Should normal people get into sci fi and fantasy?

[CmdrShep2183]

http://files.stablerack.com/webfiles/62580/chalmers3.jpg

This is Phil Chalmers. He goes to schools to talk about teen killers. He says violent video games and movies are creating a generation of killers. His favorite TV shows are reality TV, Sports and Sitcoms. He appears on Fox News. He enjoys stock car racing, MMA, the UFC, NFL Football, and fast cars.

Should people like him broaden their horizons and get interested in a work of sci fi or fantasy?

I am surprised these people glorify the military but aren't interested in any fiction with badass characters. Sci fi is filled to the brim with badass military characters.

http://community.fortunecity.ws/roswell/king/291/interstellaralliance/sheridan.jpg

[An Enemy Spy]

People are gonna like what they like. It's not liking science fiction and fantasy puts us into some secretive elite societies the "normals" could never understand. We ain't special.

Second off, I would hardly call a guy like this representative of most non-sci fi fans. He makes a perfect strawman because he's such a stereotype, but most people don't hold views as extreme as he does. They just aren't interested in science fiction.

[Toastkart]

What are normal people?

[An Enemy Spy]

What are normal people?

Yeah really. No two people on Earth are exactly the same, so how can you define what normal even is?

[Kitten Champion]

There's a lot of issues I have with the OP, but mostly it seems like you're trying to paint yourself as somehow being marginalized because your preferences in media aren't being shared by the majority, and they're somehow lesser for it.

Though, I will point out, science fiction and fantasy movies of various stripes are enormously popular - Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Jurassic World, The Avengers, Harry Potter, Frozen - are some of the most profitable movies ever with huge world-wide audiences. They are, in fact, dominating forces in popular culture.

[Chives]

There's a big difference between sci fi that focuses on science and storytelling and pew pew SPAAAAAACE.

People should do what they like, It's all for fun anyways. And people who jump on bandwagons never get the really cool stuff anyways :D

[Armaius]

What, exactly, makes enjoying sci-fi and fantasy not "normal"? :smallconfused:

Thinking of it, how exactly are you defining 'normal' anyway?

[Urzamax]

Frankly OP, one could just as easily tell you that you ought to broaden your own horizons by watching stock car racing or MMA fighting, if you don't mind the turnabout.

[DaOldeWolf]

I agree that "normal" is a stupid term to define anything. Common, average, usual are all better terms to define something than normal.

Now, about whether someone should like or not like something, well, its not anyone´s business but their own. As long as we both can enjoy what we like, it really doesn't matter if he is into the same stuff as me or if he isn't. I just couldn't care less.

As a side note, the geek culture is actually pretty well accepted in today´s culture. It actually is a good time for the geeks. :smallcool:

[Traab]

All I know is the guy the op is talking about is a moron. There has been violence in our various forms of media and entertainment for as long as humanity has existed. Violence wasnt created with the first mortal kombat game.

[An Enemy Spy]

All I know is the guy the op is talking about is a moron. There has been violence in our various forms of media and entertainment for as long as humanity has existed. Violence wasnt created with the first mortal kombat game.

Of course not. Spacewar! invented violence.

[Fri]

From googling the topic title, there's big possibility that this is one of the advanced spambot that xkcd welcomed for us back then.

https://xkcd.com/810/

(I googled this guy's topic title and found exact same title in different places)

Sorry if you're not though! Just kinda amuses me.

[Wardog]

All I know is the guy the op is talking about is a moron. There has been violence in our various forms of media and entertainment for as long as humanity has existed. Violence wasnt created with the first mortal kombat game.

I think this calls for a SMAC quote:



Man has killed man from the beginning of time, and each new frontier has brought new ways and new places to die. Why should the future be different?

[Porthos]

The 1980s called. They want their talking points back. :smallwink:

[Darth Ultron]

No.

Sci fi and fantasy are not for normal people. The normal folks can only take slight bits of very soft and cheesy sci-fi and fantasy, Star Wars is the perfect example.

Sci fi and fantasy is only for people with open minds and higher levels of intelligence.

[kraftcheese]

No.

Sci fi and fantasy are not for normal people. The normal folks can only take slight bits of very soft and cheesy sci-fi and fantasy, Star Wars is the perfect example.

Sci fi and fantasy is only for people with open minds and higher levels of intelligence.

Did you forget the coloured text for sarcasm on this one?

[Darth Ultron]

Did you forget the coloured text for sarcasm on this one?

No., not at all.

[Friv]

Sci fi and fantasy is only for people with open minds

The irony is just dripping out of my computer right now.


Look, obviously science fiction and fantasy are for anyone who likes them. I personally think there's a lot of advantage to speculative fiction in general, as far as training your brain to consider odd possibilities and explore different situations and ideas that you can't reasonably do in a historical or modern story.

On the flip side, to quote a great man, people like what they like. My horizons would probably be broadened by studying a few more sports, rather than the toe-dipping I mainly do, but they only hold my interest for so long.

