Steampunk Reprised
On November 18 I discussed whether steampunk was the next genre wave and Joff’s comment included a link to a blogpost by Charles Stross, critiquing the subgenre.
Leviathan author Scott Westerfeld riposted with the following post (interestingly titled “Genre Cooties!”):
” … But then I come home to discover that the internet got stupid while I was gone. And not just regular internet stupid about cats or politics, but stupid about steampunk!
Perhaps the prime example is this post from the normally incisive Charles Stross, surely the most banal thing he’s ever typed. I mean, pointing out that the Victorian era was imperialistic? Racist? Sexist? Had lousy labor laws and no class mobility? Like no one in the steampunk world was considering this?
News flash: the online world of steampunk is constantly engaged in exactly those issues …”
The rest of Westerfeld’s post is here.
So what do you think? Are you in Camp Stross or Camp Westerfeld? For steampunk or against? Or bivouacked somewhere in no-man’s-land?
Put me down for team Westerfield. There is plenty of social commentary in the steam punk I have read. “The Difference Engine” by Bruce Stirling and William Gibson springs directly to mind here.
I am inclined to be more in the Westerfeld camp myself, simply because I feel one could level the Stross critique at almost any form of fiction that is not unrelentingly realistic—and I can’t help feeling that there is a place for fun and adventure in story without necessarily delving into every aspect of socio-political realism in the surrounding world.
Um… wow. Writer vitriole: Check.
I’ve decided not to choose a side in case Westerfield out-writes me in blogland.
Cool discussion though. Might have to run out and get me some steampunk so I can decide.
Choosing to bivouack in no-man’s-land is always a valid option, although one does sometimes have to watch out for the shells exploding overhead. 🙂 But there’s nothing like a bit of writerly biffo to get people talking! Steampunk I would recommend to get a ‘taste’ includes—always!—Girl Genius Online, Scott Westerfeld’s Leviathan, Cherie Priest’s Boneshaker, Stirling and Gibson’s The Difference Engine (mentioned in Andrew’s comment) and Tim Powers’ The Anubis Gates.
Hm, by the ‘against’ logic no one should ever write fantasy inspired by the Middle Ages, because, *gasp* it was a racist, sexist, crusaderist, witchesburntatstake-ist era! Never mind that these facts give grist for the story mill… and that in fantasy, unlike history-textbook writing, we’re allowed to mess around with the ‘facts,’ change and develop our worlds differently if we see fit. Lord love it.
I’ve always seen steampunk as an opportunity to take the aesthetic/mindset/technology of the Victorian era and use it to explore very modern preoccupations… like all good science fiction or fantasy can do.
Yes, the whole point about dealing with “the fantastic” seems to have got a bit lost in the mix, otherwise one would be writing historical fiction, or even more likely, historical non fiction …
Ah Steampunk. Got to love it. Also gotta say hate bandwagons. Unless there’s something in the story that’s fresh and new – why bother? Might as well write Romance — Or say that all Romance is the same.
Maybe fiction is a bandwagon too?
Steampunk with romance? After all, Girl Genius: Romance, Adventure, Mad Science! Gotta love it all! 🙂