Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7881299" data-attributes="member: 996">It's a common and understandable double-standard.  I blame the long strange association between sci-fi & fantasy. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Reality + one 'what if' is the nucleus of sci-fi.  Fantasy comes with a whole raft of baggage that doesn't dovetail neatly with reality, nor even, strictly logically, itself, at times,  - but it's all familiar and intuitive enough if you let that impulse go.Now-a-days - and, by that, I really mean my whole life - there's a lot of 'science fantasy' that either is a boatload of tropes with little realism, but their tropes all taken from classic sci-fi, where each was part of the 'what if' proposition (even if you have to go back to Asimov or EE 'Doc' Smith to find it), so really, fantasy that looks like science fiction, or a thought-through, realistic historically-inspired setting with the addition of a supernatural element that explores the logical the impact of the supernatural on the setting, so, really, science-fiction storytelling that looks like fantasy*.*and, no, I don't mean "magical realism" an artistic/literary sub-genre originating in Latin America, typified by Jorge Borges, the definition of which has been stretched, of late, to include dreck like Twilight, nor do I mean 'urban fantasy,' to which V:tM, Twilight & whatnot more properly belong.</blockquote>

Verification