4 ms·

I think it depends on what you want out of it. In western sci-fi, the story exists to make the reader feel good about themselves. At least, the successful one

I think it depends on what you want out of it. In western sci-fi, the story exists to make the reader feel good about themselves. At least, the successful ones are like this. It makes for good movies, and good story telling. Think about that for a moment. All the western sci-fi that we've been used to: Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, etc.. All these stories are not really science fiction, but rather, science fantasy. It goes through the normal story telling, of establishing a good guy and a bad guy. And it tries to pull you in, to empathize with the challenges of the good guy, so that you can experience his trials and tribulations. And then, at the end, the good guy always wins. He always succeeds, in some way or other. And you're left with feeling a sense of joy. But, Cixin Lui's stories, threw all that aside. He presented you with the cold hard reality, of survival in the jungle. That there are not really any good or bad sides. Just different perspectives. And everyone is just trying to survive. And the jungle is the galaxy. Western sci-fi is all about being human-centric, as if we are the only species in the universe that matters. Whereas Cixin, presented us with a reality, where humanity is only one of billions of intelligent species. Those that had survived the jungle, or those that hide from the rest, or those that evolved into another form, or those that end up hunting, to maintain their probability of survival. So, if you want to continue to feel good about yourself, then stick with what you know. Keep reading western sci-fi. If you want to expand your mind, then try out Cixin's novel. Admittedly, I think something was lost in translation. The translated text was overly wordy. But the concepts behind it, was still incredible. I especially loved the story about the human computer system, the Qin 1.0 Operating System. That was quite creative.

