Comments on The Galaxy Express: Branding Science Fiction Romance, Part I

@Yvette "WalMart"--lol, good one! I consider roma...

2009-10-31T23:54:34.487-04:00

@Yvette "WalMart"--lol, good one!

I consider romantic scifi to be a sub-genre of SF, so anything with a greater romantic focus becomes SFR. Romance readers are more likely to enjoy it in greater numbers, but it will have cross-genre appeal for SF fans who enjoy character-driven stories.

What I'd like to see is a continued emphasis on more sophisticated science fictional elements (or at least great BS Devices), even if they constitute a smaller ratio of the plot. And there's no reason they can't be accessible as well. (Hm, could I be any greedier, lol?!)

Anon, good point about speculative being awfully broad. I like the economy of the term but it's also doubtful publishers will adapt it. Like you and others have noted, concerted marketing is the key regardless of the label.

The term 'speculative' is too ambiguous as it can ...

2009-10-31T23:40:28.704-04:00

The term 'speculative' is too ambiguous as it can encompass a host of genres and styles including SFR. Futuristic always had Fantasy lumped into it. Paranormal itself can be broad ranged (taking in psychic, horror, witchcraft and SFR elements). There is always an area where genres overlap/blur.
Perhaps it is the hang-over from the past of 'science' where it indeed was seen as the male domain and the odd brainiac female as an intruder into this arena.
Do we need a newly minted term to attract the everyday reader to this genre? or do we educate and hope in time the acceptance of Science fiction romance name is the norm? The term speculative just does not sit well with me. All I can think of is theterm AVANT-GARDE ROMANCE (but then someone will think this is erotica terminology). Again, it is all a case of concerted marketing to get the word out there and identifiable for what it is - SFR.

Labels have tremendous power! Consider if your bf ...

2009-10-31T22:40:24.939-04:00

Labels have tremendous power! Consider if your bf bought you a ring from Tiffany's....or one from WalMart. Um.....yeah.

Besides you made the point quite clear with the whip cream goddess sales argument.

But science fiction isn't a dirty word. The questions is, it is still sellable when paired with the word romance? What is the real focus of the genre? Is it romantic scifi or scifi romance? Which one is the horse and which is the cart?

One is a delivery system for the other is how I see it.

To me "romance" can happen in any genre, any setti...

2009-10-31T10:04:47.909-04:00

To me "romance" can happen in any genre, any setting. It's the interaction between two people and often emotional arcs are the same no matter what the setting.

Um, yeah, but then again, can't science fiction happens in just about any setting, too? Or are you limiting it to only a setting, a background upon which the story happens?

Maybe I'm the one who's misunderstanding what's being said here. Because it sure sounds like science fiction is being limited to only a setting when things like this are said The attraction of using scifi as a speculative "what if" setting and that can't be right.

Can it? It has to much more than that, just like romance is much more than just about about the relationship.

"the speculative settings from science fiction cou...

2009-10-31T02:41:56.123-04:00

"the speculative settings from science fiction couldn't function in a romance novel?"

Sorry, can't see the logic here? Why can't it?

To me "romance" can happen in any genre, any setting. It's the interaction between two people and often emotional arcs are the same no matter what the setting.

Are you saying people won't buy "science fiction" because the "what if" has some basis in science/technology as distinct from paranormal or fantasy? Because apart from historical or contemporary they are the only three setting options left (speaking in broad brush terms).

Fantasy is another "what if" speculative setting, but the difference there is (so far) there is no proof any current technology would ever produce "magic" no matter how much it evolves/improves.

The attraction of using scifi as a speculative "what if" setting is to put the whole story into a framework where current (or past) precepts don't apply, yet allows the reader to think that it is not totally impossible.

Maybe, I've misunderstood what you're trying to say.

romance readers having been burned trying to find the "romance" in supposed SFR.

Perhaps it's the fault of writers who let the world building swamp the "story".

Just a thought as I was reading this excellent con...

2009-10-30T23:34:32.554-04:00

Just a thought as I was reading this excellent conversation. You might play with: romance science fiction. I agree with BevBB about romance readers having been burned trying to find the "romance" in supposed SFR.
Or SFR could be the genre and rsf the sub ...

You do realize that if what you're saying is take...

2009-10-30T12:09:09.187-04:00

You do realize that if what you're saying is taken at face value, ozambersand, that SFR couldn't even exist because, gasp, the speculative settings from science fiction couldn't function in a romance novel? That the crossover we're talking about couldn't even exist because romance readers wouldn't buy it?

