Comments on: On Mundane SF

By: Task Newsletter

Task Newsletter — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 09:49:22 +0000

Years later, and we’re STILL talking about Mundane SF:
http://tasknewsletter.blogspot.com/2009/08/mundane-science-fiction-another-article.html

By: M.G.M.

M.G.M. — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:16:16 +0000

Rudy, you need to read “Summa Technologiae”, a treatise by a Polish SF writer Stanislaw Lem. He proves conclusively that sending a COPY of your personality (or otherwise teleporting) will not give YOU the experience of having traveled anywhere. Making a copy, or many copies, of yourself “somewhere else”, and destroying the original “here”, at the same time or later, is an expensive way of committing suicide, according to Lem. The only way I can imagine to sidestep this roadblock, is to prove that self-experience is tied to the quantum state as a whole. I doubt that it is possible to prove it one way or the other, but let’s say it is, for the sake of argument. We could teleport the quantum state such that consciousness is not lost in the process. Would you volunteer for such an experiment? By the way, if it doesn’t work out, no one will know that you have died, and a copy, or copies, have taken your place…

By: FutureNerd

FutureNerd — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:29:40 +0000

I think what old SF escaped from was a padded world. This Mundane thing has me thinking about books I’ve liked and wondering whether old SF ideas really have become padding by now.

Rudy, you say, “I’ve always felt that SF is more like surrealism. The idea is to shock people into awareness.” My feeling is that SF takes you to unfamiliar territory and then rubs your nose in something, and the particular SF trippy zing effect happens because it’s a real something, however mapped. Some connection to reality or realism-attitude gives the author a grip on your guts and your brain.

I’m not sure realism per se, relevance, responsibility and predicting the future are the right astringents, but still it’s a scary question whether SF is imperceptibly or inadvertently giving up that particular grip, authority, magic.

By: D.N.D.

D.N.D. — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:52:53 +0000

I agreed with a lot of what was siad on this blog. I am a mundane sympathizer, but I also write non-mundane sci fi. I also agree with PK Lentz in that “there’s room for any number of sub-genres”.

I would also like to clarify that nowhere do Mundaners say that FTL/aliens/AI is impossible, they just say its very unlikely. Overall, though, I think SF is about the fiction more than the science, and thats the way its always been. It’s important to remember that its all just entertainment.

By: PK Lentz

PK Lentz — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 21:50:11 +0000

Just came across this blog while searching out the debate on mundane SF, and really enjoyed the post. I don’t know if it’s necessary to take sides, since IMO there’s room for any number of sub-genres. I’ve “committed” (as they say) mundane SF by accident rather than design, and submitted to their issue of IZ, but I personally wouldn’t endorse any “manifesto” for writing. Even if I made rules for myself, I’m sure I’d break them at least once.

One trap I don’t think opponents of mundane SF should fall into is defending why FTL/aliens/AI etc *might* be possible. That just lets the mundanes say, “Hey, look how wacky they are, talking about teleportation while we talk real science.” It doesn’t matter if those things are plausible because, as is wisely noted here, SF isn’t really about predicting the future.

By: Kelson

Kelson — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 04:01:45 +0000

Oh, just to throw a odd bit of synchronocity out there, but i threw Varèse’s quote into google and find a vid, and sure enough, it’s FZ mentioning pitchforks. With what appears to be dutch subtitles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMBNdDs-q4E

By: Kelson

Kelson — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:55:35 +0000

“The present-day composer refuses to die!” -Edgard Varèse

Be they pitchforks or harps or SF writers or other musicians of various and sundry sorts.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 21:44:29 +0000

Viva Rudy!
Down with mundane SF!

By: Steve H

Steve H — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:50:33 +0000

Rudy, that wasn’t a writer, it was the editor of SPY magazine. He and BS were separated at birth, but have a happy reunion every time bean dip is served. I bet with a little searching you could find the wiki article he cribbed to drop names like Edward Everett Hale until he got to his buddy Crichton. The point of the article seems to be that people who write SF don’t even bother to wear thongs and Spock ears and he’s not down with that. Actually, last time I looked, SPY was dead and SF was doing fine (didja notice that EVERY new tv show for Fall is either SF or fantasy?).

By: Rudy

Rudy — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:57:03 +0000

New outrage: Discover mag attacks SF! It's an article saying SF is obsolete and "has suddenly and entirely ceased to matter." Imagine my fury! The essay is lame BS by a professional pontificator who doesn't actually read SF---other than Michael Crichton. He went to a SFWA gathering, got creeped out by our looks and the cheap venue (generic hotel room with bean dip buffet) and he decided the field is dead. His reasoning: (a) SF is for proposing ideas about the future in fictional form, (b) fiction doesn't matter anymore, as people prefer putting their opinions into pontificating essays and blogs, (c) our technology is changing so fast that predicting the future is impossible. Rebuttal: (a) SF is an ecstatic visionary art form akin to surrealism and the primary goal is to understand the present, (b) independent art is more important than ever as a last stand against psychic McDonaldsization, (c) in the face of change, we need wild and demented SF as the best possible way for conceptualizing what's happening around us. Shorter rebuttal. The guy is saying "I don't read SF anymore, therefore it doesn't matter." Still shorter and non-vocal: The Finger, followed by turning my back and walking away. I don't think the Discover attack bears directly on the to-Mundane-or-not-to-Mundane discussion, though. Either camp could argue that their approach is the most likely to produce SF likely to stem the abuse by morons like the Discover essayist. I'd say, let's all keep writing SF any old way! Solidarity against the tyranny of consensus reality! SF isn't dying. It's only just starting.