The Genre Manglers

Liosse de Velishaf · Dec 16, 2009

Ace Tachyon cracked the joke over in the Death of SF thread, refering to the sort of science fiction that sits on the very edge of the genre: New Space Opera, near-future sf, sci-fantasy, cyber-adventure and sci-paranormal. The kind of current material trending away from the full-fledged "hard sf" of the past. I'm sure there are other labels to be thrown around. So, how are you contributing to the death of your own genre? How have you mangled the tropes and conventions and expectations? And why?

Ruv Draba · Dec 16, 2009

Fantasy steampunk isn't new. Tim Powers did it back in the day, and Girl Genius is doing it now. But I'm doing it in the Edwardian era, which for some reason I can't fathom is normally reserved for Lovecraftian horror.

sunandshadow · Dec 16, 2009

Some of my stuff is 'alien historical', and on top of that it may be science fantasy. Example: humans don't have magic, they have spaceships or at least teh interweb. Aliens however have real working magic, but no spaceships or advanced technology. Aliens use magic to kidnap a human to their world, and the puzzled human tries to find technological explanations for various magical things he sees because he thinks magic is impossible.

dolores haze · Dec 16, 2009

Liosse de Velishaf said:
So, how are you contributing to the death of your own genre?

I'm not. I'm contributing to its ongoing revitalization and evolution.

Liosse de Velishaf · Dec 16, 2009

dolores haze said:
I'm not. I'm contributing to its ongoing revitalization and evolution.

It was tongue in cheek, Dolores.

dolores haze · Dec 16, 2009

Liosse de Velishaf said:
It was tongue in cheek, Dolores.

Oh. In which case I'm bringing far too many tongues in far too many cheeks in far too many places across the galaxy. So there.

Liosse de Velishaf · Dec 16, 2009

dolores haze said:
Oh. In which case I'm bringing far too many tongues in far too many cheeks in far too many places across the galaxy. So there.

lol

Albedo · Dec 16, 2009

A few times I've written in a secondary world fantasy setting that just happens to have entered the space age. So I guess I'm destroying both science fiction and fantasy with my earnest extrapolations of the future of magic.

Liosse de Velishaf · Dec 16, 2009

I have one story right now that's like cyber-punk meets urban fantasy or maybe near-future sci-fantasy.

I also have some near-future stories dealing with augmented reality.

I also have a few back-burner projects dealing with psychological issues in a near-future setting.

Also, some secondary-world and/or near-future space opera with very limited tech upgrades.

Finally, one or two near-future military sf stories, set on secondary world planets.

So yeah, a ton of stuff that isn't quite the common perception of SF. Which is good really, but I hope some other people keep up the ore "traditional" subgenres, 'cause I like them, too.

Straka · Dec 16, 2009

Liosse de Velishaf said:
So, how are you contributing to the death of your own genre? How have you mangled the tropes and conventions and expectations? And why?

Does stumbling around in the dark count? I generally don't think about sub-genres when I write, that comes afterward when I'm trying to pen the query letter.

My last WIP turned about to have more in common with Sword & Sorcery than any other sub-genre I could find.

Chasing the Horizon · Dec 16, 2009

I certainly do my part to destroy the preconceptions about tech level in high fantasy. I have a lot of traditional fantasy elements, but only write Edwardian or higher tech levels. I usually have somewhat steam-punky tech, with things like airships and funky looking steam-powered submarines. One of the scenes I've always felt best embodied the feel I'm going for is a dragon landing on the balcony of a 70-story steel skyscraper. Rather than conflicting or negating each other, magic and science work together to create a cohesive background for my stories, each filling in the holes left by the other.

C. C. · Dec 16, 2009

Oh, gosh, I think I must be guilty of helping kill the genre. :Huh:

What I'm writing is sort of near-future science fiction-y, but with lots of in-depth character elements and not too much action (of the 'adventure' type...there's plenty of the other kind of 'action'). Only, I'm not sure what I've got is even science fiction at all. I'm...not really sure what it is. :Shrug:

Chasing the Horizon · Dec 16, 2009

Straka said:
Does stumbling around in the dark count? I generally don't think about sub-genres when I write, that comes afterward when I'm trying to pen the query letter.

LOL, yeah I'm the same way. I was going to call one of my books "High questing fantasy set on a steampunk world with feminist elements and dragons" but it was too long to fit in my query.

Liosse de Velishaf · Dec 16, 2009

Chasing the Horizon said:
I certainly do my part to destroy the preconceptions about tech level in high fantasy. I have a lot of traditional fantasy elements, but only write Edwardian or higher tech levels. I usually have somewhat steam-punky tech, with things like airships and funky looking steam-powered submarines. One of the scenes I've always felt best embodied the feel I'm going for is a dragon landing on the balcony of a 70-story steel skyscraper. Rather than conflicting or negating each other, magic and science work together to create a cohesive background for my stories, each filling in the holes left by the other.

