Acknowledgements

First thing, my good will to SISU library, it is a treasure-house of science fictions, and

it has an almost complete collection of foreign critical works of science fiction. This library

excites me for long.

Thanks to the daring, prudent and passionate precursors who implored the terra

incognita of science fiction and found gems of it. I learned a lot. What if I had to start from

square one of science fiction studies? Fortunately, they saved me much of the cumbersome

pedant search work. Their works built grounds of this paper. I am very honored to continue

their paths.

My instructor Prof. Song Binghui shared with me his ideas on how to lay out this

paper, how to make it complete and persuading in arguments of the thesis, helped me in

weighing fairness and balance of its structure. Beside this, he let me enjoyed full freedom

in writing of this paper. I appreciated it and I hope I hadn’t fall short of those requirements

and fail him.

My thanks go still to Prof. Ren Shengming from whom I learned thinking and thoughts

(by the way, I know your translation of a science fiction, that means a connection between

us in terms of science fiction.), to Prof. Zha Mingjian who showed engagement and

industriousness on basis of perfecting attitude so as to reach certain altitude of scholarship,

to Dr. Kang Lin and Dr. Zhang Yu who own literary sensitivity and cultured taste. Studies

of comparative literature from them benefitted.

Thanks to my classmate Gao Haoyue as a casual science fiction reader and supporter

of my writing of this SF dissertation. I am not alone.

Thanks to Prof. Wu Yan from Beijing Normal University for a copy of the book

New

Maps of Hell

he delivered to me although he actually did not know anything of me. That is

a book which is really not easy to find. I value the hospitality from SF circle.

It is only after painstaking work, influence and help from all of the above people that I

can finally bring this paper to completion. I am deeply indebted to them. i

中文摘要

本文拟以文类学的方法就科幻小说这一文类传入中国后发生的形态变化系统地

作深层次的探讨。

近几年，作为一种通俗文学样式，包括晚清启蒙民智用的“科学小说”和八十年

代受欧美影响一度兴起却又受到意识形态冲击的“科幻小说”在内的中国科幻小说创

作和翻译逐渐受到了研究者一定程度的关注。日本的樽本照雄和武田雅哉也孜孜不倦

地挖掘和整理着清末民初以来的中国科幻小说文本，使得我们对历史上出现过的主要

的科幻文本有了初步的了解。

然而，令人讶异的是，虽说科幻小说的创作、翻译和评论已历经岁月，但在中国

几乎所有人对科幻小说的认识还依然停留在是否蕴含科学元素和幻想成分的粗浅层

次，枉顾它作为一种类型文学的自身逻辑规律，似乎科幻小说只是科学和幻想的机械

加合。在这种古旧、教条的观念束缚下，基于科幻史的论文终不过是松散地堆砌、码

放文本名称，并对其或大加夸耀或偶有指摘。

有鉴于此，铺设符合文学本体发展逻辑的中国科幻小说文类演化轨迹就将给人们

提供看待科幻小说的更深入的视角、更连贯的脉络和更深入本质的认识。和其他任何

形式的文学一样，科幻小说与其他文类之间，以及在科幻小说内部的亚文类之间都存

在着密切的文类传承和影响关系。正是这些文类传统构成了同一文类的同质元素，又

在不断的使用和损耗中催生了文类的异变，通过辨明此中的变与不变就可以揭示科幻

小说的根本价值所在。

科幻文类自体内和与科幻小说牵系的其他文类之间两方面的嬗变都需要文类学

方法的介入。文类学作为一种文学类别的系统研究，在对历史上产生的某一文类的研

究、理论化的过程中都会牵扯到几乎整个文学系统的各种文类的定位和阐释，所以本

文将首先对比较文学提倡过但却建树不多，但半个世纪以来却在比较文学学科视野外

发展的文类研究作全面、精要的归纳总结，并融会贯通，以利于对中国科幻小说的形

态流变的过程中条分缕析、去伪存真。所谓“形态流变”涉及两种：一种是影响研究

内的“文类旅行”，是外部催生的变化。再者就是中国科幻小说生发后对独立的文类

演变，但在本文中不会对二者分而述之。

需要说明的是，本文的论述顺序不严格地以时序为限，而是在不严重乖违时序的

前提下适当地以从文本自身结构发掘出的逻辑来代替文本发生时间的逻辑，但也绝不ii

宣扬完全的文学自足。再者，本文论述的文本范围是中国大陆的科幻翻译和创作，但

也包括内地人在香港发表的原创作品和香港人在内地发表的原创和翻译作品。

具体来说本文力图做到一下几点：

1.

