Sci-fi or fantasy??

A story doesn't need to be tech-heavy to be science fiction. Without more information on the story, my feeling would be to go ahead and call it SF.

I'm no expert, but to me, if it's in the future, that's sci-fi, even without technology.

Unless it has fantasy elements, like magic, mythical beasts, etc.

Then I'm not sure.

I think I'll just wait here with you until a real expert comes along.

ETA: I didn't see jchines post. Didn't mean to say he wasn't an expert.

Put together a cover letter, and if your future setting shows up in your paragraph synopsis then the book is SF. If not, it's just fiction.

Even then, plenty of solid literature and fiction has SF and fantasy elements that enhance the story. (100 Years of Solitude, Oryx and Crake)

DamaNegra said:

I am currently writing the novel set in a possible future, so my first guess is sci-fi. But there's no significant or even decent amounts of technology in the story, so that's why I'm not sure about calling it sci-fi.

Click to expand...

At a quick glance it looks like SF.

(Remember if you are going to write "sci-fi" you need to call it SF. Or people will keep correcting you at conferences. Boy did I learn that the hard way...)

SF does not require technology. If the setting is the future, and you're using that setting in order to explore or make a statement about society today or something about the "human condition", then the novel is SF. So as has been said, you need to decide why the story is set in the future. Does it really NEED to be set in the future? If the future element is required in order for the story to work, the it's definitely SF. If you could tell the same story but set it in the 1400s or the 400s or today, and the story still has the same impact, then it's probably simply fiction.

If you decide it IS "simply fiction" then you have a choice. Which audience do you want to target? "Simply fiction" means that you can set the story anywhere, in any time period, and it still resonates. If you'd prefer to set it in the future, then you're aiming toward an SF audience and an SF market. The story may only appeal to SF readers then. If you're happy with that, then call it SF. If you'd rather catch a more general audience, then label it fiction. Etc.

DamaNegra said:

I am currently writing the novel set in a possible future, so my first guess is sci-fi. But there's no significant or even decent amounts of technology in the story, so that's why I'm not sure about calling it sci-fi.

Click to expand...

WHY is it set in a possible future? What is different in this future from the present that is important to the story?

johnzakour said:

At a quick glance it looks like SF.

(Remember if you are going to write "sci-fi" you need to call it SF. Or people will keep correcting you at conferences. Boy did I learn that the hard way...)

Click to expand...

IIRC Heinlein wrote about this in "Expanded Universe" and boy did he rag on the phrase sci-fi (apparently coined as a variation of hi-fi, short for "high fidelity", the field of allegedly better-sounding audio reproduction that started in the 1950's). It seems most everyone outside the field called (and still calls) it sci-fi, and no one "on the inside" (in magazines such as Analog) ever does or did - it's either SF or Science Fiction.

jpsorrow said:

If you'd prefer to set it in the future, then you're aiming toward an SF audience and an SF market. The story may only appeal to SF readers then.

Click to expand...

If the only reason it's set in the future is to "aim toward an SF audience" then not only are you limiting your audience to SF readers, it may not appeal to SF readers either. There has to be a good (story-related) reason for it being set in the future. Be aware that good (and bad) SF can be set in the present or the past as well.

I read somewhere that SF was something which could happen in the world (or the universe) as we knew it, while fantasy was something that couldn't happen unless the laws of physics and biology and so on were broken. By those standards, your book would be science fiction.

Queen of Swords said:

I read somewhere that SF was something which could happen in the world (or the universe) as we knew it, while fantasy was something that couldn't happen unless the laws of physics and biology and so on were broken. By those standards, your book would be science fiction.

Click to expand...

I agree with this, but SF to me should also include speculations on technology and science.

Queen of Swords said:

I read somewhere that SF was something which could happen in the world (or the universe) as we knew it, while fantasy was something that couldn't happen unless the laws of physics and biology and so on were broken. By those standards, your book would be science fiction.

Click to expand...

I like that.

Of course what happens when you use science to break the laws of physics as we currently understand them? Is that soft SF or fantasy? This to me at least is where the line gets blurry. For example, teleporting... I have had people tell me that my books aren't true SF as I have people teleporting within the next 100 years which is beyond the realm of science. I agree that there doesn't seem to be any way humans will be teleporting in this current century, still it made the story more fun. (I explained it away by saying, "aliens helped a lot.")

Perhaps this is why book stores group SF & F together....

Said the guy who writes, humorous, pulp sf, PI stories with a touch a fantasy (that may or may not be explained by science.)

Of course what happens when you use science to break the laws of physics as we currently understand them?

Click to expand...

I think as long as it's an extrapolation based on what we currently understand about the universe, it's still SF.

ETA: I'm reminded of a discussion we had in here some time ago, on bolognium. Basically, you can put only so much stuff that's outside the realm of what is currently known before you risk losing the reader's suspension of disbelief. I'll see if I can find the thread and link to it....

Found it: Bolognium

Is it fantasy if there's no magic or no mythical creatures? What if it takes place in an entirely created world?

MattW said:

Is it fantasy if there's no magic or no mythical creatures? What if it takes place in an entirely created world?

Click to expand...

I have a novel that contains no magic at all - not even the use of the word. But it takes place on another land where I've speeded up and twisted evolution to the point where the original race of humans has given rise, over thousands of years, to people who are biologically and socially very different from their ancestors. Still, everything is medieval - humans and their descendants alike fight with swords and ride horses - so I think of the book as a fantasy, albeit with a strong scientific slant. It's difficult to classify. Maybe that's one reason I could never get a literary agent interested.

johnzakour said:

For example, teleporting... I have had people tell me that my books aren't true SF as I have people teleporting within the next 100 years which is beyond the realm of science. I agree that there doesn't seem to be any way humans will be teleporting in this current century, still it made the story more fun. (I explained it away by saying, "aliens helped a lot.")

Click to expand...

Teleportation might be possible in the future, but it's impossible to know when it will happen. So that particular part is SF.

Perhaps this is why book stores group SF & F together....

Click to expand...

The local bookstores group them together here too, and I suppose otherwise all the five SF titles would seem terribly lonely if put alone. Maybe this is because I suspect SF to be almost dead as a genre over here. But grouping them together might make people confused about what SF is. I once saw someone state that Harry Potter was a kind of SF. One of our cable channels categorises the series HEX as SF. Apparently, anything is SF as long as one say it is...

Teleportation

There's never any possible way of putting a timeline of scientific advanement. Teleportation could take a thousand years to achieve, or it could happen next week. Breakthroughs do happen, and they usually happen suddenly.

Then tehre's this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3811785.stm

Jamesaritchie said:

There's never any possible way of putting a timeline of scientific advanement. Teleportation could take a thousand years to achieve, or it could happen next week. Breakthroughs do happen, and they usually happen suddenly.

Then tehre's this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3811785.stm

Click to expand...

Wow, neat article. I'm all for teleportation as quickly as possible, especially since I'm not a big fan of driving or flying... ;-)

johnzakour said:

For example, teleporting... I have had people tell me that my books aren't true SF as I have people teleporting within the next 100 years which is beyond the realm of science.

Click to expand...

If that were true, then Alfred Bester's The Stars My Destination, a SF classic if ever there was one, (and one of my all time favorites) would not qualify as SF.