Sci-fi makes for poor reading!

[William King]

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

 

 

[Former Member]

Interesting...One would think the genre would not take away from the quality of the story... Well, this proves that it actually can. 

[Graeme]

I think the genre tends to make the reader think differently. The genre shifts the focus from the human condition and towards science and technology. Since 'great literature' is generally about the human condition, the shift reduces the 'greatness' quality in the perception of some readers. 

 

Having said that, I know there are SF texts used in high schools here in Australia alongside more traditional literature, so the view is by no means universal. 

[BDANR]

Thank you for sparking this discussion. The article poses thought-provoking questions on readers' thoughts when reading sc-fi. And it makes sense! If the reader is focused on the world the author is creating, they're missing out the on the "internal" world of the characters involved (thoughts and motives etc.).

 

Two sc-fi author that comes to mind is Octavia Butler and N.K. Jemisin. While they're both intentional about creating these well-developed settings, the characters they create and how they interact with each other is arguably one of their greatest strengths and are prominent themes in their work. To ignore these would make you lose out on in so much that is packed in their stories. For other sci-fi authors, this could be somewhat discouraging.

Edited November 23, 2017 by BDANR

[Former Member]

11 hours ago, BDANR said:

Octavia Butler

I love her work! My best friend recommended one of her books to me. It’s so sad she’s no longer with us to create new stories.

 

 

One problem I have with the overall field is the wild imbalance of gender – many stories seem to have been written in a world devoid of women. Others seem to lack ethnic diversity – as if the Nazis managed to conquer all of space! And there is a definite tendency towards heterocentrism – look at how many decades passed before Star Trek had its first explicitly Gay couple in it, but Star Wars fans have to acknowledge that their franchise still hasn’t managed that feat yet!

 

I know there are science fiction and fantasy writers who are women, People of Color, LBGTQ, and various combinations too. Andre Norton was a favorite of mine when I was in my twenties, although I thought she was a man due to her intentionally masculine nom de plume. Ursula LeGuin was also a favorite in my twenties. I’ve mentioned Samuel R Delany elsewhere. There are others I can't recall off the top of my head.

 

Many of the first science fiction/fantasy books I read were pretty sexist. I now have problems with the Robert Heinlein books I read – he’s much too much of a Libertarian for me! My very religious parents were happy to supply me with CS Lewis books, but as an Agnostic I have issues with the blatant religious content in his work (although I was much less aware of that when I was reading the books). Nearly all of the books were nearly or completely filled with white characters which made it difficult for this Person of Color to identify with some of them.

[Former Member]

15 hours ago, William King said:

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.

It seems as though the participants were not all regular readers of genre fiction. As someone who has never read any of the books normally shelved in the Romance section, I would almost certainly be predisposed to make exactly those assumptions that the study participants did about science fiction stories! I’m not sure their methodology can accurately lead to the conclusions they came to.

[Carlos Hazday]

My junior year in high school two of the books on the English Honors class reading list were 1984 and Brave New World. We were required to read both and write about the differing views of a future society. Georgetown University required some reading over the summer preceding my freshman year, one of the books on the list was Childhood's End. Three science fiction books by three different authors hooked me. Authors like Robert Heinlein, Orson Scott Card, and our own @Myr have successfully promoted/advanced their views using the genre to provide social commentary while entertaining. Childhood's End exposed me to Clarke and afterward, I couldn't read enough of him. Finding at least one reference to same-sex relationships in his stories cemented my love for his work. I believe were he still alive today, his sexuality would have played a larger role in his writing. He saturated his later works with people-of-color and female characters.

 

I find reading his books always makes me think. His is hard science fiction and my non-scientific mind struggles at times to grasp the concepts, but I love the way he uses the settings and science to deal with our humanity. Most of my work in the CJ series attempts to emulate this, using politics as the background for character development. Now, if I could do so even a hundredth as well as he did...