本文主要综合参考了诺斯罗普?弗莱、茨维坦?托多洛夫和达可?苏文宏观的文

类理论和实践研究的成果在结构主义方法的范围内对中国清末（

1902

）至今的科幻小

说翻译和创作的历史和现状作了形式和深层结构上的考察。

2

．全面强调和阐明了文类意识在创作、阅读和研究中的必要性及其重要意义，

整合了文类研究的重要成果，并指出它属于比较文学文类学的研究范畴，并且应该为

比较文学的文类学研究所借鉴和运用。

3

．利用文类研究的方法和成果发展和修正了托多洛夫和达可?苏文对科幻小说认

识的阐述，以此勘明了科幻小说的本质属性（即它所创造和开拓出的独特的阅读情趣，

它的奇趣和奇迹）以及它和其他相关文类的关联和传承关系，指出了它的现代童话（即

奇趣）基调和它的大男孩童话的定位，并证之于中国科幻小说的创作和翻译。

4

．通过文类学的方法全面梳理了百余年来中国科幻小说翻译和创作的文本，对

比参照国内外同类文本，对其形式上的归属，周边文类（神话、乌托邦、冒险、幻想

文学）和亚文类（科学罗曼史、时间旅行或平行世界、赛博朋克、叛逆机器人、模拟

世界构筑、域外连接等）的逻辑演变去伪存真，首次有了比较清晰的认识和明确的表

达。

5.

对中国科幻小说创作走过的歧途和中国特色的科幻创作的利弊作了阐述，指出

了在科幻文类和亚文类的路径上遇到的主要阻力和做出突破的文本，未见突破的地方

从形式逻辑上用翻译或未译文本作了补充，聊作未来中国科幻小说创作的典范和参

考。

关键词：科幻小说

前幻想

风格化

风格差异化

视野拓展

新奇

奇趣

奇迹

文类意识

文本质地

文类关联

亚文类

陌生化

认知

非均衡

虚构性

去中心的

iii

Abstract

This paper attempts to systematically address the evolvement of deep-seated forms of

science fiction in China by means of genrology or genre study, as it were.

In the past few years, science fiction as a popular literature, including “scientific

jottings” of Late Qing dynasty as a means of scientific enlightenment and “science

fantasy” revived in early 1980s due to western influences and others before suppressed by

ideological dispute in 1983, drew concerns of some researchers of literature. Thus we come

to have some knowledge of SF texts in history. Till now, science fiction writing translation

and criticism have had decades’ long history.

Yet, to our disappointment, most people are still stuck in the old dogmatized

conception of science fiction as a mere mixture of scientific elements and whims of

groundless fantasy, ignorant of rules and logics if itself as a literary genre.

On top of this, to lay out the track of development of science fiction in China

according to rules of literariness provides us with an instrumental insight, ribs and

backbones of the SF continuum and depth of SF nature. Similar with other forms of

literature, there exists a relation of influence and inheritance between science fiction and

other genres as well as in between its subgenres, which make up homogeneity and

heterogeneity of SF conglomerate, the derivatives and generic hybrid of it.

The task of this paper boils down to the following points: Northrop Frye, Tzvetan

Todorov and Darko Suvin’s theoretical and practical genre study would be taken advantage

of to reach the core value of science fiction, i.e. the SF marvel and wonder, and to clear out

genre affinity with other genres, such as myth, utopia, adventure, fairy tale and high

fantasy, then was applied to studies of science fiction in China. Hereafter, scientific

romances and other five subgenres of science fiction as patterns of structures of science

fictions are further arranged by me. Deterrence and breakthroughs of the past and in the

future of the SF genre are pointed out in each branch of sub-generic path as an instruction.

Key Words

: science fiction; pre-phantasy; stylization; differentiation of styles; expansion

of horizon; novelty; marvel; wonder; genre conscious; texture; genre affinity; subgenre;

estrangement; cognitive; disproportionate; fictive/fictional; decenterized iv

Abbreviations:

SF/sf science fiction

SFS

Science Fiction Studies

SFW

Science Fiction World

SFWT

Science Fiction World—Translation Version

MOSF

Metamorphoses of Science Fiction

Contents

I. Preliminaries ............................................................................................................... 1

I.I. The Barely Matured: Genre Studies, for Comparative Literature? ...................... 3

I.II. Genre Jungle: Kindred Genres of Science Fiction .............................................. 7

I.II. I. Relation with Mystery and Marvel .............................................................. 7

I.II.II. Relation with Mythology ........................................................................... 14

I.II.III. Novelty and Wonder of Science Fiction .................................................. 15

I.III. The Structurally Unheeded: Genre Conscious & Travelling Genres ............... 19

I.III.I. Genre Conscious ........................................................................................ 19

I.III.II. Travelling Genres ..................................................................................... 22

II. Elementary: Tributaries of Science Fiction ............................................................. 24

II.I. From Utopia Tradition: Shangri-La .................................................................. 24

II.II. From the Intellectual: Symposium ................................................................... 28

II.III. From the Supernatural: High Fantasy ............................................................. 31

II.III.I. Deterrence of Fantasy ............................................................................... 31

II.III.II. Boyish Fairy Tale .................................................................................... 33

II.III.III. Epic Fantasy .......................................................................................... 34

II.IV. From Picaresque & Adventurous: Null .......................................................... 36

III. Secondary: Autonomy of Science Fiction in China ............................................... 43

III. I. Scientific Romance ......................................................................................... 43

III.II. SF Marvel and Wonder ................................................................................... 50

III.II.I. Time Travel and Parallel World ............................................................... 50

III.II.II. Analogy of World Built and Discovery .................................................. 51

III.II.III. Connection Beyond ............................................................................... 51

III.II.IV. Aberrant Robot ...................................................................................... 52

III. II.V. Back to Marvel with Marvel Attenuated: punk—the rebellious ............ 53

IV. Tertiary: Circumference & Periphery of Science Fiction in China ....................... 55

IV.I. Scientific Jottings (Non-science SF) & Science Fiction .................................. 55

IV.II. The Non-fiction SF ......................................................................................... 57

IV.II.I. Entanglement with Mystery, Superstition and Melodrama ..................... 58

IV.II.II. Ideology—Enemy of Science Fiction ..................................................... 60

V. Super-structural: Niche of Science Fiction in China .............................................. 65

Bibliography ................................................................................................................ 67

1

I. Preliminaries

Poiesis

, to make, with craftsmanship done either artistically or artificially in ancient

Greek, implies

mimesis

as an immanent undertone of it—a representative view of art

recreated towards reality. On the basis of ideal and reality being imitated, Plato raised the

question of narrative mode or points of view in narration to rebuke literary untruth in

Republic

which built the fundamentals of modern rhetoric. While Aristotle, although

inherited Plato’s mimesis, with his scholarly

Poetics

, safely resided on the prototype of

arguing (though implicitly) art and literature an aesthetic autonomy concerning no

longer the platonic political ethnics exclusively. Consequently, the burden of proof, of

justifying tragedy and epic by breaking down intricacy of manner and nature of literary

property lied on him. The binary taxonomy of tragedy and comedy, and the qualitative

homogeneity of epic and tragedy brought about by him are all but deductive results from

the following premises (in effect) permeating

Poetics

, or analytical norms of any valid

work or paper of poetics:

1.

The established synchronic genre labels as choices of objects to be theorized;

2.

A certain literary genre as the origin of coordinate anchored, center of focus. Thus

the attained result of generic differentiation is hierarchical, i.e. certain form of

literature is rightly preferred and in analyzer’s favor.

3.

Intrinsic elements (structural components to whip up emotional or psychological

effects) as caliper within the genre. The standard genre demarcated is the most

psychologically tangible;

4.

Extensive gauge of the other labeled genres on levels of affinity/estrangement; thus

rule of thumb adjusted and deepened as formal logic;

5.

The anchored genre is the most thoroughly clarified, represented as pure genre,

whereas comes out to be the most entwined criss-cross to be unraveled in its time,

hence realistic enough to be sorted out from other entangled genres.

2

In so doing, synchronically labeled descriptive genres are changed diachronically

theorized genre pattern enabling fresh interpretation and understanding of the existing

2

Greek tragedy is in any sense a kind of general art work, a combination of monologue, songs, chorus and dances.

2

works at least, and prefiguration of forthcoming clusters of works as emerging, potentially

competent genres, namely a historical, prescriptive synthesis at best. This is quite what is

done in

Poetics

, to facilitate better and deeper understanding in response to degradation of

truthfulness in narrated literary works. It spans a whole spectrum of critical works

deploring literary structure and worth of it in attempt for its appropriateness. It set up a

pattern, an example, a model that cannot be shunned.

