See ScienceFiction. Pronounced "sigh-fie" (bad) or "skiffy" (worse) or, as it has been known in The Good Ol' US of A, "si-fee" (as a derogatory).
A horrible term. If you're going to abbreviate it, say SF.
...because, within the field of science fiction, it is a very, very derogatory term, so to a writer or a fan of science fiction, it is offensive the same way that racial slurs are offensive.
The word "SciFi" has connotations similar to TheEnWord? and other racial epithets? Feh! If someone is that thin-skinned, they really ought to GetaGrip?. Perhaps we need a SmugScifiWeenies? page...
- Why are you so emotional about it? You could say the identical thing about how black people feel about "mere words", but it doesn't make you right. Offensive words exist, and the fact that it bothers you should clue you in.
- You bring up an interesting point, but one which fails the smell test. Words like TheEnWord? and such often have centuries of slavery, oppression, persecution and the like behind them. Were I to identify a particular word I don't like and claim to all and sundry that it's as offensive as TheEnWord?, should I be taken seriously? Of course not. Do bigots and demagogues of all stripes use the word "sci-fi" to belittle and demonize science fiction? Of course not. Historical context matters a great deal, and equating "sci-fi" with words like "nigger" or "faggot" simply is fatuous nonsense. I don't mean to ShootTheMessenger here, by the way...
Within the field, elitists will be dismissive of things like E.E. "Doc" Smith, Lost in Space, Piers Anthony, sometimes but not always Star Trek, etc, by calling them "sci-fi", and fans of those things resent it.
But that's from one kind of fan to another. People who are outsiders to science fiction should avoid saying "sci-fi" altogether, unless they don't care about politeness.
As for other terms ("speculative fiction", etc) and definitional issues (is fantasy a kind of science fiction, vice versa, or neither), be aware that there has been debate on the subject for almost a century now, including actual academic scholarly debate, without a definitive resolution, although much of interest has been written.
- More feh! It says here that the reason this hasn't been resolved is because that it just doesn't matter. Much of the debate over what is science fiction and what ain't--strikes me as little more than various factions within a particular subculture battling over turf and the "right" to consider themselves the elite conniseurs of the genre. In other words, a trivial and somewhat childish PissingContest, even if couched in terms of high-falutin' literary criticism. (This is hardly unique to science fiction fandom; as there are numerous examples of subcultures seeking to a) exclude the general public, wannabes, and "casual" members, and b) fighting among themselves to establish a pecking order). If you like Heinlein, or Asimov, or Anthony, or Hubbard, fine. If you like StarTrek, DoctorWho, or BabylonFive, fine. Hell, if you like StarWars or GalaxyQuest for that matter....fine with me. But endless debates that so-and-so isn't true ScienceFiction because it contains FasterThanLight? travel (or any number of other plot devices lifted from the most recent issue of ScientificAmerican) is debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
- What's your point? I didn't drag in any of the trash you're up in arms about, I just said there's existing long debate, to clue in people who haven't actively studied the subject (as opposed to simply reading stories). Again, why are you so emotional about it? What I said was a simple and accurate summary that didn't take any sides.
- Again, not trying to ShootTheMessenger; but this page (and others like it) are dripping with contempt for anything that the writer(s) in question don't like. The attitude that many science fiction fans seem to have (not all of them, for sure!) is what I am ranting and raving about. I'm not disagreeing with you at all; instead I'm claiming that the current state of affairs is in some way undesirable.
Don't forget that science fiction is in fact an academic field of study, so it has its depths even beyond the stories themselves.
As science fiction is a well-established genre of literature, the fact that it is the subject of academic study (both for literary and sociological aspects) should be neither surprising nor remarkable. Although there might be some literary snobs out there who consider even "good" SF to be rubbish next to the likes of Shakespeare and other icons of GreatLiterature?; and thus might be annoyed by this point. :)
I thought SF was nowadays the abbreviation for SpeculativeFiction.
Some people use SciFi to refer to things like Godzilla, Star Wars, the Blob, and so on, whereas ScienceFiction would be Space: 2001, Asimov's Foundation books, and other works of generally higher quality and more respect for real science. Speculative fiction is a backronym used by people who don't like the name ScienceFiction but want to keep the SF initials.
- Of course, some think that attempting to partition ScienceFiction into categories of "good" and "junk", and then insisting that the "junk" category isn't RealScienceFiction?, is a flagrant violation of SturgeonsLaw. After all, for every novel by IsaacAsimov, there really ought to be nine by EllRonHubbard.
- Well, if you asked a Scientologist, they'd probably say there should be nine IsaacAsimov books for every EllRonHubbard book. ExerciseCaution? if you are in such a situation.
- IANAS (I am not a Scientologist), but I've probably read equal # IA and L.Ron books, maybe a few more Asimov.. Asimov makes my head expand and L.RonH gets me rolling on the floor laughing. These are both GoodThings. Everyone should read EVERY Foundation book AND the "Mission Earth" dekacology. And of course, anyone doing AI stuff needs to have Asimovs ThreeLawsOfRobotics memorized...
- So... who here has watched BattlefieldEarth?? See: MoviesToAvoidAtAllCosts
- I actually have the book but haven't seen the film. I use the book as the canonical example of really, really bad SF.
[Aw come on,
SciFi is shorter and easier to type than
ScienceFiction and SF isn't a
WikiWord. Cream always rises to the top...
NuffSaid]
Also, many consider SF to mean SourceForge - SF as an abbreviation only works when surrounded by plenty of context
http://www.brunching.com/geekhierarchy.html
That's very funny, and approximately accurate, as far as it goes, except that the main point seems to be to build up (down) to dissing Furries (and who doesn't?), and it actually doesn't address a lot of less dramatic/funny things in the heart of Fandom, e.g. Con-related stuff.
True, true. It was posted mainly as a (hopefully) humorous reminder that while it's good to discuss the SF/scifi/science fiction monikers, we mustn't be too serious, lest we become one of them.
That's especially poignant in the context of scientology...
To MarkTwain, much of what obtains in the EastVillage? would have seemed to to be, SciFi.
CategoryRant
Sci Fi