|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:28 am
Hey, everyone, I had been thinking about fantasy vs. science fiction, and something came to be. Is science fiction not just fantasy but with scientific explanations? That just struck me, so I was wondering if some science fiction writers could clarify this.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:02 am
No, I don't think so, but I can see how people would think so, as most sci-fi stories have some fantasy in them, and some fantasy does have sci-fi.
Unicorns and elves and dragons are fantasy. They do not exist, and they WON'T exist. Where most of the stuff in Sci-fi does not exists, there is a definate posibility that it WILL. Take space travel before it was possible. Cell phones, lap top computers, cars that run off of H20, building a space station on the moon... All things that had appeared in sci-fi before they were thought not possible.
Sci-fi is not fantasy, it's possibility. smile
But that's just my opinion. XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 4:21 pm
Sci-fi is quite a different from fantasy- fantasy obviously, has no explanation. It's the ultimate free for all. All logic is put on hold until further notice. It doesn't have to be possible, it's what the writer wishes was possible.
SugarRos has got it. Sci Fi needs to have possiblility to it, it has to be realistic in an unrealistic way. I Am Legend is a good example of this. You can imagine a cure turning into virus- something we thought would do good actually becoming harmful. If anything, it introduces new possibilities.
You don't see a lot of fantasy books named classical for this reason. They're improbable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
