"SF & its place in our hearts and in the classroom" was a short article written for the English Teacher's journal Idiom in an edition covering the 2003 conference of the International Federation for Teaching English (IFTE). One particular seminar concerned the developement of genre fiction, in particular SF (science fiction, speculative fantasty, etc.), its acceptance and importance in society as a whole as well as the virtue of its inclusion in secondary english booklists.

[ SF = Science Fiction, Specualtive Fiction, Sci-Fi, Science Fantasy ]

It may sound like science fiction (get it?), but the fact is these days book purchases made at point of sale counters in all major outlets are recorded in databases and considered in relation to average book sales across the board by a computer; any titles that sell below the mean are pulled from display shelves replaced by titles that are currently exceeding sales expectations according to trends resulting from globalised market fashions in order to maximize profits. Of-course true science fiction grows in the soil that uniforming homogenization cannot reach, but this kind of competitiveness has become commonplace in all major bookstores, and as specialty sci-fi sales excel quality science fiction is drowning in the kind of technological marketing stratagem that could have come straight from the pit of its very own knotted stomach. Being new to the seedy, incestuous world of science fiction fandom I wasn't sure what to expect of the Science Fiction panel at IFTE 2003. Taking a few moments to fathom the seating was an initial setback; some kind of futuristic design whereby you have to push the chairback in the opposite direction in order to open up the seat, yet the others in attendance seemed to pick it up quite easily, not a good beginning. Even less did I expect to find Santa-Claus, Tori Amos and an ex-MI6 agent sitting on the panel. The agent could perhaps lend some insight into the hard-boiled elements of cyberpunk, but Santa Claus – it seemed – had left his bag at home and Tori being without her piano my expectations hadn't risen so high.

It turns out Santa Claus was in fact Peter Nichols, Tori Amos was Alison Goodman and the MI6 agent was Damien Broderick. All three are incredibly intelligent and accomplished individuals and I'm sure any effort on my part to paraphrase their discussion, let alone attempt critique, would surely be met with some disapproval… so let's hope they don't read this.

As a starting point I didn't know the difference between science fiction and sci-fi, something I figured everyone else in the room knew. Thankfully when Damien Broderick began his talk he offered a quick working definition. Science Fiction is fiction that deals with science and scientific manners, for example, Star Trek is considered science fiction whereas Sci-Fi does not necessarily concern itself with the workings of science, and therefore something like Godzilla Vs Mothra would be seen as Sci-Fi. See, easy. I came into the lecture with a respect for SF in general, but with a secret loathing of “SF junkies”, SF freaks who can speak Klingon or recite from memory the complete history including the creation of the Liquid Wrench used in Star Wars (despite it only being mentioned once, in passing, during the entire series of films). It was with a sense of relief that I learned that true fans of SF hated the eccentricity that their kind had been branded with. While none of the speakers shared any insight into the problem of science fiction eccentricity (you know what I am talking about, they sit inside on sunny days with the curtains drawn reciting Monty Python) I was reminded of a friend from university who attended fifteen theatre screenings of the film Titanic, so before you are quick to judge SF geeks just remember not all fans are eccentrics and there are some in society who are worse than us.

So where does SF stand in the year 2003? Well, there is a serious slump if you believe the panelists. SF is still branded with the “all male” syndrome, although with this comment fresh in my mind I peered about the room and found that the small crowd in attendance was roughly fifty/fifty males and females. If anything there were slightly more females at the lecture – but this number was surely influenced by the fact that it comprised almost purely of English teachers, a field which - I am sure nobody would dispute – is lacking in male figures currently.

Science is more poetic than fantasy, indeed Peter Nichols claims it was the metaphysical poetry of the 20^th century. However with the success of television shows like Buffy and Charmed an interest in fantasy over sci-fi has lead to a slump in quality science fiction sales. Fantasy, which as a form is static and emphasises continuity, is usually concerned with the struggle between free-will and determinism (consider Buffy and her destiny as a Vampire-and-anything-else-that-moves Slayer), as opposed to science fiction which is dynamic, extrapolates science and embraces change. In other words science fiction moves boldly forward while fantasy shuffles reminiscently back. Fantasy and its resurgence is a surprising trend considering, as Damien Broderick pointed out, a large number of the top all-time earning films include SF classics such as Star Wars, ET, Jurassic Park, Independence Day, and of-course the current flavour of the month The Matrix.

