Science Fiction Column

Hello and welcome to Felix’s new, unimaginatively-titled, Science Fiction Column. I’ve always been passionate about this topic and I hope that I’ll be able to pass some of this excitement on to you.

Each week I’ll try to entertain you with my thoughts on films, television shows and books in the genre which, for good or bad reasons, I found memorable. I’d thought, however, that I’d start with something more general and devote today’s column to science fiction’s relationship with science.

The genre is often criticised for its lack of scientific accuracy. I think that this is quite unfair: science fiction is just that, fiction. If I want to learn something I pick up a textbook, not a Star Wars DVD.

I believe that the main purpose of this genre is to try to predict the future, to describe how people will adapt to the new technology in this future and, most importantly, to entertain.

A good grasp of science may help in the first two of these goals, though, since the future is so unpredictable, even this may not always be the case, but it certainly does not help in the third.

Being scientifically accurate isn’t a requirement for a good story. Hardly anybody would argue that The Matrix was a bad film despite the ridiculous concept of machines using human brains as a power source. Conversely, last year’s Moon won wide acclaim for its plausibility but I found it almost unwatchable due to the antagonists’ completely illogical actions. Far more important than science are interesting characters and a good plot.

That is why the one demand that I do make of science fiction is that its made-up science be at least logical and easy to understand. I hate the ‘technobabble’ so commonly found in Star Trek and Doctor Who.

It adds nothing to the story to have the characters spouting nonsensical and vaguely technical-sounding words for half of an episode. It also takes away all dramatic tension if you know that however perilous the situation it will probably be solved by some never-before-seen and never-again-to-be-mentioned technology. It’s not that I don’t like Star Trek and Doctor Who: I just think that they’re at their best when they tone down their ‘science’.

Don’t get me wrong, my favourite sub-genre of science fiction is the so called ‘hard SF’, where believability and scientific accuracy are the most important factors. It can be very refreshing to get away from the bug-eyed monsters so prevalent in the sci-fi that most people are familiar with and see characters dealing with such mundane restrictions as the speed of light.

But I also appreciate the far greater scope that breaking a few rules of physics gives, such as intrigues spanning galactic empires and epic space battles. I guess that I just like the best of both worlds.