In a message dated 98-03-01 10:31:56 EST, Dennis Fischer wrote>
<<Thanks, Lela, though my more subtle point was that Andrew complained that
genre conventions can made it difficult for readers to penetrate the meaning
of the text (thereby not making it reader friendly), while using unfamiliar
terms such as "jouissance." The problem I have with much contemporary academic
criticism is that it relies on terms that only an academic in that discipline
would know. (How many average readers would understand what
"deconstructionism" is, what Baktain's or Foucault's theories are, etc.)
Frankly, I find terms such as FTL (faster than light), hyperdrive,
neutron star, black hole, matter transmission, teleportation, psionics, etc.,
not too difficult to pick up even given my layman's grounding in science.>>
As I read it (and I hope he'll correct me if I'm wrong), Andrew wasn't
complaining that authors make it difficult to understand a text, but quite the
opposite, that by overusing the same tropes (FTL, matter transmission, etc.)
authors make it TOO easy for readers, that is, there is no challenge to
reading. It brings to mind an earlier list discussion about Star Wars and
Star Trek novels, where a few people who had written them noted that they were
REQUIRED to leave characters unchanged. As you mention, FTL, hyperdrive,
black hole, and dozens of other SF terms don't necessitate explanation or a
scientific background, precisely because in most of the stories in which they
operate, they have no scientific importantce. You don't have to understand
how an elevator works mechanically to know how it works practically. And
those terms are recognizable to you because you read SF. Walk up to someone
on the street and say FTL to them. They probably won't be able to tell you
what it means. You understand it because you are part of that discourse
community, and saying FTL is shorthand for "Faster than Lightspeed travel."
Similarly, using "deconstructionism" or "jouissance" is shorthand for a much
longer explanation (though I think Andrew provided plenty of context for his
use of the term). Oddly enough this discussion came up in my house yesterday.
My wife, a freelance illustrator, belongs to an illustrator's listserv, where
a discussion of the artist Rowena popped up. One list member asked for
clarification because she didn't know what this "SF&F" was that everyone was
talking about. On any list like this there are a wide range of readers, and I
don't think that we want to or need to be overly self-conscious about our
language. We can all learn from each other.
Craig Jacobsen
|