Oh, that - what I've known as the Interplanetary Trilogy or Space Trilogy. I'm quite familiar with that - even named one of my kids after Ransom (middle name).
Atlantean Dust and Magical Rings:
- Thread starter Sir Godfrey
- Start date
I read the first two, but couldn't bring myself to bother looking for the third one.
Now, granted, this was when knowledge of the solar system was in it's infancy, but they're not good novels (no offence to C.S. Lewis intended).
The difference between science fiction and fantasy is this:
In fantasy, you don't have to explain the rules, everything works by magic.
In science fiction, there is no magic, everything happens for a reason and in the end, you explain what that reason is.
If I may make an observation, C.S. Lewis appeared not to know this and wrote the sci-fi books as though he was writing fantasy. Demons possessing humans and enchanted planetary spirits don't really belong in the world of sci-fi.
It was too magic and sorcery, not enough science-fiction.
Now, granted, this was when knowledge of the solar system was in it's infancy, but they're not good novels (no offence to C.S. Lewis intended).
The difference between science fiction and fantasy is this:
In fantasy, you don't have to explain the rules, everything works by magic.
In science fiction, there is no magic, everything happens for a reason and in the end, you explain what that reason is.
If I may make an observation, C.S. Lewis appeared not to know this and wrote the sci-fi books as though he was writing fantasy. Demons possessing humans and enchanted planetary spirits don't really belong in the world of sci-fi.
It was too magic and sorcery, not enough science-fiction.
The 1930s was hardly when knowledge of the solar system was in its infancy. The fact that you don't appreciate them as novels doesn't make them bad novels - many people with good literary tastes appreciate them. Your definitions of what is fantasy and what is science fiction are also quite arbitrary - upon what authority (other than your own preferences) do you make them?
Nobody's saying you have to like the Space Trilogy, but they're still great stories with a powerful sub-message.
Nobody's saying you have to like the Space Trilogy, but they're still great stories with a powerful sub-message.
MRW
New member
This is always how the difference between the two genres has been explained to me, and why Star Wars (until the thing with midichlorians) is often classified as fantasy rather than sci-fi. The (admittedly) little I know about the Cosmic Trilogy makes it seem more like science fantasy than true science fiction, but that's neither here nor there.
If I know Lewis, he was much more concerned with the underlying allegory than following the conventions of a particular genre. It seems a lot like what Madeline L'Engle did with her Time quartet/quintet, combining science, fantasy, and religious mythology.
Last edited:
MrBob
Well-known member
"Didnt' Lewis say that the dust came into our world " when it was just begining"? Ive always interprated that to mean it was part of the prosese of our worlds creation."
Narborg, Uncle Andrew tells Digory that Atlantis was already a great civilization at the dawn of time. The box was Atlantean so it, too, was an extremely ancient box. It could be that Atlantis was on one of the other worlds that connected to the Wood. Their pool disappeared millenia before Polly and Digory ever made it to the Wood.
buckmana, there is a reason bookstores and libraries place sci-fi and fantasy together. They tend to cross over a lot. Narnia is a full-fledged fantasy with no sci-fi. I can't comment on his Space Trilogy as I haven't read it, but it can have aspects of both genres. If so, it just isn't in one single genre.
As for the definitions,
"In fantasy, you don't have to explain the rules, everything works by magic.
In science fiction, there is no magic, everything happens for a reason and in the end, you explain what that reason is."
I must disagree. In fantasy, supernatural events take place as "magic." They still have rules, but they are described in terms of the rules of the magic (witches fly on broomsticks, cast spells, prophesize, etc) or they have talking animals.
In Sci-Fi, events are based on science, even seemingly supernatural events. The rules are based on the science we know or speculative science of tommorow (spaceships, energy weapons, etc.). They can also have talking animals, but the process of evolution or something similar must have produces them.
It is very easy to combine aspects of sci-fi and fantasy. Star Wars is one example. The Force is fantasy while the starships and weaponry is sci-fi, based on speculative science.
Even His Dark Materials (Philip Pullman) has a combination of sci-fi and fantasy. The entire concept of the story is fantasy, but the machine that Lord Asriel made to open the Northern Lights was sci-fi as was the remote bomb that was meant to kill Lyra.
MrBob
Narborg, Uncle Andrew tells Digory that Atlantis was already a great civilization at the dawn of time. The box was Atlantean so it, too, was an extremely ancient box. It could be that Atlantis was on one of the other worlds that connected to the Wood. Their pool disappeared millenia before Polly and Digory ever made it to the Wood.
buckmana, there is a reason bookstores and libraries place sci-fi and fantasy together. They tend to cross over a lot. Narnia is a full-fledged fantasy with no sci-fi. I can't comment on his Space Trilogy as I haven't read it, but it can have aspects of both genres. If so, it just isn't in one single genre.
As for the definitions,
"In fantasy, you don't have to explain the rules, everything works by magic.
In science fiction, there is no magic, everything happens for a reason and in the end, you explain what that reason is."
I must disagree. In fantasy, supernatural events take place as "magic." They still have rules, but they are described in terms of the rules of the magic (witches fly on broomsticks, cast spells, prophesize, etc) or they have talking animals.
In Sci-Fi, events are based on science, even seemingly supernatural events. The rules are based on the science we know or speculative science of tommorow (spaceships, energy weapons, etc.). They can also have talking animals, but the process of evolution or something similar must have produces them.
It is very easy to combine aspects of sci-fi and fantasy. Star Wars is one example. The Force is fantasy while the starships and weaponry is sci-fi, based on speculative science.
Even His Dark Materials (Philip Pullman) has a combination of sci-fi and fantasy. The entire concept of the story is fantasy, but the machine that Lord Asriel made to open the Northern Lights was sci-fi as was the remote bomb that was meant to kill Lyra.
MrBob
Sven-El
Well-known member
Keep in mind when lewis was writing the Space Trilogy, a lot of the "rules" of mdoern sci-fi had yet to be established. Look at Edger Rice Burroughs John Carter of Mars. The Martian stories of Ray Bradbury. They border on fantasy as well. Bradbury even said he wrote science fantasy not science fiction.
Arthru C. Clarke has even had things that border on fantasy in his more "hard science" fiction like the monolith and the Star Child ( Dave Bowman in his "evolved form" complete with an avatar if you will that merges with HAL), or the Overmind and OVerlrods in Childhood's End.
Many people think fo Star Trek as more Sci-fi then Star Wars, but look at some of the things the crews of the variosu ships have come across .Q is a priem example. HE ahs very magical powers. The crew of the Original Enterpsie ( Kirk's) came across a being who claimed to be Abarahm Lincoln, and they encountered several "Q" like creatures."
I feel at least teh Atlantean dust coudl border on sci-fi in the line of logic that Atlantis is a more"advanced" culture. Like wise with the differing time-stream between Narnia and our world.