From: yamauchi@ces.cwru.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Why Hard SF Should Be Character-Oriented (was Re: Diamond-hard SF)
Date: 22 Nov 92 23:37:02
Organization: Case Western Reserve University
Distribution: world
	<1992Nov6.195713.14495@math.ucla.edu> <1dfifgINN3mm@agate.berkeley.edu>
	<BxtJ4w.FDs@techbook.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: yuggoth.ces.cwru.edu
In-reply-to: szabo@techbook.com's message of Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:58:02 GMT

In article <BxtJ4w.FDs@techbook.com> szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov6.195713.14495@math.ucla.edu> dstein@oak.math.ucla.edu (David Stein) writes:
>>I'm willing to read a so-so
>>written sf novel if it is full of original and startling ideas.

>I second this, and go further.  Characters and plot are the
>exemplar components of mundane fiction.  I do not care to see them 
>at all, unless they are important to the technology or to the artistry 
>of the story

>In good diamond-hard SF, mundane characterization or plot movement 
>is edited out, right along with the bad grammar, violations of the 
>laws of physics, cliched ideas, engineering illiteracy, economic
>illiteracy, and other crap that we should not have to put up with.

I disagree strongly.

In my opinion, the best hard SF is character-oriented.  Why?  Because
science, technology, and exploration are unimportant?  No, exactly the
opposite -- because the type of people who are driven to pursue
progress in science, technology, and exploration can make fascinating
characters, if they are done right.  Portraying these people in a
compelling fashion requires both that the author care about his
characters (unlike pure idea/style writers) _and_ that the author care
about science/technology/exploration (unlike most mainstream writers).

The type of people who are driven towards these goals are largely
ignored by the mainstream literary community.  Emotions such as wonder
and exhilaration seem rare in most literary fiction as compared to,
say, guilt or anxiety.  But the former emotions are every bit as part
of the human experience as the latter, and the people who are driven
to seek the former are every bit as worthy of deep characterization
and those who seek to avoid the latter.

In my opinion, this is a role that hard SF authors are uniquely
qualified to fill.  They _understand_ why space exploration,
artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, and virtual reality are
emotionally compelling as well as intellectually stimulating.  So they
can create characters who are driven to pursue these dreams, and do so
with depth.  Such depth would be lacking if an author who couldn't
empathize with these drives were to attempt similar characters.

This is why Vernor Vinge's scientists are more believable than Kurt
Vonnegut's -- not because Vinge is necessarily a better writer than
Vonnegut, but because Vinge understands what drives scientists --
Vonnegut doesn't.

I can tolerate weak characterization for the sake of fascinating ideas
-- just as I can tolerate weak science for the sake of fascinating
characters.  But my favorite authors are those who can do _everything_
right: original ideas, accurate science, innovating technology,
skillful writing, intricate world-building, _and_ compelling
characters.

And I'm pleased that their numbers seem to be increasing.

For examples of what I consider the best character-oriented hard SF, I
would recommend:

A Fire Upon The Deep -- Vernor Vinge
Anvil of Stars -- Greg Bear
The Quiet Pools -- Michael Kube-McDowell

And an excellent book I just finished reading yesterday:

Aristoi -- Walter Jon Williams
--
_______________________________________________________________________________

Brian Yamauchi			Case Western Reserve University
yamauchi@alpha.ces.cwru.edu	Department of Computer Engineering and Science
_______________________________________________________________________________

Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA