OPINION

SF's Own Star Wars

Written by Tim Gebhart
Published May 29, 2005

It appears a brushfire is heating up amidst science fiction writers over the direction of the genre. Disputes between and among SF fans as to what types of stories and novels fit within the genre and/or deserve recognition are nothing new. Take, for example, the debate over whether J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire should have been nominated for, let alone won, the Hugo Award, one of SF's most prestigious awards, for best novel in 2001. What is intriguing about this skirmish is that it involves some of the field's newer stars who likely can influence where SF goes.

The gauntlet was tossed down with The Mundane Manifesto, which arose from a discussion between author Geoff Ryman and a class at Clarion East, a science fiction and fantasy writers' workshop at Michigan State. The term "mundane" does not come from writing SF that is ordinary and routine. Instead, the manifesto uses it in the context of the word meaning being of or related to this world. That is represented in the manifesto's proposition that SF stories follow these rules:

  • No interstellar travel — travel is limited to within the solar system and is difficult, time consuming and expensive.
  • No aliens unless the connection is distant, difficult, tenuous and expensive — and they have no interstellar travel either.
  • No Martians, Venusians, etc.
  • No alternative universes or parallel worlds.
  • No magic or supernatural elements.
  • No time travel or teleportation.

The reasoning is based on the theory that such themes neglect the problems facing humanity. "Flying off to Barsoom provides quality entertainment, but fiction has far more unrealized potential if it seeks to challenge us and find solutions to the problems of our planet's survival."

Such a proposal could not, of course, go unchallenged. Ian McDonald, whose River of Gods is nominated for the 2005 Hugo Award for best novel, posted a lengthy broadside. After examining the validity of individual propositions in the manifesto, McDonald rejects it, asserting it stifles creativity.

It's not just the Mundane Manifesto is totally unnecessary to produce the type of science-fiction it celebrates (one very very much worth celebrating, and that is due it's time in the sun), it's that the genre has a much richer palate of colours. It's a poor manifesto that would venerate Verne (tech-speculation) but consigns much of H.G. Wells' core texts to the "bonfire of stupidities" (interplanetary war, aliens, time-travel...). To me, one of the strengths of SF is that it is an allegorical literature: parables and myths of our age. That TV has appropriated and devalued many of them is tribute to their strength, not their weakness. To me, any literature that writes about the future (not all SF does by any means) cannot be realist..., to quote likelihood of a possible future is just hand waving.

What is intriguing about McDonald's position is that River of Gods probably meets the criteria for Mundane Science Fiction. McDonald admits his book "may have accidentally committed MSF."

page 1 | 2
Tim Gebhart lives in Sioux Falls, SD, where he practices law in order to provide shelter for his family, his dog, and his books. His blog de guerre is A Progressive on the Prairie.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
SF's Own Star Wars
Published: May 29, 2005
Type: Opinion
Section: Books
Filed Under: Books: SF, Culture: Arts
Writer: Tim Gebhart
Tim Gebhart's BC Writer page
Tim Gebhart's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Tim Gebhart
Books: SF
Culture: Arts
All Books Articles
Tim Gebhart's personal weblog
All Opinion articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — May 29, 2005 @ 23:45PM — SFC SKI

Sounds like a bit of sour graps or snobbery by a few writers. Their parameters for writing SF are interesting ones if they want to do a shared environment to write stories in.

Personally, I think SF is already varied enough that it defies being put under one very broad category being labelled SF.

#2 — May 30, 2005 @ 00:59AM — Jeremy [URL]

If I were to write a SF book would I get flogged by the SF union? Would they take away my writer's guild card? The only thing they can do is hold their snobby elitist noses in the air and scoff at other writers that have made an impact in peoples lives...like Robert Asprin, Orson Scott Card, Douglas Adams, C.S. Lewis and my personal favorite Piers Anthony. None of these are mundane but all of them have made an impact the the way I view the world today...even if it's only to remember where my towel is.

#3 — May 30, 2005 @ 01:49AM — Thomas M. Sipos [URL]

I don't read much modern sci-fi (a valid term) because it's been Opraphied. Too much domestic soap opera crap, too much social commentary. No more hard science, no more "sense of wonder," and no more blending of these two elements that Arthur C. Clarke did so well.

#4 — May 30, 2005 @ 01:59AM — gonzo marx [URL]

to Thomas,
might i suggest Neal Stephenson, most notably "Snowcrash" and "Diamond Age" in that order..

and Julian May...a 9 book Epic that begins with the misguiding name of "the Many Colored Land"...believe it or not..it IS science fiction, not Fantasy...

this all coming from a devout Heilein fanatic..these two are truly inspired World Builders on par with any of the past Masters...the whole Ender saga, by Orson Scott Card, is another "modern" authors trip inso solid science fiction

sooOOooOOoooOOOoooo many books....
so little Time...

Excelsior!

#5 — May 30, 2005 @ 11:48AM — DrPat [URL]

And my two favorite authors, thoroughly involved in the mundane vis their themes, (Sheri Tepper and Connie Willis), would not qualify because their novels use fantasy in the same way that Stephenson uses tech-spec - to illuminate their thematic points.

Fie on MSF, I say! It's a red herring! Cook it on its own bonfire, and eat it with rosemary and lime juice!

#6 — May 30, 2005 @ 16:11PM — Victor Plenty [URL]

It's fun to translate into mundane English, from the manifesto's quoted rationale.

Original text:

"Flying off to Barsoom provides quality entertainment, but fiction has far more unrealized potential if it seeks to challenge us and find solutions to the problems of our planet's survival."

Translated into straightforward English:

"We're never going to be best-selling authors, so we might as well try to boost our sales by getting onto some required reading lists in a few social studies classes."

#7 — May 30, 2005 @ 16:29PM — Bennett

Great post, fun comments. Victor, thanks for the chuckle.

Thomas, Arthur Clark and Stephen Baxter's "The Light Of Other Days" was published in 2000. This "modern SF" book knocked my socks off.

Among other hard science concepts, it contains the most vivid rendering of the millions of years it took for the evolution of species.

A great read.

#8 — May 30, 2005 @ 21:07PM — DrPat [URL]

There's also Bob Shaw's "Light of Other Days", a short story that often gets short shrift because Shaw wrote so few novels. Interesting that two MSF pieces should have identical titles, and widely differing themes!

#9 — May 31, 2005 @ 17:15PM — gabe chouinard [URL]

Mundane SF pretty much fails to take into account that all of these tropes that writers are apparently supposed to eschew are the metaphors that SFF has used to create exactly the sort of social, 'mundane' commentary that they clambor for.

The metaphors make it easier for people to accept and swallow. Sometimes, stepping back or traveling to the Omega Gamma Sector Prime gives us the distance we need to see our world more clearly.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/30291)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments