User:DoctorWho42/Naturalistic science fiction

Naturalistic science fiction, a term coined by Ronald D. Moore, is a "presentation of a fantastical situation in naturalistic terms." It is an effort to write science fiction teleplays for shows such as the revised Battlestar Galactica series or Joss Whedon's  Firefly with the scientific realism found in hard SF combined with a stark flawed realism of characters and situations echoing that of soft SF. This concept in SF teleplays attempts to dismiss the thematic clichés of other television SF. Unlike most hard SF writing, however, naturalistic science fiction places as much importance on characterization as technical realism, if not more. Both the short-lived Firefly television series and the anime/manga Planetes applied many naturalistic SF concepts. Although the term reflects a recent development in science fiction television, aspects of "naturalistic science fiction" can be seen in films such as Alien and Blade Runner. The best example of this in earlier science fiction is Blake's 7, a BBC science fiction drama series that very strongly resembles the later American series Firefly.

As described by its proponents, naturalistic science fiction may exhibit these characteristics:


 * Production elements of naturalistic science fiction attempt to avoid the distancing effect of traditional science fiction. Rather than trying to create an alien or futuristic environment with sets and costumes, the "look" of the show is firmly grounded in contemporary architecture, technology, and fashion.  This allows the viewer to readily identify with the setting and characters.  In the "Galactica" series, for example, the starship Colonial One, which acts as the President of the Colonies' home and office is quite clearly modeled after the contemporary US President's flying command center Air Force One.  A first-time viewer seeing the Colonial One set would be able to immediately recognize the similar elements.  Also, rather than having characters wear "futuristic" clothing fashions, civilians wear present-day Earth business suits, etc.


 * Editorial elements would avoid the traditional cinematographic styles of television SF where the camera makes a series of fast, clipped cuts between characters, locales, and events. Instead, the camera flows with the environment and other characters to maintain as much of an actual "presence" of the viewer within the area of the events. Sharp camera cuts would also be avoided to keep the orientation of the viewer from being disturbed. Shots on characters may seem lengthy to pull the viewer into a dramatic moment or to add a greater visual examination of the reactions of a character, rather than a quick reaction with perhaps a character's line to punctuate the moment. A documentary style is used with the camera work throughout, as if an amateur cameraman were filming the series live (including the special effects shots).  Thus scenes depicting space battles do not use sweeping, cinematic camera angles, but chaotic footage that has the camera constantly moving, zooming, and out of focus. In Firefly, both are used: sweeping cinematics with the grand, more futuristic Alliance, and out of focus camera angles with odd zooms and off-center shots for the more common characters.


 * Storylines in naturalistic SF avoid the use of elements that may be expected in traditional SF but might immediately lead the viewer to doubt the realism of the events. SF clichés such as alternate universes and time travel and other fictions that aren't experienced in the real world are played down in favor of events and situations that could actually occur in the viewer's life. Likewise, discussion of grandiose technology is avoided.


 * Science in the teleplay would ideally adhere to realistic physics, and would not violate the principles of Einsteinian general relativity. (An exception to this would be the inertial artificial gravity featured in both Battlestar Galactica and Firefly. In the same fashion, the latter show apparently also features acceleration dampers.) Sounds cannot be heard in space; instead, viewers might hear the sounds of the ship as the pilot may hear them while inside. High-speed space flight, whether by a fighter craft or capital ship, follows the Newtonian laws of inertia. Ideally, any faster-than-light travel would not flagrantly violate basic physical requirements, though any such travel would violate the current understanding of General Relativity. Aliens or extra-terrestrials that are recognizably "humans with makeup" do not appear. Indeed, Firefly had no non-human characters at all, and the only non-human characters in Battlestar Galactica are derived from humans (the human-created Cylons). Ships in Babylon 5 were similarly bound by Newton's laws, though the show itself only displays naturalistic tendencies.


 * Human character archetypes frequently seen in television SF, such as a "heroic leader", a "young boy genius", elite crewmen with near superheroic-abilities, luck and bravery, and so-called redshirt crewmen are avoided. While characters may generally be written as skillful and knowledgeable, they also have recognizable flaws, such as alcoholism, and other complexities that viewers immediately recognize.  Main characters do not universally do what is "right", but sometimes make mistakes.  Supporting cast members are often recurring, fleshed-out minor characters with their own backstory. This adds depth to the main cast members interacting with them, and creates more dramatic tension when their lives are placed in danger.  In other television SF, when a main cast member's life is placed in danger there is little actual chance that the character will die. The resulting "bubble" of safety around those characters causes the audience to learn that only new characters who have not appeared previously are in danger during action scenes.  In Battlestar Galactica and other naturalistic science fiction, the supporting characters are developed almost as much as the main characters, so when their lives are put in danger the audience is engaged in their fate because there is actually a possibility that they will die. Moore has stated that in the format he has developed for the new BSG, he is not afraid to kill off popular recurring characters, in order to establish the drama that when a dangerous situation occurs characters could actually die as a result. As another example, in Babylon 5, main characters were faced with long-term challenges such as drug addiction, alchoholism, and racial prejudice; the show also featured the unexpected deaths of several popular characters.

