What's worse are those who try to redefine something as "not SF" if it is somehow good. My tally is currently as follows:
- "Battlestar Galactica" is not SF because it is a socio-religious-political drama about people.
- Ursula Le Guin's "Left-hand of Darkness" is not SF because it's a superb commentary on life and prejudice.
- The literary author of the novel about a future Earth where pollution has destroyed the environment - but it's not SF because she doesn't write SF. (And how dare you suggest such a thing.)
- There is move to redefine the late great J. G. Ballard as "not an SF writer" because he was great; now that he is also "late" they think they can get away with it because he's not around to argue.
Of course there are great writers like Iain Banks who enjoy telling their literary audience how much they also enjoy writing SF. I hope it makes them squirm.
(Another annoyance are people who, due to their ignorance, cannot tell the difference between SF and Fantasy. Referring to SF as Fantasy is not too bad, obviously it is "fantastical", but I mean the ones who call Fantasy, SF. Like a rather silly woman in Broadcast magazine this week.)
I've not been feeling well this weekend. Hence the rant.
What's on the turntable? Nuffink