The Penman Writes In

It's nice to know that even noted local mainstream fiction writer Butch Dalisay reads science-fiction.

In his article last Monday in the Star (read it quick before it goes away!-- or check out his blog), Dalisay mentions growing up reading Ray Bradbury, the Tom Swift books and Edgar Rice Burroughs' John Carter of Mars books. This is quite surprising considering his reputation as one of the vanguards of local social-realist literature, which in turn has...

...earned me a reputation for being anti-sci-fi or anti-fantasy, which just isn’t true. As a kid, I devoured science fiction, or what there was of it in the 1960s. I was particularly enamored of the Martian series of Edgar Rice Burroughs (yup, the very same one who would create Tarzan in 1912 a year after he introduced John Carter, a Confederate Army captain who, a Burroughs website notes, “is whisked to Mars and discovers a dying world of dry ocean beds where giant four-armed barbarians rule, of crumbling cities home to an advanced but decaying civilization, a world of strange feasts and savage combat, a world where love, honor and loyalty become the stuff of adventure…. Without Burroughs there probably never would have been Star Wars!”).

Of course though he says he didn't get into fantasy, most of the authors he mentioned weren't what you would call "hard SF" writers (Cordwainer Smith? Alfred Bester? Help me out here, folks). But either way, it's all good as Bradbury-- despite his use of the magical in his stories-- is considered an American literary icon. On the other hand, that Burroughs' stuff is considered a Classic (with a capital C like Literature goes around with a capital L) cannot be denied.

It's also good to know that he's approving of Dean's Philippine Speculative Fiction (Volume 1). As he mentions, he says that his problem with some of science-fiction (and thus, speculative fiction) that he's come across is that the stories can be "too plainly derivative, unimaginative, juvenile, and even downright incredible." He adds:

Of course you can say that as well for many drafts of realist stories I get in class, but I tend to expect more from speculative fiction, precisely because it’s pushing the horizons of the possible.

The strain often shows in stories that spend an awful amount of time and detail on “worlding” or the creation of new life-forms, societies (utopian or dystopian), social rules, and technical gadgetry without paying enough attention to the human drama at the very core of things. Secondly, as though flustered by our scientific and economic backwardness, some authors have chosen to deny our realities altogether, fast-forwarding into the distant future and bleeding nearly everything Filipino out of their stories.

To this I’ve responded with a challenge that my students have coming out of their ears: write me a marvelous, credible sci-fi or fantasy story that takes place, say, at a Jollibee outlet in Cubao. In other words, turn everyday grime into fairy dust. (italics mine)

I presume that mainstream literature has the same argument that Dalisay has against SF (and speculative fiction) though at the least he's more open to the idea of putting in the fantastical in stories-- and not just as a component in magic realism.

And to the two points, I agree: if we are to write about the fantastic, we must: (1) push the boundaries of imagination of our readers, i.e. the "wow!" or "motherfucker!" factor; and (2) we must never forget that these are stories about people, whether they are human beings, artificial intelligence, methane-breathing aliens, elves or talking dragons. We must-- for want for a better word-- read about the human touch in these stories.

In other words, to rephrase Dalisay's words (though who am I do such a thing?), we must bring back the wonder in our mundane human world. Anything else is mediocrity that would only compound our dull, dreary lives.

(Thanks to Andrew Drilon for the heads up on this one!)