Comments on: Identity and letdown in The Raw Shark Texts, by Steven Hall (books 2008, 6) http://devilgate.org/blog/2008/06/05/identity-and-letdown-in-the-raw-shark-texts-by-steven-hall-books-2008-6/ Warning: contains language from the outset Sat, 22 Nov 2008 03:38:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Martin McCallion http://devilgate.org/blog/2008/06/05/identity-and-letdown-in-the-raw-shark-texts-by-steven-hall-books-2008-6/#comment-5527 Martin McCallion Sun, 08 Jun 2008 21:23:35 +0000 http://devilgate.org/blog/?p=167#comment-5527 Aye, fair point, Hal; and thanks for commenting. I'm strangely pleased, though, by the realisation that led to my "follow-up post":http://devilgate.org/blog/2008/06/06/novelist-joanna-kavenna-points-out-that-i-was-wrong/ that there is at least one other genre that gets the disparaging abbreviation treatment, namely "chick-lit". Although the "literature" probably raises it above mere "fiction". Aye, fair point, Hal; and thanks for commenting. I’m strangely pleased, though, by the realisation that led to my follow-up post that there is at least one other genre that gets the disparaging abbreviation treatment, namely “chick-lit”. Although the “literature” probably raises it above mere “fiction”.

]]> By: Hal Duncan http://devilgate.org/blog/2008/06/05/identity-and-letdown-in-the-raw-shark-texts-by-steven-hall-books-2008-6/#comment-5526 Hal Duncan Sat, 07 Jun 2008 11:51:07 +0000 http://devilgate.org/blog/?p=167#comment-5526 Why is SF so special that it gets its own disparaging abbreviation? We have nobody to blame but ourselves. To the best of my knowledge, Forrest Ackerman came up with the "Sci-Fi" monicker and it was happily adopted by fans who thought it sounded terribly catchy and oh-so-frickin-clever cause it paralleled "Hi-Fi". The eedjits actually thought it sounded neat-o cool-to-the-max-times-ten(!), redolent of the cutting-edge gosh-wow techno-novelty of... stereo sound. Of course, to everyone else (including many SF writers) it sounded horrifyingly naff. I mean, there's nothing *less* hip than the sort of label that the tragically unhip come up with for themselves in the attempt to sound hip. So, take the excruciating tweeness of the term, and factor in uncritical loyalty on the part of fans who lapped up schlocky B-movies, crappy TV series, any old tat with a bit of gee-whizzery in it really -- it's no wonder that label picked up its negative connotations. Why is SF so special that it gets its own disparaging abbreviation?

We have nobody to blame but ourselves. To the best of my knowledge, Forrest Ackerman came up with the “Sci-Fi” monicker and it was happily adopted by fans who thought it sounded terribly catchy and oh-so-frickin-clever cause it paralleled “Hi-Fi”. The eedjits actually thought it sounded neat-o cool-to-the-max-times-ten(!), redolent of the cutting-edge gosh-wow techno-novelty of… stereo sound. Of course, to everyone else (including many SF writers) it sounded horrifyingly naff. I mean, there’s nothing less hip than the sort of label that the tragically unhip come up with for themselves in the attempt to sound hip. So, take the excruciating tweeness of the term, and factor in uncritical loyalty on the part of fans who lapped up schlocky B-movies, crappy TV series, any old tat with a bit of gee-whizzery in it really—it’s no wonder that label picked up its negative connotations.

]]>