Superhero Fic: Science Fiction or Fantasy?

[Christopher Wright]

This is a question about genre placement that I've idly wondered for a while.

Stories set in modern day or near-future times that deal with superheroes... Science Fiction, or Fantasy?

Essentially I see very little difference between, structurally, between those stories and Urban Fantasy (like the Dresden files). The mythology behind the stories are different, but on an abstract level the conceit is very similar. And the idea of people walking around with super powers is "fantastical" on the same level as "magic is real" so in one respect I'd lean fantasy.

On the other hand, the superhero genre is primarily leveraged on science -- pseudo-science, yes, and that pseudo-science is stretched so thin that basically you can't even start to take it seriously, but... you know. Radioactive spider! Cosmic rays! Gamma radiation! Genetic mutation! Suits of powered armor! Unstable molecule costumes! SCIENCE! So in another respect I'd lean science.

And yet... there is a blending of science in magic in comic universes. Iron Man and Doctor Strange co-exist and even have crossovers. Death as a cosmic entity. Superman and John Constantine and Morpheus. So... both?

There could be cross over. I know steampunk is primarily considered science fiction, but there have been steampunk-influenced fantasy works (including a few samples shown in the Showcase forum here on Mythic Scribes). And if you were to say "comic book" I don't think your first knee-jerk reaction would be "science fiction," but if you look at Batman, stylistically he'd be more science fiction than fantasy. Superman, though? Well, he is an alien.

Dr. Fate? Dr. Strange? Different. But they're all in the same mythology.

So what do y'all think? The more I thought about it the more my brain hurt, so I thought it'd be an interesting discussion here.

 

[Ophiucha]

As a comic book reader, I find that each writer tends towards one or the other. Some writers try hard to keep things within the realms of science, often to the point of absurdity. For a popular example, the film adaptation of Thor had some strange, hokey message about how science and magic are one and the same, and how each of the Asgardian realms was another galaxy. This is weird and doesn't really make sense, but because the Marvel movie!verse is science-based, they stuck with the idea that Thor was more of an alien than he was a god. In the comics, though, that tends to vary. There are a lot of writers who keep it firmly in the realm of fantasy. Then you have things like Christopher Nolan's Batman films, which are barely even science fiction, just a bunch of people with relatively plausible, relatively modern technology wearing costumes. They use regular bombs instead of laughing gas bombs.

This applies pretty much across all comics. Sometimes, people make it more fantastical - or at least, less scientific. What's the explanation for the X-Men mutagen? Ummm... evolution. No, I won't explain it beyond that. Other writers have a six page spread of the human DNA helix detailing where, exactly, pyrokinesis comes into play. Sometimes those wizards are just frightfully skilled stage magicians. And when a writer just brings together science and magic based on their favoured origin story or explanation, instead of based on internal continuity? Well, there is a genre called science fantasy. I guess it falls into that.

 

[Christopher Wright]

Yeah to be honest I'd temporarily blanked on "Science Fantasy" as a descriptor for things, which is a little embarrassing.

But that raises sort of an interesting sidebar... how does science fantasy fit in each genre?

For example, Mythic Scribes is specifically a "fantasy" community, so there are things I don't talk about here that fit in other genres. Does "science fantasy" qualify as a sub-genre of fantasy that is also a sub-genre of science fiction? Or is it a "third way" that doesn't qualify as either? If someone were writing a story about wizards involved in the space program, would that be something that could be discussed here?[1]

-----
[1]I am not currently writing a story about wizards involved in the space program, but I'd probably read it if someone did.

 

[Steerpike]

I put it in the category of fantasy because much of the science, when present, is preposterous. I mean, a radioactive spider biting someone and giving them spider-like powers isn't science

 

[JCFarnham]

I put it in the category of fantasy because much of the science, when present, is preposterous. I mean, a radioactive spider biting someone and giving them spider-like powers isn't science

And the flip side of that arguement would be something along the lines of taking a look at early pulp science fiction. It's science fiction, and yet you had all kind of ridiculous flights of fancy (all good stuff don't get me wrong, love it, but by gosh is the "science" a load of rubbish.)

