The John Ringo novels are hardly science fiction. I believe they are considered “action thrillers” or maybe “pulp thrillers.” Sure, Ghost seems to take place in a five-minutes-from-now future, but that doesn’t make it science fiction.
Moving on: the reasons for the low volume of 9/11-influenced science fiction novels could be any of the following:
1. Distaste for exploiting an event that to some (well, to me anyway) feels like it happened “too soon” to be used as a simple backdrop or plot point in genre fiction.
2. Most science fiction writers, or at least the big name ones, these days seem to be leftists, or at least to lean towards the left in their beliefs. You maybe don’t want them to write something “inspired” by 9/11.
3. While the events of 9/11/2001 looms huge and horrid in the American psyche, it shrinks down in the average science fiction plot, which involves star systems and galaxies. Compared to an intergalactic war a few buildings being exploded in some city on some pipsqueak planet isn’t even a flash in the pan.
4. Science fiction as a genre seems to be fading in impact; every scifi novel hailed as “important” and “ground-breaking” one year is outmoded very soon as technological and societal changes overtake whatever “new” idea was contained in it.
5. Publishers just want to make money and the money is in certain sorts of scifi that don’t happen to have anything to do with scenarios inspired by 9/11. (I have no idea what those might be as I haven’t read very much science fiction recently and most of what I have read was published before 2001.)
That’s just a few things I came up with in a few minutes. I’m sure someone else could come up with more. In any case, maybe it’s true that trad publishers are red-lighting any manuscript that touches on the subject. If so, who cares? Traditional publishing is on the way out as a business model. Self-publishing is big now and it’s getting more and more respectable every day. Anyway, I’m not sure that I agree with the author of the linked post that it’s true that there are no 9/11-influenced science fiction novels out there. The events and personnel could simply be disguised — for example, for Muslim terrorists plotting destruction while living a surface life of law-abiding immigrant could become aliens disguising themselves as human and infiltrating the Earth while all the while planning to destroy and/or conquer it. This plot device — the conspirator/assassin/invader pretending to be what he is not in order to further his goals — has of course been around forever. Treacherous invaders who kill and destroy are nothing new.
It was mentioned in passing in a fantasy novel called “Stealing the Elf-King’s Roses”, where someone wondered why the towers were missing (they were from an alternate universe).
Compared to an intergalactic war a few buildings being exploded in some city on some pipsqueak planet isn’t even a flash in the pan.
But it was so sad when those evil construction workers demolished Arthur’s home. I bet they were union.
To me an interesting alternative history plot would have been if the passengers of flight 93 had not been successful in crashing into the cockpit of the plane and it had gone on its way to hit the capital building.
That would be interesting to read. It is entirely possible that the polarization of our nation since that date would be far less than it is, and our response would have been far tougher than what we have done.
The John Ringo novels are hardly science fiction. I believe they are considered “action thrillers” or maybe “pulp thrillers.”
“Carnography”
I ceased attending cons a long time ago when my mild “I like capitalism” was hotly rebuked by the drunken moderator, who hated America and had little or no understanding of orbital mechanics, and by the no-nothing audience who agreed with him. SF just ain’t worth the trouble any more.
“But it was so sad when those evil construction workers demolished Arthur’s home. I bet they were union.”
I’ll bet that Hoffa guy writes horrible poetry.
Andrea, I’d add a sixth explanation (the one that fits In the Shadow of Ares’ future history): there’s no way to predict how this thing will go in the next decade, year, or even month.
Extrapolating current trends into the future isn’t as risky when those trends have a long half-life (so to speak). But when the trajectory of the War on Terror can shift dramatically in a very short period, how does one write its future history and not have it be immediately overtaken by events. We decided to gloss over the next two decades and pick up the future around 2025 to avoid this problem.
Near future sci fi is always difficult especially with the taboos against changing Earth as we know it or that knocks chips off of shoulders (such as portraying religions in anything other than a positive light). It’s not just the risk of being irrelevant in a few years, but that you’ll move the story to a point that people dislike, don’t understand, and/or which runs counter to their beliefs.
To echo the comments at the original link, Baen Books is definitely the place to go for good SF, especially if you’re looking for something that doesn’t pretend history ended in 1989. And among them, Ringo and Kratman are probably the best still writing.
I read ‘Caliphate’ by Kratman a couple of weeks ago. Interesting alternate future but the story was pretty weak – it seemed to re-use a lot of Ringo’s standard plot development.
Bob-1, that wiki on ‘Ghost’ is really lame. The other review is much better.
In the Axis of Time alternate history series, the carrier group zapped back to WW2 comes from a future in which the West has been in a savage fight with Islamist fundamentalists for decades (bioterror, cities lost to suitcase nukes…)
Karl, you can portray religion in a bad light — the “fundamentalist Christian dystopia” has been an SF cliche since the Reagan administration.
I think it’s a combination of political correctness and timidity, but there is a third element: a global war with radical Islam isn’t science fiction. It’s happening right outside, right now. SF writers (and readers) want to escape mundane reality.
“a global war with radical Islam isn’t science fiction”
Apparently the producers of the movie “The Sum of All Our Fears” thought it was.
Chris L – Actually, I disagree. More likely that the producers and the director (probably the stars as well) wanted to go on living.
A scenario to consider for war on terror sci-fi: what if major Muslim holy sites were being destroyed by apparent acts of god, like precision meteor strikes? The rest of the world is spared. What kind of reaction might we get?
I’d say that current events, specific current events, probably don’t make good fodder for writers.
The only show on TV that mentions 9-11 is FRINGE, in the context of an alternate world where it never happened (and where Zeppelin’s still exist. How I wish they’d have an episode set on an airship).
The only SF book I can think of for WWI is FINAL BLACKOUT, by Hubbard (one of his few decent books). The Great War affected Tolkien, but only shows in his work indirectly.
WWII has a lot of stuff, as does the cold war.
There are a couple of stories that reference Vietnam, not many.
I’ve read some of Ringo’s harder SF stuff, but GHOST sounds like he’s gone off the (John Norman) deep end. Funny reviews though.
Two points,
Fox is not paying attention to enough authors. Stross and Banks engage directly with post 9-11 issues, Banks presciently and indirectly.
Secondly, using Science Fiction to say something meaningful and true about things that things that happened in the recent past or are likely to happen in the near future is not playing to the medium’s strengths.
How much valuable SF saying something important about WWII was written before 1962?
How much SF written during the Cold War got the outcome approximately right?
9/11 did happen on FRINGE, but the White house was destroyed instead of the WTC. There was an episode that had part happen on a zeppelin.
Jim B.@6:57 – thanks for the heads up on FRINGE, my Tivo has skipped a few things here and there; someday I’ll have to go through the episodes in order.
Will.M@5:10 – I missed that in Stross, but admit I’ve just read a few of the Laundry books, and the first couple of the Merchant series. They didn’t impress me all that much, and the anti-American bias just turned me off. After a while I sort of stopped reading him.
So many books, so little time…
A lot of our prophets dreams have been proven to be nonsense. No, we’re not all going to wear jumpsuits in the Future. No, a Galactic Empire makes little sense. No, Socialism in the Future is dumb.
There were a lot of agreed upon visions with some variation that formed a Grand Vision of the Future.
Most of that is tattered and timeworn.
And few want to go out and face the truth. Clever ideas are nice, but ultimately sophistic. Truth is what is needed.
Vinge pretty much put the coup de’ grace to traditional SF. 9/11 put up the tombstone, I guess.
In order to regain respect, SF is going to have to get more intimate with Reality. At that point, it can have a rebirth of the Fearful and the Awesome Futures.
Some people are trying to break through to a new world, let us hope they succeed.
A lot of our prophets dreams have been proven to be nonsense
I would hope so. What kind of world would it be if we could image all possibilities? or if possibilities were so limited?
