Talk:Science fantasy
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Science fantasy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Science fantasy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
Untitled
For an intro on the problem of SF classes, look at:
http://www.kheper.net/topics/scifi/grading.html
(there's also a "space fantasy" category at the bottom of the page) At18 15:29, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Science fantasy
Gentlemen; I would consider science fantasy stories such as Heinlein's
"Magic Inc.", L. Sprague De Camp's "Incomplete Enchanter", and some of Poul Anderson's stories in which magic works, but is subject to scien- tific laws. For example, if a 150 lb man changes into a were(dire)wolf, he must still mass 150 lbs. because of Conservation of Mass/Energy.
Robert A. Heinlein's Magic, Inc. is distinctly *not* Science Fantasy, it is Contemporary Fantasy. Star Wars is, however, definitely Science Fantasy.
Attention to and consistency of set laws in magic does not automatically make something scientific. Further, while the laws of magic descrihed in Magic, Inc. are self-consistent, they are not all based on any form of rational science (i.e. in the Half World, custom and tradition dictates natural law, rather than set physical laws).
Waldo, however, does fit the bill, barely.
WELL!
There is some question, given the above argument, whether Andre Norton's Witch World is science fantasy. Donald A. Wollheim specifically packaged it as such, which is something Mercedes Lackey dwells on at length in her introduction to the first three books (now in print but I don't have a copy handy so I can't give the information). I'm distinctly unhappy with this very restrictive definition of science fantasy given that in my baby boomer youth it would have been any fantasy which appealled primarily to someone with engineering training --like Kuttner and Moore, or de Camp and any of his collaborators, or Heinlein in "Waldo", "Magic, Inc.", or Glory Road. Or Moorcock's Elric. As Lackey said many people were cynical then about how it was marketed. And I'm willing to argue that this article goes too far in the opposite direction. When I first started messing with this article, it seemed dismissive of all the stories which appeared in the pulps. I was careful to try to discuss Philip Gordon Wylie's The Disappearance outside of genre conventions and marketing ideas because it appeared outside these conventions and marketing tools, but the argument seems to be even though "Magic, Inc." appeared in a magazine which marketed itself as science fantasy, and was written by someone who certainly knew and probably accepted these conventions, it is too rationalistic to be science fantasy. Again, however flawed the older definition was, this is part of a bias which excludes it, and I don't think that's reasonable. The guy who replaced Alexander Cockburn on the "Press Clips" column in The Village Voice had this to say about objectivity in his first column: "A prosecutor's brief is truthful. It is never objective." I truly believe that this article is sometimes too close to advocacy. Jplatt39 10:49, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) Revised Jplatt39 12:38, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Cannon-fired spacecraft
The article uses Jules Verne's story of a cannon-fired spacecraft as an example of an “impossible” device, saying ...the cannon that launched the Columbiad in Verne's From the Earth to the Moon is now known to be certainly unfeasible in theory as well as fact. This is incorrect; the concept has been researched recently and is considered plausible, using cannons with additional propellant chambers. See Project HARP, Supergun, Project Babylon, Gerald Bull. I suggest using a different example instead. Freederick 10:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- You mean space gun. A "supergun" is not a coherent concept, just a woolly and vague application of "super-". The Supergun affair centred around one specific thing, but it is not a class of weaponry. That would be large-calibre artillery. Uncle G (talk) 09:51, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
HELLO where is 40k and the Metabarons???
We all love golden age writers, but where is the rest??? No single reference to Warhammer 40,000 or the Metabarons? These are the very definition of science fantasy. No reference to Don Lawrence's Storm? It is my understanding that all these immensely popular works happen to be European. Well guess what, there are more countries in the world than USA and MAYBE you should include them in wikipedia articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.103.109.105 (talk) 08:27, 14 October 2010
Science fiction of science fantasy? It does contain dragons and other fantastical elements. Similarly, can the entire subgenre of space opera be classified as science fantasy? Comments?
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class science fiction articles
- High-importance science fiction articles
- WikiProject Science Fiction articles
- Start-Class Literature articles
- Unknown-importance Literature articles
- Start-Class novel articles
- Mid-importance novel articles
- Start-Class Fantasy fiction articles
- Top-importance Fantasy fiction articles
- WikiProject Novels articles