I'm interested in this hard science/soft science debate in terms of science
fiction, because I believe (as people have mentioned) science fiction
reflects a similar delineation in science.
Sarah Lefanu (great critic BTW) has discussed this polarity:
Soft mean[s] concerned with the new sciences such as psychology,
linguistics, ecology (and sociology and town planning), with a critique of
the uses of technology, and with the social structures of the future. Hard
SF was associated with the traditional male writer: soft, of course, was
what the women were" ("Sex, Sub-atomic Particles and Sociology" 179).
As Donna Haraway mentions in her writing, a hesitancy to stake claims on
male territory is indicative of stereotypical male/female roles in society,
where men control/create the mechanized and women are figured as purely
organic creators. The proliferation of ecologically and politically based
feminist utopias is often used as justification for such stereotypes, based
on the genre concept of "hard" and "soft" science fiction. In a world of
ever-increasing technology, such dualities must be negated by female
authorship without invalidating the feminist scholarship that has preceded
it. For centuries females have been dissuaded from choosing the "hard"
sciences (usually involving technology) like physics and astronomy, and in
a prejudiced scientific community often found a higher level of acceptance
in the "soft" sciences like sociology and psychology. A mimetic reflection
of this tendency can be found in scientific fictions, the science fiction
originally written for those interested in sciences. Unfortunately, the
bad is reflected with the good, and females have been excluded from the
respected arena of hard science fiction as a result. Feminist revisions of
what constitutes soft science fiction have been to the genre's benefit, but
the problem of synthesis still remains.
Whew. I hope that made sense. If we agree that the polarity itself
(hard/soft) is problematic, I guess we should take a look at women who
write "hard" science fiction. David mentioned Melissa Scott as a hard
science fiction writer. I would suggest Pat Cadigan for the same
reason-both women are part of the cyberpunk/post-cyberpunk genre. As
science fiction authors neither hesitate to use a level of technology often
associated with hard science fiction, yet as "cyberpunk writers"
(Cadigan's _Synners_ and Scott's _Trouble and Her Friends_) both use that
power in order to critique the technology (& rubrics of sexuality, etc)
itself. Their work often subverts stereotypes unlike writers like William
Gibson or Bruce Sterling (try _Islands in the Net_ as one example).
Tonya
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:06:07 PDT