And yet they do.

Odd that.

Historical romances have fixed setting constraints...

2009-10-30T08:33:22.809-04:00

Historical romances have fixed setting constraints unless you go for alternative history.

Regency romance settings are so well documented it takes a brave or foolish author to play with changing it. So no "what if" there as far as setting goes.

Paranormal have such fixed "rules" as to what vampires and werewolves can do, again it's pretty fixed. No "what if".

Contemporary novels are constrained by current knowledge of geography and cultures again restricts the setting.

Yes, the romance part can have the "what if", but the setting constraints of the others limit them.

That's the point I'm making. The setting of scifi itself is speculative. That's what sets it apart. It's a double "what if" if you like.

Yes, but that doesn't change the rest of them from...

2009-10-30T08:26:49.306-04:00

Yes, but that doesn't change the rest of them from being speculative, does it? It only means they each have their own unique "what if" characteristics?

Otherwise, what's the point of having genres?

I can see your point about "What if" applying to m...

2009-10-29T18:22:25.836-04:00

I can see your point about "What if" applying to many genres, Bev.

My point was more that in science fiction, the "what if" applies mainly to the setting and the world and thus almost becomes a character in the book.

"What if" we had a world where there was only one religion, or a world where telepaths ruled. How would this affect basic human (or whatever species ruled there) interactions.

Because underlying every setting, there is a "story" which is about conflict set up by the character themselves and the character of the setting.

The "science" part of the fiction allows for these differences to incorporate technology (which is governed by science) rather than fantasy or paranormal elements that aren't.

I like the term speculative in that it implies som...

2009-10-29T07:24:52.858-04:00

I like the term speculative in that it implies something is possible. To me SF is the great "what if".

The problem I see with this is that the same could easily be said about romance--and has many times. In many different ways and stories.

What are the fan fiction writers who delve into relationships that aren't happening within the properties they love saying except "what if" the romance could happen this way? Sure the new Star Trek movie gave us a Spock and Uhura relationship but there's no guarantee it'll be long-lasting or even permanent. That's up to the fan fiction writers. Or it's up to fiction writers to create alternative similar scenarios to prove but "what if" it really could happen.

What are paranormal romances but a way to challenge the old myths about the monsters that creep about in the night eternally can't find love? So, instead these stories ask "what if" those monsters walk among us, found love and get to live happily ever after just like every one else? Not that there aren't bumps along the road.

But even before the paranormal boom, romance was asking "what if" about simple male/female relationships dynamics. How they worked, why they worked. Challenging the power dynamics between the sexes. And doing it in a bunch of different time periods.

Frankly, I think most popular fiction asks what if and is speculative if that's the definition.

that is one vocal faction of SF readers. Ain't th...

2009-10-28T21:28:32.619-04:00

that is one vocal faction of SF readers.

Ain't that the truth. We'll just shop SFR to a more receptive audience.

defining what speculative means in the SF genre

I've not done a post on that, no. At its core, it basically equates with the term "science fiction." Robert A. Heinlein used it first (according to the Wikipedia entry) in that sense, and as Ozambersand pointed out, it's the "What if...?" question behind SF stories.

Later on, people began using it for other genres (fantasy, supernatural, post-apocalyptic, etc.), so I can see where it can be confusing. Currently it's both an umbrella term and a genre label, but I always associate it first and foremost with SF.

Linnea, thanks for your insights. There's definitely pros and cons to both futuristic and SFR. But the more I hear about publishers going back and forth between marketing labels, the more it seems to me that the other camps (readers, authors, reviewers, bloggers, etc.) would benefit from one term being used. I think it's unfortunate that our beloved sub-genre is in this predicament, but that's why I felt it was important to have this discussion again, and with a tighter focus.

The momentum behind SFR predates this blog considerably, so that's an important factor as well. Plus, SFR (like it's parent genres) has multiple sub-genres, and futuristic doesn't seem to cover them all anymore. It may have outlived its usefulness--perhaps not for book spines, but certainly as far as the stories being told.

Jess, what you said, lol! Good worldbuilding is when characters really seem like they came organically from their setting vs. being plunked on a stage with cardboard backdrops.

Speculative Romance is just plain confusing. What ...

2009-10-28T17:30:31.256-04:00

Speculative Romance is just plain confusing. What exactly is "speculative?" Isn't all fiction speculative?