 

 

[Cia]

That article title is such clickbait. There are soooo many assumptions and randomizations being made by the authors of those "studies" that it makes their whole process not scientific at all. A randomly sampling of people with little to no background history on their reading preferences, much less the rest of their basic make up (education, income level, religious status, region they were raised in, family history, etc...), reading generic texts written by these authors (not recognized texts in either genre), giving their opinions on how much effort they put into things... yet, 'This is a scientifically grounded claim'. All it did was expose biases and assumptions people make as to 1) What "qualifies" as literature and 2) what stupid criteria people tend to use to decide that.

 

And the fact that the authors of the study believe that taking a contemporary story and adding in some scifi "vocabulary" makes it science fiction is the hardest part to swallow and completely derails any valid feedback that might have been gathered. I mean, look at this line: "The download light on his mobile screen plinked". He's indicating a light makes a sound! He calls the trash on his device a 'cartoon trashcan' in one paragraph and the 'trashcan icon' in the next. Using that word creates a certain simplistic connotation rather than using a word such as illustration or graphic. A pet space squid crapping on a desk? It's like a caricature of a science fiction story than anything else, and I'd have to spend a lot more time trying to understand the illogical way he approaches showing things without garnering more understanding too. 

 

I think the poor quality of the fiction pieces and flawed assumptions and criteria of the study show far more about the authors' stupidity than anything scientific about literature and how to assess people's perceptions of it. 

[Carlos Hazday]

@Cia Don't hold back, you hear?

[JamesSavik]

It sounds to me as if someone is thinking in terms of black&white when a spectrum is really more appropriate.

 

Sure- when you pick up a comic book you aren't going to get Tolstoy. On the other hand, when you pick up Tolstoy, you aren't looking for the comic book experience.

 

It depends on what you are looking for. Batman or Anna Karenina?  Judge Dredd or Pierre Bezukhov?

 

We don't read things for the same reasons. God knows why anyone that's not held at gunpoint would read Tolstoy. It's a screaming, eye watering bore. Some people, obvious gluttons for punishment. actually do suffer through it. Maybe they are looking for a historical perspective on Czarist Russia. Although there is some brilliant Russian literature, I would rather be flogged than to try to read it.

 

Now we're back to the comic books and graphic novels but, if there is anything we've learned from that genre, there's more depth to it than we give it credit for. People have and do read comic books and graphic novels for a whole spectra of reasons. Like the alienation of the X-Men and redemption through community. Like the destruction of the nameless man and his recovery of self in V for Vendetta. Like the Punisher's quest for justice. No- it's not War and Peace but it is dealing with more complex themes and ideas that the genre gets credit for. If it did not deal with the human condition, it wouldn't keep drawing people back in.

 

Science Fiction has been defined by some as speculative fiction. It asks the child's question what if... What if we colonize other worlds? What if we develop radical new technologies? What if we meet alien civilizations that have very little in common with us? These are worthy areas of exploration. If we do colonize other worlds, will we repeat the mistakes of imperialism and colonialism? If we develop radical new technologies, how will they effect us? If we meet alien civilizations how will they see us? 

 

The same can be said for science fiction- while some of it is obvious fluff, some of it asks some pretty deep questions. While it is easy to dismiss a great deal of it, some of it can't be. The best of it has a rare capacity of being both worthy and readable. Herbert's Dune can stand next to anything in  terms of complexity, richness of plot and the questions it raises. Heinlein's Starship Troopers is another example of a book that is geared towards a young adult audience but addresses serious political and moral questions about civic responsibility. 

 

Yes- when it comes to science fiction some people will read, relax and enjoy- feet up, brain off.

 

If they are reading the right stuff, perhaps completely by accident, they will be exposed to ideas and questions that really do matter.

 

 

 

[Cia]

9 minutes ago, Carlos Hazday said:

@Cia Don't hold back, you hear?

 

No, I don't. When I write a science fiction story, I don't randomly throw out settings, technology, or terminology willy-nilly, and it frustrates me that people make these assumptions about writing in the genre. You can't just change certain terms and call something science fiction. That's exactly what the authors of this study did when they admitted taking a contemporary piece and just changing the setting by using science fiction terms/technology, which they didn't even do logically (lights don't make sounds!). They didn't expose readers to science fiction, they exposed readers to terms they thought quantifies science fiction. They, themselves, created a bias against the genre with readers by doing so. 

