Academic Skills Plus Essay Example for Free

Academic Skills Plus Es asseverateAtwood writes What I mean by accomplishment lying is those books that descend from H. G. Wellss The War of the Worlds, which treats of an invasion by tentacled, blood-sucking Martians shot to Earth in coat go offisters things that could non possibly happen whereas, for me, risky fabrication means plots that descend from Jules Vernes books some submarines and wallow travel and such things that sincerely could happen but adept hadnt completely happened when the authors wrote the books. I would menage my own books in this second category no Martians. (From In other worlds, p.6)With these remarks in mind, is it useful to disclose between cognizance manufacturingalisation and regretful legend? In answering this question you might retrieve Le Guins suggestion that people who refer to their works as risky legend quite a than erudition fiction ar simply attempt to protect themselves from twain(prenominal) of the negative co nnotations associated with learning fiction (see In other worlds)? Discuss in relation to at least two works.Science fiction is often congeald as a wide literary genre think to fictional stories. It contains umteen subgenres, such as space opera, cyberpunk, utopia, dystopia, alternative histories and risky fiction. Although thither are an extensive number of subgenres, some writers, as Margaret Atwood, be possessed of been trying to differentiate risky fiction from science fiction. Maybe this vastness of subgenres existing under the genre science fiction is exactly the reason why Atwood found arouse to present this differentiation. When we consider science fiction stories, umteen different things bathroom came up to our mind, such as aliens, intergalactic travel, artificial intelligence and utopian (or dystopian) societies. Considering that, as we can notice in these examples, these topics can differ a lot from each(prenominal) other and it might be understandable that A twoodwanted to differentiate ( more than than just defining different subgenres) the kind of fiction related to more plausible things (things that could really happen, as she says).Definitely, speculative fiction books have a completely different scenario from cyberpunk, aliens or space opera works and this could wind up a desire to disconnect them in a more significantly manner. However, it is practical to affirm that this trait between science and speculative fiction is not useful and that there is no reason for devising it, especially considering that speculative fiction is just one more subgenre of science fiction. This thesis will be supported by a number of points presented throughout this essay. Firstly, it will be argued that the subgenre speculative fiction fits utterly into the definitions and requisites related to science fiction.Secondly, it will be discussed that Atwoods definition of speculative fiction is bleak and can change according to interpretation, and ov erly that it can be used to define as speculative fiction other books that she clearly had classified as belonging to science fiction. Thereby, her definition can be seen as not clear, which makes it not useful at all. Finally, it will be presented that Atwood seems to reinforce this discrepancy specially because agniseing speculative fiction from science fiction is convenient for her. There are some evidences for that, for example, Le Guin once said Atwood was trying to protect herself from negative connotations associated with science fiction. This is even noticeable considering that many of her attempts to define the genre contained irony and clichs.Firstly, it will be discussed that speculative fiction fits perfectly into the definitions and requisites related to the science fiction subgenres, which makes unnecessary and not useful the feature between them. It was stated before that science fiction has a big number of subgenres and it is clear that they differ considerably fr om each other. However, despite their singularities, all of them have one kind of cohesive element in common, which brings each subgenre to be defined as fragmentise of the genre science fiction. To define this common element noticed in all the science fiction subgenres, it is useful to consider two Suvins definitions about science fiction SF is, then, a literary genre whose necessary and sufficient conditions are the presence and interaction of estrangement and cognition,and whose main formal wind is an imaginative framework alternative to the authors empirical environment (Suvin 1979, p. 7) and Science Fiction is distinguished by the memorial dominance or hegemony of a fictional novum (novelty, innovation) validated by cognitive logic (Suvin 1979, p. 63).Considering these two definitions, it is possible to affirm then that the necessary and sufficient conditions to identify one science fiction work are the presence of a novum and the presence of a cognitive logic, the logical c onsistency which makes the novum become single out of our knowledge about real things. With this in mind, we can analyse the book The Handmaids news report from Atwood. She clearly have classified this book as not being science fiction, however, it is subdued to identify the novum and also the cognitive logic in her book. The novum is represented by the whole system of semipolitical organization in the Republic of Gilead described on the book and the cognitive logic is given by some similarities that can be noticed between our society and the society described on the book.In the same way, for the book of H. G. Wells, The War of the Worlds, we can also identify the novum, which