I like the term speculative in that it implies something is possible. To me SF is the great "what if".

Perhaps comparing it with what's it's not may help.

It's not contemporary. It's not tied down to the harsh facts and prejudices of our current world.

It's not historical, we're not going to be screaming because of anachronistic terminology or wrong facts.

It's not fantasy. In most books, features like magic and other things which haven't been witnessed and proven so far aren't included. Of course, aliens may have these abilities so this line becomes blurred.

It's not paranormal, ie again including elements that as far as we know don't exist.

Science Fiction Romance when it works well involves a world where only a little jump of the imagination makes things possible. The reason things aren't done now is that the way to do them hasn't been invented yet but to be successful scifi you should always feel they could be one day if not by us then by another race.

So, to me, speculative is a good word.

Is speculative the word that will attract people scared off by the thought of too much "science". Only marketing reviews would tells us that.

I don't like the term "Space Opera" as it seems melodramatic to me for some reason, and not all SF is melodramatic.

If the term "what if" could be turned into a marketing term, I'd support that.

As for the Beyond the Rain discussion. You guys a...

2009-10-28T14:20:53.867-04:00

As for the Beyond the Rain discussion. You guys are right, I wrote the story of two people and how they fell in love. That said, I put one heck of a social/political foundation beneath them. I figured the only way I can do a personal story, and some epic world building is to try to sustain a series, where the ongoing element is the world building, with a new set of characters as the protagonists.

That way, romance fans get their solid love story in one book with a HEA at the end, but hopefully as the series progresses, the SF fans (and everyone else) will be drawn into the complexities of the worlds I've created.

Beyond the Shadows is going right back to the political problems with Azra, and how to find a solution to them, but even after the end of that book, which will have a HEA, there will still be enough problems open with Azra I could find myself back there for a third or fourth book on that planet alone, while the third book of the series will return to Soren's planet, Byra, and delve deeper into the biological/social problems of his culture and try to find some solutions.

While my characters will always find personal solutions that allow them a sense of security in their personal future, it will take the collective efforts of all my characters to solve the universe's ills hopefully over many many (Oh please God) many books.

That's what I'm shooting for anyway. I guess we'll see what happens.

LOL, that is awesome. Can we adopt Space Broadway...

2009-10-28T14:08:36.213-04:00

LOL, that is awesome. Can we adopt Space Broadway?

Coming in late to these two great discussions... ...

2009-10-28T12:37:53.923-04:00

Coming in late to these two great discussions...

I'd nix speculative. For one thing, it's vague and can have various meanings, and SFR is scary enough to the non-SF camp without taking on 'speculative.' Are we speculating there's a romance? What are we speculating? What's a speculate? Remember, I'm the one who sits behind the stack on books at the signing table. I get these questions.

Futuristics appears to be a more widely known and palatabe term. I have a knee-jerk reaction to it because of the bad press garnered by the original "futuristics," which were (for the most part) historicals in space which ignored the tenets of basic SF. But it's come to mean--to readers and many reviewers--SF with a romance plot. RT calls my books "futuristic" so I'm learning to grin and bear it.

But I don't favor the futuristic term for one other reason: it implies the plot is future Earth. That's not always true--I'd hazard it's not true for over 70% of the books. My FINDERS KEEPERS isn't future Earth. It's not anything Earth and it's Trilby Elliot's present day. JD Robb's IN DEATH series--yes, they could be futuristic. They're future NYC. Characters can talk about Coca-Cola or San Juan or an SUV without needing narrative explanation. The reader "gets it" because it's the reader's present moved forward.

A lot of SFR isn't. A writer can mention Chicago or Tokyo in a book and the reader gets an immediate picture. When I mention Port Rumor or Dock Five, I have to take the reader there. There's no commonly accepted 'visual' for Dock Five. It's not future Miami.

So in some ways, to me, futuristic is an inaccurate label. I've had a few (blessedly few) reviewers who've never read SF let alone SFR comment that they get lost in the terms in my books. You know: durohard, jumpspace, sanifac. Never having read SF, they can't make that intuitive leap needed to make an unfamilar word work. (I don't know why, since most must know things like microwaves and cellphone and iPods... but they can't.) So there is an element of readers who only want their SF+romance to be written in familiar words and concepts: Pepsi, TIVO, laptop, twin-set, Gucci. Or whatever. They see futuristic and assume they'll also see Future-Pepsi and Future-Gucci. When that doesn't happen, they're not happy.

