The Caffeinated Penguin

Posted By matt on October 15, 2009

(Or: Waaaah! Girls have cooties!)

So, fearsclave posted this, which links to this post, which basically distills down to “science fiction is about men exploring and doing things, and without this inspiration, a whole generation of boys not be so inspired and science will suffer… and it’s all the fault of evil girls” (synopsis and emphasis mine).

Now, ignoring the blatant misogyny here, because John Scalzi suggests how to appropriately deal with these folks (point and laugh), and only paying passing service to the fact that girls invent things too, and can be inspired, and as long as people are inventing things, we’re better as a species. Still, all that has been discussed to death, so I’m not to bother.

Instead, I’m going to talk about how what they really want isn’t science fiction – they want chest-thumping adventure tales – in spaaaaaace.

Charles Stross recently wrote about it, and he’s right. Let’s face it – much of science fiction (especially on TV) has been some genre set in space. Repeat after me:

Just because it is set in space, does not make it a Science Fiction piece.

As Stross says, Science Fiction is about the science – paradigms that radically change how humanity relates to the world. Space travel, while an interesting vehicle to get people to strange places and new frontiers, really doesn’t change humanity. I’d argue the same is true for ray guns, aliens, transporters, etc.

Now, one thing which might be a real game changer is the emergence of replicators/nanoassemblers/cornucopia machines. Essentially, it removes one of the prime motivations of humanity – namely the acquisition of stuff in order to be able to survive and prosper. Just as it is interesting to wonder “what if this war went a little differently”, it is also interesting to wonder “what would humanity be like without need?” or “what would society be like if people never died?”

To quote Stross:

SF, at its best, is an exploration of the human condition under circumstances that we can conceive of existing, but which don’t currently exist

Which brings us back to the original article, where they state that men are not very interested in relationship drama in space. I would argue that, ultimately, that is the point of Science Fiction – exploring how people relate to each other, have conflicts, and otherwise do something with that technology. If all you do with that technology is go explore the galaxy, well, you might as well just be exploring the new world in the age of sail. It’s the same damned thing.

Which brings us to Firefly.

By Stross’s definition, Firefly is not Science Fiction. Sure, the SF and Western tropes are backdrops, providing a world for these people to make their way, and the story is about them, so it is about the human condition. However, these circumstances do already exist. You have some folks, on a ship, smuggling cargo amongst different places (worlds, countries, whatever). This exists. It is not new.

By the Spearhead article’s definition, it’s an example of the science fiction that “women are ruining”, because it is, primarily, a relationship drama.

However, despite being a relationship drama space western, is is absolutely my favorite show ever. Period.

In conclusion, what the Spearhead folks want is “action movies and buddy comedies in space”, and attempting to claim that not having such things will somehow negatively impact scientific progress just seems completely asinine.

Category: General
Tags: