In class last week we discussed the genre of science fiction, its limitations and overlaps with other categories. We also discussed what science fiction tells us about our perception of reality and world politics. Science fiction has always been one of my favorite areas of literature and cinema. I often find myself daydreaming about the concepts of teleportation and time travel, yep I am a nerd.
I have never given much thought to the definition of science fiction, having always ‘felt’ whether a certain book or movie does or does not fit the category. There are exceptions to most of the characterizations we invented. However, they guide us and point to commonalities amongst science fiction works. Our group considered that science fiction can be contrasted with fantasy because it is grounded in our reality, involves science rather than magic, and there is a presumption that things can be explained.
I think I find the difference between science and magic more subtle than most. They are both ways of perceiving the world, like looking at the world through different eyes. Hence, phenomena can be explained both scientifically and magically – that is why Einstein was a strong believer in God. In the film Avatar, the aliens perceived their natural world magically – the braids in their hair synched with the spirit of other living beings. Scientifically, they forged a neurological connection with those other creatures.
What I mean to say is that magical and scientific explanations are not mutually exclusive, they are just different discourses. Obviously, science is the main discourse of present society, but it was not always so – in medieval times most was explained through Christianity. Personally, I prefer the scientific perspective because of the social implications of a community guided by magic, but science has its limitations. There are still mysteries in the realms of meaning beyond science that “magic” assists in understanding. There is romanticism about magic. Magic often becomes science with greater understanding. A marriage between the two perspectives might be nice for the future – so we remain in awe of the universe despite our empirical understanding of it.
Anyway, I look forward to next class and our future discussions.
I found mginsberg's discussion of how magic and science are just two different ways of looking at the world to be very interesting. By thinking about how we defined science fiction from our discussion in class I was letting myself be constrained by this view.
ReplyDeleteBut after reading this post, I find myself thinking about how we would define a piece of literature or film if it had all the characteristics of science fiction but also included a belief in god. In the eyes of society, there is no scientific proof of god but it is a widely accepted belief for many people. In this view, would science fiction that also acknowledged the existence of god, or some higher being, still be considered science fiction? I think this makes a strict definition much more difficult because, as mginsberg said, magic was widely accepted as real during the Middle Ages. I like mginsberg's view of the links between the two perspectives and the importance of understanding the limitations of science.