World in the Satin Bag

SF Signal’s MIND MELD: I’m in it!

I’m a bit late reporting this, but what the heck, right? I was recently in SF Signal’s MIND MELD feature offering up a handful of my favorite reads for 2008 (and views too, since I mentioned some films and movies). You can find part one here (which I’m not here) and part two here (which I am in). Look at both though, because there are some huge names in this and a lot of great suggestions in case you’re wondering what to get your science fiction/fantasy obsessed friend, boyfriend, fiance, husband, or family member! That is all!

World in the Satin Bag

Should Science Fiction Be Taught in Schools?

I don’t think the question should be whether it should be taught in schools, but whether there should be a larger variety of science fiction titles presented to students. Science fiction is already taught in most schools (at least in America). Some of the most popular science fiction stories taught in public high schools include 1984 by George Orwell, Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, and a select few other titles (Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card has become rather popular); some school curriculum already offer a varied diet of science fiction titles–kudos to them. In my personal opinion, however, in directing my answer to this particular question: Yes, of course science fiction should be taught in public schools, but I believe that the same criteria for quality should be applied to science fiction as to any other genre of fiction. We teach Charles Dickens for a very specific reason, and similar reasons should be applied to science fiction novels (which are why the novels I mentioned above tend to be common). I simply think that there needs to be more variety. I don’t think all science fiction texts should be taught, nor do I suggest that only the “classics” deserve a space. There are plenty of incredibly important science fiction novels that have sprung up in the last thirty years (such as William Gibson’s work or Joe Haldeman, Arthur C. Clarke. et al). As such, there is a wealth of material available to the public and to schools that could beneficial for the teaching of modern forms of literature. I personally feel that many of our schools place too much focus on “classic” forms of literature–particularly older work–and I see that as failing to prepare our students for the changes that have occurred in modern literature today. True, one’s reading ability does not necessarily have to be advanced to read the vast majority of literature written today, but critical thinking is absolutely necessary to grasping the sometimes abstract or deeply-rooted concepts found within many great science fiction novels. As to why I think science fiction should be taught: Science fiction is the literature of the future. It speculates upon the world we live in now to see where we might end up one day, whether that be 10 years ahead or 100 years ahead (or 1,000). As a genre it is important because many of the greatest science fiction novels do contain the depth and themes that make literature important to us. It is a genre that constantly questions and examines the human condition, which is precisely what literature is meant to do. That makes it an enormously important genre in preparing students for critically thinking upon the human condition. It also has a powerful influence on world perspectives and I find that the more I read science fiction the more I find that my own personal feelings about the world I live in now are put into question. While public schools aren’t necessarily there to get students to challenge themselves, good literature will do this from time to time and it is important to expose the next generation of readers to such conditions. That’s the case I’m making for teaching science fiction in schools. What do you think? Do you have different opinions on the matter?

World in the Satin Bag

Five Irritating Things About Other Writers (part three)

Here is the final installment of this series. This brings us to a total of fifteen irritating things about other writers (including Part One and Part Two)! So, feel free to leave a comment and enjoy: Thirteen-year-old kids who self-publish a book and think they are worthy of the same adoration as J. K. Rowling, Terry Pratchett, or any number of legitimately published individuals who have sold millions of copies of books. While I’m okay with people self-publishing, one should understand that you are not entitled to fair treatment. You chose to subvert the publishing process by doing it yourself. By doing so you’ve taken upon yourself the stigma that is involved with self-publishing. If you don’t like it, then don’t self-publish. You have to earn the respect of your prospective readers; readers are not entitled to respect you (which works for legitimately published writers too, but you get what I mean). Thirteen-year-old kids who did the same as above and then get really uppity with you when you point out the obvious and irritating flaws in their writing. This is part of the business. If you don’t like people throwing slams at your work, don’t write (talking fiction, of course, because I can do whatever the hell I want with my blog). This goes for all writers. If I review your book and I don’t like it, don’t argue with me about it. Being classy like some writers have been and just take the criticism. If you act like a petulant child it doesn’t look good on your part. Literary writers who rip on genre writers for writing drivel. This is almost exclusively in the realm of jealousy on their part. Get over it. People don’t want to read literary novels as much as they did in 1810. That’s just the way it is. Writers who talk more about themselves than the person they’re supposed to be interviewing. I’m not listening to your audio interview to listen to you babble out yourself in response to your own questions. I want to hear what this other person has to say. I know about you already; that’s why I’m listening to your podcast. I don’t know about the other person. So let them talk! That is all!

Scroll to Top