I would still be inclined to stick it in the science fiction catagory for the very reason that to my knowledge thats what its always been. Early superhero fiction wasn't too far from early scifi really if you think about it. In fact, everything was more or less just "speculative fiction" back then.

Maybe that sounds better?

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

And the flip side of that arguement would be something along the lines of taking a look at early pulp science fiction. It's science fiction, and yet you had all kind of ridiculous flights of fancy (all good stuff don't get me wrong, love it, but by gosh is the "science" a load of rubbish.)

But it was all plausible at the time. SF is about dealing with plausible futuristic science, technology, and sociology. Sure, some of the ideas they came up with are now (to us) obviously absurd, but at the time they made as much sense as something like nanotech immortality does to us now. (Of course, science as a whole has advanced greatly in the intervening time, so I think we have a somewhat better–though not perfect–idea about what kinds of things are plausible.)

Superhero fiction should be considered a separate genre, as its plausibility threshold (and scientific accuracy) is much lower and it's not really about how science or technology affects society. It's more mythic than that; it's about how abnormally powerful people deal with the world. It's more akin to space opera or science fantasy.

 

[Feo Takahari]

I put it in the category of fantasy because much of the science, when present, is preposterous. I mean, a radioactive spider biting someone and giving them spider-like powers isn't science

Incidentally, does anyone remember the retcon that the spider bite made Peter Parker a mystical "totem" between man and beast, subject to the will of a deity called "the Great Weaver"? (I'm not sure whether that's still in continuity--I've long since given up following Marvel--but for a while, that was the explanation of Spider-Man's abilities.)

 

[Steerpike]

Incidentally, does anyone remember the retcon that the spider bite made Peter Parker a mystical "totem" between man and beast, subject to the will of a deity called "the Great Weaver"? (I'm not sure whether that's still in continuity--I've long since given up following Marvel--but for a while, that was the explanation of Spider-Man's abilities.)

No. That's an interesting take. I've never heard of it.

 

[Christopher Wright]

That would be when JMS did his Spiderman run. It was... I'm not fond of it. JMS is an amazing, amazing writer (hey, Babylon 5!) but when you take on an existing character you need to work within the established frame--and expand it, yes, but not warp it so hard it breaks. He also had Spidey BITE OFF SOMEONE'S HEAD and ultimately had Pete sacrifice his marriage with Mary Jane to Mephisto to bring Aunt May back.

... not a good run, I think. Certainly a creative take, I'll grant that. But... undisciplined creativity can really wreck things.

 

[Queshire]

I personally don't see fantasy, science fiction, or superhero stories as different genres or really any genre at all. I prefer to think of them as hm... flavors for genres. You can have a mystery story set in the future or the past, and same with romances. To me, "Superhero" is just another flavor as well.

As for spiderman, well I haven't read much of that line as I would have liked, but I'm saddened that he tried something different but the fans hated it enough that he was forced to push the reset button.

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

Science fiction is the presumption that some form of explainable reason can be used to explain pretty much everything. It doesn't have to be real, or even possible, just as long as it is believable enough the reader will accept it as believable for the story. Fantasy allows for things that lack a possible explanation, like casting a spell which draws on some form of mystical energy. There are exceptions, but that is the basics of it.

Most of the super hero's I know of would fit into the scifi category mainly because they exist in our world and their powers have some form of pseudo science as a reason for it. It can still feel magical, like the force in star wars, but even lacking an explanation, it is assumed there is some form of definable science that govern its existence.

 

[Steerpike]

Science fiction is the presumption that some form of explainable reason can be used to explain pretty much everything. It doesn't have to be real, or even possible, just as long as it is believable enough the reader will accept it as believable for the story.

