…from George RR Martin:
Mariner’s findings thrilled scientists around the world and gave us a detailed and accurate picture of the nature of the inner planets, but for the readers and writers of science fiction, the excitement was mingled with disillusionment and dismay. This was not the Mars we wanted. This was not the Venus of our dreams.
I never wrote that Mars story. Nor any stories on Venus, or Mercury, or any of the worlds of the “lost” solar system of my youth, the worlds that had provided the setting for so many wonderful tales during the 30s, 40s and 50s. In that I was not alone. After Mariner, our genre moved to the stars in a big way, searching for the colourful exotic settings and alien races that could no longer be found here “at home”.
I think that there’s still too much romanticism about the planet.
Oh boo hoo, knowing more about Mars and other objects in our solar system, or including some of that knowledge in writing, doesn’t mean an end to the imagination.
The fiction in science fiction implies things that are not real but that doesn’t make it fantasy. There is some overlap but the two are different genres.
“The real Mars was simply not as interesting as its pulp predecessor.”
I argue that shows a lack of creativity. Setting plays a big role in writing but characters make your stories pop. Are there really no interesting characters on the real Mars?
Fear not young GRR Martin, knowing Mars will not destroy the imagination or writing about Mars.
Far flung, interstellar empires were a staple of Western science fiction long before Sputnik, let alone Mariner. Arguably the era of interplanetary romance Martin describes occurred earlier, at or before the turn of the last century, and is all but gone in the West except from bargain basement pulp, comics, B-movies and cartoons by World War II. If there was life out there, it was either long gone or too dumb/alien to build and operate radios.
If George RR Martin were writing things, Mark Watney would’ve been slowly disemboweled, beheaded, and burned just because the audience was rooting for him.
Ok the fact that Mars doesn’t have tall green fighting men or bosomy princesses is kind of a buzz kill. Not having a Venus with swamps and dinosaurs is too. The solar system of our childhood dreams was a lot of fun, no doubt about that.
On the other hand, we are actually exploring these places now. They are real worlds we are seeing as they sre, not as we wish them to be. A good writer could use the knowledge we are gaining to create a believable background in which to put interesting characters. Add a good plot, and you have the makings of a nice bit of fiction.
There is some overlap but the two are different genres.
No, science fiction is a sub-genre of fantasy.
Insofar as there are genre flow charts encompassing either, I don’t recall many (or any, for that matter) describing science fiction as a sub-genre of fantasy. I’ve seen both grouped together under the heading “speculative fiction,” however.
Hard SF is not fantasy. It extrapolates from one feature of the real world and holds to all others. Fantasy has no such constraint.
While not golden age science fiction, Dan Simmons’ “Ilium” is a terrific tale set on Mars that uses a more current knowledge of that planet
“our genre moved to the stars in a big way”
Which is why I’ve had to switch to the Mystery/Thriller/Suspense genre to get my fill of cislunar space stories (having read through pretty much every single Moon story out there, hundreds of them). Hardly any come out through the sci-fi genre, so I have to make do with paramilitary fights over space assets and power sat death beams. A few medical thrillers as well, some hijackings, the usual stuff. And some good ol’ fashioned Men’s Adventure Tales.
I’m actually working on an article on cislunar suspense stories, drawing on the copious volumes added to my Lunar Library. Tracking them all down, and then actually reading them, is taking a while. There’re just so many of them!
Near-Earth, near-future; that’s where the action is, baby!
One here for your lunar library?
http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/260248
Rand, thanks for the link to that fascinating article.
Stephen Ashworth
Cool! How do I get a hardcopy? Not that I don’t trust electrons, but no, I don’t trust electrons. Everything in the Lunar Library is a physical copy, a rule I set early on. Thanks for the pointer, though!
Does nobody have any Romance in their soul here? Is there no sense of loss that we don’t have life and intelligence right here in our metaphorical backyard?
Now, I love that we are finding more and more about the real Mars, not to mention the immense surprises on (and in) the satellites of the outer solar system, not to mention more recently Pluto…we’ve barely scratched the surfaces (generally, not even that in a literal sense) of what’s out there.
Still I see nothing wrong with occasionally sighing over “might-have-beens” as well.
Oh well.
If there were intelligence in our own back yard, it would be the worst news humanity had ever received. It would mean intelligence is extremely common in the universe. Because the universe has not been totally colonized and urbanized, it would also mean the “Great Filter” that prevents such colonization would be in our future. We’d be doomed.
Thank your lucky stars that the rest of the universe is, so far, devoid of any signs of intelligent life.
If there was other intelligent, technological life in the solar system, we wouldn’t be here, because they’d have taken it over millions of years ago.
