How is science fiction different from fantasy, according to
Le Guin?
According to Le Guin science fiction is a branch of
realism. She states that “Realism uses actuality and history, inserting
invented characters in amongst real people and places” so
“In general, science fiction proceeds just as realistic
fiction does, meeting conventional expectations of how people generally act,
and either avoiding events that will strike the reader as improbable, or
plausibly explaining them. Realism and science fiction both employ plausibility
to win the reader's consent to the fiction” (Le Guin 2005)
Science fiction has a way of making things
sound plausible. Its plausibility comes from it being written rationally. The reader invests in a story that plausibly
may have happened or could happen because of such things as the time, place,
events, characters or scientific explanations used to ground the story in
reality. Science fiction is mostly based in alternative worlds or futures and
Le Guin puts this to the idea that the future is a “blank page”, anything can
be written on it. Take a look at science fiction such as The Planet of the Apes films, Star
Wars, Predator and books such as Neuromancer (William Gibson, 1984) or The
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (Douglas Adams, 1979); though of course
they are made up there is a certain credibility to these stories because of the
explanations behind them or the fact that aspects of real life are incorporated
whether it be through the characters or setting.
In contrast Le Guin says that fantasy is much more direct in
it fictionality. There is nothing really that binds the story to reality in
fact with the readers knowledge “fantasy deliberately violates plausibility in
the sense of congruence with the world outside the story” (Le Guin 2005). Of
course there is some realism used on lesser detail to ground the story. For
example Le Guin says that in fantasy there may be characters with human
behaviour but they may not be human. Certainly one can say this with science
fiction (for example aliens are not human) but generally this is rationally
explained. She says that for the fantasy reader there “is no agreement to
pretend that its story happened, might have happened, or might ever happen”.
Le Guinn. U.K. (2005). Plausibility revisited. Retrieved August 29, 2012, from http://www.ursulakleguin.com/PlausibilityRevisited.html
Le Guinn. U.K. (2005). Plausibility revisited. Retrieved August 29, 2012, from http://www.ursulakleguin.com/PlausibilityRevisited.html
That's interesting, because with Harry Potter etc came a wider debate of different types of 'fantasy.' High Fantasy for instance being in an invented or parallel world, but there is also low fantasy described as "nonrational happenings that are without causality or rationality because they occur in the rational world where such things are not supposed to occur."
ReplyDeleteAnd although, like Le Guinn says, there is no way we should pretend it really happened, I think low fantasy still gives people hope that it did haha x)
Sorry, this probably doesn't have much to do with anything. I just have a secret hope there are unicorns out there >O>
And I found this random quote that I liked.
A definition offered by Rod Serling holds that "science fiction, the improbable made possible; fantasy, the impossible made probable"
High quality discussion here, Kristy and Che. Love the quote by Rod Sterling. How does this sound – most SF worlds could exist but Fantasy worlds could not.
ReplyDeleteIt's a pity, because I'd love for some fantasy things to exist haha.
DeleteMe too, Che. Which is probably why we like to read it.
ReplyDeleteIs fantasy therefore more excapist than SF, particularly Speculative fiction?
What do you think Kirsty?