小说与文学2019slate.com
我们的科幻出了什么问题：为何走不出赛博朋克？
Something Is Broken in Our Science Fiction. Why Can’t We Move Past Cyberpunk?
导读
这篇文章追问：科幻为何仍难以走出赛博朋克的想象框架，并讨论“hopepunk/solarpunk”等替代方向是否真能带来新的未来叙事。对写作者来说，它值得读的地方在于：类型创新不只是换美学标签，更关乎如何检验旧假设、建构替代世界，并讲出有方向感的故事。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
不要只把类型写作当成“励志宣传”：作品的价值不取决于它能否让读者更乐观，而取决于它是否把世界讲得准确、有趣、有洞见。
- 02
类型创新往往是演化而非断裂：可以在既有类型上叠加新变量（如真实 AI、后稀缺社会、意识克隆），但要让这些变量改变人物处境和权力结构。
- 03
批判旧范式之后，还要给出替代设想：先找出当下社会与技术秩序中的错误假设，再设计反事实、抵达路径和“为何要去”的动机地图。
- 04
作品的黏性常来自“说对了很多事”和强美学，也受产业偏爱续作/重启的影响；写作者要警惕被安全投资逻辑牵着走。
HN 评论精选
赛博朋克的生命力来自预言力和美学/产业逻辑；把科幻当励志宣传是错位。
文章的整体前提和“hopepunk”的前提一样自欺。赛博朋克之所以黏人，是因为它很多事都说对了：政治、经济、社会预测和吸引人的美学；技术上它成了一个替代性的当下——我们走向了 VR 而不是智能手机，走向私人军事承包商而不是战略媒体战。说科幻“坏了”，或推销那种“ thoughts-and-prayers-punk”垃圾，等于采取 Bannon 的观点：政治是文化的下游，类型小说的价值要用它作为 motivational propaganda 的价值来衡量。另一个原因是它已是成熟类型，媒体公司知道成熟类型投资更安全（最好的投资：人们已经喜欢的东西的重启/续集）。
freshhawk查看英文原文
The whole premise of this piece is the same as the deluded "hopepunk" premise. Cyberpunk is sticky because it got so many things right. Both in terms of political/economic/social predictions and in terms of an attractive aesthetic. And technologically it is now an alternate present where we went with VR instead of smartphones and private military commandos instead of strategic media campaigns. Saying that SF is "broken" because of this, or pushing thoughts-and-prayers-punk trash, is taking the Bannon view that "politics is downstream from culture". That the worth of a genre of fiction is measured by its value as motivational propaganda. I wonder what sub-genre of SF has something to say about the people who are pushing "consume this corporate media that makes you feel happy and hopeful instead of angry" as a response to social problems? Of course the other reason for cyberpunk's staying power is that it is an established genre and media companies know how that established genres are safer investments (best investment: reboot/sequel to something people already like). I wonder what sub-genre of SF had a lot to say about the result of corporate/economic influences on popular art? Gee, what a mystery.
科幻已超越赛博朋克，类型创新多是既有观念上的演化。
我很困惑，现代科幻早已远远超出赛博朋克。它会考虑真正的人工智能对世界意味着什么，后稀缺社会可能是什么样，或者向其后稀缺社会过渡会有多可怕/痛苦——因为当前掌权者会尽一切努力维持对世界的控制。现代科幻描写人可以把自己的意识克隆 50 次、可以调整时间感知、计划要上千年才实现的世界。例子有 Charles Stross 的《Accelerando》、Tony Ballantyne 的《Recursion》、Cory Doctorow 的《Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom》。是的，这些都是旧观念的演化，但科幻一直是在自身基础上搭建的。
com2kid查看英文原文
I am confused, modern Science Fiction has gone way beyond Cyberpunk. It takes into consideration what having real AI might mean for the world, or what a post-scarcity society might look like, or how horrible/painful the transition to that post scarcity society might be, as all the current holders of power do everything they can to maintain their grip on the world. Modern science fiction describes worlds where people can clone their consciousness 50 times over, where it is possible to adjust the perception of time, and where plans take millennia to come to fruition. Accelerando by Charles Stross. Recursion by Tony Ballantyne. Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom by Cory Doctorow. Yes, these are all evolutions of previous ideas, but Science Fiction has always built on itself.