[Darth Ultron]

Look, obviously science fiction and fantasy are for anyone who likes them. I personally think there's a lot of advantage to speculative fiction in general, as far as training your brain to consider odd possibilities and explore different situations and ideas that you can't reasonably do in a historical or modern story.

On the flip side, to quote a great man, people like what they like. My horizons would probably be broadened by studying a few more sports, rather than the toe-dipping I mainly do, but they only hold my interest for so long.

Right, except normal people don't like science fiction and fantasy. So sure it's for ''everyone who likes it'', but the normal people never will.

You might notice a lack of prime time science fiction and fantasy shows and even more so top ten rated science fiction and fantasy by viewership.

Normal people don't like speculative fiction, that hurts their brains and worse attacks their one sided worldview. They like straightforward fiction that is easy on the brain and supports their worldview. All the CSI shows fall into this category for example, as do most other network ''cop/law'' shows that give the false ''some random bad guys do bad stuff(but always rated pg-13, wink wink) and always get caught by super cops that care about their jobs''. Normal people like shows like that where they don't need to think.

[Chen]

You might notice a lack of prime time science fiction and fantasy shows and even more so top ten rated science fiction and fantasy by viewership.

I'm pretty sure the Walking Dead is right up there in terms of ratings. Game of Thrones too. You have Stranger Things and Sense8 on Netflix as well, not to mention Daredevil and Jessica Jones.

[The Glyphstone]

I'm pretty sure the Walking Dead is right up there in terms of ratings. Game of Thrones too. You have Stranger Things and Sense8 on Netflix as well, not to mention Daredevil and Jessica Jones.

A true Scotsman wouldn't watch such things.

[An Enemy Spy]

Right, except normal people don't like science fiction and fantasy. So sure it's for ''everyone who likes it'', but the normal people never will.

You might notice a lack of prime time science fiction and fantasy shows and even more so top ten rated science fiction and fantasy by viewership.

Normal people don't like speculative fiction, that hurts their brains and worse attacks their one sided worldview. They like straightforward fiction that is easy on the brain and supports their worldview. All the CSI shows fall into this category for example, as do most other network ''cop/law'' shows that give the false ''some random bad guys do bad stuff(but always rated pg-13, wink wink) and always get caught by super cops that care about their jobs''. Normal people like shows like that where they don't need to think.

Wow. Could your head be any farther up your backside? You sound like one of those people who constantly brag about how much deeper and smarter you are than everyone around you and then think the reason people don't like you is that they're intimidated by your intelligence.

You don't have window into anyone else's mind, and you don't get to judge their intelligence just because they don't like what you do.

[Lethologica]

Darth Ultron is engaging in some bizarre special pleading where only SF/F has mainstream shallows and a hardcore deep end, and using that to prop up his belief that nerds are t3h sm4rt 0nes. (And of course someone snidely commenting about how normal people only like "very soft and cheesy sci-fi and fantasy" is named Darth Ultron, for Pete's sake.)

I think the bot chose a terrible thread topic this time, and verged on the IRL politics line to boot with the Phil Chalmers bit. I'm not sure where this conversation could possibly go except (a) people getting defensive about SF/F or (b) people getting defensive about "normal people", both of which are conducive to heated, insubstantial arguments.

[An Enemy Spy]

Darth Ultron likes to hijack threads and run them into the ground by making bizarre claims and refusing to budge from them. I remember a thread about how the economy of the Federation works ended up in a giant argument about whether or not the Federation is an oppressive government because you can't have your replicator instantly create every single book ever written at the same time and fit them all in your house.

[DoctorFaust]

I mean, four of the five highest grossing movie franchises of all time fall into those two categories, as do four of the five highest grossing individual movies. So it seems to me that "normal" people already are into them.

[OldTrees1]

I think the bot chose a terrible thread topic this time, and verged on the IRL politics line to boot with the Phil Chalmers bit. I'm not sure where this conversation could possibly go except (a) people getting defensive about SF/F or (b) people getting defensive about "normal people", both of which are conducive to heated, insubstantial arguments.

Pro:
Interest in speculative fiction can drive innovation

Con:
People's time is their own to spend as best suits them


I would love if more people enjoyed sci fi and fantasy, but nobody should be forced to partake against their desires.

[lt_murgen]

Darth Ultron likes to hijack threads and run them into the ground by making bizarre claims and refusing to budge from them. I remember a thread about how the economy of the Federation works ended up in a giant argument about whether or not the Federation is an oppressive government because you can't have your replicator instantly create every single book ever written at the same time and fit them all in your house.

Seconded- please ignore Darthn Ultron.

[BeerMug Paladin]

There seems to be two different approaches to sci-fi in general. In my experience, the type that just includes things like robots, spaceships and so forth, but doesn't have their means of operation in any way explained or matter is far more typical of the massively popular fare.

