Subject
Re: Fwd: RE: Ilium
From
Date
Body
Dear Don and List...
In kneejerk response to Don's inverted commas, I spring to the defence of
Science Fiction!
Margaret Atwood denies that she writes sf: "...no talking squids in outer
space..." She insists that her stuff is "speculative fiction". The truth
of the matter is that she's afraid of being consigned to the ghetto of a
badly misunderstood genre. Any sf practitioner who finds commercial
success is immediately removed to the "literary" fiction shelf, before the
smell of squid drives customers away. For example, H.G. Wells, K.
Vonnegut, R. Bradbury, J. Verne. Mind you, Verne's squid in "20 000
Leagues under the Sea" -- assertive though it may be -- doesn't actually
talk. And let's not forget H.G Wells, who fascinated the young VN.
I am not defending the sub-literate pre-1950s pulp SF that VN deplored --
"with its gals and goons..." But sf, in its squiddish little way, can more
easily open up the mind, or even turn it inside out, than any number of
well-respected, tasteful, restrained, character-driven instances of
"literary" fiction.
The Encyclopaedia of Science Fiction has an entire column on VN, which is
cautious in places: "Several of his novels can be read precariously in
terms of their fantasy or sf elements..." But "Izobretenie Val'sa" and the
short story "Lance" are firmly placed in the ghetto. Of "Ada", the
encyclopaedia says: "...can be read with some interest for its sf
elements, although the novel itself comprises much, much more." This
well-balanced entry, by John Clute, concludes by saying that VN was
concerned in all his works "to shape versions of the creative act. The
materials he used were subjunctive to the shaping, not vice versa, as in
sf."
If I write with feeling, it's because I've spent the last seven years in
the ghetto. My Voltairean cacotopia "After the Eclipse" was written off by
innumerable agents and publishers as hard sf. Finally published last year,
it is getting intelligent, favourable reviews -- as satire. In the
meantime I have been plotting my revenge, with an sf opus which is
successfully disguised -- right up to the moment when I ambush the reader
-- as "literary" fiction. "The X-Crystals" is coming out this year; if
it's serialised on the Web, I shall let you know, as it teems with VN
sightings.
Having said all that, I declare that my love for real sf is accompanied by
a total detestation of fantasy, from Lord Dunsany through Tolkien's
soporific three-decker to the dire repetetive pap that clogs the bookshops
today.
Signed seriously on April 1...
Tom (Rymour)
----- End forwarded message -----
EDNOTE. Whoops, didn't mean to tread on toes. I was a hard-core S-F reader in my
youth and still indulge every now & then. Most recently, Neal Stephenson's
_Cryptomicon_. I have not read the Simmons book but had _Cryptomicon_ in mind
when I blathered on about about "high-end" S-F. S-F is long past the point it
should be ghetto-ized. Anyway, congratulations on your "After the Eclipse" and
best wishes for "X-Crystals."
In kneejerk response to Don's inverted commas, I spring to the defence of
Science Fiction!
Margaret Atwood denies that she writes sf: "...no talking squids in outer
space..." She insists that her stuff is "speculative fiction". The truth
of the matter is that she's afraid of being consigned to the ghetto of a
badly misunderstood genre. Any sf practitioner who finds commercial
success is immediately removed to the "literary" fiction shelf, before the
smell of squid drives customers away. For example, H.G. Wells, K.
Vonnegut, R. Bradbury, J. Verne. Mind you, Verne's squid in "20 000
Leagues under the Sea" -- assertive though it may be -- doesn't actually
talk. And let's not forget H.G Wells, who fascinated the young VN.
I am not defending the sub-literate pre-1950s pulp SF that VN deplored --
"with its gals and goons..." But sf, in its squiddish little way, can more
easily open up the mind, or even turn it inside out, than any number of
well-respected, tasteful, restrained, character-driven instances of
"literary" fiction.
The Encyclopaedia of Science Fiction has an entire column on VN, which is
cautious in places: "Several of his novels can be read precariously in
terms of their fantasy or sf elements..." But "Izobretenie Val'sa" and the
short story "Lance" are firmly placed in the ghetto. Of "Ada", the
encyclopaedia says: "...can be read with some interest for its sf
elements, although the novel itself comprises much, much more." This
well-balanced entry, by John Clute, concludes by saying that VN was
concerned in all his works "to shape versions of the creative act. The
materials he used were subjunctive to the shaping, not vice versa, as in
sf."
If I write with feeling, it's because I've spent the last seven years in
the ghetto. My Voltairean cacotopia "After the Eclipse" was written off by
innumerable agents and publishers as hard sf. Finally published last year,
it is getting intelligent, favourable reviews -- as satire. In the
meantime I have been plotting my revenge, with an sf opus which is
successfully disguised -- right up to the moment when I ambush the reader
-- as "literary" fiction. "The X-Crystals" is coming out this year; if
it's serialised on the Web, I shall let you know, as it teems with VN
sightings.
Having said all that, I declare that my love for real sf is accompanied by
a total detestation of fantasy, from Lord Dunsany through Tolkien's
soporific three-decker to the dire repetetive pap that clogs the bookshops
today.
Signed seriously on April 1...
Tom (Rymour)
----- End forwarded message -----
EDNOTE. Whoops, didn't mean to tread on toes. I was a hard-core S-F reader in my
youth and still indulge every now & then. Most recently, Neal Stephenson's
_Cryptomicon_. I have not read the Simmons book but had _Cryptomicon_ in mind
when I blathered on about about "high-end" S-F. S-F is long past the point it
should be ghetto-ized. Anyway, congratulations on your "After the Eclipse" and
best wishes for "X-Crystals."