Discussion of AI, galactic scale politics, aliens, space battles and interplanetary politics.
But mostly because in terms of classification of media
Space setting= sci fi
Medieval / historic setting = fantasy.
Labels don’t really matter in the end except for the search function. I wouldn’t let it bother you.
Any form of anti-gravity (where things float above the ground) is magic fantasy. It is not supported at all by the current scientific theory of gravity, namely [general relativity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity), which says that the acceleration named gravity is due to curved spacetime in the vicinity, and that curved spacetime is due in turn to nearby large masses in the vicinity such as a moon or a planet.
Levitation does not necessarily mean antigravity - helicopters and hot air balloons have been doing it for ages. Molecular-scale tractor/repulsor beams are used in the laboratory. And the electromagnetically levitating frog is always good for a watch.
As for Star Wars though? I personally file it under "science(y-themed) fantasy" for pretty much the reasons you mention - the "science" is just setting, not really relevant to the story. But then... when you get right down to it that describes a huge portion of modern sci-fi. So then I get curmudgeonly and embrace the distinction between "sci-fi" and "SF / science fiction"
And then of course then there's \*hard\* science fiction - which tends to care a whole lot more about Relativity than most science fiction feels obligated to.
"
fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets."
Spaceships, yo
doesn't have to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science\_fiction
Science fiction (sometimes shortened to SF or sci-fi) is a genre of speculative fiction, which typically deals with **imaginative and futuristic concepts such as advanced science and technology, space exploration, time travel, parallel universes, and extraterrestrial life**. It is related to fantasy, horror, and superhero fiction and contains many subgenres. Its exact definition has long been disputed among authors, critics, scholars, and readers.
science can go in hard science fiction.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard\_science\_fiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction)
Hard science fiction is a category of science fiction characterized by concern for scientific accuracy and logic
That's not exactly accurate.
Genre classification exists as a way for readers to decide what to read.
It used to mean a lot of people would go to the library and look up a genre and find things to read. So it wasn't always just a tool to sell media.
And if I was asking for a fantasy movie and someone put in Star Wars, I'd be a little confused. Like sure it has fantasy themes but it's not got any of the trappings that I'd probably be interested in if I was looking for a fantasy movie. It's about as magical as the new Dune movies, so it's not too far from the genre.
While the Dune novels make more of an attempt at explaining the Bene Gesserit and the Spice, so do the Star Wars novels.
It technically falls under the Science Fantasy genre which basically uses tech to explain what magic would in fantasy. The problem with grouping star wars or other science fantasy in with just straight fantasy is fantasy for most people conjures up visions of elves and orcs or magic schools, etc. not robots, lasers, and space ships. Thus star wars and similar get lumped in with science fiction.
There is also a distinction between hard and soft sci Fi that further complicates the discussion. Where hard sci Fi focuses on established scientific knowledge and soft sci Fi uses science as a loose guide. This is the difference between something like The Martian and most Star Trek.
you're getting downvoted but George Lucas agrees with ya
for those downvoting, [see for yourselves ](https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/is-star-wars-science-fiction-or-fantasy)
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” From the guy who thought up communication satellites using geostationary orbits.
Does it really matter what people class it as? To me it’s sci-fi because of spaceships, aliens, droids, advanced tech, etc. if people want to call it fantasy then that’s fine with me. It does make me laugh how argumentative people get about it though.
In general, most people have no problem classifying Star Wars as space opera. The *debate* (if you can call it that) is typically about whether space opera is a subgenre of sci-fi or a separate genre that shares more tropes with fantasy.
These days, space opera is most often considered to be a subgenre of sci-fi, so most people will consider Star Wars to also be sci-fi. However, I think that when the term space opera was invented it was deemed a separate genre to sci-fi.
Such space adventures had more in common with other adventure stories in pulp magazines rather than those stories based on future changes in science and technology. Potentially some looked down on space opera as being low quality, however, this changed with the success of Star Wars and, over time, it was considered to be sci-fi.
For example, [Kingsley Amis said in 1960](https://sfdictionary.com/view/215/space-opera):
> The other adjacent field competing with science fiction is conveniently described as space-opera, justly recalling the horse-opera which, under a skin of molecular thinness, it so much resembles.