 

And that drives me absolutely crazy. 

[Brayon]

Yes, I used the angry react, and not because of the Author of this topic. But because of the article he linked, and the very bad assumptions that the panel made. Cia said it better than I can, so I won't add any more criticism of the piece.

 

Needless to say, as a Sci-Fi writer, I found the article offensive. Especially seeing the diverse types of stories I read both online and in dead-tree versions, and of the audience that reads my work both here on GA and in "Real Life."

[Myr]

I think between @Cia and @jamessavik this topic is well answered.  @Carlos Hazday also touched on it as well.  Didn't Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land help kick off the Hippy 60's?

(and isn't fascinating how VERY different Stranger in a Strange Land is from Starship Troopers?)  Yet both are Sci-Fi.

 

 

 

 

[Hermetically Sealed]

I think it worth pointing out that a single study means nothing. It merely shows that one group reached certain conclusions based on their research.  It takes many others repeating the experiment, as well as checking the process used to actually verify a study as anything other than a curious anomaly. Now show me dozens of independent, quality controlled studies which bear out the same conclusion and I might take it seriously.  But as Cia pointed out, this study alone is seriously flawed, and is not likely to be corroborated in peer review.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Hermetically Sealed

[Mikiesboy]

I'm not what you'd call a sci fi fan, i dont seek it out on purpose. Things with oddly weird names put me off, mostly because for me i cant pronounce them in my head, or remember them easily.

 

I am however a fan of a good story, no matter what planet it takes place on, or in what year. So in that sense, i can and have been a fan of some sci-fi. works. I have to agree with @Cia and @jamessavik.  

[mad_artist]

Imo good sci fi includes people dealing with real human issues... not only about super technologies or outer space worlds or other dimensions and aliens etc but how we as humans, relate and live with new tech and habitats.

[Jeff1]

In 1933 Nazi's burned books in the street if they 'Thought' they went against their beliefs. This is not an isolated incident in 213bc the Chinese also burnt books,   here is a good link.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_burning       Maybe the (cough, cough ) author wants to add 2017 to the list and burn all Sci-fi and non fiction books as well.............How far has mankind come???? somehow I think people like this 'writer' have not even reached chapter 2 of the Book of life. I would have thought that non fiction escapism such as sci-fi and other non fiction be better than the 'real world' of destruction, sadness mind numbing boredom and misery that we read and see EVERY day in the media be it paper, internet ,tv or involved in our daily lives. I thought in the civilised world that all country's liberty and freedom of speech  was what wars were fought for and laws created, but in doing so you give a numpty like this author the same freedom. Sad world........................ 

[Former Member]

Things are usually more subtle than book burning these days. Usually, in the cause of ‘protecting children’s innocent minds’ (they haven’t met the same kids I have!), they just restrict access or remove books from reading lists, one library or school at a time. If you do it quietly enough, no one notices what you’ve done and ‘controversial’ subjects like LGBTQ, non-christian religions, uncomfortable topics (like genocides committed by your country, civil wars that your side lost, leaders who have done things that are now illegal, etc), and other disruptive things just disappear!

 

Librarians and booksellers are typically very opposed to censorship. They maintain lists of banned books and the last week in September is devoted to highlighting the issue. This is a list of the most commonly challenged books in the US – note how often LGBTQ is the reason for the challenge (and be aware that LGBTQ is the unstated reason for others). I was required to read at least four of the books on the challenged list for English classes (that was more than four decades ago!).

[Myr]

I stopped counting at 20, the number of books on that list I read.  At least 5 of them were for school in English or History classes.

 

1 hour ago, droughtquake said:

Things are usually more subtle than book burning these days. Usually, in the cause of ‘protecting children’s innocent minds’ (they haven’t met the same kids I have!), they just restrict access or remove books from reading lists, one library or school at a time. If you do it quietly enough, no one notices what you’ve done and ‘controversial’ subjects like LGBTQ, non-christian religions, uncomfortable topics (like genocides committed by your country, civil wars that your side lost, leaders who have done things that are now illegal, etc), and other disruptive things just disappear!

