Star Wars isn't fantasy

[Onyx]

I’m certainly not going to spend time arguing over WHICH genre of sf.

I thought you already had.

But I also thought you referred to SW being fantasy, so I just misunderstood.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I thought you already had.

But I also thought you referred to SW being fantasy, so I just misunderstood.

Sorry, nope. I had it as Space Fantasy. Which is just a side kick away from Space Opera. And close enough not to care which it goes in under.

I do think arguing it has NO fantasy elements (given dad and Ben’s ghosties) is a hard battle but I salute you in going forwards with it.

 

[Onyx]

I do think arguing it has NO fantasy elements (given dad and Ben’s ghosties) is a hard battle but I salute you in going forwards with it.

If anyone other than Jedi's appeared in astral form, you could make an argument that they were ghosts. But Ben primed the pump by saying that killing his body would only expand his power. It isn't like they are haunting anyone or cursed in any way.


I found this article, which nicely articulates the debate:
Opinion | Is Star Wars science fiction?

I do think that we are quick to judge surface elements of SW - is Ben actually a wizard? Or is that a something we put on Ben because he has certain powers and is an old bearded man with a robe?


The "long time ago" thing is also overstated. Lots of future fiction speaks to the audience as if their present comes after or at the same time as the events shown. Deckard is not narrating into the past when he uses the present tense to talk about events in the future. The conceit is that we are also living in the future, and SW is in the past of that glorious future.

 

[Joshua Jones]

I really don’t see what the argument is. Science/Space Fantasy is a subgenre of sf, not fantasy. It’s science fiction with fantasy elements.
Regardless whether it falls into Space Opera, pure sf, or Space Fantasy it’s still in the sf genre.
I’m certainly not going to spend time arguing over WHICH genre of sf.

I think the problem is that some people REALLY don't like Fantasy, and see Fantasy as little more than Tolkien and Tolkien copycats. If this is one's definition of Fantasy, then SW is obviously not Fantasy.

The catch is, this isn't what Fantasy is limited to. Fantasy can be set in ancient times, Roman times, modern times... in civilizations reminiscent of any society that has ever existed or could be imagined. Why cannot Fantasy be set in space? Fact of the matter is, it can be, just like SF doesn't necessarily need to be set in space. The setting is just that; a setting. And, a setting can define a subgenre (historical fiction, apocalyptic, etc.) but not a full genre. Hence, I argue that either Fantasy or SF could be set in any setting, including space. And, as technology level is manifestly related to setting, it too is irrelevant to the distinction between SF and Fantasy.

If the presence of a space setting or Space related technology isn't what sets the two apart, what does? This is where things get a bit tricky. Unless there is an agreed upon definition which I am not privy to, it would seem there is a sliding scale between the two, with Hard SF on one side and High Fantasy on the other. As such, I would argue the storyline and character tropes (young farmer is drawn into a battle between the forces of light and their white knights [Jedi and the light side of the force] and the forces of darkness [Sith and the dark side of the force], led by a black knight and sorcerer emperor) from SW would place it somewhere toward the middle, leaning toward the Fantasy side. The mystical aspects of the Force (note, it need not be religious to be Fantasy!) push it more that direction.

So, I would argue the SW, while being in the middle somewhere, leans more toward the Fantasy side than the SF side. That is why I am comfortable calling it Space Fantasy.

 

[Onyx]

As such, I would argue the storyline and character tropes (young farmer is drawn into a battle between the forces of light and their white knights [Jedi and the light side of the force] and the forces of darkness [Sith and the dark side of the force], led by a black knight and sorcerer emperor) from SW would place it somewhere toward the middle, leaning toward the Fantasy side.

As such, I would argue the storyline and character tropes (young mechanic and pilot is drawn into a battle between the forces of freedom and their soldiers [Rebel infantry, pilots, Jedi and the liberty side of the force] and the forces of oppression [Stormtroopers, pilots, Sith and the cruel side of the force], led by a black cyborg and martial artist emperor) from SW would place it somewhere toward the middle, leaning toward the Science Fiction side.

It really comes down to the labels we choose, doesn't it? A bit like how mentally ill people used to be possessed by fantasy demons.

 

[Parson]

I really don’t see what the argument is. Science/Space Fantasy is a subgenre of sf, not fantasy. It’s science fiction with fantasy elements.
Regardless whether it falls into Space Opera, pure sf, or Space Fantasy it’s still in the sf genre.
I’m certainly not going to spend time arguing over WHICH genre of sf.

I see that you were not "out of here" as you said up tread of that post.

I like your term "Space Fantasy" a lot in relationship to Star Wars.

 

[HareBrain]

Genre has to be subjective to some degree.

To use a somewhat unlikely example: suppose I write a story set 1000 years hence, with an explanation for FTL travel that satisfies most readers. That's SF, even hard SF. Now suppose my prediction of that future is stunningly accurate, except that FTL travel has been proven possible. Now imagine that 1000 years on from that, someone writes the exact same story as mine. Their version, identical in every word, would be fantasy.

 

[The Big Peat]

I'm asking why you keep saying it is referred to as fantasy when exclusive categorizations put Star Wars in SF, while non-exclusive categories, like Google searches, include Jurassic Park in fantasy. You make it sound like SW is universally thought of as fantasy when clearly it is commonly classed as sci fi by a great number of people who bother to see SF and fantasy as different.

Which isn't to say that the categorization by the Rotten Tomatoes is right or wrong, but it does go to show that SW is commonly thought of as SF by a large group of people.

I think I mentioned the "space fantasy" thing in another thread - "science fiction" in the 1970s was a term that referred to stuffy, egghead or dystopian films like 2001, Logan's Run and Omega Man. Star Wars was marketed to differentiate itself from the approach and tone of those films. Today we would obviously classify "space opera" as sci fi, but Lucas is calling space opera not-sci fi. Is he right?