Science Fiction has had its day in the sun, including its own renaissance in 1953 - argues Broderick - considering the number of excellent works published that year and the attention the genre garnered. In 1953 seminal works are published by the legends of SF including Arthur C. Clarke, Issac Assimov, Ray Bradbury and the recent “comeback king” Phillip K. Dick whose paranoia eventually led to a complete breakdown but whose prolific writing saw the publication of no less than 33 pieces in this year alone, many of which have made resurgences in recent times. The gritty rhelm of science clashed with the romanticised ideal of society often found in traditional melodrama resulting in monumental changes. Indeed his emphasis on monumental change is perhaps an exaggerated claim itself, comparisons to Wagner seem at first almost absurd, then simply over-zealous, then somehow charming as we hear of his obsession with SF beginning in early adolescence.

With a captive audience of English teachers, Peter Nichols could not help but address those in attendance on his views concerning the place of SF on student syllabi. Lamenting the selection of texts for this generation's year 12 booklist he was shocked to find that VCE studies could be succeeded without encountering a single traditional text. Perhaps a play by Shakespeare would raise its head somewhere along the way, but the study of traditional classics has been ransomed in favour of contemporary works of fiction, dumbed down for a modern audience and often dealing with current social and political issues. I wondered how long it had been since Nichols had actually taught in a classroom, if indeed he ever had, and I wrote in scribbled letters on my notepad that he had spent too many years in England where all things are neatly divided between Radical and Conservative lines.

The film Gatacca, as it turns out, sports the list of VCE texts this year, and I must say I've seen it and consider it quite a good film, especially in light of its examination of a society ruled by biological discrimination. Those who are genetically engineered towards physical and mental excellence are given preference of place in every imaginable circumstance in the society of the future where the characteristics of children are handpicked by their parents. I suspect Nichols' grievance was that if the examiners board was to allow science fiction on the syllabus at all why was such a poor example of it chosen? When there exists SF that examines the societal structures of times past and could easily be assimilated into academia, why should such “hackery” be accepted. Nichols view was that of a biased SF fan, a man who has researched in great depths the most profound science fiction writers of his time and understands completely their virtue, but I fear these works operate on levels above that of a year 12 classroom. The fact that Gatacca is a work of SF seems coincidental, a small allowance made by a pool of like minded individuals in an attempt to retain their students narrow attention span.

As Alison Goodman points out, when she was earning her education in creative writing any suggestion of writing to a genre was discouraged. The virtue of fiction lied in its broad appeal, yet Goodman wanted only to allow herself to be swept into the exciting sphere of compelling genre fiction, writing that could entertain, educate and excite its audience, whomever it should be. The attitude that SF or any form of genre fiction is unsuitable for scholarly education is an educational boondoggle. In a time when the television cameras of shows like Big Brother, Popstars and Survivor have turned their attention back onto the 90's “Slacker” audience, now a decade older, we see a lack of appreciation for modern society and understanding of the history that has fueled social progress. If nothing else literature appeals to the dark hearts of adults, exposing our own disturbing underbelly while dazzling our intellect, all this and more can be found in the better works of SF over the last fifty years and should be explored in our classrooms, says Nichols. The “pure” science fiction that thrived exactly fifty years ago in 1953 seems to have been ignored completely, pulled from our schools library shelves, punished for not meeting the interest means.

A century ago two great authors argued over the nature of fiction heading into the twentieth century. For twenty years they mailed letters back and forth each critiquing the other's style and literary approach. The authors were Henry James and H. G. Wells, and I shouldn't have to explain their literary feats. These intellectual heavyweights were heralded as trailblazers in contemporary discourse not only in their chosen fields. My point is that truly progressive educational strategies require both radical and conservative texts. Old-fashioned as it may seem students need to be taught texts from the left as well as the right, comparative analysis provides a richer understanding of dense social and political issues. And so there is no reason why science fiction, true science fiction and not sci-fi pulp, could not be taught in our classrooms. In a world becoming increasingly tech-literate it just makes good sense.

© 2003 R. W. Gordon. All rights reserved.