I don't agree. Fantasy generally looks for logical consistency within the fantasy world. It doesn't have to be real, but it has to be enough for the reader to accept it as believable in a story.

Science fiction needs explanations that are believable in that they are in line with accepted scientific principles, or extrapolations from those principles, or which provides explanations when things deviate from those principles, and the explanations are derived from acceptable principles or extrapolations.

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

I think you are confusing believability with a definable explanation for how something works. You don't have to have accepted scientific principles to write scifi. Every scifi book that includes ftl breaks that. There are so many things in scifi books...space based ones especially...that don't even try and stay withing accepted science. Hard core scifi, yes, that would be the case. But just like fantasy can go from tolkienesque to urban fantasy, scifi goes from soft to super rigid. I find much of the very hard scifi too dry for my tastes, and I avoid it almost as much as I do any fantasy with the word 'epic' attached to it in any way shape or form.

 

[Steerpike]

You don't have to have accepted scientific principles to write scifi. Every scifi book that includes ftl breaks that.

I think it depends on how you break it. Like I said, you can extrapolate from known principles and even though exotic things so long as you can maintain that extrapolation. There are ways around FTL (like wormholes, for example) that are not possible with what we know now, but also not outright contradictory to what we do know. That's my personal take on it, at least. I like the word "science" in the genre name to have some meaning. There is a wide range, as you day. Look at a book like The Dragon's Egg. That's some hard sci-fi.

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

Take the dragon riders of pern, when I first started it I thought it more fantasy than scifi, but it wasn't fantasy. I have dozens of books on my shelf by Andre Norton that is called scifi, but most of it wasn't realistic in scientific terms then, and not even close now. Doesn't even matter, it's still scifi. If you look at both scifi and fantasy, they both have to have a consistency to remain believable, the biggest difference between the two is one has the implied understanding that there is some form of science (known or not) driving thing that could be perceived as something magical.

Although, I don't really understand why we even care anymore...both are lumped into the same section at a book store.

 

[Queshire]

I still maintain that they're different flavors of the same damn thing....

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

I still maintain that they're different flavors of the same damn thing....

Actually, you are pretty much spot on. Which is why I can enjoy them both.

 

[Steerpike]

I like any kind of speculative fiction. Science Fiction, Fantasy, Horror. Really, any kind of fiction, period. So I don't care what it is called, but it is interesting from an academic standpoint.

 

[JCFarnham]

I only break things down to sci/fantasy levels of distinction for the benefit of others. People expect it so I provide it, but to myself what I write is "speculative fiction" and what I like to read is "speculative fiction".

I just like the term better.

Hence Super hero fiction = speculative fiction.

... though that's not a specific enough descriptor for a lot of people haha

 

[Dreamhand]

I'll add my two cents to the discussion and offer that the details of the setting and the universe are only part of the equation. The other factor that distinguishes genre is the type of story being told.

I'm not sure if anyone ever made the distinction but there's a big difference between the tales told in Fantastic Four or Avengers and Daredevil or Batman. The scope of the narrative can be grand and sweeping or very close and intimate (High and Low Comic Book?).

The thing that always struck me about superhero stories was that (usually) the heroes started out as ordinary people and through some quirk of fate or science or willpower, they evolved into something more, something mythic and far beyond normal human parameters. In a sense, they become icons, almost deities - not in the sense of supreme power or omniscience, but rising above humanity and its limitations.

Fantasy tales tend (again, "tend") to involve ordinary people drawn into extraordinary events. Granted, "ordinary" has a different meaning in a fantasy setting, but its the context that marks the distinction. A thief drawn into political intrigue, a band of mercenaries caught up in a battle between gods, a young wizard thrust into a grand adventure... they all start out at what passes for normal in the setting and express their heroism through deeds and choices. Yes, they may grow in power as the tale progresses, but that's part of the story, whereas with superheroes, they already HAVE the power and the stories tend to be about how they deal with it or are challenged or tested by it.

Just some thoughts...