Science-Fiction Lecture & Workshop –

Science Fiction vs Fantasy

  • Opening image: “anti-detection glasses” → illustrates SF’s preoccupation with technology that can realistically (or semi-realistically) be engineered.
  • BLURRING of the two genres acknowledged, yet there is a “fundamental difference”:
    • Fantasy: no obligation to supply scientifically plausible mechanisms; may freely break the laws of physics.
    • Science Fiction (SF): the word science in the label signals an expectation of at least an arguable scientific basis; the writer must prove or rationalise the world-building.
  • Emotional palette:
    • Fantasy emphasises wonder and the marvellous.
    • SF keeps the wonder but often adds fear/dread, tending toward dystopia.

Historical Status & H. G. Wells

  • Both genres were once dismissed as escapist and “illegitimate” because they were not seen as addressing “the real world.”
  • H. G. Wells: early exemplar who stretched contemporary science to its limits (“going to the moon,” etc.).
    • Demonstrates that SF can imagine the impossible of its day yet foreshadow real technological achievement.

Breadth of Scientific Lenses

SF today draws upon—and interrogates—the full spectrum of disciplines:

  • Natural science, physics, engineering, computer science, biology, chemistry, astronomy, atmospheric science, oceanography.
  • Human-centred sciences: political science, psychology, anthropology.
  • Key idea: SF is non-realist, but it is systematically non-realist, filtered through one or more scientific frameworks.

Definitions & Authorial Perspectives

Isaac Asimov
  • “Modern science fiction is the only form of literature consistently considering the nature of the changes that face us.”
  • Focus: impact of scientific advance on human beings.
  • Historical note: SF flourishes during times of intense discovery/innovation.
Ray Bradbury
  • Calls SF “sociological studies of the future” arrived at by “putting 2+22+2 together.”
  • Stresses its predictive dimension – e.g.
    • “If AI gains consciousness, what would the world look like?”
  • Also labels SF “a fabled teacher of morality.”
  • Distinguishes Fantasy & SF via law-breaking:
    • Fantasy → overtly violates physical law.
    • SF → chronicles “ideas that work themselves out and become real.”
  • Example of genre-fusion profitability: the James Bond franchise = “romantic, adventurous, frivolous, fantastic science fiction” and the top-grossing film series of all time.
Philip K. Dick
  • SF world “must differ from the given in at least one way,” providing a conceptual dislocation that enables events impossible in present or past reality.
  • Core function: construction of new societies in the author’s mind.
Ursula K. Le Guin
  • Harnesses the physicist’s thought experiment: not to predict the future but to describe (and critique) the present.
  • “Science fiction is not predictive; it is descriptive.”
  • Yet SF is simultaneously extrapolative:
    • Takes an existing trait/technology, purifies or intensifies it, then extends it.
    • Analogy: feeding mice “large doses of purified food additive” → inevitable outcome: cancer → parallels dystopian trajectories in SF when variables are exaggerated.

Core Tool Set of SF Writers

  • Central speculative prompt: “What if …?”
  • Auxiliary verb: Extrapolate – project from now into an altered future or alternate reality.
  • Double nature (tension):
    • Predictive (Bradbury, Asimov).
    • Descriptive/diagnostic (Le Guin).
  • Process resembles the scientific method: pose a hypothesis → test via narrative experiment → observe consequences on characters/society.

Real-World & Pop-Culture Validation

  • Early Star Trek (1960s) portrayed then-impossible technologies now commonplace (e.g.
    mobile communication devices).
  • Still-unrealised items (teleportation) show the forward-looking gap.
  • Commercial evidence: $James\ Bond$ series proves audiences gravitate to technologically flavoured adventure even when marketed as spy thrillers.

Ethical & Moral Dimensions

  • SF serves as a moral laboratory.
    • Examines potential misuses or unintended consequences of innovation (e.g.
      AI overlord scenarios, genetic engineering, reanimation of life).
  • Frequently yields dystopian outcomes when projecting trajectories unchecked.

Workshop / Tutorial Road Map

  • Pre-class reflection: choose a favourite SF text (TV, film, novel, Black Mirror, etc.) and interrogate it with these questions:
    1. Why is it SF?
    2. How does it extrapolate?
    3. Is it predicting the future or diagnosing the present?
    4. What specific element is speculative?
  • In-class activity set:
    • Begin with What if prompts (e.g.
      “What if AI takes over?” “What if humans found a way to reanimate life?” “What if evolution continued?”).
    • Formulate each as a scientific hypothesis.
    • “Put the characters in a test tube” → observe narrative results.
    • Draft an 800-word What-if scene:
      • Plunge reader into the speculative moment.
      • Anchor scene with fully realised characters.
      • Let the engineered world pressure those characters.
  • Slides enumerate concrete steps:
    1. World design.
    2. Scientific premise articulation.
    3. Character construction.
    4. Scene mechanics.
  • Goal: produce raw material potentially expandable into Task 1 assignment.

Key Readings & Exemplars Mentioned

  • Ray Bradbury (multiple short stories).
  • Margaret Atwood – Year of the Flood (eco-dystopia).
  • Kurt Vonnegut – exemplar of extrapolated short fiction.
  • Additional weekly set (≥ 3 pieces; instructor added more).

Take-Home Checklist

  • Know the difference between SF & Fantasy (scientific plausibility).
  • Remember the four authorial lenses (Asimov, Bradbury, Dick, Le Guin) and how they frame SF’s purpose.
  • Practise extrapolation: start from the present, purify/intensify a variable, extend.
  • Use the What if question relentlessly; it is the engine of speculative narrative.
  • Approach draft scenes as lab experiments: hypothesis → method (narrative) → observation (plot/character outcome).