Science Fiction vs Fantasy, or, Optimism vs Nostalgia

It's a common argument that I see: science fiction is intellectual, productive, inspirational, innovative, optimistic, and emphasises everything good and worthwhile about humanity.  Fantasy, however, is superstitious, nostalgic, stagnant, and emphasises the glorification of the past over hope for the future.  It's one I utterly disagree with - what of dystopian science fiction, for example, and those fantasy stories which open up realms of insight and supposition normally the domain of science fiction - but the dichotomy usually favours science fiction as being "good" and fantasy being "bad."  It's a dangerous stereotype, and one you'd think the supposedly higher-minded SF fans would recognize and avoid.

Well, I think I've found the ultimate example of that argument. Enter Science Fiction vs Fantasy by Ryan Somma.





The first part of this article fixates on a fictional debate that boils down to that most absurd and preposterous pseudo-argument, "mine's bigger." It's kind of breathtaking, and I'm half convinced it's a troll:

Fanboy: Hey gang! Did you read The Sword of Shanara? The characters traveled hundreds of miles described in excruciating detail for hundreds of pages, until they reached the ultimate battle between good and evil! Cool huh?
Scientist: Whatever. The characters in Red Planet traveled 48 million miles to Mars, while those in 2001 traveled 369 million miles to Jupiter. Characters in Asimov’s Foundation books travel millions of light-years all over the Milky Way galaxy in routine manner. Isn’t it amazing what people can accomplish when they don’t have to walk everywhere? Thank a scientist for your planes, trains, automobiles, and spaceflight whydontcha.

Fanboy: Yeah, but did you see in The Lord of the Rings when Gandalf fought the Balrog all the way down a really deep hole and then all the way back up to the top of a mountain peak!?!?
Scientist: Big whoop. The adventurers in The Core traveled to the very center of the Earth, fighting technological, natural, and human hazards all the way down and all the way back up to the Earth’s crust again. Characters in Fantastic Voyage and Innerspace fought their way all through the human body in microscopic form.

Fanboy: Ooookay… But did you see all those maps having to do with the Wheel of Time books? It’s a huge continent! Pretty epic, huh?
Scientist: Thpppt. Not. The film Contact opens with a satellite shot of Earth and pulls away, out of the solar system, out of the galaxy, and out to a view of many galaxies. The film Men in Black pulls out past many galaxies to many universes. Maybe you can find some flat-Earthers to impress with you dinky little maps.

Fanboy: The Dragon Riders in Eragon spent thousands of years protecting and guarding and stuff. Thousands of years!!! Isn’t that amazing?
Scientist: No, that’s “we todd did.” (Say that outloud until you get it.) The film A.I. begins in our near future and then jumps 10,000 years ahead of that. And you know what? Things changed. Technology advanced incomprehensibly, society changed and its inhabitants evolved. Compare this to a bunch of dumbass Dragon Riders who never updated their swords to guns or dragons to fighter jets despite having millenia to do so? Dude, that’s Weak.

Fanboy: The Balrog, Godzilla, and Dragons are really big. That’s got to count for something. Right?
Scientist: Whaddya want, a cookie? V’ger, from Star Trek, The Motion Picture, is so large that much of the movie is spent showing the Enterprise traveling through it. The living ocean in Solaris covers an entire planet. V’ger wants to find god. Solaris is so advanced we cannot even decipher it’s motivations. Colossal Science Ficiton beings, have much bigger aspirations than growling and smashing things.

Fanboy: There were thousands of monsters and people on the battlefields of Lord of the Rings. When Sauron is destroyed a volcano erupts and the earth swallows its legions of monsters. Now that was awesome! Am I right? I mean, am I right???
Scientist: (Rolling eyes and pantomiming masturbation.) War of the Worlds reduced entire cities to rubble. Star Wars blew up entire planets. 2010 transformed Jupiter into a star just to thaw out Europa for life to evolve there. Your “epic” armies are kind of cute though.