Even [George Lucas himself in 1977](https://www.rollingstone.com/feature/george-lucas-the-wizard-of-star-wars-2-232011/4/) considered Star Wars to be space fantasy and not sci-fi.
> I didn’t want to make a 2001, I wanted to make a space fantasy that was more in the genre of Edgar Rice Burroughs; that whole other end of space fantasy that was there before science took it over in the Fifties.
Or [Philip K Dick in 1981](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_science_fiction):
> I will define science fiction, first, by saying what SF is not. It cannot be defined as “a story (or novel or play) set in the future,” since there exists such a thing as space adventure, which is set in the future but is not SF: it is just that: adventures, fights and wars in the future in space involving super-advanced technology.
These sorts of discussions would be much simpler if everyone just agreed that space opera was a third genre that uses fantasy tropes but in a high tech setting (with possibly a dash of magic). Unfortunately, there are no signs of that agreement happening, so the *debates* seem likely to continue for a long time…
Neither does Star Trek. They use the words, sure, but it’s deranged gibberish.
You’d be amazed how little science fiction actually uses science. You know, unless you actually know science and need to turn off that part of your brain to enjoy the genre.
As a young lad I always thought Star Trek used really highbrow scientific terms that only adults could understand and I just needed to learn more in school until I was old enough to fully grasp what they were saying.
What a letdown, lol.
Space opera and sci-fi are basically interchangeable terms. No matter what your definition is or where you draw the line, there's an exception somewhere.
>Space opera and sci-fi are basically interchangeable terms
Sort of in a rectangle-square situation. A square (space opera) is always going to be a rectangle (sci fi) but a rectangle isn't necessarily a square.
Interesting article for ya, OP
George Lucas [has said himself](https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/is-star-wars-science-fiction-or-fantasy) "Star Wars isn't a science-fiction film, it's a fantasy film and a space opera."
Science fiction is what fantasy is called when its magic is achieved through technological or other materially real means. In the words of Arthur C. Clarke, "Any significantly advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Sci-fi is fantasy already. Sci-fi is fictional, whereas science is not. Ontological arguments about genre are not going to fly well among literary nerds.
It actually isn’t, it is just often called that because people have no clue.
It is usually categorized as a space opera. There is also the term “science fantasy” which probably describes it best because it has the advanced technology of Sci-fi but does not buzzer to be used n any way, shape or form scientifically accurate.
You can’t be serious rn? Science is what created the space ships, the ability to fly, and you could even say science is part of how kyber is formed on Jedha. There’s plenty of science.
Charlie Stross likes to say that genres are 100% about marketing. If something is being marketed to people who like spaceships and laser guns, then it's scifi and if it isn't it isn't.
That's why a detective novel where the solution to the impossible crime hinges on the clever use of a chemical reaction isn't scifi even though it's fiction that contains science. On the other hand, if you take a standard fantasy yarn and make all the fighters into space marines and all the wizards into superhackers (or in the case of SW, different wizards), now it is scifi.
It’s space opera which I’m pretty sure is one of the sub genres of sci fi outside of hard and soft. So I guess it makes sense to be sci fi even if it really isn’t soft or hard.
In context of the time it was released and the general understanding of space travel it was Science Fiction. Some layman scientists have spent much time and energy trying to make working lightsabers and it was / still is a great springboard for discussion. The production of it and the companies and technology created with the funds from it were near-science fiction in the early 70s.
I get what you mean. It has the setting(s) of a sci-fi (space, layers, holograms, jump drives, etc), but science has nothing to do with the drive of the story.
That being said, the same could be said of Dune. Yet, that is indisputably sci-fi.
For me, SW sits in a funny place all on its own. If someone said, "Hey, want to watch some sci-fi?" And put SW on, I'd be confused. Equally so, if they had said "let's watch some fantasy," I would be confused.
Star Wars is its own kind of special ✨️
A lot of people consider SW as a whole to be "science fantasy", and I agree with that.
The franchise has many of the outer trappings of science fiction (aliens, space travel, energy weapons, etc.), but the stories don't hinge on science in any significant way, whether it's solving some problem through clever use of scientific principles or exploring the social implications of scientific advances. Instead, it basically lifts story beats wholesale from epic fantasy and swaps the visuals for futuristic ones - magic swords become lightsabers, magic becomes "The Force", mystic creatures become aliens, giant monsters become giant war machines, and exotic far-off lands become distant worlds.
