Aliens that are less or more than human... which do you prefer?

[jjabrams55]

I was just using the words hero or villain as examples of character rolls. I just can't list all of them... There are so many different rolls a character in a novel can fill that just naming the few obvious ones is easiest, but that does not mean that the rolls are limited to that.

One just needs to create something the helps with ease of plot movement as well. You need the interactions between the characters to be (depending on the events within the story) either easy (more human aliens) or harder (less human aliens) in order to create the right tension and story movement for your book.

So if what they are does not matter than write them however you like. To be honest a good writer can make anything sympathetic to the readers/audience look at Enders Game or Galaxy Quest...

True... a good writer can write about a guy making a peanut butter sandwich to eat entertaining. All he would have to do is make throw some obstacles in the way and put in a resolution at the end.

The classic hero story everyone is familiar with is one of conflict. There are three broad categories of conflict to choose from for any story. Man against man. Man against self. Man against the environment.

For a story about something as simple as making a peanut butter sandwich, the writer would have to think about what would be most compelling/interesting. Either A: Somebody doesn't want him to have a peanut butter sandwich or somehow hinders him from achieving it, or B: He has some personal issues that make it hard for him to make the sandwich (which would be really sad BTW... compelling perhaps if not only absurd), or C: The environment around him makes it really HARD... like he is a survivor of a nuclear bomb attack, and he has all this bread but not peanut butter.

Personally... I would find C most compelling... although for fun effect I may leave out the fact that he is a survivor of a nuke attack until the ending.


Actually for scenario C, I could use all three conflicts... man against man would be easy in nuke survivor situation over food. Man against self could also occur if the nuke attack effected the man with severe PTSD, and the environment alone would be a good fight in of itself before reaching his goal.

The question of any and all stories is... who is gonna win? And how are they gonna win?

 

[Elventine]

True... a good writer can write about a guy making a peanut butter sandwich to eat entertaining. All he would have to do is make throw some obstacles in the way and put in a resolution at the end.

The classic hero story everyone is familiar with is one of conflict. There are three broad categories of conflict to choose from for any story. Man against man. Man against self. Man against the environment.

For a story about something as simple as making a peanut butter sandwich, the writer would have to think about what would be most compelling/interesting. Either A: Somebody doesn't want him to have a peanut butter sandwich or somehow hinders him from achieving it, or B: He has some personal issues that make it hard for him to make the sandwich (which would be really sad BTW... compelling perhaps if not only absurd), or C: The environment around him makes it really HARD... like he is a survivor of a nuclear bomb attack, and he has all this bread but not peanut butter.

Personally... I would find C most compelling... although for fun effect I may leave out the fact that he is a survivor of a nuke attack until the ending.


Actually for scenario C, I could use all three conflicts... man against man would be easy in nuke survivor situation over food. Man against self could also occur if the nuke attack effected the man with severe PTSD, and the environment alone would be a good fight in of itself before reaching his goal.

The question of any and all stories is... who is gonna win? And how are they gonna win?

You are preaching too the choir here...

 

[jjabrams55]

You are preaching too the choir here...

Hey... I google info on writing. Much of it is pure garbage... but on occasion I actually get helpful info.


What I just wrote was basically inspired about how to write outlines, which I plan to use.

The simplest outline I could make would be based off conflict, and then the three MAJOR turning points in the story that lead to the resolution of the main problem.

Wallah! Story solved.

Because let's admit the hard, cold truth... writing a story is a story in of itself. It is a problem that needs solving... just like any story has.

 

[jjabrams55]

While this is an interesting thought experiment, I wonder how much of it will be noticed by the reader. There are a lot of perfectly workable SF stories where the story's aliens are simply a bit like wasps, fascists, New Age gurus, elves, samurai or whatever else seems appropriate. Provided that it isn't glaringly wrong or done really crudely, I don't really see the problem in saying "Well, I want them to be like this, because the story requires it, so let's write them that way and provide sufficient background to make it plausible." I'm not sure that much else is required unless the book is going to be about the aliens themselves, like The Left Hand of Darkness, say.