Technical accuracy in terms of knowledge of modern science tends to be a last priority or overlooked entirely for most media. I tend to think of sci-fi that doesn't care about science at all to be more of fantasy, myself. But I don't really care about classifications all that much, they only matter when talking to other people, and in sci-fi there's scientists (who are often really engineers) doing the weird things and in fantasy, there's wizards doing it. Also, sci-fi usually has a future aesthetic, and fantasy uses the past.

That distinction is good enough for communication, but in general, I prefer a little more precision in my sci-fi about something that usually isn't considered.

Not really sure what to say about fantasy. It seems popular enough.

[Friv]

Normal people don't like speculative fiction, that hurts their brains and worse attacks their one sided worldview.

http://i.imgur.com/MUbPqqP.gif

[Kitten Champion]

I mean, four of the five highest grossing movie franchises of all time fall into those two categories, as do four of the five highest grossing individual movies. So it seems to me that "normal" people already are into them.

Apparently they don't count. It has to be a slightly fictionalized physics textbook (very slightly, let's not go crazy here) to qualify as science fiction.

No idea about fantasy though, I'm sure there's a way of pretentious gate-keeping there too though.

[Peelee]

Normal people don't like speculative fiction, that hurts their brains and worse attacks their one sided worldview.

Today I learned that 1984 was not, in fact, ever popular.
Is the blue text really required at this point?

[Porthos]

Speaking as an old-timer, I think the last time people could unironically say "normal" or the pejorative "mundane" in discussions was the early-mid 90s. And even then it was a load of codswallop, but we were too stuck up to really notice at the time.

The fact of the matter is, SF&F has ALWAYS been popular. It's why it's called popular entertainment. Hell, go as far back as the earliest myths and legends, and they're functionally the same as current SF&F. Joseph Campbell was on to a thing or two, after all.

Ignoring that though, Star Wars kicked in the door and started beating people up when it came to the masses and how it viewed current SF&F and then Harry Potter came along and shot everybody resisting in the house stone cold dead. In fact, once the Harry Potter phenomenon occurred (and there is absolutely no other word for it) I think it became IMPOSSIBLE to use the terms Mundane, Normal, Muggle or whatever word of choice unironically in a serious discussion. I mean, hell, major news organizations were covering HP launch parties. Harry Potter was EVERYWHERE.

If that wasn't enough, just as Harry Potter was exploding on the scene, we had The Lord of the Rings become an international and critical blockbuster. We had The Matrix revolutionize filmmaking and we had Star Wars burst back onto the scene, enrapturing millions with both the Special Editions and the Prequels. And just a short time after all of THAT shows like LOST entered the picture and Doctor Who came back from the dead and basically took over the UK.

Video games, which have ALWAYS been part of the masses, leapt back into fore. It wasn't called Evercrack for nothing, after all.

And the great nerderizer itself, the Internet, really took off in all its glory as the 90s closed and the Aughts loomed.

In the timespan from 1997 to 2005, SF&F exploded on all fronts. And that's even before the current superhero craze or Star Wars 3.0 started to unfold. One of the reasons for this is pretty obvious, by the way. The folks who grew up on Forbidden Planet, Star Trek, Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and all the rest entered the field of entertainment.

They took the lessons they learned from the media they consumed and the games they played (including a little thing called Role Playing Games) and took it into the mainstream with them.

Normal people ARE into Sci-Fi and Fantasy. Trying to deny that is to deny reality itself. Sure, some might be a bit more... obsessive and gate-keeperish than others. But you'll find that in all walks of life. Folks get obsessive about all sorts of things from sports to politics to even crossword puzzles (see the HUGE controversy over plagiarism in crossword puzzles a while back (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-plagiarism-scandal-is-unfolding-in-the-crossword-world/)). You have the so-called casual and the so-called hardcore fans. But, ultimately, they're all fans.

Trust me when I say as a person who walks and talks among sports fans, politicos, and SF&F fans there ain't one whit of difference between us and the folks who obsess over the plotlines of the WWE. Not one thing. No, not even that. Or that for that matter.

Fandom is fandom, for good and for ill. Mostly good, thankfully. Especially if you tune out the jerks. :smallwink:

[Darth Ultron]

I'm pretty sure the Walking Dead is right up there in terms of ratings. Game of Thrones too. You have Stranger Things and Sense8 on Netflix as well, not to mention Daredevil and Jessica Jones.

Note nothing you listed is prime time: shown on free broadcast network television from 8pm to 11 pm.

[Ceaon]

Right, except normal people don't like science fiction and fantasy. So sure it's for ''everyone who likes it'', but the normal people never will.

You might notice a lack of prime time science fiction and fantasy shows and even more so top ten rated science fiction and fantasy by viewership.

Normal people don't like speculative fiction, that hurts their brains and worse attacks their one sided worldview. They like straightforward fiction that is easy on the brain and supports their worldview. All the CSI shows fall into this category for example, as do most other network ''cop/law'' shows that give the false ''some random bad guys do bad stuff(but always rated pg-13, wink wink) and always get caught by super cops that care about their jobs''. Normal people like shows like that where they don't need to think.

