As I venture forth into a new genre (Steampunk, see Matthew Delman’s treatise on the subject) for a contest, I found myself desiring to break the laws of physics in favor of fashion. Bad scientist! I know.
Now, there are some rules you can break in genre fiction, and some you cannot, and it’s important to know which ones. Once I figured out (actually, Matt told me) that steampunk was really a variant of SF, not fantasy, I realized that my original law breaking ideas wouldn’t work. Too bad.
The opening scene in my fictional novel (it’s a “fictional” novel, because it’s not really a novel, it’s a pretend novel for a contest. Get it? Ok, I’ll stop now), has my steampunkerish protagonist running through a dark forest. Naturally, we need gear for such a thing, and I originally came up with an idea of bug-eyed light gathering goggles (let’s call them goggicals), complete with leather straps and lots of bolts to hold these sweet hand-ground objective lenses. The only problem being a persnickety law about conservation of light, and the field of view during magnification, and long-story-short, my goggles would have to look more like binoculars and wouldn’t do much for running through brambles in low-light conditions.
Heavy sigh. But they looked so cool! Well, in my head, anyway.
Turns out there actually were optics-only light-gathering “night glasses” used in World War II that could effectively enhance night vision, but only at a distance, and only to the level of the general ambient light conditions. I may yet punk out those rad night glasses and put them in the story. Regardless, along the way I discovered that my protagonist has a fascination for optics, hand-grinds lenses, and peers at the stars. So, all that time was not entirely wasted.
The laws of physics get broken all the time in fantasy and space opera SF, but there are at least plausible reasons given for it (gravity in space? Sure, with my special gravity boots). But once you break a law then you have to consistently apply that (broken) law throughout your story, which can cause some problems. Having light magically multiply itself was a law with far-reaching consequences, far too painful to explore for my purposes. Besides, there are much easier laws to break (or bend), especially when you have the craziness of quantum mechanics and the things we have yet to know about physics to play with, all of which leaves lots of room for conjecture and outright hookum (alternate worlds! Dark matter!).
Do you worry about violating the laws of physics, or do you merrily invent your way to a fantastical world? Once you break a law are you careful to explore the consequences? Or do you stick to realistic worlds where normalness applies?
Happy Weekend!
It depends on the purpose of the story. In general, I try to avoid crafting something fantastic if something real (or realistic) will do the work for me. Why bother spending time to figure out some massive gadget that has to break half a dozen laws of physics in order to work, when something that already exists serves my purpose? Merely appropriate the real object, change a few bits here and there, and move along on your merry way.
That's why my zeppelins, steam tanks, and other steampunk gadgetry might not seem as fantastic as some. My theory is that if something real or semi-real can serve, then it enhances the connection to the real world that the reader needs in order to slip into my fantasy world.
You're totally right about having to consistently break laws of physics if you do it once. I find I'm too lazy to bother coming up with new laws for everything in my world (though I did develop two systems of a dozen rules each for twin magic styles in my epic fantasy stories). So there's another point for keeping things real.
Remind me to come to you for physics questions in the future, btw.
@Matt Ah, fun with physics! Almost as much joy as math. 🙂 One of the things I am quickly coming to love about Steampunk is the absolute realism of the tech. In some ways, I think it's a reactionary impulse against the high tech of the modern era, which is fascinating in its own right. Not that there aren't other elements of the fantastic (hello, vampires in Changeless?). But the fascination with "low" mechanical tech, that is very understandable and has an intuitive feel to it, is very appealing to a gear head such as myself.
Then again, some of the coolest worlds break a big law of physics and go with it – there was one SF story (I can't recall the author at the moment) where he took the idea that time moved at different speeds in a gravity well, and placed a world there, so that different people living at different heights in this mythical world (because they would all be torn apart by gravitational forces, natch) aged at different rates…and what did that mean for the people who lived there.
Fascinating.
And thanks for the help earlier! Hurry up and get your book published, ok? Cuz I want to read it. 🙂
Your fictional novel sounds awesome! :o)
And have I ever told you my theory about scientists writing fiction? We embellish and break rules more! (Because we justify things step by step in our brains and pretty soon we're far from the real science and past the point of explaining our thought processes to our audiences without boring them to tears. That and we know too much about speculative science.)
