What do you like in science fiction

Machines with personalities
With 3D people in it
Not too much bloody battles
A lot of humour
No kings
Tight structure and engaging plots
......

Peter Vida said:

It seems most people who have responded are not a fan of the soft opening. how do you feel about authors who use the first few chapters to introduce you to the "universe" and the characters before the action begins?

Click to expand...

Brian Turner said:

The story begins from the first word. Usually it's character-driven, which means we must learn their internal conflict, theme, and stakes, from the beginning.

Click to expand...

As Brian and others have said. It doesn't need to be a "Hollywood opening", in fact I rather detest that in prose, but something interesting has to happen. A character doing something interesting, in an interesting situation, facing an interesting problem... something. It's that old adage of 'start the story where the story starts'. Don't begin your story a month, a week, a day, or even an hour before the story actually starts.

I think authors that rely on prologues to info dump... erm, world-build... are weak writers relying on weak writing. If the information is actually relevant to the story it can be worked into the regular narration in a non-info dump way or via dialogue. If it really matters that the last king was assassinated and the heirs have been fighting over the throne for the last decade, then it can be mentioned when and where it becomes relevant to the story in the story itself... through narration or dialogue. To do so whilst keeping it short, sweet, relevant, and interesting isn't easy to do... which is why weaker writers simply dump it all in a prologue. It's a huge pet peeve of mine.

Peter Vida said:

SF as metaphor is big for me.

What do you mean by this? Can you give an example?

Click to expand...

I can only assume that since SF as metaphor is big for you that you're not asking for an example of SF as metaphor, but I'm not sure what else you could be asking here.

Raises hand. But sometimes - rarely - a prologue is what's needed. GOT, for instance - the white walkers aren't part of the main story but are the central horror we need to know about.

Sometimes prologues work really well.

The prologue on Bakkers The Darkness that Comes Before is one of the best.

I'm a bit of a sucker for this but I always loved "a wind rose..." prologues in the Wheel of Time series, they helped connect the narratives.

Fishbowl Helmet said:

Something interesting has to happen in the first 20 pages or I'm out. Doesn't need to be action-adventure, but something engaging has to happen. Crazy situation, interesting characters, bizarre setting... something.

Click to expand...

LOL

That was my standard way back when, then I raised it to 50.

Books have gotten so much longer since I started. They could be 125 pages in the early 60s, now they can be 500.

I like the science/technology to be as important as a secondary character.

psik

Jo Zebedee said:

Raises hand. But sometimes - rarely - a prologue is what's needed. GOT, for instance - the white walkers aren't part of the main story but are the central horror we need to know about.

Click to expand...

The problem prologues I'm talking about are where the author directly addresses the reader and goes into an almost non-fiction, non-dramatic style of direct writing that's meant only to impart information, i.e. the info dump prologue. You know what I'm talking about, the prologues that simply states that this character is the descendant of this line of nobles, this family has been at war with this other family for generations, dryly tells the reader about the socio-political background of the novel... terrible writing info dump prologues. Encyclopedia entry rather than dramatic prose. If any of that information matters to the story, it can be weaved into the story itself in a dramatised scene.

What Martin did was simply mislabel his chapter one. The prologue for Game of Thrones is in 'real time', includes description, narration, and dialogue. It features characters with a goal trying to achieve that goal. Some of the characters never appear again, but the events of that prologue do effect the rest of the story in that book, even if only peripherally, and I'd wager that the prologue will matter in the long run. It imparts information without being a tedious info dump prologue. This isn't the kind of prologue I'm against.

Temperance said:

This also applies to cultures in the distant future where art stopped in 1990, so Bob Dylan and Jimi Hendrix shows you have musical taste etc, post 21st century art is mentioned, ever. And it's only the cool stuff, no renegade space captain goes around listening to the venga boys or one direction.

Click to expand...

Heh. Ever seen Guardians of the Galaxy?
I find my sf tastes are eclectic. SF is a broad church and there are riches to be found throughout. I like good writing. Humour and irony helps. Rayguns and flashing spaceships are cool, but non-space opera SF works equally well.

What do I like about S.F.?
Unlimited imagination, being able to roam freely in the worlds of "What If?".
To escape the humdrum work-a-day world.
To exercise your good old Sense Of Wonder!!!

Victoria Silverwolf said:

This is a very big question.

I guess the very first thing I demand is a reasonably high level of general writing ability. Unlike some, I can't enjoy an exciting plot that is poorly written.

Like just about everyone who reads SFF, I want the "sense of wonder." I want to be amazed by new things. This is why I tend to be allergic to series.

I want to able to feel the things I am reading about. Vividness and strong sensory appeal are important.

Complex characters that seem real are a big factor.

I could name many other things.

Click to expand...

Have to go with "sense of wonder". Don't much care how I get it, I just want it.