Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Repair/rewrite/split/cleanup?
, started by GlennMagusHarvey on Feb 11th 2011 at 2:42:30 AM
While I think changing the name to something like the "Genre Fiction Ghetto" as discussed in that linked thread is probably a good idea, I think this trope page has a bigger problem of becoming a dumping ground for nerds to air their grievances against imagined audiences or critics not liking their favorite movies enough, or quibbling over people not classifying cross-genre works properly.
To be honest, I feel like the idea of the sci fi ghetto as it was originally described is a largely outdated notion, with many works of science fiction and fantasy now being both big business and also receiving critical acclaim. While there are definitely genres and mediums that are not taken as seriously as they should be by the general public or the critics, I don't really think that's the case for science fiction and fantasy in our modern age.
There's also the issue of too many entries complaining about particular big budget action blockbusters like Infinity War or the Star Wars movies not winning best picture Oscars. This has way less to do with the fact that they're works of speculative fiction and way more to do with the fact that they're action movies that aren't really trying to grapple with particularly heavy themes and topics. While these are perfectly fine, entertaining movies, they're not really trying to be more than mass market entertainment.
Overall I think that this trope page should focus itself more on documented, historical examples or examples of this bias showing up in-universe and less on tropers vague-posting about how "some people" who may or may not exist aren't taking a particular work seriously enough.
Force Awkens did not fall into the ghetto. Rey was a Marry Sue. There was a lot of genuine hate for the movie from people who loved Star Wars. That movie essentially nullified everything the Luke Skywalker and the Rebel Alliance Accomplished in Return of the Jedi. Right from the outset of the movie you have esptablished that things are just as bad as they were in A New Hope. The good guys are fighting a loosing battle against the Empire 2.0 and There are no Jedi to help them. Thanks Disney and Lucasfilm you have just made the events in the fist trilogy pointless and have proven ol Ben... Franklen right we are only ever one generation away from loosing our freedom.
I feel like this page could benefit from some serious restructuring. Over time it seems to broadened from the Sci-Fi Ghetto, to the Sci-Fi / Fantasy Ghetto, to the Sci-Fi / Fantasy / Horror Ghetto, to the Sci-Fi / Fantasy / Horror / [Insert whatever genre of fiction the Troper feels a bit disgruntled doesn't get the respect he/she thinks it deserves] Ghetto. Also, some of the examples seem slightly overly defensive / combative or slightly over-general. At very least, I'd suggest it would benefit from a rename (Genre Ghetto, perhaps?) and a rule that you'd have to support examples with a link to an outside example to avoid all the generalised "Bookstores do this! Critics say that!" type-examples that don't really seem to have a lot of backing behind them beyond a slightly annoyed Troper.
Hide / Show Replies
Strongly agreed. I also think the fact that more than half the entries on this page are "aversions" or examples of sci fi/fantasy works that have received broad critical acclaim suggests a lot of this is examples of fans being overly defensive of their favorite works.
Alright, I went through and cleaned up a bunch of examples. As a point I want to address some stuff that kept coming up in unrelated trope examples:
- A series with elements of multiple genres being primarily classified as only one of these genres is usually not an example of this trope.
- The works of an author that primarily works in one genre being grouped together in a bookstore regardless of genre is not an example of this trope: That's the bookstore trying to make it easier for patrons to find the works of a particular author by grouping them all together.
- A work of sci-fi or fantasy doing well at the box office or in book sales is not an aversion of this trope. This specifically relates to critical acclaim or perceived artistic merit.
- Similarly, a bunch of examples were complaining about individual works' categorization within the sci fi/fantasy/horror spectrum. That's not really the point of this trope.
- By that same token: Please recognize that there is a difference between "Popcorn" fiction (That is, fiction that only seeks to entertain) and fiction that attempts for broader artistic merit. There is nothing wrong with a work being "popcorn" but these works tend to be judged by different merits than works aiming for artistic significance. I bring this up because this trope is about genre fiction being perceived as only consisting of popcorn works, not of the popcorn works of sci fi and fantasy not being given equal footing with non-popcorn works of other genres.
The Star Wars section is a gigantic mess, someone please clean this thing up.
Edited by ThePhantomoftheButt
Isn't the term "ghetto" a little misleading? Genre status isn't really a ghetto that some genres are in and others are out of, it's a sliding scale. Porn is probably at the bottom, romance novels and fantasy maybe at the next rung, sci-fi one step above, then horror, then thrillers and detective novels, then maybe historical novels, and so on. And that's just literature; the ladder of genre respect isn't the same for movies, comics, tv shows etc.
Removed the Gravity entry simply because, to the best of my knowledge, it does not actually meet the science fiction criteria. There is no futuristic technology, no phenomena not accepted by current mainstream science etc. Even the entry in the tropes page admits that it has purely existing technology and purely current actions in space, and does not give a reason for why it should still be considered science fiction despite that.
