In sci-fi circles, one of the big arguments you’ll find is between hard and soft sci fi fans. Hard describing sci-fi deeply rooted in traditional sciences, attempting to be semi-realistic. Soft describing sci-fi that doesn’t often resemble a realistic, or even plausible, future.
One will often find a tone of superiority to those who favour hard sci-fi. They often claim soft sci-fi isn’t really science-fiction, it’s just fiction. That without the use of plausible science, there’s nothing scientific about it.
They’re right.
Soft science fiction is nothing more than Frodo travelling across the Mordor system to throw the one antimatter ring into the Star of Doom. It’s fantasy, set in spaceships or skyscraper filled landscapes.
And, done well, that can be incredible.
Dune is soft sci-fi, and an absolute classic of the genre. While I’m incredibly nervous about the upcoming film (God, please don’t let them GoT it), I’m still going to see it. But I won’t be going with my fingers crossed for some lengthy, detailed spice explanation scenes. The pot that the space wizards use to fly spaceships doesn’t interest me.
What interests me are the characters. The betrayal. The romance. The struggle between right and wrong, and the fight for vengeance. I don’t care if they travel through space with drugs, or by saying Muad-dib three times while spinning in a circle.
On the other hand, there’s nothing about hard sci-fi that prevents it from telling an equally compelling story. The Expanse book series has a pretty high bar for it’s vision of the future. No artificial gravity, the complicated use of acceleration to travel from Mars to Earth.
But the characters are still compelling. The small family that’s born of fire aboard the Rocinante are full of their charms and quirks, but also complicated relationships, and compelling character motivations. Naomi may come up with bizarre thrust based plans using rail gun physics that honestly illude me, but her relationship with Jim is sweet and realistically complicated.
There’s nothing superior about hard sci-fi. It’s a different sub-genre. Nothing more or less. If you want to read a book filled with intricate details about how a ringworld might be constructed around an alien star, terrific. That’s brilliant. But in the same way some find military sci-fi a tad boring (My goodness. The lieutenant is incompetant and the sergeant is going to have to save the day? Shocker) many people don’t want to read through specific details of how the ship’s engine works.
People read for different things. Character. Story. Twists. Ideas. Writing around any of these things is as viable as any of the others.
Soft sci fi has strengths. Room to focus on character and plot over satellite positioning. It also has weaknesses. A tendency to stray from a credible suspension of disbelief, and one too many saucy alien lady friends.
But both have their audiences. So be prepared to give either a go, and don’t dismiss soft sci-fi off hand because “It’s not sciency enough”.
*It’s worth noting that these terms have better definitions, but on amateur platforms such as Reddit, this is what they’re often used for
The Fellowship Of Ink 