Sci-fi actually needs science

[Jo Zebedee]

Folks I think we got off the direction I was heading. I wanted to know if the author has asked for feedback as this one did, do you give them feedback?

Okay, back on track, then. He wants feedback but he is a space opera writer. If he is at the handwavium end of the spectrum, he's probably not that keen on science fact. You could ask if he wants it.

But, on a different note, why do you want to give it? To make the book better, to change it, or to enforce science into it? Is it for you or them?

If I got the note, all seriousness in place, it would depend on the tone. If it was the tone of your first post - nope. I'd mark you down as not my target audience and move on. But if it was a polite enquiry asking if I wanted to know why my fun space battle broke lots of laws of physics, I might want to know. Might. Depending on if there was an expectation to fix it. (You say he doesn't know gravity - perhaps he does, and finds it boring and wants more escapism.) so, I think, if I sent the feedback I'd start by asking would it be helpful. In case he's a particle physicist having fun on his day off...

Ps don't ever read my stuff. Your toes would curl in horror.

 

[abrucestewart]

I'll go with the consensus here and say it's horses for courses. Some want escapist fantasy, some want escapist reality.

If you want space based SF high on the Mohs Scale, I'd recommend

The Lost Fleet: Dauntless (Book 1) (Lost Fleet 1): Amazon.co.uk: Jack Campbell: 9780857681300: Books

or the
Apollo Quartet by Ian Sales

If you were to give me feedback along the lines you're suggesting, I'd be OK if you explained briefly what you were looking for and enquiring if I thought I was trying write that sort of thing.

If you just came along and said my writing was just because it wasn't what you were looking for, I'd probably be a bit .

If that's clear?

ABS

 

[tinkerdan]

My question would be: how was the writing, the grammar, the spelling the punctuation? If all of that was spot on then look at the genre and decide just how far afield of science it can go as opposed to how far afield you would like to see it go.

I think if you approach it from the point that there were many things to like about it; then the author might appreciate how you feel about the science.

One of the few reviews I received about my first novel was complementary about the story, the plot, the characters and the writing but made a point of expressing that the science was inscrutable.(Unlike what I sense from you; he said he'd read the next one.)

I joked with my wife after reading the review saying. I should title the third in the trilogy as Inscrutable Science.

Really though there are two occasions when the precocious main character, who tends to show off now and then, goes off on a wild description on how she feels the science in the story works. She can't help it if the other character's hung on every word. Point of fact; I wasn't always taking myself seriously when it came to the science so I can't expect the reader to.

Hey maybe it was my book. Nah, the engagements aren't till the second book and you can't call them Military.(Well you could I suppose in the same way you could say the science is inscrutable.)

 

[zmunkz]

No, because traditionally Space Opera doesn't bother.

It sounds like you want Hard SF, Space Opera is very much very soft SF.

This, 100%.

If the goal is Space opera, or military sci-fi, or any of the other soft sci-fi genres, then comments on the science could take a back seat. The exception would be something blatant even to a non-science major... but if the issue requires actual knowledge of physics to discern, then outside of the hard sci-fi genre, that kind of scrutiny is generally not expected.

Romulans use an artificial singularity to power their ships because... science! Everyone speaks english because... story telling!

Good enough for a space opera.

 

[Cathbad]

Even in hard SF... must the science be explained?

Nothing bugs me more in the genre than when an author (~cough~ Mr. Niven ~cough~) spends an exorbitant amount of time explaining the science behind something.

 

[abrucestewart]

Even in hard SF... must the science be explained?

I wouldn't say it had to be explained, but at the of risk stating the obvious, there's a difference between a universe which follows accepted science, and one which uses handwavium to allow things to happen the way the writer wants them to.

I guess if you're using handwavium or an unusual scientific fact, it can be at least nice for the reader, if not actually useful to the story, to explain what's different or unusual.

But not, of course, in bum-numbing detail .

ABS

 

[zmunkz]

Even in hard SF... must the science be explained?

I would say yes. That is kinda the point of that genre... to do interesting things with strong science basis, for an audience interested in said science.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I would say yes. That is kinda the point of that genre... to do interesting things with strong science basis, for an audience interested in said science.

Really? Space Opera? That rules out half the books in that genre.

 

[millymollymo]

I'm curious as to what caused you to pick up the book in question, Gregory. Was it the blurb, a recommendation, or a cover perhaps?
What you were expecting to read, wasn't what was inside.

"Give me your feedback." is a dangerous invite to leave around. I've seen it on (commercial) sites where the negative comments are deleted. Some authors don't respond well to "You did this all wrong. Your story would have been x amount better if you had done this instead." or words to that effect.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Even in hard SF... must the science be explained?

Usually not.
You don't explain how cars or cell phones work in a detective story unless it's important to the plot.

Explain nothing is my motto, unless it's part of the story, even when I know how to make one.

 

[Droflet]

Really? Space Opera? That rules out half the books in that genre.

Absolutely agree. And Jo, our books would be in the mix.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Absolutely agree. And Jo, our books would be in the mix.

