tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post462898694090586903..comments2024-03-03T13:55:46.243-08:00Comments on Ambling Along the Aqueduct: Science Fiction Aesthetics and SensibilityTimmi Duchamphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-49437853192547016662012-12-11T06:06:02.999-08:002012-12-11T06:06:02.999-08:00Thank you!
I recall the comments of Delany that y...Thank you!<br /><br />I recall the comments of Delany that you're referring to--and they've been very helpful to me as well. Something I wasn't able to address in my post (but hopefully will at some point) is the notion that--related to the importance of the object--where non-sf can, if it chooses, take the context in which it occurs for granted, assume it as natural, sf can't do this. Or at least can't to a certain extent--obviously vast swathes of sf writers have been guilty of taking a lot of aspects of social context (gender roles leap to mind!) for granted...<br /><br />In a way it relates too to Russ's observation (I think it's in "Toward an Aesthetic"?) that sf is the only literature to take work as its primary subject.Ethan Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11207042480666924085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-86779082461875958452012-12-10T14:05:36.764-08:002012-12-10T14:05:36.764-08:00Thanks to both Chris & Ethan for your links.
...Thanks to both Chris & Ethan for your links. <br /><br><br />Ethan, I particularly like the way you explore how "infodumping" can (and, at its best, does) work. In several places (which I lack the time to hunt for just now) Delany insists that the major difference between sf & literary fiction is the former's emphasis on objects & the "objective world" and the latter's on subjects & subjectivity. That has been a crucial insight for me & one that bears heavily, I think, on this discussion (& also complements the direction you chose to explore in your post).Timmi Duchamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-7472909479452131732012-12-10T06:39:55.235-08:002012-12-10T06:39:55.235-08:00Thanks so much for this! I've been pondering t...Thanks so much for this! I've been pondering these issues on my own for a while now and have been having a hard time finding my way in to think and write effectively about them--your comments and Jonathan McCalmont's have opened things up for me tremendously. If blatant self-promotion can be forgiven, I've written the first of what I hope will be many essays in response to points raised here and there. <a href="http://maroonedoffvesta.blogspot.com/2012/12/coincidentally-about-5175-words.html" rel="nofollow">This one's</a> on the implications of various expositional techniques in sf.Ethan Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11207042480666924085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-27374065898373311482012-12-04T13:42:28.569-08:002012-12-04T13:42:28.569-08:00Great points about the discussion and evolution of...Great points about the discussion and evolution of the aesthetics and sensibility of SF!<br /><br />"About 5,750 Words" is one of my favorite critical essays, and in his later "Science Fiction and 'Literature' - or the Conscience of the King" Delany eloquently makes the point that those aesthetics aren't static.<br /><br />Personally, I think much of the "grumpiness" in contemporary genre criticism stems from a shift in the cultural vocabulary that underlies genre aesthetics: the development of a "new normal" which non-cognoscenti can interpret and enjoy (FWIW, I've written about this in greater detail <a href="http://elflands2ndcousin.com/2012/08/15/science-fiction-and-literature-or-thoughts-on-delany-and-the-plurality-of-interprative-processes/" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://elflands2ndcousin.com/2012/11/06/what-is-science-fiction-for/" rel="nofollow">here</a>).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com