I dare you to read this plot summary without laughing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_(John_Ringo_novel)
Also, google “Oh John Ringo No!”
The John Ringo novels are hardly science fiction. I believe they are considered “action thrillers” or maybe “pulp thrillers.” Sure, Ghost seems to take place in a five-minutes-from-now future, but that doesn’t make it science fiction.
Moving on: the reasons for the low volume of 9/11-influenced science fiction novels could be any of the following:
1. Distaste for exploiting an event that to some (well, to me anyway) feels like it happened “too soon” to be used as a simple backdrop or plot point in genre fiction.
2. Most science fiction writers, or at least the big name ones, these days seem to be leftists, or at least to lean towards the left in their beliefs. You maybe don’t want them to write something “inspired” by 9/11.
3. While the events of 9/11/2001 looms huge and horrid in the American psyche, it shrinks down in the average science fiction plot, which involves star systems and galaxies. Compared to an intergalactic war a few buildings being exploded in some city on some pipsqueak planet isn’t even a flash in the pan.
4. Science fiction as a genre seems to be fading in impact; every scifi novel hailed as “important” and “ground-breaking” one year is outmoded very soon as technological and societal changes overtake whatever “new” idea was contained in it.
5. Publishers just want to make money and the money is in certain sorts of scifi that don’t happen to have anything to do with scenarios inspired by 9/11. (I have no idea what those might be as I haven’t read very much science fiction recently and most of what I have read was published before 2001.)
That’s just a few things I came up with in a few minutes. I’m sure someone else could come up with more. In any case, maybe it’s true that trad publishers are red-lighting any manuscript that touches on the subject. If so, who cares? Traditional publishing is on the way out as a business model. Self-publishing is big now and it’s getting more and more respectable every day. Anyway, I’m not sure that I agree with the author of the linked post that it’s true that there are no 9/11-influenced science fiction novels out there. The events and personnel could simply be disguised — for example, for Muslim terrorists plotting destruction while living a surface life of law-abiding immigrant could become aliens disguising themselves as human and infiltrating the Earth while all the while planning to destroy and/or conquer it. This plot device — the conspirator/assassin/invader pretending to be what he is not in order to further his goals — has of course been around forever. Treacherous invaders who kill and destroy are nothing new.
It was mentioned in passing in a fantasy novel called “Stealing the Elf-King’s Roses”, where someone wondered why the towers were missing (they were from an alternate universe).
Compared to an intergalactic war a few buildings being exploded in some city on some pipsqueak planet isn’t even a flash in the pan.
But it was so sad when those evil construction workers demolished Arthur’s home. I bet they were union.
To me an interesting alternative history plot would have been if the passengers of flight 93 had not been successful in crashing into the cockpit of the plane and it had gone on its way to hit the capital building.
That would be interesting to read. It is entirely possible that the polarization of our nation since that date would be far less than it is, and our response would have been far tougher than what we have done.
The John Ringo novels are hardly science fiction. I believe they are considered “action thrillers” or maybe “pulp thrillers.”
“Carnography”
I ceased attending cons a long time ago when my mild “I like capitalism” was hotly rebuked by the drunken moderator, who hated America and had little or no understanding of orbital mechanics, and by the no-nothing audience who agreed with him. SF just ain’t worth the trouble any more.
“But it was so sad when those evil construction workers demolished Arthur’s home. I bet they were union.”
I’ll bet that Hoffa guy writes horrible poetry.
Andrea, I’d add a sixth explanation (the one that fits In the Shadow of Ares’ future history): there’s no way to predict how this thing will go in the next decade, year, or even month.
Extrapolating current trends into the future isn’t as risky when those trends have a long half-life (so to speak). But when the trajectory of the War on Terror can shift dramatically in a very short period, how does one write its future history and not have it be immediately overtaken by events. We decided to gloss over the next two decades and pick up the future around 2025 to avoid this problem.
Near future sci fi is always difficult especially with the taboos against changing Earth as we know it or that knocks chips off of shoulders (such as portraying religions in anything other than a positive light). It’s not just the risk of being irrelevant in a few years, but that you’ll move the story to a point that people dislike, don’t understand, and/or which runs counter to their beliefs.