If put in present critical terms, Plato can be said of being discursive, pragmatic and

unitarian for his stress on moral and social fiction, while Aristotle generic and structural. In

general, one went the way of reductionists while the other took up the cumbersome

scholarly research work. Then what is the difference between them away from an uncritical

chitter-chattering final judgment of methodological diversity? Where do they stand and

start from?

Plato dismissed poets as liars, as we know it, for fear that the young and uneducated

could be most vulnerable to the poetic untruth, which, if took for granted by the civilians,

degraded as blasphemy for gods, virtue and the ideal, but for me the confounding

substitutes only for a single communicative virtue for human society as far as I know it.

Deviation from direct, straightforward honesty (I do not say integrity for its bent for moral

commitment) would stunt effective and efficient communication by speeches, increase the

cost of verbal communication for the reason that people rarely recognize the different

genres of the verbal and the script. Both agreed on the risk of miscommunication as the

Chinese saying “True words are not decorated while the decorated untrustworthy” goes.

Whether or not there is any solution to the question raised by Plato at all, the truthfulness

of literary facts, regardless of the worth of arguing, is kept contended on. The maintenance

of direct and full relevance (otherwise total void) between verbal codes and the signified

for the largest majority minimizes the cost of communication

3

. On the contrary, an

additional privileged discursive system of unfathomable perplexity gave birth to a want for

profession of criticism and theories, among which genre studies/theory best serves its

interpretive end. And Aristotle could be seen as the first established figure in breaking the

3

Cf. the third chapter of Umberto Eco’s

The Open Work

—Openness, Information, Communication. Systematic

communication is packed with additional information that is rules, the channel to full and deep understanding.

3

grounds of genre study. Despite that the whole realm of literature study has expanded

much more than Aristotle could imagine, his method retains its value in research. The

simplest task of genre study narrowed down is to name is to categorize, to classify, to put

the objects in good order according to newly established rules and sort out the unaccorded

by demarcating in semantic field in order to try out if the name fit the nature better. As in

Aristotle’s case, it is a compromise and an optimizing strategy between continuity of the

proper name usage and obsolescence, and so radical reconstruction of the network of

relevant term usage.

Generic classification of literary works never cease as long as literary history

proceeds and the urge to comprehend progression and scenario of literature continue.

However, systematic implementation of it resurrected only until realistic fictions was

decentred and correspondingly, genre fictions flooded for perplexity of fiction novel on

one hand, and stylization which made it easier to perceive and interpret on the other.

Literary evolution accelerated in 20

th

century west.

4

So it was for China. It calls for more

efficient, comprehensive implementation of dispositional recognition and conduct to put

specific genres in their place. Such exuberance, or rather extreme heterogeneity of literary

works and events provide with a disintegrated literary field before our eyes. The

disorganized literary opus calls for splitting-reuniting process, i.e. the undertakings of the

mediating genre studies, as was done by Aristotle’s

Poetics

before and still others to come.

This is what is to be done to science fiction in this paper.

I.I. The Barely Matured: Genre Studies, for Comparative

Literature?

The concept of literary genres do itself justice to the tradition of insufficient

(qualitatively) or excessive (quantitatively) classification of literary works. It enhances

family relationship and developmental consistency of literary forms. The labels of

historical genres were little by little accumulated and the whole range of generic repertoire

4

“Genre in the nineteenth century and in our own time suffers from the same difficulty as ‘period’: we are conscious of

the quick changes in literary fashion—a new literary generation every ten years, rather than every fifty.” From P. 232 of

René Wellek and Austin Warren’s

Theory of Literature

.

4

gradually enriched. It is a wardrobe of patchwork in repair after worn-out. The species of

literature recorded in history was determined by various criteria: by form; by content; by

function. Actually, the most general differentiation between verse and prose is

form-determined. They are named in general by elements convenient to perceive: by

subject matter; by metrics; by the type of protagonist; by style or tone (mental effect

excitated), and the most disastrous of all-by length as to lengthy narratives. All these

factors taken consideration, we will find none of logical tie among them except the

logic of, if any, juxtaposition. Mechanical enumeration of genre labels, no matter how

comprehensive it becomes, does not lead to an animated organism, so cannot escape

Todorov’s penetrating criticism—“a catalogue is of course only one of the tools of

knowledge, not knowledge itself.… his classification is arbitrary”.