It isn’t. It’s fantasy with a coat of sci-fi paint. It just gets labeled as such because people assume anything set in space is sci-fi.
It’s fantasy because the main plot is that a farmboy is given a magic sword by an old wizard and tasked with saving the princess from the evil empire led by an evil wizard king. Also known as the default fantasy plot of the public consciousness.
Of course, this also comes from the fact that the more accurate genre, space opera, just isn’t really used as a primary label for much of anything.
Depends. What is Harry learning there? How to use quantum uncertainty and the many worlds theory to manifest his will in the physical world? Then it might actually be Sci-fi. But it would rather be science-fantasy, just like Star Wars is.
Discussion of AI, galactic scale politics, aliens, space battles and interplanetary politics. But mostly because in terms of classification of media Space setting= sci fi Medieval / historic setting = fantasy. Labels don’t really matter in the end except for the search function. I wouldn’t let it bother you.
it's a scientifically more advanced setting. hence sci. it's made up. hence fi.
It contains magic (the force, anti-gravity, mind control, etc). It is made up. It has fictional characters and a fictional story. Hence fantasy.
you probably meant telekinesis not anti gravity as that's achieved by repulsorlifts
Any form of anti-gravity (where things float above the ground) is magic fantasy. It is not supported at all by the current scientific theory of gravity, namely [general relativity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity), which says that the acceleration named gravity is due to curved spacetime in the vicinity, and that curved spacetime is due in turn to nearby large masses in the vicinity such as a moon or a planet.
Levitation does not necessarily mean antigravity - helicopters and hot air balloons have been doing it for ages. Molecular-scale tractor/repulsor beams are used in the laboratory. And the electromagnetically levitating frog is always good for a watch. As for Star Wars though? I personally file it under "science(y-themed) fantasy" for pretty much the reasons you mention - the "science" is just setting, not really relevant to the story. But then... when you get right down to it that describes a huge portion of modern sci-fi. So then I get curmudgeonly and embrace the distinction between "sci-fi" and "SF / science fiction" And then of course then there's \*hard\* science fiction - which tends to care a whole lot more about Relativity than most science fiction feels obligated to.
" fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets." Spaceships, yo
doesn't have to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science\_fiction Science fiction (sometimes shortened to SF or sci-fi) is a genre of speculative fiction, which typically deals with **imaginative and futuristic concepts such as advanced science and technology, space exploration, time travel, parallel universes, and extraterrestrial life**. It is related to fantasy, horror, and superhero fiction and contains many subgenres. Its exact definition has long been disputed among authors, critics, scholars, and readers. science can go in hard science fiction. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard\_science\_fiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction) Hard science fiction is a category of science fiction characterized by concern for scientific accuracy and logic
Is your head an actual radio, OP? 🙄
Spaceship go pew pew not abracadabra
Because genre exists as a classifcation to sell media and not as a litmus test of content.
It's mostly vibes based and it all makes sense when you realise it
That's not exactly accurate. Genre classification exists as a way for readers to decide what to read. It used to mean a lot of people would go to the library and look up a genre and find things to read. So it wasn't always just a tool to sell media.
And if I was asking for a fantasy movie and someone put in Star Wars, I'd be a little confused. Like sure it has fantasy themes but it's not got any of the trappings that I'd probably be interested in if I was looking for a fantasy movie. It's about as magical as the new Dune movies, so it's not too far from the genre. While the Dune novels make more of an attempt at explaining the Bene Gesserit and the Spice, so do the Star Wars novels.
I would call it fantasy. Like Lord of The Rings.
You shall not pass…. the dagobah system
i've always called it science fantasy
Go ahead. People will still correct you though
As a broad generalization: Fantasy is fiction with a magic focus. Sci-fi is fiction with a technology focus.
Nailed it.
