[PREV - NEOLOOGIES]    [TOP]

IN_DEEP


I'm toying with the
name "Deep SF", for
a new sub-category
of science fiction.


Here I'm trying to
manifest a manifesto
for it:

   ((note: deleted some dull crap
    about how "deep sf" isn't like
    that shallow stuff.    ))

All right, do over:
You gotta show more
enthusiasm, none of
this incessant rambling     Next step: drop the first person.
about what something        Manifestoes are supposed to
*isn't*, come on.           pretend that there are hordes of
                            people out there marching in lockstep
                            chanting the words.

What am I after?

  I'm after *depth*.

  I'm after stuff that
  cuts to the heart of
  the way the world works
                              not just the way the world *seems*
                              not just the way the world *is*


  I'm after visions
  detailed enough to
  give you a feel for        Or at least a feel for the way
  how they might work        it has to be falsified to give
  out in reality.            you the feeling that it might
                             work.
  I'm after
  content. I want                   THROUGH_THE_LENS
  form and content
  fused together,
  but if I can
  only get one,
  I'll take the
  content.                      "Deep SF" should display a grasp
  Stylists need                 of both technology and the humanities.
  not apply.                    Get every lobe firing.

                                          BIBLES

  The ultimate in Deep SF               (It "cranks on both lobes"?)
  transforms the world by
  it's very existance, it's a
  meme vortex that spins off
  through the minds of
  humanity and infects even
  those that haven't read the
  original work.

  It depicts a world that does not
  exist, but seems so vivid, so
  plausible that all who encounter it
  make it their life's work to bring
  it about or prevent it from ever         Or to begin desperately
  happening.                               imagining other alternatives:
                                           third ways out.



  Deep SF need not be
  "Hard SF" But the
  ultimate Deep SF                       HARD_PROBLEMS
  would be:
                                                How hard is
  A union of insights from                      "More Than Human"?
  disparate fields, that
  creates new disciplines                       "The Stars My
  in it's wake.                                  Destination"?


                                                      Would I want to
                                                      deny that they're
                                                      "Deep"?
                                                                   HARD

People to watch:

   Gregory Benford
   Bruce Sterling            Yeah, they're
   Kenneth MacCleod          all boys.
   Cory Doctorow
   Samuel R. Delany             I'm not sure that
                                this is my problem.
Maybe:

   Stephen Baxter
   Iain M. Banks
   Greg Egan
   Charles Stross

===


The evolution of a doomfile                        Should I move this to
rectpara in four snapshots:                          SCAFFOLDING?

                                                   No, I guess not...
(1)    I'm after visions worked                    there's a relevant
       out in detail to give you                   point or two way down
       a feel for the way the                      there.
       vision might actually work
       out.


   Uh, "worked out" and "work out"?
   Bleh.  There has to be a better way
   to say this... eh, already, delete
   the last "out" for now, come back to this
   later:


(2)    I'm after visions worked
       out in detail to give you
       a feel for the way the
       vision might actually work.


  Now it's later, and there's still
  that style problem, "worked out"
  and "work".  Ah, just change the
  first to "realized"!  And I can
  restore the word "out" to the
  phrase "actually work out"...
  that's one of those "unnecessary"
  words that helps the flow
  somehow.  In fact, maybe it could
  use a few more words:


(3)   I'm after visions realized
      in enough detail to give
      you a feel for the way the
      vision might actually work
      out in reality.

  Um... "visions realized"
  and "work out in reality"?
  Okay, okay, chop some of
  the "excess" again:                          Maybe:
                                                 
(4)   I'm after visions realized               I'm after visions    
      in enough detail to give                 detailed enough to    
      you a feel for the way the               give you a feel for    
      vision might actually work               how they might work    
      out.                                     out in reality.    
                                                              
                                                  Okay call that (5)
   And there it sits for now.

   I have to wonder though, what's
   really going on here?

   There's this rule about
   avoiding the reuse of                 I've been having the same
   words in close proximity,             problem with "spin offs".
   and subjectively I agree              I got gadgets spinning off
   with the rule.                        from ideas, and memes
                                         spinning off through minds.
   It looks stupidly stupid to go
   around stupidifying your stupid                My brain is
   shit with too many stupid                      all awhirl.
   repetitions unless it's obvious
   your stupidizing things on
   purpose.

   But why am I having such problems             But I don't *think* so.
   with this one damn sentence?                  It's not really that
   Maybe it's really an inane                    complicated a set of concepts.
   tautology I'm doing my best to
   diguise.
                                                          Idea ---> Fiction
                                                            \         .
   Sometimes you gotta wonder about language                 \       .
   as the medium for expressing thought.                     .\|    .
                                                              `'
     It's a medium that definitely                              Reality
     massages the message.

        Not a new thought, not
        an original thought,                                Two methods of
        but maybe a true enough                             implementing an
        thought, if not the                                 idea; fiction
        whole truth.                                        considered as a
                                                            demo, a dress-
        There it is.                                        rehersal, part
        How do you deal?                                    of an evaluation
                                                            process.

                                                              Maybe the
                                                              trouble is
                                                              that most of
                                                              the terminology
                                                              that describes
                                                              what I'm getting
                                        "I think fiction      at already has
                                        should be more        this notion
                                        realistic so          embedded in it.
                                        that it can be
                                        more like stuff
                                        that's real."





--------
[NEXT - HARD_PROBLEMS]