Why Sci-Fi is So Good

In 1982 the makers of the ‘Muppets’ series and films embarked on a fantasy called ‘The Dark Crystal’.

Jim Henson and Frank Oz were both in the film—as voices, of course.

While it is a definite ‘Muppet’—type film it is still entertaining and well made. With modern special effects and computer generated images one could argue that it would, now, be a better visual entertainment but the story would remain, one would hope, the same.

Briefly it is about a pure crystal that was broken when a Skeksis hit it. The whole of Ska was thrown out of kilter so that the world was split into goodies and baddies—‘Mystics’ and ‘Skeksis’.

The synopsis for the film was as follows:

“Another World, Another Time... In the Age of Wonder. A thousand years ago, this land was green and good, until the Crystal cracked. For a single piece was lost; a shard of the Crystal. Then strife began, and two new races appeared: the cruel Skeksis... the gentle Mystics.”

For the first time a complete whole new world was developed. This included eating implements and drinking vessels.

Now we think that this idea is ‘normal’ but in those days it was a breakthrough.

In modern times we even have ‘made-up’ languages. That, more or less, started with ‘Star Trek’ and the ‘Klingon’ language that is now so well developed that there are courses in it and people who can converse with each other using it!

Science fiction is a wonderful genre. It brings all sorts of thought processes to bear.

We have, within the genre, different aspects quite apart from ‘eutopian’, ‘kakatopian’ and ‘dystopian’.

There are divisions within each of these sub-genres that can be described loosely as horror, thriller, crime and even humour.

Most of the ‘eutopian’ stories are split up so that one group of future dwellers has a comfortable life which, for the sake of the story, is threatened by those whose lives are less than adequate.

In the ‘Judge Dredd’ stories even the ‘haves’ are not really any better off than the ‘have nots’ in the badlands.

‘The Postman’, turned into a film starring Kevin Costner described a kakatopian future that was, gradually, turned into a ‘eutopian’ world because of the rise of communication—courtesy of Mr. Costner, of course. This was an excellent plot because it showed, in simple terms, the value of communication connecting outposts where there were still aspects of civilisation being preserved.

‘The Book of Eli’ explored a ‘dystopian’ future where, somewhere, there was a jewel of civilisation lurking in a protected environment amongst a sea of anarchy.

Each of these stories has great worth as different examples of the genre. They are all entertaining reading (and viewing, of course).

They are all science fiction. Yet they are all a different form of science fiction from the likes of ‘Star Wars’ and ‘Star Trek’.

None of them is better than the others because their quality in each case will depend on how you, the reader or viewer, sees it and how it satisfies you.

With romance novels you can tell the same story over and over again by just turning the hero from a blonde to a ‘raven hired athlete’. Sci-fi readers are not so easily palmed off. They need, expect and should get something different in each story.

That great dissimilarity is what makes science fiction so great.