I would wonder how they would know that one title that they do have is going to outdraw another title that they don’t. This is a single libary for the entire state. I doubt that they could amass and compare the checkout rates on paper books for all the dozens or hundreds of local library systems without a great deal of work.
I dunno; Stranger In A Strange Land is classic sci-fi, innit? And, off the top of my head, The Paradox Men plays the over-the-top altruism as straight as the sci-fi.
Today’s numbers. Here is the WPLC Digital Library site should anyone wish to browse or check my data (though – who’s anal enough to care but me?)
There are a total of 785 Science Fiction titles. 149 (19%) of them have the Star Wars logo on the cover.
There are 457 titles currently available, 97 (21%) with the Star Wars logo.
There are 328 titles checked out, meaning 152 (15%) of them are Star Wars books.
Perhaps these numbers are too small to be statistically very meaningful, but it certainly doesn’t support that the readership “overwhelmingly” support it. If anything, by a small margin, they underwhelmingly support it, as they are left on the shelf disproportionally more than the rest of the collection.
I’m no accusing you of defending it.
As for the criteria by which libraries choose which books to retain, I have to admit I don’t know what it is, and suspect that it varies from place to place. I know that the MIT library keeps tabs on how often their books are checked out, and uses that to decide who goes into storage.
On the other hand, the Salt lake City library, when I lived there, had a suspiciously high level of Fredric Brown mystery novels. I loved it, being a Brown fan, and read them all. But Brown had died way back in 1972 (and most of his mysteries were written in the 1950s), and it’s hard to believe there was a lot of call for them. I suspect that the high incidence represented the tastes of some librarian.
I would say if that were true the story is a Fantasy story with Sci Fi trappings.
I suspect the high incidence of Star Wars titles in the local digital library represents pretty much total ignorance of the genre of sciene fiction, but I could be completely wrong.
They all are.
Insufficient data to classify. The story will determine the genre. What are these gifted persons doing with their psychic powers? What are they striving to overcome? It might even be a spy story or a technothriller.
Multivac?
Multivac can easily be replaced by a knowledge spirit summoned by the wizards to ask it questions. The details of its construction are not relevant to any of the stories about it.
One thing that struck me, though, is that in a good science fiction story, the author can show you what the characters observe, and let you draw the same conclusions the characters did, without having to tell you directly. For instance, take my favorite short story, Niven’s “Inconstant Moon”. The basic premise translates well enough: The main characters see portents in the sky that warn of the imminent end of the world. But to actually tell the story as a fantasy, you’d need to either spend a lot of time (enough that it wouldn’t fit into a short story any more) explaining the methods by which one interprets portents, or you’d need to just jump the characters straight to the conclusion, which removes a major chunk of the story. But with a known framework to work from (i.e., the actual laws of physics of our world), Niven can tell us that the Moon has inexplicably brightened, and then a few hours later Jupiter inexplicably brightens, and leave it to us to work out the implications (yes, he does it himself eventually, but he leaves us a chance to realize it first).
Now, one could do something similar with pre-existing and well-known rules for a fantasy world (a story based on the rules of D&D, say). But part of the appeal of fantasy is the freedom to set your own rules in the first place. Or you can create your own rules, lay them out in the first part of the work, and follow them through, such that by the end of the work your readers can do the same thing, but that takes a very long time, even when it works.
I was calling DrFidelius Multivac because of his “Insufficient data” post.
Many, many good things here.
I used the library for a bit in the late 90s, early 2000s and I found out a few things. They would get books if requested and they accepted donations. I requested several DND novels and they got them in. I doubt anyone else has checked them out! And if someone dumped a bunch of SW books on them, then that’s what they have.
Chronos: Hmm. I having a problem with your theory but I don’t know why. I think it’s because the Niven story depends on someone with some amount of science knowledge. If a novel is set in a DND world, there is a basis for that world. If no more is written about the world, or the mechanics of that world, then there is about science, in terms of page count or words, and the reader can make the same logical guesses about the story, then what?
For example, in the core rulebook, wizards use components for their spells, although a lot of groups hand wave that away. If a short story was about how someone was taking all of the diamonds, it could be about wealth but it could also be about the spells that have diamonds as components, such as raise dead type spells.
