William King Posted November 23, 2017 Report Share Posted November 23, 2017 It might feature such thought-stretching concepts as time travel and warp drives, but reading science fiction actually makes you read more “stupidly”, according to new research. In a paper published in the journal Scientific Study of Literature, Washington and Lee University professors Chris Gavaler and Dan Johnson set out to measure how identifying a text as science fiction makes readers automatically assume it is less worthwhile, in a literary sense, and thus devote less effort to reading it. This is an interesting article and you can read it in full here: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/nov/23/science-fiction-triggers-poorer-reading-study-finds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted November 23, 2017 Report Share Posted November 23, 2017 I totally disagree with this article. What is sic-fi today maybe reality tomorrow. More so I disagree on stupid reading. It is never stupid to read and more than that stupid to read what ever you enjoy. The article in its own way lessens the art of the author that wrights Sic-fi. I think an Sic-fi author most use their imagination more than the standard author. In this they find it more difficult to wright such tails. William King 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Norris Posted November 24, 2017 Report Share Posted November 24, 2017 I'm glad that you linked the entire article. Many won't bother to read it, or if they do, they will stop reading, after a few paragraphs, when it appears that the article says what was implied, above. Fact is, many won't even notice that the first two paragraphs of Mr. Kings post, were direct quotes from the first two paragraphs of the Guardian article! But what we find, when reading the article in full, is that the professors study had more to do with literary bias, than literary stupidity. Quote “So when readers who are biased against SF read the word ‘airlock’, their negative assumptions kick in – ‘Oh, it’s that kind of story’ – and they begin reading poorly. So, no, SF doesn’t really make you stupid. It’s more that if you’re stupid enough to be biased against SF you will read SF stupidly.” Which is a finding that altogether throws out the opening assumptions. William King 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William King Posted November 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 24, 2017 43 minutes ago, Al Norris said: Fact is, many won't even notice that the first two paragraphs of Mr. Kings post, were direct quotes from the first two paragraphs of the Guardian article! Yes, I throw my hands up - even the title is more or less the same as the Guardian headline. I'm currently writing a Sci-Fi story myself and have read loads of Sci-Fi, from that, read I have nothing against the genre. No, this was to provoke discussion about what was a good experiment which I thought well conducted and draws some interesting conclusions. Perhaps don't mention airlock or warp drives in the opening chapter, leave it until you've hooked your reader (lol!). Or more seriously, be sure not to neglect the characterisation that gets readers rooting for the hero whatever the genre. A sympathetic main characer that readers can identify with and are concerned about, will win the day on Alpha Centuri as easily as they would on good old planet Earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted November 25, 2017 Report Share Posted November 25, 2017 As an amateur student of quantum mechanics, am I being obscurantist to ask exactly what is science FICTION today? William King 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Norris Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 If we take a decent definition, say, from Merriam Websters, we get: Quote fiction dealing principally with the impact of actual or imagined science on society or individuals or having a scientific factor as an essential orienting component Sci-Fi doesn't always have to include space travel; alien cultures; time travel, etc. Much Sci-Fi deals with fundamental changes in society as a result of certain technological advances. William King 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William King Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Kind of off topic a bit, but interesting article: Today's Sci-Fi Oddly Adheres to Strict Gender Norms "...even our best creative minds are simply unable to imagine, under any circumstances, on any world, in any galaxy, in any alien form, a character who is nonbinary and/or profoundly gender-nonconforming..." https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2017/5/26/todays-sci-fi-oddly-adheres-strict-gender-norms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashdaw Posted July 13, 2018 Report Share Posted July 13, 2018 I am sure that Asimov would disagree. ? ken barber and William King 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William King Posted July 14, 2018 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2018 22 hours ago, Ashdaw said: I am sure that Asimov would disagree. ? Asimov, Arthur C Clarke, and everyone else... with good reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.