I am sorry you feel that way.

[kraftcheese]

Note nothing you listed is prime time: shown on free broadcast network television from 8pm to 11 pm.
And? They're all still vastly successful, multi-million earning, popular shows with big viewerships; sci-fi and fantasy are accepted by the general public these days.

[golentan]

Note nothing you listed is prime time: shown on free broadcast network television from 8pm to 11 pm.

A quick google search for "top ten prime time shows 2016" shows the Walking Dead in the #4 spot, the third item on the list which is not a sports related program.

Isn't scotland amazing?

[Starwulf]

Video games, which have ALWAYS been part of the masses, leapt back into fore. It wasn't called Evercrack for nothing, after all.


I agree with almost everything you wrote, except for this part. Video games have NOT always been part of the masses, not until the early-mid 2000's did they reach "popular status". I was bullied to hell and back(I have no desire to go into how bad it was, just that it was damn awful) because I was a "nerd who plays those stupid video games". In my entire grade, I only knew of one other person who regularly played video games, and that one person happened to be my best friend.

Hell, I didn't start meeting people who played video games and/or were willing to talk about them until about 2005, and I know my experience is not that unusual because of all the people I've met since then, both in RL, and on the internet that claim the exact same thing.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying video gamers didn't exist before the 2000's, just that they were NOT "part of the masses". Video gamers endured quite a bit of scorn up until that point, with a lot of people maintaining the attitude of "Wow, you play video games? Man you seriously need to grow the hell up and move on to real hobbies, not that kiddy ****". Hell, I can remember talking to random people on old chat rooms in my mid-teens, and you could talk about just about anything and no-one would bat an eye, but bring up video games, and all of a sudden you were a pariah. I had to switch usernames quite a few times before I learned to just not talk about that part of my life.

[Darth Ultron]

And? They're all still vastly successful, multi-million earning, popular shows with big viewerships; sci-fi and fantasy are accepted by the general public these days.

If the were ''accepted by the public'' they would be in prime time on a network.

[An Enemy Spy]

If the were ''accepted by the public'' they would be in prime time on a network.

So anything that's not on a primetime network is unpopular is what I'm getting here. I think that "fact" is becoming less true with each passing year. Frankly, I think you just don't want sci-fi to be popular because then you wouldn't feel special. It's hard to be a snob when you're part of the mainstream.

[kraftcheese]

If the were ''accepted by the public'' they would be in prime time on a network.
Many of the shows listed are either mostly (or exclusively) watched online via streaming services, rated in an age range that won't allow them to be shown primetime, kept on cable or the hosting streaming service OR all three!

The TV world doesn't even necessarily revolve around TV these days considering the success of streaming and downloading (done by more and more "normal" people).

I really don't understand your argument unless it's an excuse to try defend the "nerd" identity that doesnt really exist in a recognizable form anymore? Not one that hasn't infused into the majority of people in Western culture, anyway.

Here stands Darth Ultron, culturally and intellectually superior nerd in his ivory tower, constantly moving the goalposts of what is and isn't acceptable to TRUE nerds! Long may this True Scotsman protect us from the unwashed masses!

[comicshorse]

Or there's the fact that 7 of the top 10 grossing movies of the year so far are science fiction or fantasy according to IMDB

[Darth Ultron]

I really don't understand your argument unless it's an excuse to try defend the "nerd" identity that doesnt really exist in a recognizable form anymore? Not one that hasn't infused into the majority of people in Western culture, anyway.


Mainstream is normal, and normal folks don't like sci fi and fantasy.

To start with the ''numbers'', as everyone thinks they mean so much. A new movie attracts the normal movie goers that just ''go and see all new movies''. They are not going as they ''like'' the movie, they are just going to see it as it is new. This is a huge chunk of the numbers, the same way couples and kids are and they artificially inflate the numbers. Now, if you only care about money, it does not matter that, say half of the money made was from people that did not want to see the film, went anyway, and did not like it. So that number is just telling you ''money made'', not ''how popular'' it is.

If sci fi and fantasy is so popular, where are all the shows? The Walking Dead is a bit of a stretch as it is Horror and Drama then anything. Though we do have Once upon a Time.....


Here is a good way to put it:

Lets say a sci-fi/fantasy show and a big ''the game'' sporting event were on at the same time. What would you watch?

The normal person: Like a good sports robot they must watch the game no matter what.

The not normal person: Is watching the tv show.

The betweener is a normal person that pretends to be not normal...sometimes: They are with the other sports robots watching the big game, of course....but they plan to watch the TV show soon enough. So they can pretend to be a not normal person later and say ''oh well sure I saw the show'' to a real not normal person.

