Not quite sure what to say for this one without sounding redundant. Again, one of my favorite points to take away was the idea that science fiction is not just limited to one kind of science. As seen with the Omelas story, it can deal with more things like anthropology and psychology. Rachel and the Nanny stories were fun what-if scenarios as well...
I suppose what I took away was that some artists hate being called sci-fi writers and want to just be known as writers. Why is sci-fi looked down upon and not given the same amount of merit and value? I suppose it's like that in any arts. Music, painting, ect. I went to the David Houle presentation/movie screening of Burning Man and one cool idea was "it's special, at least people are making anything at all, creating." I just see those "labels" (sci-fi-horror-fantasy) as a way to find something easier. We tend to like to categorize, put things in boxes as well. I guess it makes things easier for us. Things have to have a name, have to have a category. Why we tend to do that, I don't know. More so, is it such a bad thing to be "organized" in that way or would we have a deeper appreciation for arts if we didn't.
Maybe it doesn't matter at all? I'm not sure.
No comments:
Post a Comment