Fanboy: Okay. Okay. Okay. I got one. In LOTR Arwen Evenstar’s father warns her that, as an immortal, if she abandons her elfin people, her mortal lover will eventually die and she will be alone forever. Forever! Top that Science Fiction!
Scientist: Bite me fanboy. In Science Fiction, all of the immortal elves would be cursed, as eventually the Universe would dissipate to an entropic state of absolute zero, leaving them frozen in total darkness forever, completely devoid of emotional, intellectual, or spiritual growth (Not too different from sitting through all 16-plus hours of the extended DVD version of Lord of the Rings). Sucks to be an elf.

Oh, so your fantasy world is described in remarkable detail?  Well my science fiction galaxy is bigger.  So your balrogs and dragons are huge?  Well my alien starships and cosmic beings are huger.  So your fantasy spans millennia?  Well my science fiction lasts eons.  It almost reads like a parody of such a juvenile argument, so obsessed with scope and scale as it is.  It's like saying Cleopatra is better than Citizen Kane not because of any cinematic merits, but because it cost more to make, has a larger cast, and lasts hours longer.

This paragraph in particular takes my breath away:

Fanboy: Yeah, but did you see in The Lord of the Rings when Gandalf fought the Balrog all the way down a really deep hole and then all the way back up to the top of a mountain peak!?!?
Scientist: Big whoop. The adventurers in The Core traveled to the very center of the Earth, fighting technological, natural, and human hazards all the way down and all the way back up to the Earth’s crust again. Characters in Fantastic Voyage and Innerspace fought their way all through the human body in microscopic form. 

This fictional scientist is exalting The Core* above The Lord of the Rings purely on the justification that the characters in The Core travelled pretty far.  I cannot understand how this fictional scientist cannot be impressed that Gandalf fought the Balrog for miles on foot over a matter of days.  That's what's impressive about the battle, not the actual units of distance.  "Oh, so Pheidippedes ran 140 miles in two days to warn the Athenians that the Persians were coming?  Pfft, that's nothing: Charles Lindburgh flew 3,600 miles in 33 hours!"  It completely misses the point of what makes the journey so remarkable in the first place.

Part of me is thinking this has to be a troll.  Only the most myopic, literalistic mind could look at the struggles, details and wonders of fantasy fiction and think "mine's bigger, ergo it's better."  A detailed map of a fantasy world is nothing compared to a vague diagram of a fantasy galaxy.  An arduous journey of thousands of miles on foot is immaterial in relation to hopping on a flying saucer to Mars.  A story told over the course of millennia is minor next to one told over star-cycles.  And, as noted above, a single man running on foot over rough terrain can't hold a candle to another man in a plane flying over the Atlantic.

Nonetheless, let's just assume it's snark, even if it fails to make fantasy look bad and makes scientists look like petty, stats-obsessed weenies. The second part of the article is easier to understand, in that it doesn't come across as a parody - but it's still problematic.

In Star Trek human beings travel through space in a type of flying saucer, secretly visiting primitive civilizations like the one we live in presently, never interfering with them so as not to violate the “Prime Directive.” Star Trek provides a powerfully positive vision of what the human race may become through scientific understanding, technological progress, and human ambition.

Conan, The Barbarian is about a barbarian. He travels around a teensy-weensy percentage of planet Earth’s total landmass, chopping things with his sword, and seeking revenge against the man who killed his parents. Conan presents a glimpse into a single lifetime from ancient human history, and one we may aspire to if we abandon all technology, burn down all libraries, abolish all Universities, and stop wiping our butts.

I love Star Trek. Star Trek inspires me to educate and improve myself. I know I can’t achieve in my lifetime what Star Trek presents, but I also know my children’s children’s children will one day make similarly fantastic accomplishments, so long as they remain as inspired as I am by Science Fiction’s vision.

At the same time, Conan, while entertaining, doesn’t provide a practical model for inspiring present-day action. I like having a clean butt, and I want my children to have clean butts; therefore, Conan doesn’t hold much appeal as role-model. The Lord of the Rings films were entertaining, but we all know the reality is that Frodo would be missing lots of teeth, Gandalf would be a very stinky old man, and Aragorn would have a serious flea problem.