5

Ever since the taxonomy of classical genre (epic, drama and lyrical poetry/narrative,

performative and expressive) took shape, through Horace and neo-classists’ dogmatization

of the rigid classification, all along the way fiction rose to power, the realm of genre

studies was almost left unattended until Fry and Todorov’s age

6

. This seemingly plain fact

comes out to be a precarious misunderstanding most widely spread and deeply believed

when investigated by Gérard Genette in his

Introduction à l\'architexte

. From his research,

classical poetic works all kept reticence on lyrics, the expressive form due to authority of

Aristotle Poetics and its incompatibility with mimesis. Through time, critics and

theoreticians conjured a couple of methods to make do with the out-dated poetic system

while at the same time challenged its validity implicitly. So, in an era of novel and fiction,

when poetry paled in face of narrative form, it is a wonder that Aristotelian poetics, the

genre study’s vitality was rekindled.

Among all research areas of comparative literature, genrology is undoubtedly the

most unheeded, but not the least referred to, compared with imagology, themology,

influence study and parallel study. We even do not have a clear picture of what genre study

for comparative literature is like. The comparative literature journal

Genre

propagandized

5

Todorov,

The Fantastic

, p. 19.

6

These years saw that discussions of genre in Renaissance period had been put light. But there was not as valid

systematic genre studies then as Aristotle did. Moreover, there is a distance between words and thoughts of poets at that

time.

5

itself as a thematic journal, and it is. For decades, nearly only Fran?ois Jost’s

Introduction

to Comparative Literature

and Ulrich Weisstein’s

The Study of Literary Genres

give an

easy access to this area of comparative literature study.

The fourth genre introduced by Fran?ois Jost is a para-literary genre and still a

subgenre of the narrative in comparison with the former three

—

Bildungsroman, the

interpretive or educative. The difference is in genre index of code of expression or end of

expression. Therefore, Ulrich Weisstein pointed out that quadriform generic classification

could never be successful.

When exemplifying the loose use of genre as substitutes of form, Fran?ois Jost

touched on picaresque genre and euphuistic genre which quite approximates the concept of

literary trend. Ulrich agreed on being against genre label as adjective. However, Jost

cannot help introducing the three classical genres a fourth genre

—

the educative. The

use of lyrical poem, drama, epic as adjective is problematic.

7

But we cannot vote against

them being translated “narrative, performative and expressive”. Normally, we cannot

but believe that a genre label endured through times would become omni-functional in

terms of linguistic usage. The character of tragedy is tragical, comedy comical, fiction

fictional. When it comes to the most difficult-science fiction, it goes on as science fiction

novel or story (a needless repetition?), Sci-Fi channel, SF film, and sf being almost

self-evident. It even does not have to be inflected the adjective form

“science-fictional” (rare use). All the nouns are larger than themselves, aspiring to be

essence of the adjectives. Although to generalize is to be an idiot, genre labels’ evolving

adjective continues to be seen as crystallization of core concept of certain genre, of

course unconsciously as customs develop themselves. By verbose discussion of literal

meanings and dictions, I strains to persuade that an essence could be distilled and refined

from a certain genre. redistribution of connotation of the genre can shed some light on

coherence of it as a valid genre.

My thesis here is that the case of genre is not only a strategy of classification when

skillfully handled, it is construction or reconstruction of concrete and successive elements

7

Ulrich Weinsstein, p. 109.

6

of deeper form of textual unit; it is transcendental

8

as in a compositional institution open

to public; it is empirical, the outspoken rules and skills in composition is experiencing

breakthrough at times as well as inheriting as genre tradition. The key to genre studies,

then, is systematic construction but not individual and separated observation. And Tzvetan

Todorov and Northrop Frye are two of them who had done the systematic inspection on

basis of such understanding.

Northrop Frye farthurmostly synthesized until now the widest spectrum of literary

genres and had put them each in place. Only that Frye was being too archetypal with a

birds’ eye view. This reductionist’s approach was severely criticized by Todorov as an

erroneous model.

9

But the brilliance of his incisive volume still cannot be overshadowed.

He did not break away from the Aristotelian methodology in

Poetics

. Rather, he utilized it

for I believe what the practice of instrumental genre studies can never escape the norms or

premises deduced from

Poetics

. In the way Aristotle attributes catharsis/sublimity to

tragedy Todorov narrowed down the genre of fantastic (I would rather call it “mystery”)

“sustained hesitation”.