I think I must be missing something here as I don't get the idea of aliens being "more" or "less" than humans. Surely they're just a bit like people but different in some strange way? Or are we talking about things like the Alien which are unintelligent but still dangerous and interesting?

Yes... the story is going to have the aliens as main characters. That is why I'm going through such depth.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

If one does not consider the OP question, they will end up making a race that is either:

1. A race that is merely a substitute for something else (the klingons of Star Trek were inspired by the russians, with likely a strong mongol influence as well).

2. A race that is merely a copy of what someone else has already done.

Well, I disagree. We know a heck of a lot of stuff that has never made its way into science fiction yet. There are, for instance, millions of species of creatures on our planet that could be used as the basis for an alien race, and they all have different biological needs and drives which a writer could extrapolate from to come up with a likely psychology, culture, code of ethics etc. for an intelligent species with similar needs and drives. There is so much known material to begin with, and the human imagination when put to work, examining the possibilities in depth instead of coming up with facile conclusions, can and has come up with a dazzling array of alien species in works of speculative fiction, and no doubt will continue to do so.

Besides, two authors can take the same basic concept and each come up with something that is radically different from the other. The only way it ends up being copying is if the author is too lazy to bring his or her own perspective to bear and ask the questions (and come up with the answers) that only he or she would think to ask.

But my remark was meant to point out my discomfort with the idea that what is different from human would have to be either better or worse. Why? Might the same race not be better (according to our judgements) in some ways and worse in others? And in many cases how would we make those judgements?

___

On another note (and putting on my moderator's hat) if you will take a look at the messages you are answering you will see toward the right side of your screen the option +Quote. That's multi-quote which you can use when answering several different messages at once, consolidating everything into one post. We would really prefer that you -- and anyone else who has been unaware of this option -- use that function rather than posting a string of separate posts one after the other. Thanks.

 

[jjabrams55]

Well, I disagree. We know a heck of a lot of stuff that has never made its way into science fiction yet. There are, for instance, millions of species of creatures on our planet that could be used as the basis for an alien race, and they all have different biological needs and drives which a writer could extrapolate from to come up with a likely psychology, culture, code of ethics etc. for an intelligent species with similar needs and drives. There is so much known material to begin with, and the human imagination when put to work, examining the possibilities in depth instead of coming up with facile conclusions, can and has come up with a dazzling array of alien species in works of speculative fiction, and no doubt will continue to do so.

Besides, two authors can take the same basic concept and each come up with something that is radically different from the other. The only way it ends up being copying is if the author is too lazy to bring his or her own perspective to bear and ask the questions (and come up with the answers) that only he or she would think to ask.

But my remark was meant to point out my discomfort with the idea that what is different from human would have to be either better or worse. Why? Might the same race not be better (according to our judgements) in some ways and worse in others? And in many cases how would we make those judgements?

___

On another note (and putting on my moderator's hat) if you will take a look at the messages you are answering you will see toward the right side of your screen the option +Quote. That's multi-quote which you can use when answering several different messages at once, consolidating everything into one post. We would really prefer that you -- and anyone else who has been unaware of this option -- use that function rather than posting a string of separate posts one after the other. Thanks.

Was not aware of it... will try it it next time.

Nonetheless, what you said still proves my argument. What you said about other Earth species is still known information. Yet sifting through all that info is not something I really need to do. All I need to do is create a race I'm satisfied with... and I am.

No... one does not need to use humans as a base, but I think aliens are easier to relate to when you let them have some human needs.

Even animals, for all their differences with us humans, have enough in common with us that we can relate to them. Too many differences and characters can't relate.


As for what is better or worse than human needs, that was regarding what I can stomach as a writer with what I create as far as aliens.

I cannot stomach making alien races I myself dislike by giving them traits that only the worst in humanity display. I am quite fine with making alien races with traits I can stomach, because it is quite possible to make a villain from that.

I don't like making an entire race of villains. I like to think that that is a choice for individual aliens to make or not make.