"* Some critics (such as the writer of this article) have been arguing that the Alfonso Cuarón film Gravity, a thriller about two astronauts trying to survive after being stranded in space, is not science fiction simply because it uses existing technology and focuses on actual activities performed in space. The fact that it's one of the most critically acclaimed films of 2013 has absolutely nothing to do with this, of course. This does become somewhat ironic when you consider the premise is somewhat similar to Ray Bradbury's short story Kaleidoscope."
If someone wants to put it back, alright, but please first explain why you would want to do so. Simply because something takes place in outer space does not mean it is automatically futuristic.
Hide / Show Replies
Well, there was the whole thing with the wave of debris as "something that theoretically could happen", and the fact that it's been nominated for a Hugo Award (not the first time something with no obvious SF elements other than being set in space has been nominated, though - precedents include The Right Stuff, Apollo 13, and news footage of the Apollo 11 mission!
Not sure that the debris would really count. We've already got people causing debris to be created by leaving old satellites up or testing anti-satellite weapons on them.
As for the Hugo Award, that seems to be just the fact that it involves spacecraft. Overall I don't see more reason to call this Science Fiction (which Wikipedia does) than Space Cowboys (which Wikipedia calls a Space Drama).
Still having spacecraft may be enough of a gray area for us (or the world might just be too close to turning science fiction into science that it's all a gray area now) that if you want to replace it I won't remove the entry a second time.
The guy in the HalfwayBeret
Would we be able to change the name to the "Sci-Fi/Fantasy Ghetto"? Honestly the two are represented equally in the article, but I, as a fantasy fan, feel left out.
The only thing bigger than my ego is my heart. And imagine what a huge ego I have to brag about my heart like that.
I think I understand why the Ghetto exists, and it's quite simple. In general, after they reach a certain age, Males don't read Books anymore unless it's their profession.
On the contrast, Girls are likely to continue reading Books well into their Old Age. Not to insult any girls, but usually they prefer thing's that are more Character Driven, with more Emotion, Character Depth, and Interpersonal Relationships then Hard Speculative Explanation of So and So along with what's usually a Plot Driven Story. There are exceptions to these, of course.
HOWEVER, there is a market, especially among Geeks that enjoy Science Fiction in Literature, but it is wholly separate from the "Mainstream".
It also explains why Lo TR, Harry Potter, and Narnia enjoy considerable success as Literature even though their technically Sci-Fi/Fantasy. The fact the former are hotbeds for Shipping also does not hurt either.
Edited by exia Hide / Show Replies
You're making some incredibly generalized assumptions here, and I'm not sure where they're coming from. The idea that men don't read books after a particular age is frankly bizarre. And, all generalizations concerning the reading habits of girls and women aside, the allegation that sci-fi and fantasy aren't concerned with characterization and interpersonal relationships is exactly the sort of thing that those who enforce the idea of the Sci Fi Ghetto would say.
Yes, this is a bad generalization. You've pretty much said that males don't like books with good literary devices. The idea that fantasy/SF can't be character focused is just nonsense, and apart from certain hard SF fans, people want well rounded characters who drive the plot, rather than characters that just exist for the sake of the plot. The best literature will generally be about character, no matter what the genre. Plot should be secondary (and dry technical explanations are rarely, if ever, necessary). This is why writers like Ian M. Banks, Ursula K. Le Guin and Brian Aldiss, are more well regarded as "literature" than, say, Clarke.
I'll admit it is a BAD Generalization, but I think you read my words wrong.
I didn't say that Men don't like good literary devices, but after a certain age they are less likely to read entire Books since they lack the time or desire to do so. That's why I said unless their Profession benefits from reading books.
Usually, Intellectual College Professions tend to promote the reading of Sci-Fi, and actually, the best Sci-Fi Literature are NOT about Characters as people but ARE more about Big Ideas or Mythic Archetypes.
Arthur C. Clarke: Alien Space God Spirituality.
Assimov: Rise of Robots, growth of Humans to a spacefaring civilization.
Dune: The Rise of a Space Messiah.
The most iconic Sci-Fi are not about Normal People, but Big Ideas or Mythic Archetypes. Considering the rest of Literature TEND to be more...Soap Operish, AKA Human oriented, it creates a noticeably contrast in writing style.
That, and if you check the actual bookstore or library, your see girls outnumber the boys, and the boys are more likely to look like Nerds.
But yes, this is a "Bad" Generalization. But the Sci-Fi Ghetto exists for a reason.
"I didn't say that Men don't like good literary devices, but after a certain age they are less likely to read entire Books since they lack the time or desire to do so. That's why I said unless their Profession benefits from reading books."
That's still a generalisation that's ridiculously huge to the point of being utterly fatuous, though, particularly since your evidence basically stems to "girls outnumber boys in bookstores and the boys all look like nerds". Been to every bookstore / library in the world, have you?
"I didn't say that Men don't like good literary devices, but after a certain age they are less likely to read entire Books since they lack the time or desire to do so. That's why I said unless their Profession benefits from reading books."
That's still a generalisation that's ridiculously huge to the point of being utterly fatuous, though, particularly since your evidence basically stems to "girls outnumber boys in bookstores and the boys all look like nerds". Been to every bookstore / library in the world, have you?