[OldTrees1]

Remember In Darth Ultron's world:
"Normal" people are those that only watch TV on their TV and only during Primetime but also robotically watches every sports game and also happen to go to every movie without attempting to predict if they will or will not like it. This is a very small niche demographic, but it is even smaller that this because Darth Ultron has yet to move the goalposts yet again. Eventually (if not already) Darth Ultorn will only be talking about a single person and that person will be fictional to boot!

Edit: He even moved the goal posts while I was posting this post.

[danzibr]

In my circle, all the normal people are into sci-fi and/or fantasy. It is abnormal to not be into either.

[Kid Jake]

Note nothing you listed is prime time: shown on free broadcast network television from 8pm to 11 pm.

In the past I've resolved not to respond to you, because your halfassed logic gives me headaches, but this is ridiculous.

When you've only got 3 stations to watch, you watch whatever they tell you to watch. Why would they waste money on a big budget sci-fi or fantasy series when they will literally make just as much off of "America's Sluttiest Dogs" without the overhead?

It's not about popularity, it's about bang for their buck.

[DoctorFaust]

I mean, if I were given a choice of watching, say, WWE Smackdown or Divergent, I would pick Smackdown every time. Does that mean I'm too normal to like authors like Isaac Aasimov or Goethe? Should I sell all my Discworld books because I care more about how CM Punk did in his UFC debut than I do about the new Ghostbusters movie? Does the fact I care about who gets to the Rose Bowl mean I'm just pretending to like shows like Firefly or Cowboy Bebop?

[An Enemy Spy]

DU, were you bullied as a kid or something? I'm sensing a real anger in the way you talk about "normal" people. Not to play the psychiatrist here, but it seems like your opinions on "normal" things go beyond just sneering gate keeping snobbery and into full on hatred.

[Friv]

Mainstream is normal, and normal folks don't like sci fi and fantasy.

To start with the ''numbers'', as everyone thinks they mean so much. A new movie attracts the normal movie goers that just ''go and see all new movies''. They are not going as they ''like'' the movie, they are just going to see it as it is new. This is a huge chunk of the numbers, the same way couples and kids are and they artificially inflate the numbers. Now, if you only care about money, it does not matter that, say half of the money made was from people that did not want to see the film, went anyway, and did not like it. So that number is just telling you ''money made'', not ''how popular'' it is.

If sci fi and fantasy is so popular, where are all the shows? The Walking Dead is a bit of a stretch as it is Horror and Drama then anything. Though we do have Once upon a Time.....


Here is a good way to put it:

Lets say a sci-fi/fantasy show and a big ''the game'' sporting event were on at the same time. What would you watch?

The normal person: Like a good sports robot they must watch the game no matter what.

The not normal person: Is watching the tv show.

The betweener is a normal person that pretends to be not normal...sometimes: They are with the other sports robots watching the big game, of course....but they plan to watch the TV show soon enough. So they can pretend to be a not normal person later and say ''oh well sure I saw the show'' to a real not normal person.

http://media2.giphy.com/media/4J3X4NqsgNCXC/giphy-downsized-medium.gif



(There is a part of me that's a little sad about taking part in the derailing of this thread, but it was pretty much derailed from moment one and also there's nothing to seriously discuss, so might as well have fun while we're here.)

[An Enemy Spy]

Normal people don't like speculative fiction, that hurts their brains and worse attacks their one sided worldview. They like straightforward fiction that is easy on the brain and supports their worldview. All the CSI shows fall into this category for example, as do most other network ''cop/law'' shows that give the false ''some random bad guys do bad stuff(but always rated pg-13, wink wink) and always get caught by super cops that care about their jobs''. Normal people like shows like that where they don't need to think.

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/sheeple.png

[Friv]

Darn, Enemy Spy, you found a much better relevant image than I did.

[Kato]

I kind of expected this thing to go off the rails from reading the title... that is, when you say liking scifi and fantasy is not something "normal" people do...
I didn't expect it to turn as bad as it has gotten, though :smalleek: Lucky we're civilized around here...

To give a short answer: I think everyone should read whatever they like. I wouldn't want anyone to tell me to read romance novels, so I'm not going to tell someone to read fantasy ot scifi if they are not interested. (Except Pratchett. Everyone must have their book shelves full of his works, naturally)

[Knaight]

Or there's the fact that 7 of the top 10 grossing movies of the year so far are science fiction or fantasy according to IMDB

Yeah, but these movies weren't played from 8pm to 11pm on a major network, and as we all know that's the only valid standard for popularity.

As for the whole idea that nerds are inherently intelligent: That's hilarious.

[BeerMug Paladin]

Maybe we're having a breakdown of communication here.

A normal runs perpendicularly. Since the area of this forum is sci-fi and fantasy, a normal person does not like sci-fi and fantasy. Trivially true statement, really.

[TeChameleon]

There's also the minor factor that 'normal', at least as defined by the OP and (maybe?) Darth Ultron would be distinctly abnormal basically anywhere in the world except for the United States of America. I mean, speaking as a Canadian, we tend to look a bit sideways at some of the habits of our Southern cousins, and generally speaking, we like Americans.

