I have to agree with Fenris here about why some people who are fans prefer the term SF. This morning I wrote (and did not post, thank Ghod) a long rant comparing people who use “sci-fi” with those who “Colored” for African Americans.
Before you all leap, the reason I didn’t post it is because it was a seriously inflammatory and inaccurate comparison.
But there is a germ of a concept here. If you know that a group finds a term offensive or derogatory and persist in using that term, then you shouldn’t take offense in turn if they are upset. (And, sorry, but calling people “anal” because they have a preference seems like needless namecalling.)
Am I too sensitive? Yeah, probably. It comes from having faced scorn by many for my choice of reading matter for most of the past four decades.
So what we may have here is a Felix and Oscar odd-couple situation: compulsive versus sloppy. It’s probably more a matter of style than substance, but style can be irritating, too. Just as you are perfectly free to call it what you want; I am perfectly free to judge you by your actions.
And, for the record, I had college roommates from the Bay Area, who severely judged people who used “Frisco” as bozos. Perhaps I generalized from too small a sample, but I had the impression that this attitude was more widespread in the culture. If I’m wrong, I do apologize.
Look, basically, only readers who go to cons and/or read trade rags are going to know “SF.” Readers who get their science fiction from the county library and from (O horror of horrors) the goddamn-noisy-box and the rest of mainstream media are just not exposed to the term. Doesn’t matter how many books they’ve read or how many hours they’ve devoted to thoughtful conversation with other readers or how devoted they are to the genre; a slip-up in terminology reveals the speaker to be an uncultured rube, and elicits a hoity-toity little speech from the Wise Fan In The Know.
It’s damn cussedness, I realize, but it’s because of that attitude–the attitude displayed in spades in this thread–that I’m going to continue to use the term sci-fi. When anyone uses “sci-fi” in a derogatory manner in my presence, I set them straight about how science fiction a rich and thoughtful field that happens to contain Battlestar Galactica and Star Trek Voyager. (Sturgeon’s Law: Ninety percent of science fiction is crap. Ninety percent of everything is crap.) If anyone is going to get so bent out of shape over my failure to use the in-clique’s buzzword that they won’t talk to me about a subject we both share a passion for, then I don’t need 'em.
With lots of spit, now: Ssssssssssssibboleth!
::Podkayne picks her teeth.::
I say “SF” or “Science Fiction” at least a dozen times a day, usually in conversation with fellow editors. (Example: “How many SF books do we have in that month?” or “So, in the end, is it really SF or Fantasy?”) I say “skiffy” somewhat less often (but more than I used to), especially when I’m feeling puckish. I say “sci-fi” if I’m referring to the cable TV channel, but not otherwise. I say “scientifiction” if I’m channelling Hugo Gernsback or otherwise being deliberately retro (this is pretty rare, happening more often on convention panels, for emphasis or laughs, than in “real life”). I don’t think I’ve ever spoken the words “Speculative Fiction.”
But this is all personal; other editors, depending on personal preference or the people they work with, might have different answers. I don’t know of any editors who would regularly use “sci-fi,” but that doesn’t prove they don’t exist. (Editors who don’t read, like or acquire science fiction, on the other hand, call it “sci-fi” with great unanimity.)
Good post, G.B.H. A lot of people were misunderstanding my point. It’s not a matter of assigning good or bad to the use of “fan,” but pointing out that in the SF field, “fandom” (and “fans”) are a specific subgroup of those who take part in fannish activities, not just readers who love the stuff.
And how about Westercon? Portland, Oregon July 5-8. Many Dopers are SF/Sci-Fi/Scientifiction/Speculative Fiction fans, and those in the region might like to get together at this event.
Just a thought. I’d even offer to buy the gracious Podkayne lunch, if she’d promise not to pick her teeth at me.
A tempting offer, but that’s on the other side of the continent for me, and my hubby and I tend to save our travel budget for gaming cons. I will keep an eye out for goings-on in our area, though. Now I’m curious as to exactly what goes on at these shindigs. Should I go in stealth mode, making proper use of “SF” and the dessert fork, or should I get myself a pair of Spock ears and tell everybody that I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream is my faaaaaaavorite skiffy book?
OK. I’ve read the replies and I more or less understand the situation. well said, Fenris, although I still tend to agree with Mr. Chance- that “Fan” is to science fiction as “groupie” is to rock. The parallel appeals to me; I’ve never been much of a follower.
Therefore, I’ve reached a few conclusions:
I am no longer a Science Fiction Fan. I am, instead, a Science Fiction Enthusiast.
I will, from now on, use the term SF. It doesn’t cause any unnecessary semantic debates, and it’s easier to write.
I just found the three books in <aargh…can’t remember the title or series name> that one series and Tigana by Kay used. Can you compare him to someone? (I’d ask if you liked him, but the answer is pretty obvious )
Well, I’ve been an SF, sci-fi, and fan since I learned to read. Mind you, that was just last Thursday, but never mind. I find the whole Fan vs. fan controversy, not to mention SF vs sci-fi, ludicrous. The whole us/them mentality inherent in creating nomenclature for the initiated vs. the unenlightened reminds me so much of the Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons. He might not be able to get a date or see his toes, but he can tell you which issue of the X-Men introduced Gambit. People who say “Fandom is a way of life,”
or are just a little too obsessed with Star Trek are folks you can just bet have never been laid. It doesn’t matter what you call it, it’s just entertainament, as is any other literary or cinematic genre. There’s no point in being a geek about it.
