Lint's was intellectual (though I can't point to anything specific that makes it intellectual). You really can't use the sciences to present evidence of intellectualism (unless you count Terry Brooks' druids). So you're basically left with sociological intellectualism, and I'm having a hard time coming up with an example. (not saying it doesn't exist)."

The best intellectual science fiction that I've ever read deals with how people react to science fictional events. It's never about how a bussard ramjet works but about the kinds of societies and economies that find them useful or about the people who fly them. Interesting stories about aliens are not about their bloo0d chemistry but about how we react to them or about conveying the aspect of their thinking that makes them really alien. Any of those things can be done in a fantasy setting as well. GRRM's Song of Ice and Fire is much more intellectual than is his Tuf Voyaging SF book. For example, I'd say that fantasy is better than SF at embedding interesting and deeply intellectual thinking about religions into narratives (eg, Curse of Chalion, City of Stairs, Alif the Unseen, etc.) All that said, I think that many writers with something to say about the current state of the world will find it more effective and easier to embed that thought into an SF narrative that extrapolates our society into the future they want to warn against than to create an entire parallel world for their story.

As for intellectual tricks - whether witty asides, infodumps, or what have you - I'd say that Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell is an exceedingly intellectual novel, as much or more so than anything Neal Stephenson has written. (Unfortunately, it most decidedly was not for me but that doesn't mean it isn't a very smart book.)

Papaphilly wrote: "Enjoy your slice of science fiction...."

Well put :-) Although I don't ignore purists; I appreciate them... But I don't let them convert me.

Serendi wrote: "I tend to think of the hard-SF snobbery as a thing from 30 or 40 years ago. Is it still significantly around?"

There is always snobbery in anything and yes they are still out there. In many ways it is worse now that it was when I was young when the moon was new. To me, it is very odd because the genre is so big now that it is virtually impossible to read it all. I think it is a way to try and be elitist about what you read. I think it is an attempt to exclude someone because they will not be as cool as yourself.

Gaines wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Enjoy your slice of science fiction...."

Well put :-) Although I don't ignore purists; I appreciate them... But I don't let them convert me."

It is not that I ignore them, I just do not engage when it goes to you are wrong because I do not agree with your choice. There is no point when it is opinion because you will not change anyone's mind.

I have always leaned more toward Fantasy. While it's true that either can give one the opportunity to fashion a complex world with new rules, I have always loved the concept of magic. Some writers can meld the two together but not often. I love to write and read about spells, dragons and a hero that prevails against all odds.