"Considering the rest of Literature TEND to be more...Soap Operish, AKA Human oriented, it creates a noticeably contrast in writing style."
The entire "New Wave" of science fiction shifted the focus on characters for the sole reason that they though tthe old school of science fiction lacked real literary merit. I think by focus on characters you mean things like romance and teenage drama and such, but there's more to "character development" than that. Why do you think people talk about SF exploring the "human condition"?
Also, I've actually studied Biotechnology and most of my friends I know are in science or engineering (mostly physics), and I can tell you that none of them are interested in sci-fi, apart from the typical mainstream stuff. None of my college professors have ever mentioned a science fiction novel and only ever used the term "science fiction" to mean bad science.
Edited by supergod For we shall slay evil with logic...
I think the trope is more related to the fundamental err of attribution. Yes, there is plenty of crappy sci-fi out there. But there are also a lot of crappy poli-thrillers or family drama or whatever. When those "mainstream" genre books fail, people will point out the weak characters, obvious plot, or something specific. When a Sci-Fi novel fails, they tend to just say "Well, it's Sci-Fi". It's genre is the first weakness, and any other weakness is linked to the genre.
The Master
I'm confused. At certain points this page seems to imply that Fantasy has it even worse than Sci-Fi. Maybe among academics that is true, since literary Sci-Fi is seen as a way to write about real world problems, but among the general public it is quite the opposite, with great works like The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and the Chronicles of Narnia justifying Fantasy in the public's eye, while Star Wars and Star Trek are still ridiculed and made fun of despite bringing in billions of dollars.
Hide / Show Replies
It depends on the level of fantasy, I think. High fantasy is almost always ridiculed in every fashion; Lot R and Narnia are exceptions to the rule (Harry Potter is not high fantasy at all. It's still obviously fantasy, but it's not the Medieval dragon-slaying type of book that people tend to associate with fantasy) . There's also the fact that sci-fi and fantasy tend to work better when targeted towards children and young adults, and more of those franchises tend to be fantasy than science fiction. It's also because fantasy tends to tie into Dungeons and Dragons very well, and we all know what the average person thinks of D&D. Besides, I would actually say that Star Wars itself isn't what's ridiculed, it's more the fandom and the expanded universe. The actual movies were always immensely popular.
"Maybe among academics that is true" - Not even then really. There aren't any science fictional works that are considered to be "classics" in the vein of Alice In Wonderland, The Wizard of Oz, The Wind In The Willows, etc. Though most adult fantasy has it just as bad as any sci-fi, regardless of literary merit.
For we shall slay evil with logic...
Writer, fantasy fanatic, cat lover
Would anybody happen to know a credible site that basically discusses the same things as this trope?
“Fiction is the truth inside the lie.” ― Stephen King http://thespellcraftcolumn.wordpress.com/
Okay, so my justifying edit on the subject was probably rightfully deleted, but is it possible to do something about all the "Author X has written Y genre as well as science fiction, yet all his/her works are located in the Y section" style entries? That doesn't seem like the ghetto to me, that's standard bookstore operating procedure for people who don't want to trail all over the store to find different books in different sections by the same author. It happens whether the author's written science fiction, mysteries, horror, romance or literary works, so to keep singling it out here as an example of the ghetto seems like a bit of a persecution complex.
Edited by DoctorNemesis
Slay foes with bow and arrow
I was wondering if it would be okay to add something like this to the blurb about Horror. Bolded text is my addition.
"This can also link to Horror as well; especially when it overlaps with Sci-Fi and Fantasy. It's been a little more accepted than Sci-Fi and Fantasy, but you'll rarely seen awards given to horror works. Horror authors are also thought of as being creepy, at least before people actually meet them and realize that most of them are perfectly normal people. Horror is actually often put in with the rest of the non-genre literature in bookstores.*"
I am not sure whether to add this or not, the main article is already really long.
Hide / Show Replies
I don't see how that adds to or is related to the trope. It's not about the authors being "creepy".
Wizzard
Pulled the Pratchett bit from JKR; he wasn't missing the point, he was criticising a UK newspaper article which was, and which wanted to "rescue" JK from the ghetto at the expense of both misquoting her and dismissing everything else classified as fantasy.
- "And the BBC website put a nice little spin on thing on things with a headline suggesting I'm directing a tirade at J K Rowling, rather than expressing annoyance at the habits of journalists and specifically one telling phrase *clearly used by someone else*."Terry Pratchett, Usenet.
I don' ghetto what a ghetto has to do with all this?
Hide / Show Replies
A ghetto is where an "undesirable" minority is segregated from the rest of the population (Jews in Nazi Germany, poor African-Americans and other racial and ethnic minorities in inner cities, etc.). Science Fiction and Fantasy are often segregated (literally in bookstores, metaphorically by the reading public) from "real" literature.
This page is just pure cope lmao. Sci-fi is genre fiction, it's written to follow specific conventions to please an established, unquestioning demographic of readers whose ideas and preconceptions you can't challenge without damaging your bottom line. If it wasn't juvinile unliterary slop then yeah, it wouldn't be sci-fi. Margaret Atwood shut you guys down once and you've been seething ever since.