To grab the essence of traditional genre, Northrop Frye further broke down the -icals

and -nals in to elemental parts: mytho, etho, dianoia, auto in place of the classical triad and

modern miscellany, thereby resurveyed the whole range of literary works and evolution.

The ultimate difference between Todorov and Frye is that Frye arrived at Freudian

and Jungian psycho-analysis while Todorov opinioned that the genre of the purely fantastic

had been edged out and taken over by the rise of psycho-analysis. Very convenient fuse

rather than opposition as Todorov posed in the beginning of his work.

Todorov stressed the “first and unique example” surpassing the past paramount of a

stable genre. We grant text the right to figure in the history of literature or of science in so

far as it produces a change in our previous notion of the one activity or another.

10

Thereby,

Todorov resolved the first question of mountainous pedant toil of reading all texts that

constitute a genre. Only the seminal works that define a genre or initiate a new direction in

8

Cf.

刘光耀

,

诗

学与时间.

9

Todorov, p. 17. Todorov revealed that Frye’s structural approach to genre studies was explicitly “a diagrammatic

pattern”, and that Frye himself was being shallow in believing that “structure” or “system” is “to some extent synonyms

of diagram”.

10

Todorov,

The Fantastic

, p. 6.

7

genre development is to be lingered on and should be recognized with critical importance.

While Frye proved that a genre turn take place as social atmosphere altered, so he extended

the object of genre analysis to quotidian speeches and acts, although limitedly, compared

with Mikhail Bakhtin’s speech genres.

The pattern of Frye and Todorov’s genre study practice ate to be taken up by me at the

level of general genres. Next, Darko Suvin’s specific genre study practice is going to be

my starting point in formulating science fiction.

I.II. Genre Jungle: Kindred Genres of Science Fiction

This sub-title is derived from Darko Suvin’s

SF and the Genological Jungle

(in

MOSF), in which he is mapping the tracks of science fiction among a jungle of many

genres, genre “parasites” in his own term. By stressing open end cognition of true

estrangement, Suvin explained away magical marvel of fairy tale, gothic, horror, doom,

weird fantasy and finally myth for their being a “decadence of cultural taste”. At last, he

had to make do with the “analogy modeling”

11

kind of science fiction and impatiently

jumped to a SF “castle in the air” which did not guarantee its own existence. So I guess he

is after a SF version of Platonic logos which does not exist in reality for sure. The

bigger-than-life cognition by means of fictive devise can never materialize. Anyway, we

are going to resume the trip to genre jungle, for true science fiction definitely.

I.II. I. Relation with Mystery and Marvel

For ages and ages, dogmatized conceptions fettered understanding of science fiction

as it fused with many other narrative genres and entangled with vines and tendrils of them,

textual features of the trail led to science fiction grew harder and harder to find.

The term science fiction which was derived from the use of “scientific fiction” was

coined by Hugo Gernsback in 1926. The attributive “scientific” loosely defined the nature

of science fiction-1. Directly about or of science and technology, therefore scientists,

technicians or the gadgets, after all, the realm of natural science always dominate in the

story, especially in the so-called hard(core) science fiction like Arthur C. Clarke’s 1961

11

A pattern of science fiction structure that will be expounded in the second part of the third chapter

Analogy of World

Built and Discovery

.

8

novel

A Fall of Moondust

. This is a content-determining frame; 2. In contradiction to the

hard science fiction featured by natural sciences, the New Wave

12

science fiction

introduced sf anthropological, psychological and philosophical and even linguistic

ideas the so-called soft science fictions, by which readers and writers began to show a

tolerance of non-golden-age

13

SF and confusion of nature of SF as a whole.

Later on, when science fictions do not necessarily keep them on the track of the

scientific, when the lyrical romanticism of Ray Bradbury in

The Martian Chronicles

, the

“Sword and Sorcery” fantasy novel like

A Pirate Cosmos

by Philip José Farmer, the

feminism of

The Left Hand of Darkness

by Ursula Le Guin, the alternative history of

Moorcock’s

Warlord of the Air

were all celebrated as science fictions, the core of science

fiction moved from the science of science fiction to a scientific thinking pattern of science

fictions which Eric S. Rabkin called it “scientific habits of mind”

14

. That is, “the idea that

paradigms do control on the views of all phenomena, that within these paradigms all

normal problems can be solved, and the abnormal occurrences must either be explained or

initiate the search for a better (usually more inclusive) paradigm.” Science fiction cannot


试阅到此结束，如需查看全部内容请购买正版文献。如因学习需要阅览全文，请联系站长。