[...]Writing Excuses Episode 9: Sci-Fi Sub-Genre » Writing Excuses[...]…

I mean, you’re not even endorsing it, you’re just stating that the book exists. Why interrupt your train of thought and waste 30 seconds of the podcast to simply mention that a product exists? It serves no one and accomplishes nothing.

I sure hope you’re making a mint off of this. The only thing that would suck worse than a pointless out-of-place advertisement in what was formerly a sincere and informal discussion of the art and science of fiction, would be to discover that they’re not even making it worth your while.

So yeah, I hope you’re all talking into solid gold diamond-encrusted microphones in the next podcast. Or, conversely, I hope that our locust-like internet browsing habits were eating you alive with bandwidth expenses until you this advertising deal came along to help stop the hemorrhaging.

I guess what I’m saying is, I sure hope it was worth it.

The ad did nothing for me. Hopefully it did something for you.

-Joseph-

Regarding this particular episode – it came to me as a blessing, cause right now I am exploring a lot of new books and realized that the little SciFi I read would probably be Space Opera. This podcast made it clear for me why I like this subgenre and why I stay away from others (as much as niches are always oversimplifications).

If you want to upload 1000-word essays (you only posted 823 words, but who besides me is counting?) it’s a good idea to break your paragraphs up.

This, by the way, is good advice for writers in any genre. Too many unbroken walls of non-indented text can and will intimidate readers, and your content will go unread.

@Thanos: Verne’s work “predicted” submarines and space travel, but more importantly it foreshadowed the entire genre in which we currently write. You can call it Space Opera, Hard SF, and even Fantasy. Those elements are all there, and he predates the rise of the genre by an entire generation, so any categorization you apply is wholly artificial. Verne certainly wasn’t thinking of genres in that way when he wrote.

I wanted to respond to a couple of comments here. Asmund mentions silly technology in regards as things not to do, particularly referencing the attack droids from Revenge of the Sith and the exo-skeleton mecha from The Matrix: Revolutions. The thought that occurs to me is that there’s a definite sliding scale when it comes to weird or inefficient technology depending on sub-genre. Harder scifi sub-genres are obviously going to have a low tolerance for such features, but in the case of space opera, it actually can serve as a major stylistic feature. Star Wars of course has lightsabers, which are very weird/inefficient technology; it’s not only acceptable but is embraced because of the sub-genre. In space opera, technology can be forgiven for being kind of absurd as long as it adds an enjoyable stylistic element – basically, as long as it’s cool and doesn’t break suspension of disbelief too badly. The droids in Revenge of the Sith did not bother me because they created an interesting dilemma and fit the style of the setting. Sure, an actual warhead would be more realistic and effective, but the droids added an element of suspense and felt more dangerous. Essentially, space opera (and other soft genres) can – and probably should be encouraged – to ignore realism in favor of the dramatic. Of course, a writer has to be careful not to go too far. The exo-skeletons from The Matrix provide a great example of this. Walking tanks are a bit of a ridiculous idea in the first place, but the open cockpit, as Asmund mentions, puts them way over the top – a viewer simply cannot take them seriously, cannot get over the glaringly obvious flaw. Simply enclosing the operator in some sort of cockpit would have resolved this – the viewers are willing to accept the silliness of a mecha if the writer (or in this case film-makes) make at least a nod towards realistic concerns. Different readers will have different tastes and how far they’re willing to stretch their sense of disbelief varies, but if the writer at least addresses the readily obvious problems in some way and makes it dramatically or stylistically interesting, the readers will often go along for the ride. (And please excuse me, but as a card carrying geek I must take this moment to be pedantic lest I am stripped of my membership – Obi-wan’s starfighter in Revenge of the Sith is actually a ETA-2 Actis Interceptor ).

In reference to cyberpunk, Jon W. suggests it should be a sub-genre of dystopian works. I think there’s good reason to feel this way, but I disagree for a few reasons. Primarily, in dystopian works the entire population – even the supposed elite – live in oppressive and restricted circumstances. Even the supposed elite are better off only in comparison to the general populace, and rarely live in anything that could be likened to opulence. In 1984, for example, the Party leadership have but a few privileges – they can turn off their CCTVs, have slightly better living quarters, personal vehicles, and a few other relatively minor allowances. However, they are if anything watched even more closely and face even worse repercussions should they break their society’s rules. In cyberpunk, however, the world is dystopian primarily from the viewpoints of the standard protagonists. These characters are on the outside of the system, either by circumstance or choice, and the system by nature tends to grind down and oppress outsiders. However, they conversely have a great deal more individual freedom – they may be in constant danger and have no support net besides what they create themselves, but they are also not beholden to the powers that control a cyberpunk world. Those at the top of these powers, on the other hand, enjoy virtually limitless wealth and privilege, and can get away with almost anything they want. It’s really only the people in the middle – part of the system, but not controlling it – that face what would be considered the typical dystopian oppression. In fact, this aspect can vary greatly depending on which corporation or government or whatever a person is part of. Some cyberpunk works even call this version of circumstances into question – are the people in charge really that bad, and are regular people that sheep like, or are the protagonists just violent underworld extremists, paranoids, and criminals?