5 ms·

I think they never talk about it. Star wars is space opera, basically a fairy tale in space, with the ancient story patterns, and not science fiction.

by kaybe 11y ago

pavel_lishin 11y ago
Sure, but it's fun to speculate and try to pin down consistent rules! (I'm a happy reader of r/asksciencefiction, if you can't tell.)
aaronem 11y ago
Put more accurately, it's even softer sci-fi than Trek. The deuterocanonical "Expanded Universe" material[1] goes to a lot of effort to explain and justify stuff like moon-sized space stations and jet-fighter-sized ships that can destroy stars, but if you don't just sort of turn your critical faculties off and go along for the ride, it gets too much to bear pretty quick. [1] Now more properly called the "apocryphal pre-Disney Expanded Universe material", or so I gather.
- dcole2929 11y ago
  For the record that's not what it's called. The official terms are legends. It's been re-branded as Star Wars Legends. Honestly the EU was a bit of a mess but by far the best parts of Star Wars were in there. Unfortunately books make less money than movies and no one was interested in doing direct translations of already told stories no matter how much they made sense.
  - TillE 11y ago
    The key problem with most of the best EU stuff is that, by the mid/late 90s, the original actors were far too old for it. Although, I'd love to see a (live action) TV series based very loosely on the early Han Solo stories, obviously with someone else cast in the part of a 20-something Han.
philh 11y ago
(Sorry, pet peeve.) It's space opera, which is a subgenre of science fiction. Some people invent definitions of "science fiction" that exclude some works of science fiction, but that's silly. There's no definition of "science fiction". It's a concept that we feel out by pointing to things that are "clearly science fiction" and then sort of deriving a fuzzy decision boundary from that. If you ask people whether Star Wars is science fiction, most people will say yes. Robots! Lasers! Space ships! Aliens! It's clearly science fiction. There are useful definitions, which talk about subsets of science fiction that don't include Star Wars. But those aren't definitions of science fiction, even if they use the same words.
- danharaj 11y ago
  "Science fiction" is also an artificial ghetto that historically was used to segregate "science fiction" from "literary fiction". It's funny to see the same process being repeated.
  - pavel_lishin 11y ago
    Larry Niven examined the "ghetto" argument, and concluded that it's more of a country club.
    - GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
      I don't have a lot of trust in Larry Niven's arguments.
      - pavel_lishin 11y ago
        I suspect I might know at least a partial answer, but how come?
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > It's space opera, which is a subgenre of science fiction. That's an interesting view, but one which is nullified by: > There's no definition of "science fiction". Then the phrase has no meaning or use, and the statements "Star Wars is science fiction" or "space opera is a subgenre of science fiction" are semantically null, neither true nor false, just sequences of words that form grammatically valid sentences that communicate no meaning. If "space opera is a subgenre of science fiction" is to be true, then "space opera" and "science fiction" both need to have definitions, and the definition of the latter must include at least everything included in the definition of the former. If either or both has no definition, then the statement has no meaning, and cannot be said to be true or false. For
sandworm101 11y ago
Star Trek = Science fiction. Star Wars = Fantasy. Science fiction answers the question "What if science?". It explores how the human condition may react to the new circumstances presented by advanced science. That's why it is almost universally set in the future, even where quazi-magical (Dune). But Star Wars separates itself from frame one. What is the first thing lucas says in star wars? "A long time ago..." so this isn't anything that might happen in the future. And "in a galaxy far far away" ... it isn't anything to do with us. Lucas couldn't be more blatant. Star Wars is not science fiction. It's basically LOTR+lasers.
- talmand 11y ago
  Science fiction doesn't have to revolve around the human condition. It can be set in any location, at any point in time, with any species. The only criteria is that science has to be involved as part of the plot in some way. I think Star Wars qualifies as science fiction or any of its sub-genres. Fantasy is the same, except that instead of science you have some form of magic as part of the plot. Then you can mix to create a hybrid of sorts. Of which, because of the Force one could make an argument that Star Wars is a hybrid. Except that it is part of canon that there is scientific reasoning for it all.
- lordnacho 11y ago
  That's just how I'd word it. Trek is about how science affects society. Quite often there's some dilemma thrown up by by technology, and the characters have to deal with it. The characters are ordinary people who happen to have some training and some intelligence, working in groups. Star Wars is an opera. You have heroes, with heroic skills, fighting epic battles of historical significance. It's very much about individuals, and not terribly much about groups. Technology is purely incidental in Star Wars. We have light sabres, so let's have a duel where we can investigate some emotions. If Lucas hadn't thought of light sabres, but just given them samurai swords, not much would change in your assessment of the world. You'd think the same of the characters, and it would be just as entertaining. If Trek didn't have FTL travel, it would be a very different show.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Science fiction answers the question "What if science?". I prefer this definition, too, but by it, quite a lot of Trek stories (even just the canon, on-screen stuff) are space fantasy of the same type as Star Wars; there's lots of SF-by-that-definition in Trek, too, which Star Wars pretty much completely avoids, but its not a black-or-white, all-or-nothing distinction with ST purely on the SF side of the fence.
bduerst 11y ago
Why does it need to be mutually exclusive? Why not both? Science fantasy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fantasy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fantasy

I think they never talk about it. Star wars is space opera, basically a fairy tale in space, with the ancient story patterns, and not science fiction.

