Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Genre Fiction vs. Genre Tropes

Cory Doctorow discusses the difference between genre stories and genre tropes (the signifiers of a genre) by distinguishing between sci-fi elements that are futuristic and sci-fi stories that are futurismic. He writes:

There's a lovely neologism to describe these visions: "futurismic." Futurismic media is that which depicts futurism, not the future. It is often self-serving — think of the antigrav Nikes in Back to the Future III — and it generally doesn't hold up well to scrutiny.

SF films and TV are great fonts of futurismic imagery: R2D2 is a fully conscious AI, can hack the firewall of the Death Star, and is equipped with a range of holographic projectors and antipersonnel devices — but no one has installed a $15 sound card and some text-to-speech software on him, so he has to whistle like Harpo Marx. Or take the Starship Enterprise, with a transporter capable of constituting matter from digitally stored plans, and radios that can breach the speed of light.

The non-futurismic version of NCC-1701 would be the size of a softball (or whatever the minimum size for a warp drive, transporter, and subspace radio would be). It would zip around the galaxy at FTL speeds under remote control. When it reached an interesting planet, it would beam a stored copy of a landing party onto the surface, and when their mission was over, it would beam them back into storage, annihilating their physical selves until they reached the next stopping point. If a member of the landing party were eaten by a green-skinned interspatial hippie or giant toga-wearing galactic tyrant, that member would be recovered from backup by the transporter beam. Hell, the entire landing party could consist of multiple copies of the most effective crewmember onboard: no redshirts, just a half-dozen instances of Kirk operating in clonal harmony.

Of course, the futurismic NCC-1701 was really based on Rodenberry's desire to do Horatio Hornblower stories in space. Not a hardcore attempt to think about the real social and scientific implications of FTL or transporters or replicators. The question is, can you go hardcore non-futurismic (or non-horrorismic, or non-fantasyismic) and still have anything that resembles a story in the mind of the reader. Or do you just get high-modern experimental meta-fiction which we've had for nearly 100 years now?