Does fantasy speculate?

[The Judge]

Most of this discussion is over my head as I'm not given to philosophical musing, but re the Heinlein quote, could it be that he used the term "speculative" not in the sense of "what if?" -- which is, after all, the point of most literature -- but in the sense of "what will happen to us?", which can only relate to future- and human-based SF.

 

[goldhawk]

Most of this discussion is over my head as I'm not given to philosophical musing, but re the Heinlein quote, could it be that he used the term "speculative" not in the sense of "what if?" -- which is, after all, the point of most literature -- but in the sense of "what will happen to us?", which can only relate to future- and human-based SF.

One could argue that fantasy answers the question, "What will happen to us?"

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -- Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)

What happens when technology becomes so complex that nobody has more than a surface understanding of how it works? Would that be magic? We tell a magic genie called Computer what we want done and somehow it's done for us: Computer, turn on the lights. Computer, do the dishes. Computer, what are my friends doing? Stories that tell us how to cope with magic may be a sneak preview of the future.

 

[The Procrastinator]

"What will happen to us" is a pretty limited way to view speculation in my oh so humble opinion. I agree with Teresa - fantasy has the capacity to speculate on many aspects of the human condition, the animal condition, concepts such as truth, justice, change, love, etc. (so perhaps not all fantasy is speculative - but lots of it is). Of course all fiction falls within the "what if" umbrella, but I think speculative fiction takes the vital step of tinkering with reality. Science fiction and fantasy do not deal with the world as it is, they change it in some way - which can make the speculation more effective.

 

[Michael01]

(And could Heinlein's opinion have been behind the argument Michael had elsewhere?)

Yes. This was part of what stimulated the discussion. And, I have since learned, reading a plethora of fantasy based on role-playing games!

Plenty of good points here. Glad to see you all engaged in the topic. Actually thought there was only so far we could take it, really, but we've gone further than I'd expected.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

The traditional cure for a plethora is to do a little blood-letting.

I believe I have a lancet somewhere I can lend you.

 

[Michael01]

The traditional cure for a plethora is to do a little blood-letting.

I believe I have a lancet somewhere I can lend you.

Saw that one, although I'll be honest and say I wasn't familiar with it. You got me.

 

[Toby Frost]

I'd define "speculative" in two ways. Firstly, a narrow sense of "What will happen next?" I don't think fantasy can be said to be speculative in this way, as very little of it attempts to literally predict the future. But actually very little SF does either: even 1984 is a satire of the present rather than an attempt to literally predict the future.

Secondly, the wider sense of "question-asking". Yes, I think fantasy has to be considered speculative by this definition. If the author is not directly posing questions to the reader through the text (I can think of very little fantasy that does that) he is speculating by making himself come up with unusual settings, people etc. But you could probably say the same for almost all novels - the degree of speculation is probably what differs.

But is there a third meaning of speculative, meaning "not grounded in certainty"? If that's the case then fantasy must be speculative because the background on which the story sits isn't real and never has been.

To be absolutely honest I think it's very difficult to define the question, and even then I'm not sure what the answer gives us.

 

[Lilmizflashythang]

It's been awhile since I've been here, and it's an interesting subject. Personally I believe all fiction speculates to some degree or another; fantasy just does so in a more concentrated dose. Much like all fiction has suspenseful elements; mysteries are just loaded with them. Hope this helps you.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Interesting discussion. I've only really come across "speculative fiction" as an umbrella term for SF, fantasy and horror, but I agree that most fantasy doesn't really focus on "what if" to the same extent that SF typically does. In a lot of fantasy, the unreal setting is just a convenient frame that allows the writer to have fun

Consider that the reason there are two genders is because DNA is a double spiral. And consider the reason we have marriage is because we have no fur.

As a biologist working for one of the world's pre-eminent genome research centres, I feel obliged to point out that you are utterly wrong. Sorry.

1. All living creatures on the planet have double-helix DNA, whether or not they have gender (and a great many don't). The double helix enables DNA to split and transform itself into two identical copies, which is vital to cell division in every living organism, but sexual differentiation uses many different mechanisms. These range from environmental (temperature of incubation in many fish and reptiles) through individual sex-determining genes (birds) to entire sex chromosomes (or sets thereof - the platypus has five pairs!!!).

Sexual reproduction evolved because mixing up the genes each generation increases fitness - an alien world with different biochemistry could easily evolve sexes without a double-helical genetic structure.

2. What about other species that mate for life, like wolves and prairie voles? We may dress it up with ritual, but we didn't invent the idea.

On the other hand, if you want to write some speculative fiction that explores either of those arguments, go for it!