Sci-Fi and Fantasy Should Be One Single Genre: An Argument

Okay. I know what you’re saying. “Science fiction and fantasy are so different, what are you talking about?”, and I get it. I implore you to hear me out regardless.

This is a debate that I have been having with myself (and my roommate, who puts up with all of my pedantic debates) since I took a fantasy fiction class my sophomore year. What started out as a simple question of “What kind of literature will I be reading in this class?” quickly devolved into a realization that the line between science fiction and fantasy is less of a line and more of a… smudge. Various unpopular opinions in collections of “bookish hot takes” that sci-fi and fantasy should never be grouped together in bookstores and libraries because the two genres are far too different only added fuel to my fire. So, with that said, let’s get into the actual argument.

To begin, we need definitions for sci-fi and fantasy. As it turns out, that's easier said than done. A basic Google search of “What’s the difference between sci-fi and fantasy?” yields several different results, so let’s go through a few of them. One very common and very vague definition is content based. Sci-fi is all about space, aliens, and technology; fantasy is all about elves, strange creatures, and magic. This definition is, frankly, wrong. It’s incredibly limiting to define a genre based on vibes. Just because a piece of work takes place in space or has a bunch of strange creatures doesn’t define its genre. I will die on the hill that Star Wars isn’t sci-fi, it’s a space fantasy soap opera. The Force is a magic system, and everyone fights with magic swords fueled by rocks.

Something I see said a lot on the topic of sci-fi vs fantasy is that fantasy explores the impossible while sci-fi deals with what is humanly possible, no matter how improbable. On the surface, this seems like a fair comparison. However, I think sci-fi can be impossible. The first thing that comes to mind is The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams. That series is for sure 100% sci-fi, right? Yet, I would argue that ninety percent of that novel is straight up impossible. Sure, Adams calls it the Infinite Improbability Drive, not the Infinite Impossibility Drive; but most of the stuff that is does is more impossible than improbable. Despite this, I would be shocked to see anyone argue that The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is not a sci-fi comedy because of its lack of realism.

Another argument that I honestly like is that sci-fi is based in scientific fact while fantasy is not. This seemed like a fair definition to me at first. It’s very concrete, and it makes a lot of sense. However, this one falls apart pretty quickly. What do we do about books and movies that are clearly trying to be scientific, but all of their facts are wrong? I may not be a STEM major, but even I can tell if the science is questionable. I think of Christopher Nolan’s Inception. It definitely presents itself as scientifically sound, but the anti-gravity scene Joseph Gordon-Levitt is… less than scientific. Not to mention most of the dream stuff is a little absurd. On the other hand, what about a magic system that is based in actual science? I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility to have a character who can manipulate individual atoms. (Feel free to steal

the idea for your own writing). It’s both impossible magic and factual science. Let’s take the argument even further. When does magic stop being magic and instead become science? I mean, to my uneducated self, quantum physics seems like magic. But to a quantum physicist, it’s science. Most early human civilizations believed that the sun was a god instead of a flaming ball of gas in space; now, we know better. If the line between science and magic is based on personal perception, then so is the line between sci-fi and fantasy.

There is one more thing, one little wrinkle that, in my opinion, completely destroys the wall between science fiction and fantasy:

The superhero genre.

We can all agree that superheroes 1), are speculative fiction and 2), generally fall under the sci-fi/fantasy sphere (over something like horror or historical fiction). But, when it comes to a more specific categorization, things get interesting. I’ll use the Marvel universe as my example, although I imagine this would apply to nearly all superhero universes as a whole. On one hand, we have a superhero like Iron Man; genius billionaire who built a mech-suit from scratch. While not easy, there’s some level of possibility of a real-life Iron Man suit. Then, take Captain America. The super-solider serum, while improbable, is still presented scientifically. Or Antman, who deals in inconsistent quantum physics that really don’t make sense. On the other hand, we have Doctor Strange, who can create magic portals and guards a rock that can control time. To go a step further, there’s the actual literal Norse god Thor, who has a hammer that judges your “worthiness” and a shape-shifting Frost Giant brother. The full spectrum of sci-fi and fantasy is here, contained in one ever-growing cinematic universe. Trying to separate sci-fi and fantasy into two “starkly different” genres leaves the superhero genre high and dry without a place to go.

So, I propose that science fiction and fantasy should merge into one big genre instead of two genres sometimes forced to cohabitate. I would be okay with continuing to refer to is as sci-fi/fantasy, but if anyone has a better, more concise name, I’m all ears.

I do admit that this does leave a lack of specificity, especially in the realm of bookstores and libraries. The point of a book having a genre is so that a potential reader has a vague idea of what kind of book they are picking up. Therefore, in addition to my big genre merge, I also propose that books that fall under the sci-fi/fantasy genre should be labeled with a sliding scale, similar to the “sourness meters” you’d see on the back of some sour candies. On one end of the spectrum, you’d have books that are solidly sci-fi, like Andy Weir’s The Martian, and on the other, solid fantasy books, like The Lord of the Rings. Everything else, from unrealistic sci-fi, scientific fantasy, and whatever the deal with the superhero genre is, can be placed on the scale based on how fantastical or scientific it is. The same goes for movies, TV shows, and other various forms of speculative media. Frankly, this method is probably more descriptive than simply labeling something sci-fi or fantasy. Therefore, you all get a better way of understanding what you are reading or watching, and I get peace of mind from this pedantic debate. Win-win for everyone!