Talk:Sci-fi

Usage avoidance
Science fiction fans of the "serious" as well as the frivolous kind often actively avoid the use of the term "sci-fi" in order not to hurt the feelings of those who feel embarassed or otherwise hurt by the jokey pun.

Thus, the appearance of the term "sci-fi", in text or in conversation, is sometimes an indication of a certain lack of politeness or of a certain degree of ignorance or both.

In other words, these people would not recognize Isaac Asimov's three laws of robotics if it hit them in the face. It is logical to very discretely help them or to quietly ignore them, depending on the circumstances.

The article does not currently spell out the terribly "loaded" nature of the term or its use as a practical way of distinguishing the literate from those who are repeating things without understanding what they are saying.

Even though I started helping to flesh out the list of authors, etc., I think the lists should be removed and replaced by text directing the user to science fiction where there are already extensive lists. UtherSRG 18:06, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Done.  Revert if you disagree.  Samw 18:15, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Agreed! And even more so. Putting more emphasis on a less troublesome term (science fiction) is certainly an excellent way of lessening the impact of this sometimes difficult one, without trying to deny its existence. AlainV. 2003-12-06

A Clockwork Orange
I am puzzled by the statement that A Clockwork Orange is described as sci-fi though it is "nothing in the movie to blatantly suggest sci-fi, except ...it takes place ... in the not too distant future."

Surely A Clockwork Orange meets many definition of science fiction. Is this an example of the "it's by a serious author, it can't be sci fi" philosophy (applied e.g. to On The Beach, works of Doris Lessing etc.) It is about the extrapolation of social trends, questions the abuse of science, and imagines future linguistic development. Yes, there are no rocket ships. Notinasnaid 10:57, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Belated reply: It takes place in the future and examines sociological changes. That puts it solidly into the category of science fiction. Lee M 17:04, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh, it's definitely science fiction, but it's far too serious and well-conceived to be "sci-fi". Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 23:53, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * The problem is that fantasy is often mis categorized as sci-fi, just because the fewer doesn't understand the difference.

Scientifiction
I recall seeing the term scientifiction (scientific__fiction) before, especially in old material discussion SF stemming from the UK. (At least until the early 1960s). I am not sure if it should be mentioned in this article, however. Jordi·✆ 00:11, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * The term was the original word for science fiction, once it started being a separate genre - and was coined by Hugo Gernsback, if I remember correctly (after whom the Hugo awards were named) in the 1920s. It is a very rare term today. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 06:44, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Awesome reference. Now I realize what the title The Gernsback Continuum refers to. Jordi·✆ 07:26, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Merge to Science fiction
It has been suggested that this article be moved to science fiction. I cannot find any discussion of this, but someone went ahead and did it. This seems to have been jumping the gun a bit, so I will revert.

I oppose such a move. It is to assume that "sci fi" is a simple synonym of science fiction. It is not, for the reasons described in this article. Notinasnaid 20:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)