• FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Nope.

    Science fiction is an exploration of how science or technology changes society, or how society might respond to stuff, or how a society with a given tech might exist; it’s a form of speculative fiction.

    Avatar isn’t that. It’s supposed to be an indictment of capitalist greed.

    Just because it has technology doesn’t make it “sci-fi” and the elements that might are just a maghuffin to explain what they’re doing there. It could have just as easily been gold. Or diamonds or alien art.

    Take Marry Shelly’s Frankenstein and compare it to say, avengers.

    • Bronzebeard@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Sorry, no. Genre doesn’t require a specific theme. This is some literature vs pulp gatekeeping.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        So… if it has robots and space and cloning, its science fiction and if it doesn’t it’s not?

        so by that definition Marry Shelly’s Frankenstein is not proto-SciFi?

        Or Jules Verne’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea? The Steam House? Around the World in 80 Days?

        Or HG Wells The Island of Dr. Moreau, The Sleeper Awakes, and The Invisible Man are not?

        Or maybe Snow Crash? …Children of Men?

        I find it hilarious that you’re criticizing me for gatekeeping. Science Fiction as a genre is much broader than just space, or robots, or cloning. or any of the cool, glittery-glowy-things.

        Sure, any single work can span a few genres. Even things you might not necessarily think go together like Comedic SciFi as in Red Dwarf, Farscape or Dr. Who. Sure, books and movies don’t have to be overt about it, and most the really good ones aren’t. The core of Science Fiction is (or any form of speculative fiction, really,) is asking “the question”. It’s asking “what if…” For example, The World Well Lost; the scifi elements are secondary to the emotional and social aspects.

        If you enjoy Avatar, that’s great. I’m glad you did. I found it annoying, cliche and trite with terrible plot development and horrible characterization. The science or technological elements in Avatar could easily be removed for more…historic… settings, devices or straight up objects. the Unobtanium could easily be replaced with Lunar regolith or some sort of fancy Martian Marble™️ being sold for countertops. Or Inca gold. Or Peruvian emeralds. or anything to which an obscene value could be placed.

        It serves no purpose at all to the plot. none of the technology or science or technology influences the characters, the plot or anything else. The entire movie is an orgy of CGI and an anti-capitalist screed. (nothing wrong with being anti-capitalist, mind.)

        Ultimately, genres are delineated not because they’re necessary for the art they’re describing, but because people want to know what they’re getting into before they sit down and watch it. When you tell me something is scifi, and it turns out to be horror with aliens or… a marvel superhero movie… I’m not going to be very happy with you.

        • Bronzebeard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          So… if it has robots and space and cloning, its science fiction and if it doesn’t it’s not?

          At no point did I say this. Even remotely.

          You can’t just inverse something I said and assume it’s still equivalent. You’d think someone this passionate about reading would have a higher level of comprehension…

          There was no point in me reading past this pathetic strawman. Hope you enjoyed writing that pointless essay.