arkh 8y ago
You may want to read Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space.
- pferde 8y ago
  I would also recommend David Brin's Uplift Series, set in a universe where the human race is just a very small (and barely tolerated) side-note. While sometimes being overly focused on the ecology angle - although not as much as his standalone book "Earth" - they're great reading.
watwut 8y ago
I agree with you, but I dont think the schema makes for "good story telling". It more that we defined we defined "good storyleling" in a way that limits options and forcing us to be repetitive. It makes for predictable story telling we are used to. But I think it is changing slowly with new popular shows being bit different.
PurpleRamen 8y ago
> In western sci-fi, the story exists to make the reader feel good about themselves. At least, the successful ones are like this. It makes for good movies, and good story telling. > > Think about that for a moment. All the western sci-fi that we've been used to: Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, etc.. All these stories are not really science fiction, but rather, science fantasy. I'm not sure how much Wetern Science Fiction you know, but those are all Cinematic Franchises, not western science fiction-books. That popcorn-movies have a specific angle for being successful is not a surprise. If you wanna compare Cixin Lui's stories with modern western writers then be more honest, and take recent books from modern western writers. Charles Stross, Alastair Reynolds, Neal Stephenson, they all come to mind in that regard.
glogla 8y ago
Yes, but only if you count Star Wars or other American-style production "action movie but in space" movies or series (like Stargate, Firefly, ...). When you go into the things that don't get blockbuster movies, you end up with old-school scifi. Newer like The Expanse or Blindsight, older like The Culture or Hyperion, or proper old school stuff like In general, piece of unwanted and unrequested advice - whenever you make a huge sweeping statement about complex topic with many examples (like "In western sci-fi, the story exists to make the reader feel good about themselves.") you are inevitably wrong.
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
I don't think the cliche Hollywood ending that presents the feel good about yourself, happy resolution, complete with positive family messages at the end of absolutely sodding everything is anything to do with good story telling. It's just the very tired Hollywood cliche that's proven time and again can draw an American family audience. It's not an either/or. Books are often much, much darker than Hollywood adaptations. Why is a US programme such as Breaking Bad considered ground breaking and hugely refreshing? For the first time in decades the USA has produced something where the hero is also the bad guy. You end up with some sympathy, and conflicted, for a complex main character, with many shades of grey and black. None of the usual black/white, so obvious it's painful. Something like Stross's Merchant Princes can finish with a horrible ending and still be a fabulous series and story telling without many reasons to feel good to be found. Then derail after those 6 brilliant books with a clumsy reboot/relaunch.
- oblio 8y ago
  > It's just the very tired Hollywood cliche that's proven time and again can draw an American family audience. Global family audience. They're doing something right. As big as China is getting and will get in the future, I wonder if their movie industry will ever become a global draw. They seem to be awfully local right now. Same goes for Japan or even India.
- richardhod 8y ago
  Indeed, the GP ignores the whole Cyberpunk scifi movement and the effect it has had on almost all scifi writing since Gibson et al.
hnaccy 8y ago
Your post is a bit dismissive given your familiarity with western sci-fi seems to extend only to incredibly popular film series.
JetSetWilly 8y ago
I think you are confusing the terms "western" and "american". Not only that your examples of American SF are all TV and film which tends to be even further along that axis than American print SF. Certainly lots of UK science fiction is not about optimism and making the reader feel good. I have read a few Cixin Lui books and just didn't find them particularly good. The characters are dull and the plots are bad. His proponents tend to go on about him being not being optimistic and him being introspective as though that is a new thing and I just need to open my mind to this new radical way of thinking, but it just isn't new - people like Brian Aldis just did it so much better for me many decades ago.
C1sc0cat 8y ago
Battle Star Galactica is a bit on the Grimdark side as I Starship troopers and the forever war.
uxcolumbo 8y ago
> All these stories are not really science fiction, but rather, science fantasy. How do you define science fantasy? I would agree Star Wars is fantasy, but I don't think Star Trek (pre Discovery) can be classed as fantasy. For example, a few of their concepts are now real, e.g. they envisioned tablets back in the 60s, now we have iPads etc. More is explored here: https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/star_trek.html https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/star_trek.ht...
- krapp 8y ago
  There is no objective definition for a line between "science fiction" and "science fantasy," but I've come to view Star Trek as no less science fantasy than Star Wars. Replicators and transporters violate physical laws to such a degree that they might as well be magic. The way the universe and tech are described (subspace, particles of the week, negative space wedgies, etc.) have little to do with the actual universe, or the way space and time actually behave. Beings with arbitrary, if not omnipotent, reality-warping powers like the Q, Trelane and Douwd exist, which are basically space gods. I mean, there is little real difference between "the Force did it," the Q did it" and "a wizard did it." That the show also happened to have imagined portable computers and other technological innovations ... makes it science fantasy, rather than fantasy outright. But more to the point, what makes Star Trek more science fantasy than fiction is that it isn't about science, or extrapolating a plausible future, but simply using a futuristic setting as a backdrop for drama, without regard for actual scientific plausibility. I'm not mocking Star Trek, I love the franchise and the original series, for what it was, was the first attempt at describing a persistent futuristic setting on television that I'm aware of (also, it was the series with the least technobabble and "teching the tech" which always helps.) That also (to me) makes it the most "science fictional" of the series, maybe the only one that counts as science fiction. YMMV.
  - uxcolumbo 8y ago
    Fair point. Totally forgot about Q (assuming we're not in a simulation, the feats that Q pulled off are most probably not realistic in the real world.) As with most things, I think it's probably more on a spectrum. I probably should have said that Star Trek leans more towards science fiction than Star Wars - so yes - I agree with your points. Another one that's more 'science fictional' is the Expanse - worth checking out if you haven't yet.

arkh 8y ago

You may want to read Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space.

pferde 8y ago
I would also recommend David Brin's Uplift Series, set in a universe where the human race is just a very small (and barely tolerated) side-note. While sometimes being overly focused on the ecology angle - although not as much as his standalone book "Earth" - they're great reading.

watwut 8y ago

I agree with you, but I dont think the schema makes for "good story telling". It more that we defined we defined "good storyleling" in a way that limits options and forcing us to be repetitive. It makes for predictable story telling we are used to. But I think it is changing slowly with new popular shows being bit different.

PurpleRamen 8y ago

> In western sci-fi, the story exists to make the reader feel good about themselves. At least, the successful ones are like this. It makes for good movies, and good story telling. > > Think about that for a moment. All the western sci-fi that we've been used to: Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, etc.. All these stories are not really science fiction, but rather, science fantasy. I'm not sure how much Wetern Science Fiction you know, but those are all Cinematic Franchises, not western science fiction-books. That popcorn-movies have a specific angle for being successful is not a surprise. If you wanna compare Cixin Lui's stories with modern western writers then be more honest, and take recent books from modern western writers. Charles Stross, Alastair Reynolds, Neal Stephenson, they all come to mind in that regard.

glogla 8y ago

Yes, but only if you count Star Wars or other American-style production "action movie but in space" movies or series (like Stargate, Firefly, ...). When you go into the things that don't get blockbuster movies, you end up with old-school scifi. Newer like The Expanse or Blindsight, older like The Culture or Hyperion, or proper old school stuff like In general, piece of unwanted and unrequested advice - whenever you make a huge sweeping statement about complex topic with many examples (like "In western sci-fi, the story exists to make the reader feel good about themselves.") you are inevitably wrong.