Just because SF and Fantasy are different things doesn't mean its impossible for something to feature in both. The very existence of the Science-Fantasy and Space Fantasy genres proves this.

Which makes the fact that SW is commonly thought of as Sci-Fi completely moot to whether it's Fantasy.

And no, Star Wars isn't universally thought of as fantasy. However, it is commonly enough thought of as one that it counts as one if going with consensus views of genres, regardless of what one thinks of the decision.



And, mildly tangentially, I don't see the value in trying to come up with genre definitions that don't fit with consensus views. There's simply too much luggage associated with the terms and too little thought given to what they meant to begin with. The result is that after a certain point, the new definitions simply don't bear up to critique.

 

[Susan Boulton]

Going to upset a few folks now:
Dictionary meaning
Fantasy; noun.
1.The faculty or activity of imagining impossible or improbable things.

Hence star Wars is fantasy, so too, are all fictional stories, no matter what genre you try to ram them into. They are all products of imagination unrestricted in part, or totally, by reality. Just enjoy the story/stories.

 

[svalbard]

I think it is a bit of both. You have the mentor figure in Obi-Wan, the young, farmboy/orphan/apprentice in Luke, the over arching evil in The Emperor, the plucky revolutionaries in The Rebellion, deposed royalty in Princess Leia, young Princes hidden at birth, again Luke and it goes on. I think Space Fantasy is a good term.

Star Wars Origins - Joseph Campbell and the Hero's Journey

 

[Joshua Jones]

As such, I would argue the storyline and character tropes (young mechanic and pilot is drawn into a battle between the forces of freedom and their soldiers [Rebel infantry, pilots, Jedi and the liberty side of the force] and the forces of oppression [Stormtroopers, pilots, Sith and the cruel side of the force], led by a black cyborg and martial artist emperor) from SW would place it somewhere toward the middle, leaning toward the Science Fiction side.

It really comes down to the labels we choose, doesn't it? A bit like how mentally ill people used to be possessed by fantasy demons.

The last part touches on religion, so let's just leave that where it lies for right now...

Let's start thus discussion with (hopefully) some common ground. It would seem that we both agree that reasonable people could disagree with an informed perspective, simply because it is toward the middle. Hence, the claim that only those who are being contrarians argue that it is more Fantasy should be withdrawn. To be sure, some make the claim to anger the SW fanboys, but this is not a necessary feature of the claim. Will you grant this?

Now, I will add that the reason I don't find your description convincing is that it primarily focuses on the incidentals related to the setting, rather than the plot roles assumed. Luke simply isn't a mechanic and pilot in terms of profession; he is a farmer whose farm uses droids, and therefore he must be able to work on the machines. We aren't given enough background in the movies as to why he was flying, but being he talked about shooting womp rats from his plane, one would have to assume this was either necessary for the farm or sport, rather than an active war against the womp rats in which he played a part. It is honestly quite like a Fantasy farm boy who has some knowledge of blacksmithing and riding learned from his time on the farm.

Yes, there are Rebel and Imperial infantry and pilots (as well as Imperial armor), and these are necessary for the battles in the setting described. But, what I sought to demonstrate above is that setting and tech do not necessarily reflect genre. Hence, I don't see these as determinators of genre, but reflections of the setting. If you changed the setting of SW to a pseudo-medieval setting, the infantry with blasters would be replaced with infantry with swords and spears, but they would still have the same plot function; mooks who are killed en masse to introduce the sides of the conflict and main characters. Fighter pilots would be replaced with calvary, armed with enchanted spears that need to hit the weak point of the dragon, and the protagonist is able to be both a paladin knight and calvaryman to defeat the dragon.

And, where in universe is the Force described as "Liberty side" and "Cruel side"? Remember, prequels are canon, so the "Light side" is primarily about suppressing feelings and attachments (hence why Jedi cannot have families), and the "Dark side" is about embracing emotions, positive and negative. Honestly, it is closer to the Theravada/Vajrayana debate in Buddhism than liberty vs. cruelty. But, in the original trilogy, it is straight up good vs. evil.

And, then there is Darth Vader and the Emperor. On the former, the fact that he is a cyborg is basically irrelevant; it provides the menacing aesthetic, but that is about it. The role he fulfills, though, is clear. This is what TV Tropes says about the Black Knight trope;

"An enigmatic warrior, clad head to toe in armor black as night, which he is never seen without. Usually ridiculously powerful, he is feared by all who know of him. Wielding a sword, speaking in a low monotone or sinister growl, and looking totally badass while doing it, he is almost always a major antagonist. Commonly filling the role of The Dragon in fantasy stories. The Heroprobably has a score to settle with him. The mystery surrounding his true identity is often a main plot point."

That simply is Darth Vader. He is a Black Knight straight from Fantasy. The only variations are setting based (is a cyborg, uses a laser sword, etc.). Forgive me if I overstate my case, but this point seems indisputable to me.

And, regarding the Emperor, in the original trilogy, he certainly was not a martial artist. His only demonstrated attack was shooting lighting bolts from his fingertips. That falls into mage territory. Even in the prequels, his preferred attacks seem to be lightning and flinging platforms, though he does use his lightsaber a bit. So, I would argue that he fits the role of evil sorcerer emperor better than martial artist, as the latter typically uses physical abilities first, then may use more mystical or magical ones, either as an augment or as a special attack.

For these reasons, I think the description I gave is more accurate than the one you did. Ultimately, the defining question is if setting determines genre. If it does, then SW is SF. If it doesn't, it leans Fantasy. In my estimation, this is really what it comes down to.