by A.C. Williams @ACW_Author
Where do you stand in the age-old debate between Star Trek and Star Wars? Are they science fiction? Or are they fantasy that’s just set in space?
There is nothing more annoying than listening to a roomful of nerds arguing over granular details that really don’t matter to a story’s reception, so we’re not going to do that. A good story is a good story, and in the end, it doesn’t really matter what its classification is.
Otherwise there wouldn’t be so many “weird” outliers that have hit the bestseller charts. Excellent stories supersede their genre’s perceived limitations.
But, genre matters immensely because how else will we market our stories? How else will we help our readers know if what we’ve written will suit their needs or not?
As stated in our foray into the difference between Romantic Fantasy and Fantasy Romance last month, declaring a genre is a promise you make to your readers. You have to deliver on that promise, or your audience will likely be disappointed. And a disappointed reader is rarely a repeat reader.
So what about science fiction? What about fantasy? In general, the lines between these two genres have started to blur in the last 10 to 20 years. Some of that is our own level of technology has achieved things that would have been considered fantastical 50 years ago. What used to be considered fantasy (impossible) is now ordinary.
Granted, there are still general elements and characteristics that will distinguish science fiction from fantasy. In most cases, if you find a story with a dragon in it, you can assume it will be a fantasy. If you find a story with a spaceship in it, you can assume it will be science fiction.
The problem is that in our current storytelling culture, where tropes cross-pollinate and hybrid genres are more popular than ever, how can you tell the difference anymore? And does it even matter?
Well, yes, it does. It matters a lot.
Let’s go back to our first question: Star Wars versus Star Trek.
They both have spaceships. They both feature epic space battles. They both include alien species. They both incorporate some fantastical elements (for Star Wars, it’s the Force; for Star Trek, it’s Q and the Q Continuum). So since they are similar, don’t they belong in the same genre?
No.
Very much like the difference between Fantasy Romance and Romantic Fantasy, the dividing line between Science Fantasy and Space Opera is the driving core of the story itself.
Star Trek is focused on the curiosity of the human spirit. Exploration and experimentation. Learning about new cultures and the relationships between vastly different people groups. And while there are some elements of the obviously fantastic, most Star Trek content remains solidly in the scientifically probable category. The purpose of Star Trek stories is understanding the universe scientifically.
Star Wars, on the other hand, is generally focused on a philosophical understanding of the universe. With the exception of a few examples (i.e. Andor, Solo, The Bad Batch, etc.), you cannot separate Star Wars from it’s highly spiritualized concept of a Higher Power. The Force. It has shaped every characteristic of every Star Wars story in some way.
If you were writing a Star Wars story, and you focused the plot on whether or not the Wookies had the technology to stop a natural disaster—it wouldn’t really fit in the canon of Star Wars. Nobody is really interested in Wookie technology. They live in giant trees. But when there is a potential to feature a story with a Wookie Jedi? That’s fascinating. A Wookie with a lightsaber and the power to manipulate objects with the Fore?
If you were writing a Star Trek novel, and you focused your plot on the crew accidentally stumbling into a world controlled by magic, there are ways you could make it fit. But their solution to whatever problem they encounter would need to be based on science. You couldn’t give Mr. Spock magic powers. You couldn’t allow Lt. Commander Data to suddenly, magically have control of his synthetic emotions. There would have to be a scientific explanation. (And a bar-room brawl. Just saying.)
This is the difference between Science Fantasy (Star Wars) and Space Opera (Star Trek). They are similar, yes, but they speak to very different audiences.
So, if you want to dive into the nerdy world of space adventure stories, keep these distinguishing factors in mind.
Science Fantasy and Space Opera will both include elements of science and technology. Since both are considered subgenres of “soft” science fiction, they will be more stories about adventure and relationships. Most times, they’ll take place in space or on another planet, feature alien species, advanced technologies, and even time travel, although that’s another topic for another day. You might even encounter religious systems or belief systems in both subgenres.
The primary difference you’ll need to remember is that Space Opera generally focuses on how a solution to the problem can be achieved. In Science Fantasy, how you reach the solution will be less important than why it matters, both to the individual characters and the universe as a whole.
TWEETABLE
Don't Miss the Previous Posts in This Series
I've long been aware of science fantasy, so I don't debate about Star Wars / Star Trek genres. Science fantasy is my favorite genre, and space opera is actually one of the subgenres of science fantasy. The other one is planetary romance, e.g. "Dune," and "A Princess of Mars," the latter of which which tells you how old science fantasy actually is. A contemporary of Edgar Rice Burroughs is Abraham Merritt, who was big on science fantasy, see "The Moon Pool" for an example. The Witch World series by Andre Norton is science fantasy, the Morgaine Cycle by CJ Cherryh is science fantasy, etc. You'll notice Norton began writing in the 40s, and Cherryh began in the 70s, and there's also Anne McCaffrey's Dragon Riders of Pern series, where the dragons have a scientific explanation.
ReplyDeleteI gather in the 50s some people started getting the idea that you had to have "hard science" in your sci-fi, and the idea really took over. But I ultimately think it's dumb to concentrate on what modern engineers are capable of in order to inform one's plot. Or to focus too much on what we "know" right now. When I was but a slip of a girl we had nine planets in our solar system. Now we have eight. At the time Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote the John Carter stories, scientists thought there had been oceans on Mars that had since dried up. And that's why John Carter is walking around in the "dead sea bottoms" on Barsoom.
My science textbooks in middle school said scientists thought Venus was a jungle planet at one point. That's why Leigh Brackett portrayed Venus as a jungle world in "Enchantress of Venus." Incidentally, she wrote the first draft of "The Empire Strikes Back" and is responsible for that opening scene were Luke is on his tauntaun :)
I do agree that how the characters solve problems, and where the narrative focus is, is a great dividing line, though. In a Star Wars story the "tech" would probably be Jedi oriented, like "the Sith are going to get their hands on soul crystals, we can't let them get it." So Obi Wan would concentrate on Jedi techniques to combat the effects of the soul crystals. Whereas for Kirk it would be, "the Romulans have created a mind-control device and we must stop them," and would focus on how to short-circuit the machine.