To echo the comments at the original link, Baen Books is definitely the place to go for good SF, especially if you’re looking for something that doesn’t pretend history ended in 1989. And among them, Ringo and Kratman are probably the best still writing.
I read ‘Caliphate’ by Kratman a couple of weeks ago. Interesting alternate future but the story was pretty weak – it seemed to re-use a lot of Ringo’s standard plot development.
Bob-1, that wiki on ‘Ghost’ is really lame. The other review is much better.
In the Axis of Time alternate history series, the carrier group zapped back to WW2 comes from a future in which the West has been in a savage fight with Islamist fundamentalists for decades (bioterror, cities lost to suitcase nukes…)
Karl, you can portray religion in a bad light — the “fundamentalist Christian dystopia” has been an SF cliche since the Reagan administration.
I think it’s a combination of political correctness and timidity, but there is a third element: a global war with radical Islam isn’t science fiction. It’s happening right outside, right now. SF writers (and readers) want to escape mundane reality.
“a global war with radical Islam isn’t science fiction”
Apparently the producers of the movie “The Sum of All Our Fears” thought it was.
Chris L – Actually, I disagree. More likely that the producers and the director (probably the stars as well) wanted to go on living.
A scenario to consider for war on terror sci-fi: what if major Muslim holy sites were being destroyed by apparent acts of god, like precision meteor strikes? The rest of the world is spared. What kind of reaction might we get?
I’d say that current events, specific current events, probably don’t make good fodder for writers.
The only show on TV that mentions 9-11 is FRINGE, in the context of an alternate world where it never happened (and where Zeppelin’s still exist. How I wish they’d have an episode set on an airship).
The only SF book I can think of for WWI is FINAL BLACKOUT, by Hubbard (one of his few decent books). The Great War affected Tolkien, but only shows in his work indirectly.
WWII has a lot of stuff, as does the cold war.
There are a couple of stories that reference Vietnam, not many.
I’ve read some of Ringo’s harder SF stuff, but GHOST sounds like he’s gone off the (John Norman) deep end. Funny reviews though.
Two points,
Fox is not paying attention to enough authors. Stross and Banks engage directly with post 9-11 issues, Banks presciently and indirectly.
Secondly, using Science Fiction to say something meaningful and true about things that things that happened in the recent past or are likely to happen in the near future is not playing to the medium’s strengths.
How much valuable SF saying something important about WWII was written before 1962?
How much SF written during the Cold War got the outcome approximately right?
9/11 did happen on FRINGE, but the White house was destroyed instead of the WTC. There was an episode that had part happen on a zeppelin.
Jim B.@6:57 – thanks for the heads up on FRINGE, my Tivo has skipped a few things here and there; someday I’ll have to go through the episodes in order.
Will.M@5:10 – I missed that in Stross, but admit I’ve just read a few of the Laundry books, and the first couple of the Merchant series. They didn’t impress me all that much, and the anti-American bias just turned me off. After a while I sort of stopped reading him.
So many books, so little time…
A lot of our prophets dreams have been proven to be nonsense. No, we’re not all going to wear jumpsuits in the Future. No, a Galactic Empire makes little sense. No, Socialism in the Future is dumb.
There were a lot of agreed upon visions with some variation that formed a Grand Vision of the Future.
Most of that is tattered and timeworn.
And few want to go out and face the truth. Clever ideas are nice, but ultimately sophistic. Truth is what is needed.
Vinge pretty much put the coup de’ grace to traditional SF. 9/11 put up the tombstone, I guess.
In order to regain respect, SF is going to have to get more intimate with Reality. At that point, it can have a rebirth of the Fearful and the Awesome Futures.
Some people are trying to break through to a new world, let us hope they succeed.
A lot of our prophets dreams have been proven to be nonsense
I would hope so. What kind of world would it be if we could image all possibilities? or if possibilities were so limited?