In limited doses, at least :smalltongue:

But in any case, I don't think there are many up here in the Great White North that would call that kind of person 'normal'.

Elsewhere in the world... I mean, that kind of behaviour would earn you a label in the UK, and... let's just say that said label wouldn't be 'normal'. 'Chav' or 'hooligan', maybe, but certainly not 'normal'.

*shrug*

In whatever case, people like what they like. Dismissing something because it's 'nerdy' and dismissing something because it's 'mundane' are equally ridiculous. And you can find the horrible fandumb lurking in basically any fandom for anything.


As for the whole idea that nerds are inherently intelligent: That's hilarious.

... in fairness, that is something of an inherent part of the stereotype. 'Nerds', at least in the popular consciousness, are book-smart, social-skill-lacking individuals with a tendency to focus obsessively on a single, or at most a small handful of non-mainstream topics.

Or possibly candies.

[Manga Shoggoth]

Maybe we're having a breakdown of communication here.

A normal runs perpendicularly. Since the area of this forum is sci-fi and fantasy, a normal person does not like sci-fi and fantasy. Trivially true statement, really.

I think you are going off at a tangent there...

(Yay! Maths Puns! - you gave single-handedly made my morning!)

[Wardog]

You don't have window into anyone else's mind, and you don't get to judge their intelligence just because they don't like what you do.

Case in point: I was recently talking to a marine scientist, who spends all day doing intellectual work, and so when she comes home prefers to relax by watching cartoons. (This sometimes causes conflict with her boyfriend, who is a bricklayer who, after a long day of physical labour, wants to watch documentaries and other intellectually stimulating programs).


Apparently they don't count. It has to be a slightly fictionalized physics textbook (very slightly, let's not go crazy here) to qualify as science fiction.

Which is why I don't enjoy a lot of the older, classic hard-sf. The science tends to get dated very quickly, and the fiction (and particularly the characters) are often badly written and uninspiring.


I think you are going off at a tangent there...

(Yay! Maths Puns! - you gave single-handedly made my morning!)

That's quite an oblique reference.

[Darth Ultron]

DU, were you bullied as a kid or something? I'm sensing a real anger in the way you talk about "normal" people. Not to play the psychiatrist here, but it seems like your opinions on "normal" things go beyond just sneering gate keeping snobbery and into full on hatred.

I think I might have a great description of a normal person: A normal person is one who thinks they are just a person and would think and say ''what is normal?" and they would not know the answer to that question. This fits as one of the big hallmarks of a normal person is lack of self awareness and lack of empathy.

Anyone who is not normal, knows so, without question.

Though, this does only apply to the USA, of course.

[An Enemy Spy]

I think I might have a great description of a normal person: A normal person is one who thinks they are just a person and would think and say ''what is normal?" and they would not know the answer to that question. This fits as one of the big hallmarks of a normal person is lack of self awareness and lack of empathy.

Anyone who is not normal, knows so, without question.

Though, this does only apply to the USA, of course.

Yeah, I'm definitely going with "bullied as a kid" here. Nobody who didn't have a bad experience in their youth could actually think so lowly of everyone around them that they actually believe it's the norm to lack a sense of empathy. I feel bad for you. I really do.

[An Enemy Spy]

Oh, and can I just add that the inability to look at someone with different interests than yourself and still think of them as an intelligent and rational human being displays a staggering lack of the empathy you claim other people don't have.

[DoctorFaust]

So, following the definitions of "normal" that you have offered over the last two or three pages, what you are saying, essentially, is that because I would rather watch Wrestlemania XIX than Fire Maidens from Outer Space if given a choice between the two, I am an unintelligent sociopath. Well, TIL, I guess.

[McBish]

There are no normal people. Talk to some of them, they aren't normal.

[SlyGuyMcFly]

There are no normal people. Talk to some of them, they aren't normal.

I prefer to say that all people are normal in some ways, but nobody is normal in every way. Some people are normal in lots ways and others in decidedly fewer.

[Traab]

A brief callback to the debate over Evercrack and gaming becoming mainstream. I have to agree witht he rebuttal. I played everquest back when it was new. It was probably the first mmorpg to become known outside its circle of players, but it was still a very very nerdy and abnormal thing to talk about. I honestly think it wasnt until World of Wacraft came out that this type of gaming became mainstream. While I never talked about everquest outside of the game forums, I got into tons of discussions with random fellow students and eventually coworkers about WoW.

And over the last few years all the old nerdy things have become well known and, even if not popular, not something "normal" people make fun of. Im working in a factory chatting with the forklift driver and mechanic about what versions of dragonball I should avoid watching if I want to enjoy the series properly, exchanging account information for everquest 2 with my manager so we can group up later after work, and even arguing over appropriate fanfiction crossover universes. "Dude! You cant put superman in high school of the dead! No, not even smallville clark kent is weak enough for it to work!"

