Soft Science Fiction or Science Fantasy?

[Prince of Spires]

The best definition about fantasy and science fiction I've found is the following quote from Rod Serling:
"Fantasy is the impossible made probable. Science Fiction is the improbably made possible."

Science fantasy then combines these two. Of course, there is plenty that can be remarked on this definition. But for me it conveys the idea of what the difference is.

 

[The Dark One]

I don't want to drag on this discussion... BUT:

• For instance, think about flying. Now we know how to do the trick, but in ancient or medieval times they could only dream of it and just as a sort of sorcery or impossible fantasy (that's why paradise is traditionally found in the heavens in some traditions). Yet the rules to make flight true were already present in nature, although we didn't knew about them until quite recently in our history.

Yes, that was exactly my point. Flight was physically possible even if regarded as impossible for most of human history. Doesn't make it magic once it happens though. Magic is a supernatural phenomenon which (I would suggest) exists only in fantasy. And no matter how shocked the rubes and yokels are when OTT science happens - no matter how magical it seems to them - it is not magic in the hands of the wielder. It is technology.

 

[Queshire]

I mean.... if a guy with a pointy hat figured out how to toss around a fireball back when scientists were still doing leechings then I reckon he can call it whatever he wants.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Yes, that was exactly my point. Flight was physically possible even if regarded as impossible for most of human history. Doesn't make it magic once it happens though.

It's a bit a slippery slope. Flight in and of itself is physically possible and I'm sure in most of human history they agreed. Just look at birds... And an airplane is solidly grounded in physics. But, a flying carpet is physically impossible. It's not that you can't make a carpet fly, but it's that with the rules of conservation of energy it is very much impossible to keep the carpet flying without any energy put into it. Same with flying using other means. The characters in Mistborne by Brandon Sanderson sort of fly (they technically push themselves away from metals). But they do so without a source of energy powering the flight. Therefore, magic.

It becomes very confusing with superhero's (who admitedly sort of have their own genre). Ironman sort of uses technology to power his armor which takes it out of the realm of magic. But it's still impossible technology

 

[The Dark One]

I'd be very wary of the word impossible.

Flight was impossible, but no longer. I can envisage an anti-gravity sled that might look very like a flying carpet, but only works because a form of anti-grav has been developed (for which there are already some theoretical constructs).

 

[Prince of Spires]

I'd be very wary of the word impossible.

Flight was impossible, but no longer. I can envisage an anti-gravity sled that might look very like a flying carpet, but only works because a form of anti-grav has been developed (for which there are already some theoretical constructs).

That's the slippery slope part. But with an anti-gravity vehicle, you would be feeding energy into the system to maintain your anti-gravity (or you would have expended energy to create the anti-gravity). Since this would be making the improbable possible would consider that Science Fiction.

However, I was talking about your every day run of the mill carpet you have lying on your livingroom floor, without technological thingies attached to it. If that suddenly takes off and flies away, then you are in the impossible physics realm, since there is no energy going in, but energy is being used. It's impossible made probable, which makes it Fantasy.

Of course, there's a large suspension of disbelieve involved in the whole process. The space-ships in Star Wars violate a few laws of physics and no-one bothers explaining how they work (in the films I've seen at least). There's just "because SCIENCE!" going on. But we accept that as valid in certain Science Fiction settings.

 

[Queshire]

In the Nasuverse, which is perhaps most famous for the various Fate/ series, they divide True Magic (achieving something not possible through science) from Magecraft (achieving something possible through science by alternative means.) Closely tied to Magecraft is the idea of Mystery. Basically when you use Magecraft you're hoodwinking the world into thinking that something that shouldn't work does for a time. As a result, the more people know about something the less Mystery, less wiggleroom, there is to hoodwink the world.

The result is that both Magic and Magecraft is slowly fading. Once flight was True Magic, but once mankind became capable of flying by science it became Magecraft.

 

[S.T. Ockenner]

Magic is a supernatural phenomenon which (I would suggest) exists only in fantasy.

I personally disagree, but I respect your opinion.

 

[The Dark One]

That's the slippery slope part. But with an anti-gravity vehicle, you would be feeding energy into the system to maintain your anti-gravity (or you would have expended energy to create the anti-gravity). Since this would be making the improbable possible would consider that Science Fiction.

However, I was talking about your every day run of the mill carpet you have lying on your livingroom floor, without technological thingies attached to it. If that suddenly takes off and flies away, then you are in the impossible physics realm, since there is no energy going in, but energy is being used. It's impossible made probable, which makes it Fantasy.

Of course, there's a large suspension of disbelieve involved in the whole process. The space-ships in Star Wars violate a few laws of physics and no-one bothers explaining how they work (in the films I've seen at least). There's just "because SCIENCE!" going on. But we accept that as valid in certain Science Fiction settings.

I think we're arguing in furious agreement here.

 

[Eduardo Ficaria]

After reading this thread, I almost immediately return to your post, and re-read it. For me, your explanation is the construction of the world, pure revelation. My consciousness seems to never be the same again. You are a true master, I wanted to thank you.

Well, Darel Aranovski , that means that I can create a cult for writers and start preaching them for an unreasonable price! If Ron L. Hubbard could do it, why not I?
About worldbuilding, when I think about it, it seems to me that it's possible the most important thing in speculative fiction. Why? Usually, stories of those genres are set in rather uncommon or distant places (either in space or time, or both), or have weird or strange elements, than what readers are used to. So the writers need to describe somewhat solid worlds where their fictions can feel grounded. Put in other words, if wordly events in a speculative story happen in an apparent whimsical fashion, the story might end feeling unbelievable and even childish. This may explain the care some scribers put in their magic systems...