I find this dichotomy so superfluous that it makes my head hurt a little.  This gentleman likes Star Trek because he believes showing a positive vision of the future is more useful and practical for modern action than a gritty vision of the past.  I disagree: I believe both visions have something vital to offer the present day, but obviously for different reasons.

First, Trek. I agree with all the things Ryan says, but with the qualifier that even with humanity being as advanced as it was, it wasn't all roses.  In the original series, the Federation was still wrestling with prejudice, xenophobia, racism, political strife, ethical conundrums, and questions of war: the difference was that humanity was far more united than any point in history prior to this.  In TNG, the problems were exacerbated as the Federation became complacent and unprepared for dealing with what was out there, proving that much as we'd like to think the Federation's Utopia was absolute, there is a whole universe out there beyond those of that little corner of the Alpha Quadrant.  Yet the Federation continued to work on, striving to improve itself with every obstacle and problem thrown their way.  It's a compelling and optimistic worldview.

Now, Conan. Sure, one could dismiss Conan as simple Puerile Adolescent Wish Fulfillment at best, and dangerous nostalgia for a past-that-never-was at worst, but that would be easy.  That's what Ryan does.  However, there are several reasons why an antediluvian world can offer insight and relevance to our world, in exactly the same way as Trek: applicability.  The barbarism-civilization dynamic has clear relevance to the modern world, as the age of Empire has fallen to be replaced by globalism and multiculturalism, leading to conflict and troubles.  Our own search for truth and knowledge can be compared to the journeys of Conan as he explores the Hyborian Age.  Showing people with their lives nailed to their spines without the benefits of computers, advanced medicines and the comforts of the Information Age tells us about how far we've come, and how different we are - for good and ill.  There really is an awful lot in there that works as inspiration.

There's a quote by George Santaya which shows exactly why looking to the past, or even facsimiles of the past, has value: "the one who does not remember history is bound to live through it again."  That's one of the most powerfully important things Conan shows us: that much as we'd like to think we're on a constant upward climb, there's no telling if our future is assured.  Despite our micro-processors and quantum theories, we're at the mercy of the elements as surely as our hominid ancestors were.  A sufficiently devastating cataclysm could easily send us back to a pre-industrial time regardless of our current technological level, and it'll be a long time before we can avoid or combat the mighty of nature.

So we don't need to abandon all technology, burn down all libraries, abolish all Universities, and relinquish personal hygiene for the Hyborian Age to become our future: all we need is for Yellowstone to erupt, La Palma to sink and start a megatsunami, or some cosmic terror like a Gamma Ray Burst or asteroid impact to sunder our magnificent civilization. In fact, that's how the Trek universe was born: in the ashes of World War 3, responsible for millions upon millions of deaths, and the complete destruction of the world's governments.

As an aside, it's bothersome that a supposed scientist still adheres to the old hyperbole about ancient hygiene, forgetting about how the Mesopotamians and Celts used soap, and that without artificial sugars in their diet their teeth would be better than the scurvy-blighted Renaissance.  Obviously, it's true that hygiene back then was far inferior to nowadays, and I'm grateful for the comforts of civilization, but one mustn't forget the Middle Ages didn't have AIDS, MRSA, radiation poisoning or any number of maladies which accompany modern advances.  Just saying: yes, we have it better, but they didn't have it as bad as the stereotype would have it.

It gets worse.

Not that we could aspire to anything in fantasy stories even if we wanted to. That’s because fantasy stories are about “chosen ones,” be they kings, hobbits, or wizards. Only these elites, born into their castes, may save the world.
It’s also really boring. Here’s every single “chosen one” story line:
Someguy: I think he is the chosen one!
Choosen One: But I’m just some doofy pud-wacker!
Everybody Else: He is the chosen one!!!
The Grand Poo-Bah: He has defeated the melodramatic personification of pure concentrated evil!!! Thus, proving his status as the chosen one!!!
Everybody: Hooray for the chosen one! Let’s party!
Chosen One: Hooray for me!
There, now you can skip seeing Lord of the Rings Eragon, Harry Potter, Willow,, Star Wars, Highlander, Dragonslayer, Flash Gordon, Transformers The Movie, The Golden compass, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, The Matrix, The Neverending Story, Dune, Legend, Excalibur, and the New Testament.
If you weren’t born with “metachlorians” in your blood, superpowers, a magical birthmark, a fair complexion, blonde hair, blue eyes, and a penus, then I’m sorry, but you don’t qualify as a chosen one, and no amount of body building, martial arts training, gender reassignment surgery, motivational speakers, higher education, psychotherapy, hard work or determination will every make you the “chosen one.”

