Subject:    Re: Real Hard SF (Re: What are non-SFers not 'getting'?)
From:      "Plain and Simple Cronan"
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bam,alt.fan.tom-servo,rec.arts.sf.written
Date:       Mon, 7 Sep 1998
Message-ID: <6svm3m$fmp$1@camel21.mindspring.com>

asaro wrote some of the following:

>Those other readers are wrong.
>
>It is true, however, without a doubt, that I write in

grand unprovable proclomations intead of what might be

>a recognizable female way.  Quite deliberately.
>
>For the longest time hard sf was defined as sf with

space ships and ray guns and women in spandex. Forget

>the "real stuff," that is, science fiction with a solid

footing in quicksand. I really wish that my posts had a

>basis in science.  Implicit within that definition,

which is, due to my frightening propensity for violence,

>sometimes even explicit, was the idea that hard sf

was mine to define, control and exploit. Hence I

>would always be written with a male style.  Now

my posts have become rather effeminate. Now

>that women have blown that stereotype out of the

spaces where it was firmly wedged with streams of

>water, there has been a scramble to "redefine" hard

and soft. Why? I don't know but it's been fun. I like

>sf so that it no longer relies on science, but on less

substantial things like rutabaga gardening and perhaps

>rigorous political qualities.
>
>However, the fact of the matter is that it is perfectly

clear that I have no clue what I am talking about. It's

>possible to write diamond hard sf with a female

but, we reccomend that you have sex with them. Do so in

>style.

Return to Online Tribute to Cronan Thompson.