What happens with Science Fiction?

Hi,

I agree!!!

Science Fiction should be "Science and Fiction".
However, in modern literary terminology, was used to be Science
Fiction is today called "Hard Science Fiction". Moreover, some even
called it "Ultra-Hard Science Fiction", because part of the Hard
Science Fiction is also about Bug eyed alliens.
The techno-triller in the Tom Clancy's style also have certain
degree of what used to be "Science fiction".
So for the fans that still love read SF, it is better to look for
ultra hard authors and techno thriller. Most of the standard SF of
today is just plain fantasy.

Omar Vega

>
> Excuse me for being old fashioned in my views but I have always
seen
> Science Fiction as today's dreams that will become tomarrow's fact.
>
> If I ever get my space island novel going It will be published as
> Science Fiction.
>
> Jules Verne's works may have titilated his audiences but if you
look
> at his works you see a lot has become reality. Look at his
Nautiless.
> Many submariiners were encouraged by his captain nemo. True
people
> do not move into space by cannon but that technology has actually
> been perfected by a Canadian. Rockets surpassed it and proved more
> viable.
>
> Aldous Huxley's Brave New World though not total rality is in fact
> coming into being I am sorry to say.
>
> H. G. Wells wrote some good stuff. Time machine in peticular was a
> novel of his I enjoyed reading. Of course I disagree with his
social
> concepts which may have been interesting to dream about in his day
> but are in the process of being disproven in ours.
>
> Excuse me for desiring it but I want to read Science Fiction that
> will point my heart to the future. Show me the way forward. It is
> time for people to see what their future lives can be or for their
> kids. Time to show them the habitats of L5 so they may want to go
> there.
>
> I am sick of Bug Eyed space aliens. I am tired of Star Trek stuff
> written by writers who just make things up that will never be. A
> good science fiction story like the stuff coming out in the
fifties
> and sixties would be nice. They envisioned Rockets to the moon. We
> have achieved it. Now it is time for a new group to come forward
with
> science fiction that points us to the next level.
>
> Michael
>
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Richard Brooks
> wrote:
> >
> > This issue has anything to do with space colonization, however I
> > believe many in here got an oppinion about it.
> >
> > What do you think about SF Science Fiction. I mean, do you
have
> the
> > feeling Science Ficcion is not what it used to be?
> >
> > I believe in the past SF in the past was really a fiction
based
> in
> > scientifical facts. Today almost all science fiction is just
> > childish fantasies.
> >
> > In the past one could "see the future" reading Science
Fiction.
> > Today, however, we just see the crap of bad writers and
> biological
> > artificial realities, radioactive societies, drugs, guns and
> torture.
> >
> > What happened? Why a bunch of people does not have a clue of
> science
> > hijacked our favorite fantasy readings? How we allowed to happen?
> >
> > I would like to hear your oppinions, even if is not related
with
> the
> > main line of this list.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Omar Vega
> >
> > I'm afraid the problem goes back quite aways. The pulp
magazines
> had many publications for every type of fiction in the 30s and 40s.
> >
> > But by the 50s, most pulps were gone. By the 70s, only sf and
> mystery magazines were left, mostly sf.
> >
> > So short story writers that wanted to be published wrote
mainly
> for the sf mags. Hardly surprising that many of them did not give
a
> hoot for science.
> >
> > And there was the New Wave trend in sf where writers
concentrated
> on "inner space" rather than outer space.
> >
> > Instead of favorite reading being hijacked, we were just
crowded
> out. More and more short story readers came over to sf mags, but
> wanted sf without the science.
> >
> > It is sad, but it looks like the death of most genre mags
diluted