It occurs to me that there are a plethora (si, El Guapo) of ways to define the idea of "science fiction." We've seen to that. Depending on your definition of scifi, you could say it started with A Conneticut Yankee, but I'd usually start the proper scifi generation with the works of Jules Verne. At this point, we have:
1. Hardcore sci-fi. Star Wars, Andromeda, B5 and such. The technology (even to the point of midichlorians and such) is an integral part of the society, and any "mystical" properties can be explained fully. Science is as fully understood as is possible.
2. Softcore sci-fi. Trek, Stargate, etc. The technology is important, but new innovations can and do occur. Science is admitted as impossible to fully understand.
3. Bizzare sci-fi. Doctor Who, h2g2 and so forth. Technology is there, it's not really magic, but we don't want to dwell on it. Impossible stuff can and does happen, with some frequency, in fact.
So, if you accept these as broad categories, then you'd have three winners: Wars and Trek would accept laurels for the first two, but the third is more of a tossup.
__________________
mudshark: Nate's just being...Nate.
Zeke: It comes nateurally to him.
mudshark: I don't expect Nate to make sense, really -- it's just a bad idea.
Sa'ar Chasm on the 5M.net forum: Sit back, relax, and revel in the insanity.
Adam Savage: I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
Crow T. Robot: Oh, stop pretending there's a plot. Don't cheapen yourself further.
|