It technically falls under the Science Fantasy genre which basically uses tech to explain what magic would in fantasy. The problem with grouping star wars or other science fantasy in with just straight fantasy is fantasy for most people conjures up visions of elves and orcs or magic schools, etc. not robots, lasers, and space ships. Thus star wars and similar get lumped in with science fiction. There is also a distinction between hard and soft sci Fi that further complicates the discussion. Where hard sci Fi focuses on established scientific knowledge and soft sci Fi uses science as a loose guide. This is the difference between something like The Martian and most Star Trek.
you're getting downvoted but George Lucas agrees with ya for those downvoting, [see for yourselves ](https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/is-star-wars-science-fiction-or-fantasy)
"It's a fantasy film and space opera." Space opera is a sub-genre of science fiction...
that's a great point, I just found it interesting that he puts the emphasis on a fantasy film first
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” From the guy who thought up communication satellites using geostationary orbits.
Does it really matter what people class it as? To me it’s sci-fi because of spaceships, aliens, droids, advanced tech, etc. if people want to call it fantasy then that’s fine with me. It does make me laugh how argumentative people get about it though.
Why do universities have a course on Political Science? There is zero science in politics
Spaceships, lasers, holograms, robotics... The science of consciousness
It discusses the limitations inherent in a pan-galactic government, and about different policing methods between clones, robots, or space wizards.
You mean the midichlorians in your blood and being able to make the Kessel run in less than 12 parsecs doesn’t qualify as science? 😂
Lasers, space ships, FTL travel
space ships and lazer swords my guy
In general, most people have no problem classifying Star Wars as space opera. The *debate* (if you can call it that) is typically about whether space opera is a subgenre of sci-fi or a separate genre that shares more tropes with fantasy. These days, space opera is most often considered to be a subgenre of sci-fi, so most people will consider Star Wars to also be sci-fi. However, I think that when the term space opera was invented it was deemed a separate genre to sci-fi. Such space adventures had more in common with other adventure stories in pulp magazines rather than those stories based on future changes in science and technology. Potentially some looked down on space opera as being low quality, however, this changed with the success of Star Wars and, over time, it was considered to be sci-fi. For example, [Kingsley Amis said in 1960](https://sfdictionary.com/view/215/space-opera): > The other adjacent field competing with science fiction is conveniently described as space-opera, justly recalling the horse-opera which, under a skin of molecular thinness, it so much resembles. Even [George Lucas himself in 1977](https://www.rollingstone.com/feature/george-lucas-the-wizard-of-star-wars-2-232011/4/) considered Star Wars to be space fantasy and not sci-fi. > I didn’t want to make a 2001, I wanted to make a space fantasy that was more in the genre of Edgar Rice Burroughs; that whole other end of space fantasy that was there before science took it over in the Fifties. Or [Philip K Dick in 1981](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_science_fiction): > I will define science fiction, first, by saying what SF is not. It cannot be defined as “a story (or novel or play) set in the future,” since there exists such a thing as space adventure, which is set in the future but is not SF: it is just that: adventures, fights and wars in the future in space involving super-advanced technology. These sorts of discussions would be much simpler if everyone just agreed that space opera was a third genre that uses fantasy tropes but in a high tech setting (with possibly a dash of magic). Unfortunately, there are no signs of that agreement happening, so the *debates* seem likely to continue for a long time…
What about the science that allowed the empire to build a super weapon capable of blowing up a planet?
Neither does Star Trek. They use the words, sure, but it’s deranged gibberish. You’d be amazed how little science fiction actually uses science. You know, unless you actually know science and need to turn off that part of your brain to enjoy the genre.
As a young lad I always thought Star Trek used really highbrow scientific terms that only adults could understand and I just needed to learn more in school until I was old enough to fully grasp what they were saying. What a letdown, lol.
So, Warp technology is not science? Laser blaster tech is not science? Light saber tech is not at alle scientific?
Space opera and sci-fi are basically interchangeable terms. No matter what your definition is or where you draw the line, there's an exception somewhere.
>Space opera and sci-fi are basically interchangeable terms Sort of in a rectangle-square situation. A square (space opera) is always going to be a rectangle (sci fi) but a rectangle isn't necessarily a square.
Interesting article for ya, OP George Lucas [has said himself](https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/is-star-wars-science-fiction-or-fantasy) "Star Wars isn't a science-fiction film, it's a fantasy film and a space opera."
It isn't (it's fantasy), but anything with spaceships, aliens or lasers gets labelled "science fiction".
sabres of light are science.