is given by the Martians and their technology and the cognitive logic, given by the similarities existing between both societies. Thus, it can be affirmed that both books The Handmaids Tale and The War of the World belongs to the genre science fiction, contradicting Atwoods forward proposition. This prove s that although Atwoods book can be classified as speculative fiction, it truly belongs to science fiction, leading us to verify again that speculative fiction is just one more subgenre of science fiction. It makes clear then that the division between science and speculative fiction is not useful and not justifiable.Secondly, it will be presented that Atwoods definition of speculative fiction is imprecise and also can be used to define as speculative fiction other books that were categorized as science fiction by her. In order to illustrate these points, we will analyse Atwood (2011) definition about speculative fiction as things that really could happen but just hadnt completely happened when the authors wrote the books. This is a vague and inaccurate idea. It could encompass different definitions because the range of things that could really happen is highly dependent of each personsbeliefs and ideas, what makes this definition extremely subjective. Also, with just a few exception s, it is not possible to say for sure what is and what is not going to happen.Besides, Atwood even gives us another definition Oryx and Crake is not science fiction. Science fiction is when you have chemicals and rockets. (Watts 2003, p. 3). Considering both definitions given by her, it could be understood that she considers rockets and chemicals as things that really could not happen, as they belong to science fiction. However, it is known that rockets and chemicals are not things impossible to happen, especially because now we can see some examples of them. Both definitions become contradictory then. Considering her first definition, books about this theme would be classified as speculative fiction however, she decided to use these two themes to exemplify science fiction. Atwoods definitions about speculative fiction are imprecise, therefore, what is the purpose in using an imprecise and turbid definition? It is simply not useful to distinguish science from speculative fiction t hen.Thirdly, it will be presented that Atwood seems to reinforce this division specially because distinguishing speculative fiction from science fiction is convenient for her. Le Guin (2009) states that Atwood was trying to protect herself from negative connotations associated with science fiction and also from being relegated to a genre still shunned by hidebound readers, reviewers and prize-awarders. Considering Le Guins remarks, it is possible to observe that science fiction was not a literary genre with considerable prestige in the intellectual audience. This could reduce her reputation on the high literary society. One possible reason for science fiction being underestimated is that science fiction could be related to some works produced for mass audience like Star Trek and Dr Who and intellectuals would associate her books to these works. Then it would be interesting for her to dissociate the connection between her books and the genre science fiction once it was not so appreci ated by the intellectual audience.And this is also noticed by considering that some of her remarks about science fiction contains irony, as she frequently uses clichs to refer about it, such as rockets, chemicals, blood-sucking Martians, talking squids in outside space, and skin-tight clothing. Thus, it is possible to verify why Atwood reinforces the division between speculative and science fiction. Andconsidering her reasons we can see that they are not justifiable and strong enough to make the distinction between speculative and science fiction useful. Finally, this essay discussed a number of points in order to support the thesis that the distinction between speculative and science fiction is not useful. Firstly, it was stated that although it may be hard to define some literary genres it is noticeable that speculative fiction fits perfectly in most of definitions of science fiction, fashioning it a subgenre only.Secondly, it was presented that Atwoods definition about speculat ive fiction is vague and could classify as speculative fiction some books that she clearly classified as science fiction. Thirdly, it was discussed that is convenient for her to separate speculative fiction from science fiction since the genre of science fiction was not so appreciated by reviewers and prize awarders and was associated to some mass audience works. She does not want to be linked to this image so she tries to put her works under a different literary classification. This point shows us clearly that there is no consistent and general reason for her to do the distinction. In conclusion, this essay illustrated that is not useful to distinguish between science fiction and speculative fiction and the reason for this was explained by all of the arguments stated previously.ReferencesAtwood, M 1985, The Handmaids Tale, Anchor Books, youthful York.Atwood, M 2011, In Other Worlds SF and the Human Imagination, Doubleday.Le Guin, U 2009, The Year of the Flood by Margaret Atwood, The Guardian, 29 August. Available at http//www.theguardian.com/books/2009/aug/29/margaret-atwood-year-of-floodSuvin, D 1979, Metamorphoses Of Science Fiction, Yale University Press, New HavenWatts, P 2003, Margaret Atwood and the Hierarchy of Contempt, On Spec, vol. 15, no. 2, summer, pp. 3-5.Wells, H 1898, The War of the World, New York check over Books, New York.