OK, this HAS to be a troll, since although I've seen some people claim Star Wars and Flash Gordon are fantasy instead of science fiction (is "fantasy science-fiction" too complex an idea?  Is "scientific romance" outlawed?), I've never heard of anyone calling Transformers, The Matrix or Dune anything other than science fiction.

But let's play you're game about chosen ones dominating fantasy films:

The Lord of the Rings: Yeah, Aragorn's heir to the throne of Gondor and Arnor, but the story is clearly centered around Frodo & Sam, two normal Hobbits from not-particularly-remarkable families.  No magical birthmark, no superpowers, no auspicious birth circumstances.
Willow: the titular character does play a substantial role in the prophecy and chosen one story, but just like in The Lord of the Rings, Willow himself is a completely unremarkable character save for the fact he's a dwarf.
Dragonslayer: Galen is a lowly wizard's apprentice of no special talents who has extraordinary circumstances thrust upon him, which he rises to.

So, erm, no, you can't skip seeing half the films on the list.  And that's not even getting into the many fantasy stories that don't have any prophesied chosen ones like Conan (which he naturally doesn't bother to mention, seeing as it conflicts with his "chosen one" hypothesis), the Lankhmar series, A Song of Ice and Fire, and countless other Sword-and-Sorcery tales...

You know what, I'm not going to go any further.  I could talk about how Ryan completely ignores the many people who were inspired by Tolkien, Lewis and the like into worthy careers just so he can talk up the careers of Brin and Asimov, and how he unwittingly perpetuates the very sort of half-truths and myth-making he sees in fantasy fiction.  But I won't.  I've already spent an inordinate amount of time discussing it.

I think this is a troll.  His arguments are absolutely unscientific, it isn't written with the clarity and vigour one would expect from someone with multiple academic credits (even if it was just for fun), he comes across as impossibly close-minded in regards to the argument.  I could think of many people I know who are as fanatical about fantasy as they are of science-fiction, myself included: the implication is that there is some vast divide between fantasy fans and science fiction fans**, and I do not believe one to exist.  Ryan has written another article, and if you can believe it, it's even more brainless than this one.  Way to let the science fiction fans down, man.

The question of what science fiction and fantasy has to offer the modern world is a worthy one, but it deserves more intelligent discussion than Freudian size comparisons.

EDIT: While I stopped short at going full into a discussion of the false dichotomy of "science fiction always wins because fantasy is dumb," Taran posted links to two essays which encapsulate my thoughts almost perfectly anyway: "Spacesuit, Blasters, and Science(!)" which I've mentioned before and continue to recommend, and "Science Fiction, Fantasy, and the Battle for New Myth." In particular, this choice quote by J.R.R. Tolkien speaks volumes:

Fantasy is a natural human activity. It certainly does not insult Reason, and it does not either blunt the appetite for, nor obscure the perception of, scientific verity. On the contrary. The keener and clearer is the reason, the better the fantasy it will make. […] For creative fantasy is founded on the recognition that things are so in the world…on a recognition of fact, but not slavery to it.
 - “On Fairy Stories”, 18

Really, what more could there possibly be to add?

*And we know this is a fictional scientist, given the reputation of The Core among the scientific community: no scientist worth their salt would cite that film in a remotely positive manner.

** And since Star Wars has one minor vaguely mystical element to it, not to mention all those apparently hideous geeks who line up around the block for the new films, they MUST be fantasy films, not our respectable, intellectual science fiction, oh no siree)