The same, of course, applies on a galactic level, only over much larger timescales. Which is why much modern SF seems to resort to some kind of ‘creator’ seeding the galaxy with intelligence all at around the same time, to justify vast numbers of aliens with similar technology.
Rand, it’s beneath you to dismiss mars as romanticism. I for one, have nothing in common with those that are disappoint that mars lacks their romantic notions. What mars has is the full periodic table, the same land area, similar rotation and half the solar power of earth. It doesn’t have oil, but does have easily extracted methane (everywhere) without wildcat risks.
Look at industry on earth. Most of it is directly mars capable. It’s chemistry. It’s energy. If you have the chemicals and energy you have an advanced industrial society which is kept from uus on earth because of idiot Luddites. We simply leave the Luddites on earth.
Nuclear power was suppose to be to cheap to meter and would have been except for something that has absolutely nothing to do with the technology… lawyers.
Leave the lawyers on earth.
Rand, it’s beneath you to dismiss mars as romanticism.
Apparently, you’re mistaken.
I’ve known you for over twenty years, so I refuse to accept that. The martian refers to the proper mindset… ‘science the s**t out of it.’ Martians will think different the same way MIT students committing pranks will. It’s not romance.
We think like lemmings. Mars is a ‘forcing function’ that will change that.
Why Mars? Why not more energetically favorable sinkholes of chemistry?
I answer, why mars, in my booklet… because we can do it as an afterthought of the current budget you are all forced to pay now. Plus, I show in a revised argument (thanks John Hare and Steve the wound guy) that not just 6 via 3.5% of NASA’s budget, but hundreds and even thousands can be sent by normal market forces (rather than fiat thinkin’ by lord Anthony!!!)
ro-man-tic (n) of, characterized by, or suggestive of an idealized view of reality.
“Rand, it’s beneath you to dismiss mars as romanticism. I for one, have nothing in common with those that are disappoint that mars lacks their romantic notions. ”
Ken, your idea for colonization is one of the most Romantic ideas about Mars that there is. That doesn’t mean you’re wrong.
“Leave the lawyers on earth.”
Good luck with that. Every sailor is an amateur lawyer.
A man who understands the law can be a very good thing. A man who makes his living by practice of law possibly the opposite.
‘idealized’ suggests restrictive Ed. My view is extremely expansive which means any comment falls short. I’d have to write a book.
Do it. I’d contribute to a kickstarter.
It’s doable. Could I sell 500 books at $9.95 (250 pgs)? I do not know, but it’s about the only way I could make my thoughts clear where sporadic comments just seem to leave a wrong impression.
Thank you for the backside boot Ed, this is part of the intro to the booket I’m working on (with dedication to Rand)…
A HUMAN MARS COLONY: the pragmatic reality.
(copyright 2015)
For everything there is a time and season. In the 1960s, it was time to go to the moon and we went.
Google says… “Back in 1973, the total cost of the Apollo program reported to Congress was $25.4 billion.” Annual inflation from 1973 to 2015 was 4.15%. (See http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm) That’s $140 billion in 2015 dollars.
Today we argue about the next step… whether back to the moon? to mars? just out there? But there is no point to the argument. We now spend more than $18 billion annually on NASA. That’s more than $180 billion per decade vs. $140 billion for Apollo. Less than 3.5% of that $180 billion (just $625 million per year, spent wisely) would give us mars. Others may argue for the moon or space colonies (and power to them) however, this booklet will argue for a mars colony.
Wise spending would allow us to colonize mars for about $6.25 billion per decade, starting now, with the very next low energy (lowest cost) mars launch window. Less than 3.5% of NASA’s current budget would give us mars. That’s affordable. NASA however, does not spend wisely. Google reports that the next mars rover alone will cost $2.5 billion… that’s just one rover! Astronauts on the ground can accomplish more in a week than a rover can in two years and NASA knows this. Why is this acceptable? It’s not. Let that sink in!
Just informed my hemoglobin is 6.3 and falling (Iron pills and shots not working, normal is 14+, they want to transfuse below 8 which I refuse.). In combination with CHF this is bad. I hope I live long enough to publish this booklet! The doctors seem to think my interest is a bit weird.
Why do you refuse?
I refuse blood because it is sacred. It is one of the few obligations carried over to christians from jewish law.
The shot they gave me normally takes about a week to kick in stimulating the bone marrow. Sunday they will decide if I need another shot. It’s supposed to hurt (they tell you that after getting it… nice!) Let the good times roll…
32 page booklet is done. Just need to get it printed.
Anybody here wanting a copy, just ask…
kenneth_john @ yahoo.com
subject: mars booklet.
I can’t afford a 32 page pamphlet. A 200 pg book I can afford. That’s weird. So the book will be a few months to include more research (which doesn’t change the 32 pg premise.)