by kaybe 11y ago

I think they never talk about it. Star wars is space opera, basically a fairy tale in space, with the ancient story patterns, and not science fiction.

pavel_lishin 11y ago

Sure, but it's fun to speculate and try to pin down consistent rules! (I'm a happy reader of r/asksciencefiction, if you can't tell.)

aaronem 11y ago

Put more accurately, it's even softer sci-fi than Trek. The deuterocanonical "Expanded Universe" material[1] goes to a lot of effort to explain and justify stuff like moon-sized space stations and jet-fighter-sized ships that can destroy stars, but if you don't just sort of turn your critical faculties off and go along for the ride, it gets too much to bear pretty quick. [1] Now more properly called the "apocryphal pre-Disney Expanded Universe material", or so I gather.

dcole2929 11y ago
For the record that's not what it's called. The official terms are legends. It's been re-branded as Star Wars Legends. Honestly the EU was a bit of a mess but by far the best parts of Star Wars were in there. Unfortunately books make less money than movies and no one was interested in doing direct translations of already told stories no matter how much they made sense.
- TillE 11y ago
  The key problem with most of the best EU stuff is that, by the mid/late 90s, the original actors were far too old for it. Although, I'd love to see a (live action) TV series based very loosely on the early Han Solo stories, obviously with someone else cast in the part of a 20-something Han.

philh 11y ago

(Sorry, pet peeve.) It's space opera, which is a subgenre of science fiction. Some people invent definitions of "science fiction" that exclude some works of science fiction, but that's silly. There's no definition of "science fiction". It's a concept that we feel out by pointing to things that are "clearly science fiction" and then sort of deriving a fuzzy decision boundary from that. If you ask people whether Star Wars is science fiction, most people will say yes. Robots! Lasers! Space ships! Aliens! It's clearly science fiction. There are useful definitions, which talk about subsets of science fiction that don't include Star Wars. But those aren't definitions of science fiction, even if they use the same words.

danharaj 11y ago
"Science fiction" is also an artificial ghetto that historically was used to segregate "science fiction" from "literary fiction". It's funny to see the same process being repeated.
- pavel_lishin 11y ago
  Larry Niven examined the "ghetto" argument, and concluded that it's more of a country club.
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
    I don't have a lot of trust in Larry Niven's arguments.
    - pavel_lishin 11y ago
      I suspect I might know at least a partial answer, but how come?
dragonwriter 11y ago
> It's space opera, which is a subgenre of science fiction. That's an interesting view, but one which is nullified by: > There's no definition of "science fiction". Then the phrase has no meaning or use, and the statements "Star Wars is science fiction" or "space opera is a subgenre of science fiction" are semantically null, neither true nor false, just sequences of words that form grammatically valid sentences that communicate no meaning. If "space opera is a subgenre of science fiction" is to be true, then "space opera" and "science fiction" both need to have definitions, and the definition of the latter must include at least everything included in the definition of the former. If either or both has no definition, then the statement has no meaning, and cannot be said to be true or false. For

sandworm101 11y ago

Star Trek = Science fiction. Star Wars = Fantasy. Science fiction answers the question "What if science?". It explores how the human condition may react to the new circumstances presented by advanced science. That's why it is almost universally set in the future, even where quazi-magical (Dune). But Star Wars separates itself from frame one. What is the first thing lucas says in star wars? "A long time ago..." so this isn't anything that might happen in the future. And "in a galaxy far far away" ... it isn't anything to do with us. Lucas couldn't be more blatant. Star Wars is not science fiction. It's basically LOTR+lasers.

talmand 11y ago
Science fiction doesn't have to revolve around the human condition. It can be set in any location, at any point in time, with any species. The only criteria is that science has to be involved as part of the plot in some way. I think Star Wars qualifies as science fiction or any of its sub-genres. Fantasy is the same, except that instead of science you have some form of magic as part of the plot. Then you can mix to create a hybrid of sorts. Of which, because of the Force one could make an argument that Star Wars is a hybrid. Except that it is part of canon that there is scientific reasoning for it all.
lordnacho 11y ago
That's just how I'd word it. Trek is about how science affects society. Quite often there's some dilemma thrown up by by technology, and the characters have to deal with it. The characters are ordinary people who happen to have some training and some intelligence, working in groups. Star Wars is an opera. You have heroes, with heroic skills, fighting epic battles of historical significance. It's very much about individuals, and not terribly much about groups. Technology is purely incidental in Star Wars. We have light sabres, so let's have a duel where we can investigate some emotions. If Lucas hadn't thought of light sabres, but just given them samurai swords, not much would change in your assessment of the world. You'd think the same of the characters, and it would be just as entertaining. If Trek didn't have FTL travel, it would be a very different show.
dragonwriter 11y ago
> Science fiction answers the question "What if science?". I prefer this definition, too, but by it, quite a lot of Trek stories (even just the canon, on-screen stuff) are space fantasy of the same type as Star Wars; there's lots of SF-by-that-definition in Trek, too, which Star Wars pretty much completely avoids, but its not a black-or-white, all-or-nothing distinction with ST purely on the SF side of the fence.

bduerst 11y ago

Why does it need to be mutually exclusive? Why not both? Science fantasy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fantasy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fantasy