Other science fiction programs that previously tended towards the fantastic have recently adopted stylistic elements similar to those of self-proclaimed naturalistic science fiction. For example, in the 2005 season of Doctor Who, several episodes set in the distant future had characters dressed in clothes that would not have seemed out of place in 2005. Speaking about the Editor, a villain from the year 200,000, Doctor Who producer Russell T. Davies told the documentary Doctor Who Confidential, "...let's not put him in a silly costume, let's not have capes and nonsense going on that evil geniuses tend to wear &mdash; let's just put him in a suit, a really 20th/21st century suit, so you can actually connect with the image, look sharp and sexy." Also, Christopher Eccleston as the Ninth Doctor in the new series dresses in a fairly contemporary style, instead of what Davies called the "foppish" appearance of some past Doctors.

Criticisms
The re-imagined Battlestar Galactica was widely acknowledged as addressing many of the deficiencies common in television science fiction — in particular, weak character development and general cliches. However, some also felt that Moore's general philosophy of naturalistic science fiction undermines the escape value of science fiction, especially in regard to the widespread trends of cynicism, angst, gritty realism, and allegory to recent events (most notably 9/11) currently popularized as key elements in television drama.

The heavy use of allegory is also seen by many as distracting from an enjoyable immersion in a fully realized fictional world. J.R.R. Tolkien, whose Middle-earth is one of the most popular and most fully realized fictional worlds, was known for his dislike of allegory and maintained that his Lord of the Rings trilogy was not, contrary to popular belief, an allegory to World War II and contains no intended allegory to contemporary (for his time) issues or events. Gregory Benford, author of one of the books of the Second Foundation Trilogy, wrote in the Afterword of Foundation's Fear:

"SF (novels) give us worlds which are not to be taken as metaphors but as real. We are asked to participate in wrenchingly strange events, not merely watch them for clues as to what they're really talking about... The Mars and stars and digital deserts of our best novels are, finally, to be taken as real, as if to say; Life isn't like this, it is this. Journeys can take us to fresh places, not merely return us to ourselves."

Naturalistic science fiction shows are, of course, not entirely scientifically accurate: Battlestar Galactica and Firefly both use artificial gravity technology, which on present-day Earth is yet to be a reality. However, critics have hailed BSG as a major advancement towards more realistically portrayed science fiction stories, as opposed to the rampant "technobabble" in the Star Trek series which preceded it.

Naturalistic vs Realistic
It is important to remember that the purpose of naturalism is to create stories that feel realistic, not stories that are realistic. Firefly, for example, is set far in a future and deals with the aftermath of a complex inter-planetary war. Explaining this back story in a realistic way would require longer explanations than an audience would tolerate. But, by using costumes, language and images that evoke the American Civil War, these details can be given so that the audience absorbs them almost subconsciously.

So, naturalism is exactly the same story telling device that is used when historical plays are given new settings. Such as transporting Shakespear's Julius Ceaser to 1930's Europe.

Counter-Points
Although no major critics, reviews, or media publications ever made the criticisms above, the production team of Battlestar Galactica has made several (indirect) comments which seem to offer a counterpoint to the view that the series should focus on the escapism aspects of science fiction, or the view that it draws too much allegory to 9/11 and themes surrounding the post-9/11 world. In the DVD commentary for the Battlestar Galactica 2003 miniseries, executive producer Ron D. Moore and director Michael Rymer expressed the following (during the scene in which Cylon nuclear bombs are destroying the Colonial capital city, visually drawing heavy parallels to 9/11):


 * Rymer:...I think [Moore] is particularly right about the resonance, I felt a lot of resonance reading [the script for the miniseries] post-September 11th, that the immediate, the six months after September 11th there seemed to be a deepening of the American experience, where people would say hello to each other in public spaces, and suddenly we were focused on family, and heros, and loss, and bonding together. And then, within nine months, everyone was watching "The Bachelorette"...and the worst sort of shallow garbage.  And I said to myself at some point watching TV...at some level, was Al Qaeda right about us?  Are we *that* superficial, and decadent that we just go back, we sort of tap back into this, this meaninglessness?


 * Moore: When one of your leaders says, when the top of the pyramid looks around and says, "Well, the response to 9/11 is to keep shopping", when that's the 'noble sacrifice' that you're asked to make...is this really right?  And this show, I mean, this series began in that world.  Began with David [Eick] and I talking about things that were happening today, and you know, we wanted this particular piece of science fiction to be relevant, to comment on humanity, to take a hard look at the culture, and what was happening around us, and that it would have escapist tendencies in it, and attributes, but that it wasn't purely escapist.  That the show was ultimately about something.  It was about us, this point in time, and what we're going through.