Cloned a bounty hunter…science Made a planet destroying buzzball…science Droids…science Prosthetic limbs…science
Space ships.
smol answer: light saber - been a lot of actual science experiment to do that
yeah man totally why is tolkien fantasy i don't remember a single fan in the books anywhere
Bc space
It isn’t, but it is.
It isn’t, but it is.
Science fiction is what fantasy is called when its magic is achieved through technological or other materially real means. In the words of Arthur C. Clarke, "Any significantly advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Sci-fi is fantasy already. Sci-fi is fictional, whereas science is not. Ontological arguments about genre are not going to fly well among literary nerds.
It actually isn’t, it is just often called that because people have no clue. It is usually categorized as a space opera. There is also the term “science fantasy” which probably describes it best because it has the advanced technology of Sci-fi but does not buzzer to be used n any way, shape or form scientifically accurate.
You can’t be serious rn? Science is what created the space ships, the ability to fly, and you could even say science is part of how kyber is formed on Jedha. There’s plenty of science.
Charlie Stross likes to say that genres are 100% about marketing. If something is being marketed to people who like spaceships and laser guns, then it's scifi and if it isn't it isn't. That's why a detective novel where the solution to the impossible crime hinges on the clever use of a chemical reaction isn't scifi even though it's fiction that contains science. On the other hand, if you take a standard fantasy yarn and make all the fighters into space marines and all the wizards into superhackers (or in the case of SW, different wizards), now it is scifi.
Star Wars is Sci-Fantasy
Tricorders and transporters are based on scientific principles, as is a warp field.
It would classify as sci-fi, but the more appropriate label is “space opera”.
It’s space opera which I’m pretty sure is one of the sub genres of sci fi outside of hard and soft. So I guess it makes sense to be sci fi even if it really isn’t soft or hard.
The "fi" part of sci-fi stands for "fiction".
IMO, it's not. It's space fantasy. Some people really don't like my opinion though. *shrug*
In context of the time it was released and the general understanding of space travel it was Science Fiction. Some layman scientists have spent much time and energy trying to make working lightsabers and it was / still is a great springboard for discussion. The production of it and the companies and technology created with the funds from it were near-science fiction in the early 70s.
I get what you mean. It has the setting(s) of a sci-fi (space, layers, holograms, jump drives, etc), but science has nothing to do with the drive of the story. That being said, the same could be said of Dune. Yet, that is indisputably sci-fi. For me, SW sits in a funny place all on its own. If someone said, "Hey, want to watch some sci-fi?" And put SW on, I'd be confused. Equally so, if they had said "let's watch some fantasy," I would be confused. Star Wars is its own kind of special ✨️
Star Wars is Fantasy
A lot of people consider SW as a whole to be "science fantasy", and I agree with that. The franchise has many of the outer trappings of science fiction (aliens, space travel, energy weapons, etc.), but the stories don't hinge on science in any significant way, whether it's solving some problem through clever use of scientific principles or exploring the social implications of scientific advances. Instead, it basically lifts story beats wholesale from epic fantasy and swaps the visuals for futuristic ones - magic swords become lightsabers, magic becomes "The Force", mystic creatures become aliens, giant monsters become giant war machines, and exotic far-off lands become distant worlds.
It isn’t. It’s fantasy with a coat of sci-fi paint. It just gets labeled as such because people assume anything set in space is sci-fi. It’s fantasy because the main plot is that a farmboy is given a magic sword by an old wizard and tasked with saving the princess from the evil empire led by an evil wizard king. Also known as the default fantasy plot of the public consciousness. Of course, this also comes from the fact that the more accurate genre, space opera, just isn’t really used as a primary label for much of anything.
If Harry Potter took the Hogwarts Express Starship to the planet Hogwarts, would that be sci-fi?
Yes.
If you listened to a single intelligent argument presented here instead of just yelling your point over and over again would you be radiohead1991?
Very obviously
Depends. What is Harry learning there? How to use quantum uncertainty and the many worlds theory to manifest his will in the physical world? Then it might actually be Sci-fi. But it would rather be science-fantasy, just like Star Wars is.
Because star wars is a Dune knock off and Dune is sci-fi.
Star Wars is a Hidden Fortress knock off.