My theories anyway. :o)
Happy weekend to you too!
@Jackee You could well be right, although I think we have too small a sample set to know with any accuracy (ha! I crack myself up). I know the boring-to-tears part is a real danger for me, just because I love the tech stuff so. I made a Science Files appendix for my MG story, just to hold all the awesome tech tidbits. It may never make it to publication, but I feel better having written it. 🙂
And I know way more than is healthy about spec science. 🙂
Nice site, very informative. I like to read this.,it is very helpful in my part for my criminal law studies.
I'm too OCD to just invent. It has to be based, at least in part, in reality. But it's odd that I will completely buy Men In Black's memory zapper.
I think Jackee's on to something. Most of the science in my air pirates' world is perfectly normal, but then I add impossibilities like ultra-light gas. But if the ultra-light gas is really a product or by-product of a buried, ancient, super-advanced civilization, who's to say they didn't discover things we thought were impossible? 🙂
I love that you used "fictional novel" and actually meant it.
@Cynthia Campy SF has always played fast and loose with the laws of physics, and shockingly got it right sometimes, long before any "serious" SF writer would have guessed. This is one reason to let your imagination run a little wild. I think the memory zapper is completely plausible as science fantasy, in which we don't even try to explain what the science is, because it's just magic and fun. Buying in is all in the writing. 🙂
@Adam I've been looking for a way to use "fictional novel" ever since Janet Reid used it in her "fictional submission guidelines." 🙂
There are enough holes in our knowledge of the universe (worm, black, and otherwise) that ultra-light gas is entirely plausible (even the ancient, buried, super-advanced civilization is plausible!). If they were super-advanced, they almost certainly know something we didn't (as we're only medium-advanced!) 🙂 Regardless, if ultra-light gas exists in your world consistently, all is well. And that's something that wouldn't upset the order of the universe like my goggicals would (oddly enough).
And I still want to learn how to speak like an air pirate. Or perhaps I'll just have to buy the book. 🙂
What a fun post! I mostly right in fantasy, but the laws of magic are very similar to the laws of physics. You have to absolutely consistent in order for it to make sense, to get your reader to buy into it! I also thought your comment about steampunk "I think it's a reactionary impulse against the high tech of the modern era, which is fascinating in its own right" is very insightful.
oops, I hate it when I forget to re-read my comments. Very first sentence: "I mostly right fantasy" — ha ha to myself.
I have a few SF ideas, but I've never been brave enough to tackle them. On the other hand, Steampunk seems a lot less intimidating, more accessible.
@Margo Thanks! The more I think about writing steampunk, the more I see the appeal (both as writers and readers). The steampunk "movement" (if you can call it that) is also a fascinating reaction against loosening manners, with a low-tech facination and a modern-era sensibility about human rights. Very appealing.
But I don't think it's any easier to write. More accessible to read, perhaps.
Also: a cool thread on Nathan's blog about the rise of SF in YA!
I had also been under the impression that staempunk was a subgenre of scifi until I actually read a few steampunk books and found them to contain too many elements of fantasy to be considered sf. Lavie Tidhar's The Bookman is categorized as steampunk but it has giant talking lizards from outer space, which definitely falls into the fantasy realm. Though I think if you do begin applying certain rules for how the scientific aspects work, you do have to stick with them. Though frankly I always ignore anything scientific in books, so I probably wouldn't even notice inconsistencies.
@Simcha I think there is so much genre bending out there, sometimes it's hard to tell anymore. A little genetic engineering and Jurassic Park cloning experiments and viola! giant talking lizards. Okay, maybe not from space. 🙂
And you are right that only those paying attention to such things would notice – but you can be sure that the publishers would pay attention! 🙂
Great post Su; but really, the discussion here has been much more entertaining. And enlightening. So many unique ideas and methods.
I'm so interested in this genre; but I really think I just want to read it. I just bought Soulless and Changeless, and am looking forward to finding the time to read them. And others.
………dhole
@Donna I love it when people come out to play! Thanks for stopping by! 🙂