Hard SF

Author Chris Moriarty has an interesting article about hard science fiction.

…hard SF is still going strong, fueled by writers and readers who thrill to that special hard SF combination of visionary speculation backed up by nuts and bolts ‘here’s how we get there from here’ science writing. It’s still about the science, and it always will be. But it’s also about people and politics and everything else in the known and unknown universe. It’s all up for grabs. Just like it always has been. . . .

Of related interest, I Googled around and found an Intro to Hard SF for the non-SF Reader, Hard vs. Soft SF as well as Grading SF for Realism. We’ve also discussed it here at SF Signal.

[Moriarty link via Nightshade Forum via Mumpsimus]

2 thoughts on “Hard SF”

  1. Wow, what a great read. I think Mr. Moriarty has done a good job exploring and explaining hard SF vs. the other kind. And he nails it for me as to why I like ‘hard’ SF – the WOW factor backed up with nuts and bolts science. It also explains why I dislike The Dispossed, not once but twice, there’s no WOW there. Indeed, there isn’t even any ‘wow’, unless by ‘wow’ you mean ‘wow, this is incredibly boring’, then there’ plenty.

    For me, the ‘softer’ sciences of politics or psych/soci-olgy don’t lend themselve to concrete answers. You can’t prove anything or, more pointedly, you can prove anything just by talking and hand waving. It’s the talking part that doesn’t make a good book for me.

  2. Well, well, lookit that. Mr. Kazlev at “Grading SF for Realism” gave THE GOLDEN AGE a “Firm Hard SF” rating. I suspect he is being slightly generous, but no doubt he gives extra points for SF “Hardness” for book that postulate no FTL drive in the future.

    JCW

Comments are closed.