NeedMoreTea 8y ago

I don't think the cliche Hollywood ending that presents the feel good about yourself, happy resolution, complete with positive family messages at the end of absolutely sodding everything is anything to do with good story telling. It's just the very tired Hollywood cliche that's proven time and again can draw an American family audience. It's not an either/or. Books are often much, much darker than Hollywood adaptations. Why is a US programme such as Breaking Bad considered ground breaking and hugely refreshing? For the first time in decades the USA has produced something where the hero is also the bad guy. You end up with some sympathy, and conflicted, for a complex main character, with many shades of grey and black. None of the usual black/white, so obvious it's painful. Something like Stross's Merchant Princes can finish with a horrible ending and still be a fabulous series and story telling without many reasons to feel good to be found. Then derail after those 6 brilliant books with a clumsy reboot/relaunch.

oblio 8y ago
> It's just the very tired Hollywood cliche that's proven time and again can draw an American family audience. Global family audience. They're doing something right. As big as China is getting and will get in the future, I wonder if their movie industry will ever become a global draw. They seem to be awfully local right now. Same goes for Japan or even India.
richardhod 8y ago
Indeed, the GP ignores the whole Cyberpunk scifi movement and the effect it has had on almost all scifi writing since Gibson et al.

hnaccy 8y ago

Your post is a bit dismissive given your familiarity with western sci-fi seems to extend only to incredibly popular film series.

JetSetWilly 8y ago

I think you are confusing the terms "western" and "american". Not only that your examples of American SF are all TV and film which tends to be even further along that axis than American print SF. Certainly lots of UK science fiction is not about optimism and making the reader feel good. I have read a few Cixin Lui books and just didn't find them particularly good. The characters are dull and the plots are bad. His proponents tend to go on about him being not being optimistic and him being introspective as though that is a new thing and I just need to open my mind to this new radical way of thinking, but it just isn't new - people like Brian Aldis just did it so much better for me many decades ago.

C1sc0cat 8y ago

Battle Star Galactica is a bit on the Grimdark side as I Starship troopers and the forever war.

uxcolumbo 8y ago

> All these stories are not really science fiction, but rather, science fantasy. How do you define science fantasy? I would agree Star Wars is fantasy, but I don't think Star Trek (pre Discovery) can be classed as fantasy. For example, a few of their concepts are now real, e.g. they envisioned tablets back in the 60s, now we have iPads etc. More is explored here: https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/star_trek.html https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/star_trek.ht...

krapp 8y ago
There is no objective definition for a line between "science fiction" and "science fantasy," but I've come to view Star Trek as no less science fantasy than Star Wars. Replicators and transporters violate physical laws to such a degree that they might as well be magic. The way the universe and tech are described (subspace, particles of the week, negative space wedgies, etc.) have little to do with the actual universe, or the way space and time actually behave. Beings with arbitrary, if not omnipotent, reality-warping powers like the Q, Trelane and Douwd exist, which are basically space gods. I mean, there is little real difference between "the Force did it," the Q did it" and "a wizard did it." That the show also happened to have imagined portable computers and other technological innovations ... makes it science fantasy, rather than fantasy outright. But more to the point, what makes Star Trek more science fantasy than fiction is that it isn't about science, or extrapolating a plausible future, but simply using a futuristic setting as a backdrop for drama, without regard for actual scientific plausibility. I'm not mocking Star Trek, I love the franchise and the original series, for what it was, was the first attempt at describing a persistent futuristic setting on television that I'm aware of (also, it was the series with the least technobabble and "teching the tech" which always helps.) That also (to me) makes it the most "science fictional" of the series, maybe the only one that counts as science fiction. YMMV.
- uxcolumbo 8y ago
  Fair point. Totally forgot about Q (assuming we're not in a simulation, the feats that Q pulled off are most probably not realistic in the real world.) As with most things, I think it's probably more on a spectrum. I probably should have said that Star Trek leans more towards science fiction than Star Wars - so yes - I agree with your points. Another one that's more 'science fictional' is the Expanse - worth checking out if you haven't yet.