| Re: Discussing Mccaffrey - Was Re: Pratchett on Rowling, again, sort of |
|
| The Magic Engineer (pem &( @ comcastic!) |
2006/12/24 10:40 |
"mcv" <mcvmcv@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:458e86b3$0$328$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
> In alt.fan.pratchett Deevo <mckenzie@nospammidwest.com.au> wrote:
>> "Richard Heathfield" <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:MbqdnR3534x4gBDYnZ2dnUVZ8tW3nZ2d@bt.com...
>>> Deevo said:
>>>> "peachy ashie passion" <exquisitepeach@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PoZih.4101$Rc5.2720@trnddc01...
>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sorry.. Flying dragons isn't fantasy in your eyes?
>>>>
>>>> Not when put into the context of the Pern stories, no. Or haven't you
>>>> read Dragonsdawn?
>>>
>>> That's an unreasonable requirement, especially since Dragonsdawn was
>>> not
>>> available to those who were reading Pern stories *before* Dragonsdawn
>>> was
>>> written.
>>> So - were the early Pern stories fantasy *until* Dragonsdawn was
>>> written?
>>> Did they suddenly change from fantasy to SF when Dragonsdawn was -
>>> what?
>>> Conceived? Written? Published? Bought? Read?
Now doesn't that seem a little silly? Writing a story in one style to
say, "Oh wait, I really wanted to write it >this< way, so I'll change the
backstory by writing a 'prequel' to put it in a different genre"? Seems
a little convienent, and if that's the case, then Ms. McCaffrey should
be given heaps of kudos for being able to write away at least 3 books
that were 'once' fantasy and turn them into science fiction, don't you
think?
Or wouldn't it make more sense to say that they were always SF,
with small fantasy elements, and for those people who were curious
how a >colonized< planet could look so backward, here's how?
I think what happened was she >always< wrote SF, but was being
perceived as a fantasy author, and she didn't want her stories to
be looked upon like that. So she wrote Dragonsdawn to explain why
her world was the way it was, and why it was SF, not fantasy.
>> Nope, and here's my view on why, all IMO of course but that should be
>> taken
>> as a given with any post.
>>
>> First up a couple of quotes from the introduction of Dragonflight, the
>> first
>> book.
>>
[Dragonflight reference snipped]
> It's got dragons and it's got magic (telepathy, teleportation). If that's
> not fantasy, then what it? Maybe it's fantasy in an SF dressing (like
> Star Wars), or maybe it's the other way around. Fantasy does not mean
> it has to be a bad Tolkien clone. Fantasy can be anything.
> Star Wars is clearly fantasy, despite the spaceships. So how does Pern
> treat its dragons and telepathy? I haven't read it, but at first sight,
> it sounds a lot like a fantasy/SF crossover. It could be either. It
> depends on the stories; do they do big deeds, fight big battles etc to
> overcome a big evil? Do they explore and expand the realm of human
> technology? Those are, IMO anyway, the main themes of fantasy and SF
> (although there are a lot of fantasy and SF stories that don't fit in
> those categories).
>
> Lord of the Rings and Star Wars are stereotypical fantasy epics. Clarke
> and Asimov tend to explore possibilities, or explore the effect of new
> technology on society. Pratchett does a bit of both, and while the
> Discworld is highly magical, he does explore what effect the magic of
> a world like that has on society and on people, and it's generally not
> epic in the sense that a big, powerful evil has to be defeated. But on
> the other hand, it is very much about magic, about mythical stuff like
> the power of belief. It's a bit of both, but with a twist.
>> That's a good point and is actually the point I was getting at in a way.
>> Because a book has dragons and begins in a medievel like setting doesn't
>> automatically make it 'fantasy'.
>
> But the fact that the dragons were created with technology doesn't
> automatically make it science fiction either. It sounds like a crossover
> to me, but I haven't read the books.
I have read almost all of the Pern books, and the two things that you
cite are about the only things fantastic in the Pern series. Everything
else is technology-based, or trying to reclaim from the loss after
the first days of colonization. I strongly feel that the intent of Pern was
always a colony, always technologically stunted because of the
events that happened. Even if you read the introduction to
'Dragonflight', you'd see that it sounds a lot more science fiction than
fantasy. I'd say it was a crossover if there were almost equal amounts
of SF and fantasy. Pern is about 98% science fiction. Early Pern
stories were always SF. Current Pern stories are all SF.
Since you haven't read Pern, I'll explain the telepathy and teleportation.
Teleportation was explained to be a natural defense mechanism for
the original creatures that the current Pernese dragons were
engineered from. It was a way for the small fire-lizards to escape
danger. The colonists saw that and made sure that it was bred into
the larger versions of the dragons. Telepathy between the dragons
and their riders is achieved only because the riders themselves have
a telepathic trait, and the dragons developed it through the process
of being engineered to have larger brain capacities. Not everyone on
Pern is telepathic, and the dragons also don't talk to everyone. In
fact, the dragonriders are in the minority population when it comes to
telepathic abilities. As far as the fire lizards are concerned, they
are not telepathic. In fact, other attempts at genetically engineering
the dragons gave rise to several other 'cousins' (all in 'Dragonflight',
the first book) that were defective, but proved useful in other areas
of their pre-modern-tech civilization.
Ms. McCaffrey has always tried to embed as much current and
potential technology into her books as possible, even going so far
as to enlist help from scientists and researchers to make sure she
gets her facts straight. The tiny bit of fantasy that's in Pern is her
vehicle to bridge gaps that, I feel, can't be overcome with technology
alone. And it >is< tiny. So comparing Pern to HP or even Discworld
is really comparing apples to oranges, IMO.
I would think that to qualify as 'fantasy', you'd have to have at least 80%
fantasy content based on stuff like Tolkien. The same for SF, but
based on current or upcoming tech, or other early authors in the field.
Any 50/50 blend puts you into a crossover category. Star Wars is
more like a 30/70 blend of fantasy/SF. HP and Discworld are 100%
fantasy.
My 0.02 (US)
The Magic Engineer
|
|
|