Oh, gosh yes. Guilty. I'll see your barrel roll in space and raise you a horizontal drop.

 

[Nick B]

I hope you had your inertia nullifiers engaged for those manoeuvers...

 

[Ray McCarthy]

engaged for those manoeuver

My Inertial Dampers are connected by plasma conduits to the Heisenberg Uncertainty compensators.

 

[Colbey Frost]

I wanted to know if the author has asked for feedback as this one did, do you give them feedback?

If someone asks for feedback then I don't see the issue. Just because it's negative doesn't mean you should hide away from it. They don't have to agree either. Part of writing is realising that not everyone is right. Opinions are like arseholes.

 

[The Judge]

I sympathise with your concern. My scientific expertise being what it is, I would undoubtedly have missed all the errors you've found in this person's writing (well, perhaps not all -- I do know the not-coming-to-a-halt-in-space one). However, I have an interest in and some knowledge of medieval and early modern English history, and reading fantasy novels which purportedly exist in a quasi-medieval world yet have the most egregious of basic errors infuriates me. Do I complain loudly to my nearest and dearest? Yes. Do I mentally compose sarcastic letters to the author pointing out such mistakes? Oh yes. Do I send such letters? No.

In an ideal world everyone who wrote novels, of whatever variety, would ensure their books were accurate, whether as to eg the laws of physics in SF or historical facts in historical novels, and I've very little respect for those authors who fail to do the necessary research or, seemingly, don't believe they need to do any research whatsoever. But no matter how much we may regret it, there are the equivalents of Barbara Cartland in all genres, and their work is lapped up by those even more ignorant than they are.

Anyhow, as to your specific question, I've written two SF WiPs which lack the scientific rigour of Star Trek TOS, and yes I would want to know where my science is faulty, so I could consider correcting it, if by so doing I didn't wreck the plot. So if it bugs you, by all means drop this person a line and point out that there are mistakes in the first chapter and ask whether he/she would like to have them detailed and explained. I very much doubt you'll get a favourable response though -- most people don't want true feedback even if they ask for it; they want praise.

You don't say if the space opera you read was written by a Chrons member. If so, I'd definitely go down the tactful PM route, on the basis of one Chronner trying to help another. If not, and you're sufficiently angered by the lack of science in it, leave a one/zero star review.

 

[tinkerdan]

Another question that comes to mind is whether the novel claims to be Hard Science.
The catastrophic hard breaking @ near C would be bad along with the coasting to a stop (when fuel and thrust are nonexistent).
Vernier thrusters might account for some of those other maneuvers though there might be a question as to why (but we really haven't had real space battles from which to judge). Simulations are close though.

Anyway back to the HS and how some people get rightfully upset when something claims to be Hard Science and ends up being mostly space opera with handwavium and some alternate physics. I think a review and stars and some words about your disappointment might be best. Although, even then, you might be careful as I can say from experience that some authors might sic their fans on you. Sometimes the fans are worse than the authors.

I am intrigued though-about this book-the author-the challenge to leave comments. Some ring of familiarity having to do with commentators complaining that their comments mysteriously disappeared.

 

[Vertigo]

Space Opera:
Clue in name.
It's set in space and it's fun. Space opera doesn't work as a genre if the science is real.


No, because traditionally Space Opera doesn't bother.

It sounds like you want Hard SF, Space Opera is very much very soft SF.

StarWars and Star Trek TNG are more Space Opera than real SF, for instance.

I like both. I tried to write Space Opera and can't do it, though I can write Fantasy.

I would disagree with your interpretation of the space opera genre there Ray. There is a lot of pulp space opera out there certainly but that is not the definition of space opera. There is also a lot of good space opera based on reasonable science. For example, though I didn't like it for other reasons, the space opera aspects of Leviathan Wakes (which would certainly fall into that genre) were realistic, eg. as much time spent decelerating as accelerating etc. Another example that is definitely classed as space opera is Asimov's Foundation series. Whether you like them or not I don't think it's reasonable to write them off as mere 'fun' and not real SF. It almost feels like you are saying there is only one type of SF - hard SF - and anything else is not real SF. For example in your last point Star Wars and Star Trek are very definitely 'real' SF they're just not hard SF.

@Gregory in answer to your question; if the author has invited feedback then I would give it. As others have said, try to do it in a positive and reasonable way. If the author just flames back at you then that's their problem and you can just move on. On the other hand it might just make them think about doing a little more research next time and that has to be a good thing.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Everything ain't for everyone...

Including feedback.

I would be inclined to ask him what kind of feedback he's after and certainly wouldn't use emotive phrasing like 'throw the book across the room' - phrase which I see regular histrionic use of by Chronners.

It seems like by sharing your outrage at his errors you want to make him feel the same as you. It's important to know what you want out of the exchange as well as him. That way you feel like you've achieved more than just giving a negative review.

pH

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I would disagree with your interpretation of the space opera genre there Ray.

Obviously I'm considering one end of the market, but the adventure is the thing, not really how society or humanity is affected by scientific changes.