[Porthos]

A brief callback to the debate over Evercrack and gaming becoming mainstream. I have to agree witht he rebuttal. I played everquest back when it was new. It was probably the first mmorpg to become known outside its circle of players, but it was still a very very nerdy and abnormal thing to talk about. I honestly think it wasnt until World of Wacraft came out that this type of gaming became mainstream. While I never talked about everquest outside of the game forums, I got into tons of discussions with random fellow students and eventually coworkers about WoW.

All I know is that when I heard major league baseball players talk about their Everquest characters on the Jim Rome radio show without even the slighest bit of pushback back in the day, that's the moment I knew that videogames where well on their way to being mainstreamed. :smallsmile:

If we want to quibble over the exact moment, fair enuf. But for me that always stood out.

[Traab]

All I know is that when I heard major league baseball players talk about their Everquest characters on the Jim Rome radio show without even the slighest bit of pushback back in the day, that's the moment I knew that videogames where well on their way to being mainstreamed. :smallsmile:

If we want to quibble over the exact moment, fair enuf. But for me that always stood out.

Oh it was definitely the start. It was the first game of its sort to become so popular, it was also the time when owning your own computer and going online with it was becoming more and more popular, with innovations like dsl starting to spread. I think it was what placed the whole "nerd" culture at a tipping point. But it takes time for people to change their reaction from this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZVdR19E5mU) to something a bit more polite. :smalltongue:

[Knaight]

... in fairness, that is something of an inherent part of the stereotype. 'Nerds', at least in the popular consciousness, are book-smart, social-skill-lacking individuals with a tendency to focus obsessively on a single, or at most a small handful of non-mainstream topics.
And while the rest of the stereotype is routinely ignored in nerd-spaces, that particular bit is sufficiently self aggrandizing that people are willing to stick to it despite routine evidence to the contrary.

[Psyren]

I'm going with Fri's assessment on page 1, especially since the OP has not posted in this thread even once since the topic starter.

[Peelee]

I'm going with Fri's assessment on page 1, especially since the OP has not posted in this thread even once since the topic starter.

You needed more proof than just reading the original post that it was a bot? Normal people don't talk like that; they are with the other sports robots watching the big game, of course.

[Psyren]

You needed more proof than just reading the original post that it was a bot? Normal people don't talk like that; they are with the other sports robots watching the big game, of course.

It was more incredulity that the thread is still going.

http://orig12.deviantart.net/aa0e/f/2008/260/5/0/nobody_is_right_by_3_angled_blue.png

[Dragonexx]

I think I might have a great description of a normal person: A normal person is one who thinks they are just a person and would think and say ''what is normal?" and they would not know the answer to that question. This fits as one of the big hallmarks of a normal person is lack of self awareness and lack of empathy.

Anyone who is not normal, knows so, without question.

Though, this does only apply to the USA, of course.

http://s26.postimg.org/ncekszo2h/11238265_10205867674605340_8011278173218787417_n.j pg

Also, sports references. Does that make me a "normal person"?

[An Enemy Spy]

I think it makes you a brain dead sociopath afraid of having your one sided worldview challenged by TV shows that don't air from 5-8 on one of the major networks.

[nyjastul69]

Mainstream is normal, and normal folks don't like sci fi and fantasy.

To start with the ''numbers'', as everyone thinks they mean so much. A new movie attracts the normal movie goers that just ''go and see all new movies''. They are not going as they ''like'' the movie, they are just going to see it as it is new. This is a huge chunk of the numbers, the same way couples and kids are and they artificially inflate the numbers. Now, if you only care about money, it does not matter that, say half of the money made was from people that did not want to see the film, went anyway, and did not like it. So that number is just telling you ''money made'', not ''how popular'' it is.

If sci fi and fantasy is so popular, where are all the shows? The Walking Dead is a bit of a stretch as it is Horror and Drama then anything. Though we do have Once upon a Time.....


Here is a good way to put it:

Lets say a sci-fi/fantasy show and a big ''the game'' sporting event were on at the same time. What would you watch?

The normal person: Like a good sports robot they must watch the game no matter what.

The not normal person: Is watching the tv show.

The betweener is a normal person that pretends to be not normal...sometimes: They are with the other sports robots watching the big game, of course....but they plan to watch the TV show soon enough. So they can pretend to be a not normal person later and say ''oh well sure I saw the show'' to a real not normal person.

There is no reason for an interest in sports and an interest in sci-fi/fantasy to be mutually exclusive. My experience is that most people watch both.

I think your 'big game' analogy is flawed. The big game is usually a one time event that, for the most part, is difficult to enjoy outside of that one particular showing.

OTOH, whatever sci-fi thing that is on will likely be repeated at some point in the future and can be watched then.

As much of geek as I am, I like sports too.

[TheRedHerring]

in my humble opinion, yes.