Space Opera Romance I also like but I'm in the genre. When I use the term space opera at book signings, people ask me if there's music. Or they say they're really more into Broadway than opera...

~Linnea

Just out of curiosity, Heather, have you done any ...

2009-10-27T22:06:47.884-04:00

Just out of curiosity, Heather, have you done any posts that focus on defining what speculative means in the SF genre? I ask because I'm not at all sure I understand it. I mean that was one that they almost stuck on paranormal romances way back in the beginning. I've also heard it used in mystery circles. At times it almost sounds like people are talking about anything that isn't "normal" in some way and at others it sounds like something fairly specific so I'm sort of at a loss as to how to view it in my head.

You do routinely here folk at SF cons say that if ...

2009-10-27T21:21:33.434-04:00

You do routinely here folk at SF cons say that if resolution of the conflict in a story does not hinge on nuts and bolts science it's not SF it's Fantasy and the bluring of the two has "ruined" the genre.

Now I don't agree, but that is one vocal faction of SF readers.

As far as Romance goes I don't care at all about folks who I could meet in line at Krogers, no matter how committed and sexy their relationship is. Real world people are just a yawn. I live in the real world I read to go someplace else, which is why I've always loved SF. For me it is interesting folks in interesting situation that also happen to be falling in love that gets me hooked on a story which is my good SFR is like crack to me :-)

just how far that curiosity extends past the relat...

2009-10-27T19:36:16.537-04:00

just how far that curiosity extends past the relationship is something fairly routinely hotly debated within the romance reading community online.

I'd wager SF has been going through a similar evolution with concomitant debates and I find both processes fascinating. Could just be me seeing this, though.

I'm not saying that there aren't social issues or ...

2009-10-27T19:31:31.455-04:00

I'm not saying that there aren't social issues or even politics in romances but they will never be a selling point for the readers.

What I utterly failed to communicate was that for *some* readers new to SF/SFR, my feeling is that it would ease the learning curve if they started with books involving social sciences rather than books involving hard speculative elements. I should have stated more clearly that the recommendation would definitely be about the romance as well. In other words, depending on where a reader is starting from, I would take the speculative elements into consideration unless I was told otherwise.

I agree the romance can’t be shortchanged (because then it veers into romantic SF territory), but on the other hand I’m assuming readers are interested in a hybrid genre for a reason. I know I am—I like a few fireworks going off in the plot as well as the romance *grin*.

Anne points out one way SFR can have its cake and eat it, too—by making the hero or heroine a speculative element. Soren from BEYOND THE RAIN is one example. So are Branden Kel-Paten from Linnea Sinclair’s GAMES OF COMMAND and the character Alpha from Catherine Asaro’s ALPHA. Those are ways authors can explore the impact of science on human relationships. Therefore, imho, we are showing the appeal of SFR in one shiny happy package.

Mfitz, thanks for weighing in. I’m kinda digging Space Opera Romance, too, but as a few here have pointed out, it doesn’t have the same breadth of coverage as SFR. But it makes for a good sub-sub-genre label (as opposed to post-apocalyptic romance, steampunk romance, etc.)

BevBB, please don't put words in my mouth. I did n...

2009-10-27T19:16:59.100-04:00

BevBB, please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say politics, and I did not mean politics.

Actually, when I mentioned politics in science fiction before I wasn't simply thinking of your comment, Anne, but of several that I've seen recently both here and on other forums. It has more to do with the emphasis on world-building within science fiction if I'm not mistaken and that's not a bad thing. It's part of the character of the genre. Just like a lack of emphasis on world-building is part of the character of the romance genre.

Of course, that creates a definite problem for anyone who attempts a crossover novel of the two, I would think.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that most romance readers were interested in those questions. {smile}

Well, of course, they are but while romance readers might like to know "Who is she?" "Who is he?" and "How do they develop a relationship?" just how far that curiosity extends past the relationship is something fairly routinely hotly debated within the romance reading community online. Call it a laser focus on the relationship or call it a lack of focus on world-building but, in the end, it amounts to the same thing.

And the same problem for crossover novels.

Romance readers do not like to be distracted from the relationship for very long. A generalization but one based on lots and lots of sales. Which this sub-genre is trying to attract a percentage of. Think about it.

BevBB, please don't put words in my mouth. I did n...

