Najpre malo elaboracije oko te famozne spoznajne logike, tek da vidimo gde i kako nam se to razlikuju
:
Fiction is differentiated from other verbal structures by the presence of a fable, plot, or narrative, through which the writer endeavors to illuminate human relations to other people and the universe. Fiction, then, can be divided according to the manner in which men's relationships to other men and their surroundings are illuminated.
If this is accomplished by endeavoring faithfully to reproduce empirical textures and surfaces vouched for by human senses and common sense, I propose to call it
naturalistic fiction.
If, on the contrary, an endeavor is made to illuminate such relations by creating a radically or significantly different formal framework—a different space/time location or central figures for the fable, unverifiable by common sense—I propose to call it
estranged fiction.
The world of naturalistic fiction has thus a straightforward relationship to the "zero world" of empirically verifiable properties around the author. In naturalistic fiction, as in the zero world, physics stands in no significant relation to ethics. It is the activity of the protagonists, interacting with other equally unprivileged figures, that determines the course of narration and outcome of fable. In naturalistic fiction, the basic rule is that man's destiny is other humans and man-made institutions. In such a model, relating ethics to physics (Hollywoodian happy-end, say) signifies a descent into sentimentalism, into what is properly called sub-literature.
However, estranged fiction can quite legitimately postulate that circumstances around the hero—according to the basic "literary contract" making up a particular estranged genre— either are or are not passive and neutral.
One, larger group of estranged literary genres, which embraces various kinds of myths and their later descendants—fantasy and folktale—is indeed defined by a contract inverse to that of naturalistic fiction: their world is actively oriented toward the hero.
The folktale (Märchen, later fairy tale) world is oriented positively toward its protagonist; a folktale is defined by the hero's triumph: magic weapons and helpers are, with the necessary narrative retardations. at his beck and call.
Inversely, the fantasy world is oriented negatively toward its protagonist; a fantasy is defined by the hero's horrible helplessness. Both fantasy and folktale derive from mythology: the folktale from the victorious-hero myth and the fantasy from the tragic myth. Thus, in the folktale and the fantasy, ethics coincides with physics—positive (hero-furthering) in the first case, and (hero-denying) in the second. In the tragic myth ethics compensates the physics; Oedipus, Osiris or Christ have to fail because of the empirical world they live in, but the failure is then ethically exalted and put to religious use, usually by postulating a metaphysical world beyond the empirical one in which the narrative finds its true, compensatory ending. Parallel to that, in the "optimistic" myth of Perseus, Saint George and other light-bearing heroes, ethics not only coincides with hero-furthering physics but also supplies a systematic cosmosociological framework to normalize the coincidence.
The literary genres in which physics is in some magical or religious way determined by ethics, instead of being neutral toward the hero or the total human population of the presented world, deny the autonomy of physics and can properly be called
metaphysical.
But not all estranged genres enter into such a contract with their reader. Notably, the pastoral and SF worlds offer no assurances as to the outcome of their protagonists' endeavors.
Together with some prefigurations in the pastoral, SF is thus a metaempirical and non-naturalistic, that is, an estranged, literary genre which is not at the same time metaphysical. On the contrary, SF shares with naturalistic literature, naturalistic science, and naturalistic or materialist philosophy a common sophisticated, dialectical, and cognitive epistemé.The genological system discussed above can be presented schematically by using the two parameters or binary oppositions of naturalistic/estranged, and cognitive/noncognitive:
(a kako ne mogu da skinem sam dijagram, ovde ga samo prekucavam:)
NATURALISTIC ESTRANGED COGNITIVE "realistic" literature SF (& pastoral)
NONCOGNITIVE sub-literature of "realism" metaphysical: myth, folktale, fantasy
Ovim želim da naglasim kako se prepoznavanju SFa može prići na najmanje dva, podjednako efikasna načina: prvi je da prosto prepoznamo
kad je i zašto neka proza SF. Drugi je da prepoznamo kad i zašto neka proza naprosto
ne može da bude SF.
Otud, kako ne uspevam u 'dokazivanju negativa', odnosno, kako ne uspevam da ti kristalno jasno ukažem šta to „Jeci“ konkretno
fali pa da zbog toga nije SF, ja se trudim da paralelno dokazujem šta to „Jeka“ zapravo
ima pa zbog toga ne može da bude SF. Jer, kao što vidiš, definicija ne dozvoljava overlap: ako je nešto fentezi onda ne može da bude SF, ma kako se tebi činilo da jeste. Isto tako, ako je nešto nekognitivna proza, onda ne može da bude SF, ma kako se tebi činilo da je spoznajna.
(btw, ovo je iz Metamorfoza, ne znam koja strana ali moj reader to locira na nekih 7% unutar same knjige... )
