January journal: science fiction periodization

[ursula]

glowingfish asked:

The Golden Age of published science-fiction was more or less from 1955 to 1975 (lets say). Why did it end when it did? Do you think that science-fiction (or fantasy) published after 1975 was different, or do you just think it had less ability to become part of the "canon"?

This is really non-standard periodization! Wikipedia has the Golden Age of science fiction starting in the late 1930s, in connection with sci-fi magazine publishing history; the end of your period is solidly New Wave.

The counter-argument is the aphorism that the Golden Age of science fiction is twelve; by that rule, it's interesting to think about who was twelve in 1955-1975, or whatever guidelines you want to pick, and what influence they might have had on defining a canon, once they reached their twenties or thirties. The people who were twelve between 1955 and 1975 were mostly baby boomers, in the standard US generational framework; that was my parents' generation (and glowingfish's parents', I'm guessing), and it makes sense that the stories they considered formative would seem quasi-canonized to our generation.

Comments

[foxmoth]

Yes, I was about to ask where that periodization was from not because it's bad but because it doesn't match the terminology I grew up with. :D

[glowingfish]

I think I was basing it on the years when Ace Doubles were published, which I consider to be the zenith of science-fiction! :)

[foxmoth]

I've read some Ace Doubles over the years (picked up very secondhand ahahaha) and they ARE excellent! :D

[glowingfish]

I had read some, as well. Mostly picking them up over the years for cheesy fun!

Then, one day in early 2022, my local bookstore was closing, which was sad. But wasn't sad was the liquidation sale, which started out at 25%, and proceeded down to 75% off. There was an entire shelf of Ace Doubles, and by the time they reached 75% off, they were selling for less than a dollar each. I ended up buying over 30 volumes (60 titles) just during that sale, and I had some others as well. So anyway, feel free to ask me anything about Ace Doubles! :)

(NB: I also bought lots of other books during that sale, not just the Ace Doubles).

[glowingfish]

I guess the reason why I chose those years was because those were the years that novels are still read from.
Like, I know that the period before 1950 was famous for being an exploratory period that was full of formative works, and that the "ray gun and rocket ship" era was important, but...how many science-fiction novels before 1950 are still read today? How many of those pulp authors are regularly read, outside of people who are academically interested?

But also, I can see why the pulp era would be called the "Golden Age", because even though it is not the best, it is the most formative, similar to comic books, where the Golden Age is 1938-1955, even though comics were probably at their height from 1960 to 1975.

[davidgillon]

The counter-argument is the aphorism that the Golden Age of science fiction is twelve; by that rule, it's interesting to think about who was twelve in 1955-1975

Meeee!! Just ;)

OTOH, I think I'm disqualified from the argument because I'd argue SF got much better much later, so never really considered the Golden Age, whether 30s or 55-75, to be all that Golden

I did see an interesting suggestion this week that we trailing edge Boomers are a separate cultural group (Generation Jones) because we missed the whole hippie/Vietnam thing.

OTOH 55-75 would give you Asimov, Heinlein and Clarke at their peak, which would influence a lot of vocal 'classic SF' fans to argue for that period as their Golden Age.

[ursula]

I'm on the other side of the Gen X generational cusp from you! I like the "Oregon Trail" label.