Page 4 of 4

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 28 Sep 2017, 12:49
by eelavahs-jay
I started reading Island of the Gods and the author lost me as soon as he started talking about an elaborate information system that the main character had cracked. If you're going to invent something explain it using terminologies familiar to the masses first. I'm all for science in fiction but when it's not over the top. I love biotechnology (I wanted to be a gene therapist) but I know not to carelessly drop words/phrases like "electrophoresis" or "reverse transcriptase poltymerase chain reaction" when explaining how a creature was created in a lab. It's a huge turn off when a novel becomes a college textbook.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 01 Oct 2017, 14:19
by Doaa Wael
I love it when there is a scientific explanation as I don't believe that things simply happen. there must be a reason but we don't see it right away or maybe not at all. so if the author reveals the reason, possibly with making us curious and intrigued about the reason, that would be great.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 31 Oct 2017, 04:58
by Anjum
I like it when there is some real science in the story, otherwise it just goes over my head.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 15 Dec 2017, 07:39
by David_92
The science fiction book called 'Heaven and Earth ' has a section of facts to educate the reader on some scientific aspects that are in the book theme.
The role of fiction books is and has always been to open our imaginations.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 10 Feb 2018, 15:19
by Mailis
I think sometimes too much science thrown in distracts from the story and emotional aspect of it and feels like you are being given a lecture about something that just tires you out.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 24 Mar 2018, 20:35
by Sakilunamermaid
This question reminds me of how I felt when I first read Frankenstein. I had such a want to read more scientific method but just got electric eels and one day the monster was alive. Science helps stories so much. I find when reading books featuring careers or methods I don't know about, it helps learning something about it. This is especially helpful with medical or investigation driven stories.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 25 Mar 2018, 16:08
by mamalui
bluegreenmarina wrote:
02 Jun 2017, 09:49
Because sci-fi is not my top genre of choice I tend to prefer it be very "realistic" and based in solid science that at least make it sound plausible.
I agree.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 27 Mar 2018, 07:18
by atonykamau
I think there needs to be an equal balance between science and fiction. Too much both will completely ruin the story.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 06 Apr 2018, 08:18
by desantismt_17
I'm not turned off necessarily by books that gloss over the explanation for the science, but it's always nice when there is an explanation. That was one thing I really liked about Superhighway--the very scientific, but still easily understood, science behind the power. Another example that comes to mind is A Wrinkle in Time. L'Engle presented a very advanced physics concept in a children's book and explained it in such a way that I understood it when I first read the book as a kid. That is the mark of truly well-done science in scifi for me. I'm not scientificly minded, so if I need a technical manual to understand my fiction, odds are good I'll pick up a different book.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 20 Aug 2019, 02:20
by Scrawling Pen
I do believe that an over-explanation of science can sometimes make the story difficult to follow, but I think the science is interesting to better understand how the powers work.

Re: How much science with your fiction?

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 20:25
by Atara Miles
I do love the scientific explanations (even though some are so far-fetched). One of my major gripes with the very popular Star Trek series is actually related to this. Sound? In space? Which we all learned is a vacuum and thus logically incapable of transmitting sound waves? I mostly just laugh in incredulity - especially since no reason was actually given but it doesn't really affect how I view the story or necessarily irk me.