I’ve run into a convergence of “The dichotomy” over the last several weeks. In fact, it started a couple of years ago when I received feedback from an agent, explaining science and fantasy couldn’t mix.
This message was reinforced last week when I met with Chris McKitterick, who is a Scifi writer and an Associate Department Head at the University of Kansas’ Center for the Study of Science Fiction, for a manuscript consult. In the time I spent with Chris, he was courteous, professional, and constructive in his criticism. Actually, aside from a few line edits and manuscript formatting recommendations, he didn’t offer much criticism except, “the main problem I think you will have in selling this is that it has both science and fantasy.”
By the way, right before Chris met me for the consult I’m reading a Locus tribute to Arthur C. Clarke, and, of course, prominently there are his three rules, the last stating, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
Chris’ explanation thereafter was logical–the marketers won’t know where to shelf the book. At this point, I’m thinking: my protagonist is 17 years old and I’m going to pitch this as a YA novel; some of my favorite books don’t seem to have a problem mixing genres because if it’s a young adult piece, the “dense” marketing people must have not been confused. But I’m still not convinced this is the right approach: maybe I should strip the technology and science from the manuscript, and leave this as pure fantasy.
But then, two days later, I’m listening to an iTunes: Meet the Author podcast with George R.R. Martin where he discusses his “furniture rules.” The premise of his rules is that the setting and the interaction therein are just window dressing and all stories should be about the human condition and the conflict we face, whether internal or external. Amen, brother!
Later that afternoon, I’m combing Technorati and stumble across the blog entry Science vs. Fantasy: A False Dichotomy. In short, Mike Brotherton looks at the logistics of pitting science and fantasy against another. This is a mistake, he says, because “Change the rules, and science will figure it out.”
Yikes. What a mess. To me, it’s about the structure and rules the author creates. And as long they are consistent and clearly stated, isn’t that all that matters because in the end, if you believe Martin, the furniture isn’t what really matters at all.
Still, I may keep two different books.
Loading ...