[SuperPanda]

No one should "get into" speculative fiction because of the genre alone.

People should "get into" speculative fiction because of good writing and interesting ideas.

The corollary is that no one should avoid a work of fiction simply because of genre.

If one were to look at Harry Potter Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, and The Martian; they would be likely to conclude that Harry Potter and Star Wars are far more similar than Star Wars and The Martian. All four are well produced films with good effects, cinematography, acting, and all around packages (some are noticeably better than others but all can be easily said to be successful).

The Lord of the Rings is a text steeped in a deep and complex understanding of lore, mythology, Epic poetry, ancient texts, and language. There is a great deal of detail and research behind the text and the story.

The Martian is a text steeped in scientific research and understanding of real space flight. Sure it makes some stuff up and has somethings which exist only to allow the plot to happen but it is also filled with alot of real science and information.

In many ways these two texts share more in common than their "genre buddy" in the above list. They are smart, well researched, and thought provoking works of speculative fiction. These texts serve as conversation starters and inspiration for careers in science and linguistics. There is a weight about them that makes them hard to dismiss even if they don't fit a person's taste (assuming that the person knows about the work behind the text).

Harry Potter and Star Wars are texts that draw heavily from Joseph Campbell's Monomyth. They are largely archetypal in plot and tropes . Harry Potter's major claim to fame isn't being a great story, but being engaging enough to get kids reading again. Star Wars's major claim to fame is its ground breaking special effects, not its story or its universe. These are modern myths about modern heroes who help define our cultural identities. We grow up wanting to have a strength of spirit like the people from these stories, to be moral peers rather than academic or professional peers to them.

Every genre has gems that are worth experiencing. Every genre has utter trash. Choosing what texts and films to experience based off their aesthetic qualities alone is a great way to surround yourself with the trash. I love science fiction and fantasy but I don't read/watch most of it.

Orwell's 1984 is mainstream and by all meaningful definitions it is Science Fiction. Many won't call it that because A) no lasers and B) its good.

I love Star Trek and Quantum Leap, but I'd say people should be reading Asimov and Bradbury rather than getting the cliffnotes versions from Picard and Data.

Bradbury's warnings about overdependent on Technology are still very relevant. Wall-E makes them into cute jokes while Bradbury made them into existential terrors. Farenheit 451 is terribly relevant to the post-information age, as is 1984.

Some messages don't need Sci-Fi to get across. Avatar and Dances with Wolves both get the same idea across rather well. People should watch whichever one they are more likely to pay attention to and then go have discussions about that idea. One is not made objectively better or worse because the people in the story are blue.

[Themrys]

I'm pretty sure the Walking Dead is right up there in terms of ratings. Game of Thrones too. You have Stranger Things and Sense8 on Netflix as well, not to mention Daredevil and Jessica Jones.

I don't know about Walking Dead, but Game of Thrones is ... yes, it is fantasy, but it does not challenge people's brains to think outside the box. It's basically an exaggerated medieval world with dragons. But then, so is LotR. (Though LotR does have the virtue of going against the mainstream by having main heroes who are smaller and weaker than everyone else. This is seldomly seen in fantasy, even in LotR ripoffs.)

Darth has a point, but there are very few speculative fiction works that really challenge the status quo. I am not at all convinced that all people who self-describe as fans of fantasy or science-fiction are open-minded.


To answer the thread's question: No, no one who doesn't like sci fi and fantasy should "get into" it. Trying to force them to will only make them hate it instead of just ignoring it, and that's not what any fan of speculative fiction wants.

[Dill Raulnor]

First: All people should get into sci fi & fantasy. There's a story out there that everyone will enjoy in these genres

Second: Enjoying Sci-Fi and Fantasy doesn't make you less normal or weird.

Third: Have a good day :)

[Knaight]

I don't know about Walking Dead, but Game of Thrones is ... yes, it is fantasy, but it does not challenge people's brains to think outside the box. It's basically an exaggerated medieval world with dragons. But then, so is LotR. (Though LotR does have the virtue of going against the mainstream by having main heroes who are smaller and weaker than everyone else. This is seldomly seen in fantasy, even in LotR ripoffs.)

Darth has a point, but there are very few speculative fiction works that really challenge the status quo. I am not at all convinced that all people who self-describe as fans of fantasy or science-fiction are open-minded.

Two things.
1) Being a fan of fantasy or science fiction has literally nothing to do with being open minded.
2) There's plenty of speculative fiction which targets the status quo. Take Stanislaw Lem, a soviet dissident who's work had a tendency to be aimed at the Soviet Union. Getting into details would be political, but suffice to say that there was some extremely biting stuff in there. Take Ursula K. LeGuin, consider Ann Leckie, take Ray Bradbury, take Kurt Vonnegut, look at Nnedi Okorafor, look at China Melville. Heck, take Terry Goodkind*. There's plenty that is heavily critical, there's plenty that is bizarre.

*Although if you want to enjoy what you're reading, don't.