把《雪崩》当作赛博朋克例子不算错，戏仿与类型归属本身有争议。
需要引证。虽然这在类型粉丝中仍有公开争论，但我不认为 Stephenson 说过它是戏仿？不管是不是有意戏仿，我觉得它把很多观念纳入其中，也遵循了该类型的精神。把它当作该类型的例子并不算错。
Cpoll查看英文原文
> By 1992, they could be hilariously parodied by Neal Stephenson in Snow Crash (a novel often mistaken as an example of the subgenre it meant to mock). Citation needed. While this is under open debate amongst fans of the genre, I don't think Stephenson has stated it's a parody? And deliberate parody or not, I feel it brings a lot of ideas into the fold and observes the spirit of the genre. It's not a mistake to cite it as an example of the genre.
替代未来不能只靠批判，要找出错误假设的反事实并讲出有方向的故事。
说个极有个人偏见的观点：因为科学、政治和哲学还没有超越那些让赛博朋克看起来像可信未来愿景的假设。你不能只靠“行动主义科幻”在政治上解决这个问题。你得真正找出我们当下社会与技术秩序中哪些科学和哲学基石是错误假设，并想办法让它们接受质疑和推想。然后你还得把这一切讲成一个有趣的故事！我常发现，许多试图“批判”我们社会秩序的人没有迈出关键一步：追问他们所批判的错误假设的反事实是什么。他们以为只要批判，就能打开一片广阔的未开发技术—社会可能性。不，一旦你抓住了方向盘，你仍然需要有方向可开、有到达那里的地图，以及一张说明你为什么想去那里的地图。
eli_gottlieb查看英文原文
To give my extremely opinionated opinion: because science, politics, and philosophy haven't advanced past the assumptions that made cyberpunk look like a plausible vision of the future. And you can't necessarily just solve this "politically" with "activist scifi". You have to actually figure out which scientific and philosophical foundation-stones of our present social and technological orders are false assumptions, and figure out how to open them to question and speculation. Then you have to tell an interesting story about it all! (I often find that many of the people trying to "critique" our social order haven't taken that essential step of asking what the counterfactuals are to the false assumptions they critique. They think just by criticizing, you open some vast untapped field of techno-social possibilities. Nah, once you've grabbed the steering wheel, you still need to have somewhere to steer towards, a map of how to get there, and a map of why you want to go there.)
同类还值得读
乔治·奥威尔1940年对《我的奋斗》的书评
George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf
这是奥威尔 1940 年对《我的奋斗》的书评，他没有简单谴责，而是认真分析希特勒的宣传手法为何奏效、又暴露了哪些思维特征。
小说与文学2022 · 499 分 · 545 评4 条写作要点编辑精选我们都是极客：尼尔·斯蒂芬森的文学作品
We are all nerds: The literary works of Neal Stephenson
这是一篇讨论 Neal Stephenson 科幻小说的文章，评论区读者围绕《Anathem》《钻石年代》《Snow Crash》等作品，聊世界构建、结尾处理和写作风格的变化。
小说与文学2022 · 307 分 · 220 评4 条写作要点编辑精选又一部我不会再去写的小说
Yet another novel I will no longer write
科幻作家 Charles Stross 讲述自己为何放弃一部已经构思好的小说：COVID-19 疫情让他的病毒灾难设定显得多余，现实给所有人上了一堂生动的疫情应对课。
小说与文学2020 · 304 分 · 169 评4 条写作要点编辑精选用图画写作：理查德·斯卡里与儿童文学的艺术
Writing in Pictures: Richard Scarry and the art of children's literature
这是《耶鲁评论》上漫画家 Chris Ware 写的文章，分析童书作家 Richard Scarry 如何用图画而不是文字来讲故事。
小说与文学2024 · 297 分 · 131 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何写一部小说
How to Write a Novel
这篇来自 The Millions 的文章讨论写小说的两种路径——“计划派”（planners）与“即兴派”（pantsers，即“跟着感觉走、边写边编”）。
小说与文学2016 · 238 分 · 112 评4 条写作要点编辑精选