Saturday, September 21, 2013

Alternative Avenues to Sci-Fi + Fantasy

If Vox is right that Sci-Fi/Fantasy have been invaded by the PC police, it might be good for authors not totally in line with the commissars or fearful of being purged to look elsewhere. This isn't new as Bradbury mentioned this push for inclusion half a century ago. If another genre were to be built up and proven successful, don't worry, those leeches would worm their way in and ruin it within 50 years. It would be 50 years of peace though for the rest of our lifetimes. One would think in imaginary worlds it would not matter but >gulp< diversity uber alles. Let us think of other genres that would allow one to skirt the PC Nazis.

1. Historical Fiction - Speaking of Nazis, go back in time. With a history based framework, one can explain why women and men have more traditional roles or why certain groups are not represented or represented in numerically and technically appropriate ways. The Interwar Period has enough intrigue and stories to mine as does early stages of the Cold War. A serieson the tragedy of decolonization might be interesting. Mad Men, Downton Abbey and Neil Stephenson make good use of this trick.

2. Bronze and Iron Age Fiction - If you love fantasy, go back in time to a more tribal setting for humanity that resembles fantasy. You might be thinking Middle Ages settings, but the bastards will shove the foreign, 'other' warrior bullshit down your throat. Go back further and prior to the Roman Empire, which has somehow been tainted by some books, movies or premium cable shows as if the demographics of Rome were southern California. Hollywood types believe, because the Romans had the Mediterranean coast of Africa, that Bantu tribesmen were the majority of administrators. The Bronze-Iron Age allows for swords, tribes, odd religious beliefs and the ability for you to make up languages since there is a lot missing on them.

3. Post-Apocalyptic Dystopian Novels - Set the framework up where there is a reason why things are drastically different from today. One could even write in viruses that affected certain groups more than others or STDs that caused people to re-evaluate things and value traits that society used to strive to embody. Maybe to appease the PC gods, you make the disappearance of a group or an event part of an evil secret for the protagonist to discover. Reduce the number of people in total on the planet and this helps explain the lack of precious others.

4. All Robots - OK, so you can't let go of doing sci-fi or space stories. Use an all robot cast. If you make a robot a black or Asian robot, then you would be accused of racism (he wrote the robot to say "Dayyy-um"), so just use plain robots. This kind of hurts reader-character connections, but with the number of Aspies walking around, I think you will be fine.

5. Crusades Tales - I'm backtracking a bit because this will involve Muslims depending on which Crusade you select to use, but in these tales the Muslims are the bad guys. They have a real reason to be there, so a writer would use Muslims as a diversity shield from PC attacks. Women are involved, but women will be pilgrims not sword wielding 21st century, Joss Whedon created superhumans. Religion would be acceptable as a topic of character's conversations because that was the entire point of the Crusades. If marketed correctly, I bet they'd sell well with evangelicals. Side Note: After decades of watching Joss Whedon stuff, I think the guy has "sub" fantasies involving some really tough, petite woman killing people and then using him for rough, BDSM sex, calling him insulting names the entire time.

6. Pirate Tales - Now I am just being specific within the historical fiction genre like the Crusades tales. Yes, there can be diversity. Yes, there could be women pirates, but ahem, the reality is few i number scattered over the large oceans. Non-pirate women could also be in traditional roles. You can even sneak in religion due to the Protestant/Catholic warfare of the era.

Besides recommendations, here's a question: why the hell are Lady MacBeth types not adored by the feminists? Why do these pushers always want to see physically imposing, warrior women? Disregarding the entire catalogue of female monarchs, rulers and all-around dastardly ladies (Matahari) who did wield power, is rather lame but the way that modern progressives explain that today is always better than yesterday. Catherine the Great had her husband killed and took over Russia. Theodora and other women in Byzantium had tremendous influence and control of the empire. These women and characters based on them (advisers, schemers, soft power manipulators) are not enough because only chicks with swords slicing through orcs count as progress!

4 comments:

Inane Rambler said...

Very true, especially the last paragraph and "warrior women".

I don't understand what you mean by "You might be thinking Middle Ages settings, but the bastards will shove the foreign, 'other' warrior bullshit down your throat."

No clue on my end what you mean by that.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Even in middle age, dark age, medieval period pieces, writers will insert an arab trader, african ambassador or 'other'. Other being a non-euro. They never let a chance to insert someone who would have not existed or been a rarity into central Germany.

Attamo said...

To your last question, history's powerful women aren't celebrated by feminists because the average Womyn Studies knows precisely nothing about history. Or more precisely, they know nothing about history except their generalized grievance for a gender-specific faceless mass. Acknowledging specific examples of achievement might give the impression ye old Patriarchy could also be a meritocracy where there was a woman of sufficient talent. And the fact that more women did not achieve it might mean that, as a class, women were outclassed by men.

Also, feminists are victims first, last, and always. Even today, with the deck stacked so that women graduate college at a higher rate. Now, if these feminists were even aware of the historical examples you cite, why would they want to call them their own? It would suggest that women only attain power on the strength of their manipulation and lies. Which might come a tad too close to home to feminism's diseased heart.

Another genre you might be able to get through the P.C. net: horror. Whether it's splatterpunk or an old-fashioned ghost story, the settings can be sufficiently isolated that you can choose non-vibrants as your characters. While it seems a lot of the protagonists are grrl power these days (see 2011's "The Awakening" or "The Silent House"), I get the impression the genre's average horror reader/watcher is open -- and possibly enjoys -- things that are non-P.C.

AAB said...

"After decades of watching Joss Whedon stuff, I think the guy has "sub" fantasies involving some really tough, petite woman killing people."

The sci-fi flick 'Firefly' that he directed also had a super strong woman (Summer Glau) in one of the lead roles. She was the same chick who was in teh sci-fi series 'Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles', based on the hit films, which was also about two super strong feminist types who had to escort an emasculated John Connor through various adventures.

SOBL wrote:
"Even in middle age, dark age, medieval period pieces, writers will insert an arab trader, african ambassador or 'other'."
That's standard operating procedure for the BBC or Channel 4; just check out the cast for their latest productions of either 'Robin Hood' or 'Merlin' or 'Camelot', they have black people cast in key roles. If they were really interested in equality like they say they are then they would have a white man cast as Nelson Mandela, or as Muhammad Ali etc.