I would love to see more fantasy-type dragons (as opposed to horror-type, or even sci-fi-type) landing on 70-story skyscrapers. Rock on, man. :hooray:

Me&BacchusGoIntoABar · Dec 16, 2009

Liosse de Velishaf · Dec 16, 2009

SoloArtist said:
Right now, I write with themes dealing with some bigger questions and spiritual forces (for example, karma and many broader religious themes), as well as archetypally psychological character development (secretly: things that in-depth astrology has taught me about how life and the human psyche work). Doing all of that in the context of an epic fantasy story is what I'm working on.

I'm also looking much more to the character than I used to. I think the SFF genre in general could use a little more focus on characters.

AceTachyon · Dec 16, 2009

Liosse de Velishaf said:
So, how are you contributing to the death of your own genre? How have you mangled the tropes and conventions and expectations? And why?

As I mention in the other thread, I write "cyberpunk action-adventure," with an emphasis on "action-adventure." The setting and tech is cyberpunk. But I don't do a whole lot of navel-gazing at the societal effects of nanotech, AI, artificial/virtual reality, transhumanism, etc.

I write about cyber-modified female mercs squaring off against corporate cyberninjas, punkergangs, and crimelords.

Think Xena meets Blade Runner. (And for you anime/manga folks, think Gunsmith Cats meets Dirty Pair meets Appleseed meets Bubblegum Crisis.)

Why? Because these are the types of stories I enjoy, it's escapist fun, and there's cool tech.

Ardent Kat · Dec 16, 2009

The first ms I wrote was a post-apocalyptic science fantasy with a steampunk twist--mutants, necromancers, gunslinger paladins, and clockwork golems.

The second was an urban fantasy with a gender role-reversed goblin protagonist from a matriarchal society in modern-day Olympia, WA (which I guess would make it more suburban fantasy than urban fantasy)

Both of these cross standard genre lines and I think that's a good thing. Following a genre's tropes is more likely to make it boring and grind it into the ground. Changing things up and bending the rules helps keep the genre unpredictable and exciting for readers.

SPMiller · Dec 17, 2009

I'm more of a reconstructionist than anything else. I like to take disused elements of genre that are supposedly boring/cliched/passe and put them back together in interesting ways. So, you could say I'm the opposite of a genre mangler.

bearilou · Dec 17, 2009

Ruv Draba said:
But I'm doing it in the Edwardian era, which for some reason I can't fathom is normally reserved for Lovecraftian horror.

and

AceTachyon said:
(And for you anime/manga folks, think Gunsmith Cats meets Dirty Pair meets Appleseed meets Bubblegum Crisis.)

Why? Because these are the types of stories I enjoy, it's escapist fun, and there's cool tech.

*gets in line to buy your books* Take your time. I'll wait.

SPMiller said:
I'm more of a reconstructionist than anything else. I like to take disused elements of genre that are supposedly boring/cliched/passe and put them back together in interesting ways. So, you could say I'm the opposite of a genre mangler.

A genre wrangler?

Straka · Dec 17, 2009

Liosse de Velishaf said:
I'm also looking much more to the character than I used to. I think the SFF genre in general could use a little more focus on characters.

On that matter I like to make the comparison between Firefly and BSG. I could watch Firefly again and again, but as much as I liked BSG (mostly the earlier seasons) I doubt I'll ever watch it again.

The major difference in my mind is that Firefly is character driven, where as BSG becomes more plot driven as the series goes on. And once you know the plot, there's less appeal, for me, to revisit it. But I'd gladly go back to Firefly to watch the characters evolve and the hilarity that ensues.

AceTachyon · Dec 17, 2009

bearilou said:
AceTachyon said:

(And for you anime/manga folks, think Gunsmith Cats meets Dirty Pair meets Appleseed meets Bubblegum Crisis.)

Why? Because these are the types of stories I enjoy, it's escapist fun, and there's cool tech.

Click to expand...

*gets in line to buy your books* Take your time. I'll wait.

Book version is being worked on. If you want a sample, check the link below for KAT AND MOUSE: GUNS FOR HIRE.

SPMiller · Dec 17, 2009

bearilou said:
A genre wrangler?

Not bad. I'll take it.

AceTachyon · Dec 17, 2009

SPMiller said:
bearilou said:

A genre wrangler?

Click to expand...

Not bad. I'll take it.

Does that mean you have spurs that jingle-jangle-jingle?

Liosse de Velishaf · Dec 17, 2009

Straka said:
On that matter I like to make the comparison between Firefly and BSG. I could watch Firefly again and again, but as much as I liked BSG (mostly the earlier seasons) I doubt I'll ever watch it again.

The major difference in my mind is that Firefly is character driven, where as BSG becomes more plot driven as the series goes on. And once you know the plot, there's less appeal, for me, to revisit it. But I'd gladly go back to Firefly to watch the characters evolve and the hilarity that ensues.

Yeah, I feel about the same. Well, okay, I wouldn't mind rewatching the earlier seasons of BSG, which I felt were sufficiently attentive to the characters, but the latter part is a definite no.

The Genre Manglers

Impractical Fantasy Animal

international guttersnipe

international guttersnipe

Alex

Bored Fanatic

Blowing in the Wind

Blowing in the Wind

Odd person

Kill your television

Prodigiously Hanged

DenturePunk writer

Bored Fanatic

Odd person

Prodigiously Hanged

Odd person