TOWP: I also think there is insufficient evidence but I agree that the best way to know is how people approach it. If they say it’s in their bloodline, fantasy. If they say genetics, SciFi. Or other such terminology that would be in the story as well.
In the end, I thought the best stories were ones that entertained us for the surface of it but reflected us and made us think?
Good discussion! Thanks!
edg
Well, sure, telling you what our hero is doing can bring in a new genre; if I say “solve a murder,” you can say, “oh, so it’s a murder mystery with a twist – maybe a courtroom thriller?” And if I say “he’s just trying to live as normal a life as possible while on the run from people who want to exploit his psychic abilities,” or maybe “he makes lighthearted quips while breezily narrating his way through otherwise highly improbable heists,” or whatever, you’ve of course got the other half of the answer.
But it’s still sci-fi or fantasy if the OP has a point, right? There’s one not-true-to-life aspect making the whole story go: The Protagonist Is Psychic. No matter what else happens from there – be it the problems of dating while psychic or whatever – let’s say there’s nothing else to set it apart from reality: no androids who can pass for human, no vampires who can pass for human, no starships piloted by alien wizards who can pass for human; just our world, plus this psychic.
[QUOTE=vislor]
TOWP: I also think there is insufficient evidence but I agree that the best way to know is how people approach it. If they say it’s in their bloodline, fantasy. If they say genetics, SciFi.
[/QUOTE]
Dang, but that’s splitting a mighty fine hair.
If you really believe that, it shows your ignorance and unfamiliarity with science fiction.
The science is essential to some science fiction, and that’s what some people—including, apparently, the OP—find appealing about it. It’s written by and for scientifically literate people; and when you read it, you either learn some actual science, or you call upon the scientific knowledge you already have, or it turns you on to science.
Ah, there’s the sticking point. I do not happen to believe that the OP has a point. In my far from humble opinion, modern (as in since the 1890s) Science Fiction and Fantasy are conjoined twin genres. I see no good marketing reason to separate them on the bookstore’s shelves. I personally prefer my fantastic stories to have science bullshit instead of magic bullshit in their background, but the genre borders are porous.
I know exactly what Science Fiction is. It’s literature - and like all other forms of legitimate literature, it is first and foremost about people. I judge science fiction according to the same rules I judge any other poetry or prose, and scientific accuracy is not one of them.
This would be my suspicion, as well. I would guess that whoever is selecting the titles has no idea whether or not a particular SF book is considered good or bad. However, this person knows that most people consider Star Wars to be SF, and probably SW books will get checked out consistently. It’s sort of like going to McDonald’s when you’re on a road trip. You know that you probably won’t get a great meal, but the meal that you do get will be edible.
I’m afraid I’d have to agree with Thudlow Boink here: you’re speaking in ignorance.
If I’m reading a book of 100 Great Sea Stories, the stories had damn well better have something to do with ships, sailing, the sea, sailors, navigation, sea battles, or something else that justifies the inclusion. You can’t judge sea stories according to the same rules as any other poetry or prose: the genre brings along with it certain expectations, and if these are not met, the story is very likely to fail. It might be a damn good story about someone in the desert or the mountains, but that would be a big failure when it comes to sea stories.
Science fiction, similarly, depends on certain assumptions for its genre. If it doesn’t in some way bring in scientific ideas, then it isn’t science fiction. It might be perfectly good detective fiction, or romance fiction, or even “literary” fiction. But without a basis in some scientific idea, it fails as SF.
Now, yes, definitely, we can judge the storytelling of an SF story in pretty much the same way we judge the storytelling in a sea story, detective story, frontier story, etc. If the characters are flat, the action dull, the description insipid, and the plot hokey, then the story is likely a failure in any genre.
But if we’re judging an SF story as an SF story, it has to have a scientific idea in it.
Don’t mistake differing opinions for ignorance - I’ve probably read as much science fiction as you have. I just take something else out of it. You’re obviously more a fan of the Golden Age writers, whilst I believe the genre didn’t achieve full maturity until the 1960’s. But even if we’re talking about earlier stuff - would you consider “Nineteen Eighty-Four” poor science fiction because Orwell chooses to focus on how totalitarianism crushes the human soul, rather than on surveillance screen and rat-related torture technology?