SF: The Other Side of Realism ed. by Thomas Clareson (review)

SF: THE OTHER SIDE OF REALISM EDITED BY THOMAS CLARESON (Bowling Green: Bowling Green University Popular Press, 1971. 356 pages, $4.00) Thomas Clareson has been for many years the editor of Extrapolation, at first the newsletter for the MLA seminar on science fiction, then increasinglythe preeminentjournalfor SFcriticism among the scholarly ranks. Thefirst ten volumes ofExtrapolation were themselves reprinted; SF: The Other Side ofRealism is Clareson's attempt to gather some ofthe best essays from his own publication and others together with previously unpublished essays from the MLA seminars in a book apparently designed for both scholars and students of science fiction. The task ofediting such a collection of sfessays is difficultfortwo reasons. First, defining the field involves a rabid political and aesthetic controversy. Literary"mainstreamers" (often butnot always scholars) assert that sf is, and since the inception of fiction always has been, a legitimate genre ofthe art, and that only quirks of cultural and publishing history have retarded or isolated its aesthetic development. SF "isolationists" (often but not always sfpractitionersandfans) seem to feel that sfasan artform isperhaps the mostviablefictionalformat available inatechnological age and may ultimately replace the effete realism ofmainstream literature. Clareson has done an excellentjob ofbalancingthese perspectives in hiscollection, though his ownpointofview, clearly demonstrated in his title essay, is that sfis a mainstream fictional style, like French Symbolism of the last century, which "may provide writers ofthe late twentieth centurywith thevehicle that has the greatest freedom to seek for metaphors that can speak to the condition of man." His own historical survey of the species, with Judith Merrill's historical and aesthetic survey, and Rudolf Schmerl's and Samuel Delaney's aesthetic discussions, provides excellent background for the definition of sf and its aesthetics; unfortunately, several similar essays seem either repetitious (Lionel Stevenson's and Mark Hillegas's) or ill-considered (Michael Butor's and Norman Spinrad 's), and these could easily be eliminated from the text. The second major difficulty in editing a collection of sfessays is that the critical explosion in this field over the past fifteen years often reduces today's best effort to obsolesence in a matter of months. AU ofthe essays in this volume are at least nine years old and some are much older. For instance, Richard Hodgen's essay, "A Short Tragical History ofthe Science Fiction Film"(1959), was written before 2001, Silent Running, THX 1138, and a number of other fairly good science fiction films revolutionized both the content and the cinematic quality of the genre in the late 1960s. This reduces the scope and significance of Hodgen's conclusions considerably. Furthermore , there have been a variety of fairly solid publications on sf film in the past two years. There are a number of valuable treatments of individual sf works which can be expected to wear better than Hodgen's film essay, and there are several interesting theoretical and historical discussions in the book that are of enduring importance, but SF: The Other Side of Realism would undoubtedly benefit from extensive re-editing ifitis to function as ausable text rather than as merely an historical monument already greying with dust. MARK SIEGEL* •MARK SIEGEL teaches contemporary literature, film, and popular culture at the University of Wyoming and has a number of publications in those areas. 84VOL. 33, NO. 2 (SPRING 1979) ...