Please do not devolve further into political content here.  If you want to shoot it out in the Pit, go ahead.  But this statement is not something that can be properly replied to without causing a back and forth that is best suited to The Pit.

 

 

[JamesSavik]

I have a theory about banned books list. I think if a book is put on it, that is probably good for another million readers.

 

If I ever heard that a book was "banned", I had to read it to see what all the noise was about.

[LJCC]

The limitations of this study is by far monumental. Statistical variances are attributed to sample size, the demographic scale of the readers, the mental scope of the readers, and the quality of the book per se that was used to conduct the research. 

 

I'd doubt it if you'd let anyone read George Orwell's 1984 or H.G. Well's The Time Machine, that if the reader doesn't have the emotional maturity nor the mental providence to decipher the tight-fisted themes of those books, then it's safe to say that the reader will only capitalize on the glits and glamour of the 'Sciency' aspect of the read, without delving deeper on the thought provoking elements of what the novel wished to inculcate to its readers.

[ReaderPaul]

On 11/24/2017 at 5:14 AM, droughtquake said:

I love her work! My best friend recommended one of her books to me. It’s so sad she’s no longer with us to create new stories.

 

 

One problem I have with the overall field is the wild imbalance of gender – many stories seem to have been written in a world devoid of women. Others seem to lack ethnic diversity – as if the Nazis managed to conquer all of space! And there is a definite tendency towards heterocentrism – look at how many decades passed before Star Trek had its first explicitly Gay couple in it, but Star Wars fans have to acknowledge that their franchise still hasn’t managed that feat yet!

 

I know there are science fiction and fantasy writers who are women, People of Color, LBGTQ, and various combinations too. Andre Norton was a favorite of mine when I was in my twenties, although I thought she was a man due to her intentionally masculine nom de plume. Ursula LeGuin was also a favorite in my twenties. I’ve mentioned Samuel R Delany elsewhere. There are others I can't recall off the top of my head.

 

Many of the first science fiction/fantasy books I read were pretty sexist. I now have problems with the Robert Heinlein books I read – he’s much too much of a Libertarian for me! My very religious parents were happy to supply me with CS Lewis books, but as an Agnostic I have issues with the blatant religious content in his work (although I was much less aware of that when I was reading the books). Nearly all of the books were nearly or completely filled with white characters which made it difficult for this Person of Color to identify with some of them.

I like the writers who use strong female characters, or writers where equality is made obvious.  The late Anne McCaffrey wrote many strong female characters.  Alan E. Nourse had some back in the 1960s.  Addym Kehris (not yet well known) is now writing some sophisticated science fiction where women are equal and so is the LGBT community.  Alice Mary Norton legally changed her name to Andre Alice Norton to write as Andre Norton, a name most would assume was male, so editors would read and publish her work.  Would like to say more, but out of time.

[W_L]

While the study is interesting, I think it misses out on something: how does it categorize Science Fiction.

 

There are several sub-genres of science fiction, while space setting science fiction is most famous, the other settings like alternate universe Earth, a future or even non-human styled stories are just as important.

 

Point taken on the lack of strong female characters (I fixed that in book 2 of my story), but on the flip side popular movie franchises like Star Wars has flipped the script to compensate. The focus now is strongly aligned to the female characters, but it sacrifices the story in the process like Star Wars The Last Jedi's Admiral Holder, Rey, Rose, or even Leia's superman inspired scene.

 

Science fiction at its heart should not be about just the science or the crazy adventure, but the human condition of its characters. Classic sci-fi from its masters like Heinlein (he did more than Starship troopers), Frank Herbert (Dune is still a relevant social commentary on middle east as it was in 1970's), and Philip K. Dick (Artificial intelligence and government surveillance are now a reality, but he foretold it as a sci-fi writer and to me is a master of my subgenre).

 

While I started out as a Sci-Fi writer, I am more specialized now in the realm of Speculative fiction, the same kind that other writers like Dan Brown specializes. We're still considered Sci-Fi writers, but it's 70% modern fiction- 30% science fiction.