Oh, and Fenris, appreciating the work of C.L. Moore and Henry Kuttner and also enjoying schlocky 70’s movies like “Logan’s Run” are not incompatible. After all, as a gay man, I’m supposed to have a taste for camp.
As a pipe smoker, and a science fiction fan, I would really appreciate being left out of your notion of what tea, pipe smoking or a trophy room has to do with anything? Was that a reference to something or was that just off the top of your head when you envisioned a certain type of science fiction fan?
True, and I’ll admit to a certain fondness for the movie myself (I always wanted to have a Sandman costume as a kid (the Logan’s Run kind, not the Neil Gainman, or Wesley Dodds, or Jack Kirby ones))
Anyway, Logan’s Run was just the first schlock movie that came to mind outside of ID4, and ID4 is so overused as an example of badness.
<Homer Simpson voice>
I like camp too. I often go out camping. I like the trees and the birds and roasting hot-dogs over a camp-fire…mmmmmmmm…hot-dooogs…Goboy, you get the sleeping bags and the hot-dogs, I’ll get the tent!
</Homer Simpson voice>
Well, that’s kinda hard to say. I’d say he’s a combination of J.R.R. Tolkien, Stephen R. Donaldson, Marion Zimmer Bradley, Alexander Dumas and absolutely nothing on this earth. Have you been reading George R.R. Martin’s books? Kay’s similar, although he tends to be less harsh and more romantic.
BTw, my advice is: read Tigana first, then Fionavar. Fionavar is good, but… well, you should know something about Kay. Before he started writing novels, he co-edited J.R.R. Tolkien’s Silmarillion together with Tolkien’s son Christopher. Now, if you don’t know the story behind that book, then let me just say that after the prefessor’s death his son took a huge bunch of his disorganized notes and somehow edited them into one incredible, coherent novel. Kay must have worked on it for years, breathing the stuff in, along with its sources in Norse and Celtic Mythology. Therefore, it’s no surprise that a couple of years later he wrote an epic, enchanting, multi-layered and completely unoriginal novel, basicaly processing everything he’d learned before, adding a bit of sex and politics, and written what was essentialy a fantasy pastiche. It would have been an awful, horrible book, if it wasn’t so damn good. His material may have been recycled, but his style was all his own.
That’s why many people start reading Fionavar and give up before the books suck them into their world. Tigana, on the other hand, is much more original - it has a uniquely Italian flavour, and is much more grounded in reality (hte book contains precisely one - 1 - supernaural creature, in a very small pole). Besides, it’s IMHO the best single-volume fantasy novel ever written. And you’ll never see my username the same way.
Me<in a Margrart DuMont voice>: Oh! Do you like George Martin’s latest effort?
You: I adore Martin!
Me: And I adore anyone who adores Martin
You: And I adore anyone who adores anyone who adores Martin
ad nauseum. Sorry, still stuck on Goboy’s camp comment
Anyway, I love Tolkien, hate Donaldson’s stories, but like his writing, like early and middle Bradley (say through about ohhhh…1980 (Thendara House) or so, haven’t read Dumas yet and really, really love Martin’s Game of Thrones books (and his other stuff too!), so this is a pretty glowing recommendation for me.
**
Yow! Ok, Tigana has just moved to about number 8 on my reading list (I’m in the middle of a mindless 5-book space-opera series that’s redeemed by the author having so damned much fun that you overlook the lack of deep characteriztion, mediocre prose and the complete lack of subtleties, and I told Polycarp that I’d reread a couple of Spider Robinsons. When I’m done, I’ll be in the mood to read something a little weightier. Tigana sounds perfect. (Plus, I gotta admit, I’m a sucker for fantasy that doesn’t use Greek, Celtic or Norse mythology! An Italian flavor sounds good.
Have you ever read “The Stars Dispose” by Michaela Roessner? It’s a fantasy set in Italy around the time of Catherine di Medici. The main character is the son of the head cook of the di Medici court and the food descriptions are wonderful (and Roessner has recipes in the back). The story’s only good but again, the writing’s wonderful!
Wasn’t planning on it, but I’ll think about it. I mostly just go to the bigger East Coast regionals (Lunacon, Philcon, Disclave before it imploded, and Arisia when I can make it) and Worldcon.
I was born in Albany, so I don’t exactly think of it as a getaway destination, too…
BTW, fandom isn’t “us vs. them” and the various examples of fandom as the Comic Book Guy is ignorant and extremely offensive. You are the ones doing the stereotyping.
For a fan to make the differentiation is no different than a member of the Masons to make a differentiation between Masons and non-Masons. The main difference is that there are no barriers to becoming a fan (even money, since participation in certain Usenet newsgroups would be one way to be involved).
As for the “Comic Book Guy,” I’m sorry to disappoint you, but most SF fans aren’t into the trivia of what was in each particular issue, or whether Han Solo was cooler than Captain Kirk. That stereotype is dead wrong, and very offensive and, frankly, if you’ve never been to a science fiction con (a real one – not a media con), you haven’t got a clue about what actually goes on or what the people are really like.
A science fiction convention is best described as a place where they discuss science fiction when they’ve run out of other things to talk about. It is ultimately, a three-day party where you meet old friends and make new ones. Sort of like a Dopefest, just more organized. How’d you like it if someone characterized members of the SDMB as a bunch of Comic Book Guys?
You are a cruel, evil-minded woman.