2009-10-27T18:39:58.940-04:00

BevBB, please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say politics, and I did not mean politics. Political science is a social science too, but it wasn't one I was thinking of, and it wasn't one I meant to discuss. {Sigh} I'm sorry. I try to be easy going, but I've learned to be careful about the words I pick.

Anyway, I was talking about Jess Granger's Beyond the Rain. There's poltics in there, including a war with allies, enemies, and people straddling the fence, and more. However, the politics is a minority of the social science in the book. There's more sociology and cultural anthropology than politics in there, and more psychology than the rest put together.

This book isn't just about a warrior nun, a sex slave, and the nun's brother. It's about Cyani and her brother Cyn, and who they are. It looks at how their world's geography shaped their culture, and how their culture, and a couple of particularly dramatic experiences shaped their current personalities in unexpected ways. This does include their culture's politics, but the main importance of that world's politics seems to be how the politics shaped Cyani's and Cyn's personalities in rather dramatic ways.

This book is also about Soren, and who he is. It looks at how his biology shaped both his culture and himself. It looks at how a dramatic set of experiences also shaped the man he has become.

This book is about how Cyani and Soren meet. It's about how they build a relationship. It's about how the cultures and people they encounter shortly after meeting shape their relationship into what it becomes.

To me, it looks like social geography, social psychology, social biology, and personal psychology are essential to three questions about Beyond the Rain: "Who is she?" "Who is he?" and "How do they develop a relationship?"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that most romance readers were interested in those questions. {smile}

Anne Elizabeth Baldwin

I can't think of a term that works better than SF...

2009-10-27T18:13:18.913-04:00

I can't think of a term that works better than SFR. I'm in the camp that loaths "futuristic" But I grew up reading SF and didn't read my first Romance until I was out of college.

I'm oddly attracted to the term Space Opera Romance becasue Space Opera is my fave form of SF. Trek, Star Wars are both Space Opera and also both titulated fans with hints of Romance which is part of what made them such big cultural phenonena. Girls went to see SW because Han Solo was hunky and women watched Trek becasue of Spock's repressed sexiness.

In my experience that fiction that best combines Romance and SF is almost always Space Opera. I think maybe the trops of Space Opera lead to blending with Romance more than any other sub-genre of SF. When I think of Romantic SF I'm hard pressed to thing of a single book with a strong Romance sub-plot that isn't Space Opera.

The only SFR on TV I can think of that isn't Space Opera is X-Files, and 90% of what made that show work was cast chemisty.

I like the SFR label. Personally, I think all of t...

2009-10-27T15:40:35.436-04:00

I like the SFR label. Personally, I think all of the stories I've read that were called Futuristic were too sf-lite for me. Just a personal preference, I'm sure. I grew up on hard SF--Asimov and such. First really long book I remember reading was Dune. I was about ten. Got all the way through too. LOL. Actually understood a lot of it too.

"Speculative" doesn't bother me, but I don't think of the types of SF I enjoy when I hear that. I grew up with "science fiction". The Romance, for me, grew out of a love of shippy fanfic stories. Actually, none of the labels bother me.

For me, SFR works best. It's the most half/half blend I've found, even if I still find most of the stories leaning either one way or the other. Starting over with a new label now might do away with all the work SFR promoters have done for years. I see "SFR" all over now.

When I write I freely admit I'm still writing RSF or stories than lean more toward the sf than the R. My first drafts just come out that way. Eventually I plan to tweak that to a more half/half ratio.

make it clear that social science is included Goo...

2009-10-27T08:24:16.685-04:00

make it clear that social science is included

Good point. Books that include such science could be great starting places when recommending SFR to readers new to the genre (and especially new to SF).

Actually, I'm not so sure about this. At least not if you're talking about romance readers and you're talking about the politics and "world-building" found in science fiction. Let me see if I explain.

Until I started listening to the science fiction geekettes within the romance community I don't even think I realized how much politics or what you're calling social science played a part in hard-core science fiction. Once I did see that, I realized part of the reason why I really don't like to read those books... which is part of the reason I say it isn't the science turning off romance readers.

Just to prove my point, here's the question I'd ask, how many romances have you seen get promoted on the basis on the politics and social science in them? I'm thinking zero. 'Cause it ain't happening. It ain't gonna happen.

I'm not saying that there aren't social issues or even politics in romances but they will never be a selling point for the readers. Maybe for science fiction readers or others genres but not romance readers.