Do we need more optimistic science fiction?

Given the current state of affairs, should we create more hopeful science fiction, instead of the endless string of dystopian novels?

Given the current state of affairs, it takes a deft hand to create science fiction (with a future setting) that is hopeful without seeming painfully naïve. But there are various forms of "hope," I suppose.

Edited to add: Perhaps the most hopeful sf I've read published in the last decade is Staying with the Trouble.

Becky Chambers rather wonderful Long way to a small angry planet is what I'd call Cosy SF. Optimistic is perhaps not quite right, but there's this wonderful sense of togetherness, and a friendly family feeling between the very diverse crew that works very well. I'd certainly read more like that.

There's also the solarpunk stories which is based on the cyberpunk concepts, but with an ecological twist that generally seems much more positive than darkness cyberpunk tends to be set in. Many Solarpunk are still set in dystopia but they're looking up rather than down.

I would argue that most books do actually climb to an optimistic conclusion. However, having said that it's the same as the case I've heard people make for 'optimistic' news stories over the years. The simple fact is that doom and disaster sells. It really is usually more interesting in giving the reader something to root for and sympathise with.
There is always the option for sugary coated stories in some of the romance genre with everything always turning up roses for those that want it.

I also think that science fiction, as a genre, is supposed to be cautionary and inspiring. How many items in Ender's Game that was written in the 80s has come to fruition? But the message is definitely like "just because you can doesn't mean you should." Classics like Asimov are more heavy handed in their cautionary messages. I've always like the double edge sword, even in dystopia. This is what could happen and there are some cool parts, but it can also be super shitty so beware. If it makes you think, it did its job. And if you don't want to think, don't read the genre.

>5 KittyShields:
Although I totally agree that caution has it's place, I actually tend to find most dystopias rather unbelievable, and I have more faith in the slightly brighter views of the future. I guess I'm just an eternal optimist? A lot of dystopias seem to be created in order to send the reader a MESSAGE rather than as any sort of well thought out possibility of what may happen in the future. This may be one of the reasons I tend to shy away from dystopias as a concept (although not necessarily every story set in a dystopia.)

>4 Denscott:
I have noticed that doom and gloom do sell (although not, usually, to me) But I don't think that we need to have a dystopian setting in order to create enough conflict to be interesting.

>3 reading_fox:
Solarpunk sounds fascinating, I will have to check that tag to find me some new science fiction to read (now that I'm aparently able to read books again, finally.)

>2 paradoxosalpha:
I looked up Staying With the Trouble, it looks fascinating, but does it have a plot? If so, nobody seems to be saying anything about it in the reviews and so forth.

>1 TomReissmann:
As someone who has never been into dystopias much, my response to your question is 'Yes'. :)

But what positive trends or current mistakes fixed can we posit for the future?
I'm voting for universal personalized education, and universal basic living allowance.

But the plot fabulator in my head, as soon as I say something nice will probably happen immediately starts to come up with ways that even those nice things could be got around in order to create conflict. Scams involving identity theft to rob people of their allowance, and computer worms that rewrite educational modules to brainwash the youth. I could create dystopias easy if I wanted them. I just would rather assume that this sort of behavior is will individualistic and relatively rare, rather than the universal experience.

>6 LShelby:

The first and longer part of Staying with the Trouble is a bunch of essays about relationships between human and non-human life. The last part is a story with a four-century long plot (2025-2425).

>7 paradoxosalpha:
Aha! That would explain the direction of most of the commentary. Thanks!
(Pretty risky starting a plot in 2025, isn't it? Four years from now and your futuristic book is probably already out of date.)

I have just completed some very recent Science Fiction set in a dystopic future Taiwan: plague and pollution and corruption. All the usual evils. It was an okay book, but I'm kind of eager to try something else. Maybe with cool aliens?

>1 TomReissmann: That's exactly what I thought when I wrote my latest book!
There is a lot of apocalyptical science fiction for some reason. I've never been able to figure out why it's so predominant. When we escape from reality we want to escape to a depressing world? Yes, it makes good opportunities for drama and for changing the situation to make a happy ending. Still, not my favourite in any year, let alone the latest.

Though my first book (Earth and Beyond: MedSci Missions i) was fairly upbeat despite being based on an alien pandemic as the crisis that sent them to space, I made a point to put humour into book two (Ripped Genes: MedSci Missions 2). I went to some effort to put family jokes into a comedy skit a character performs in the spaceship's entertainment lounge. I had some help from an actor friend who studied it in school. (Thanks, Scott Brody). Other bits are, according to early reader reports, quite funny, which makes me happy. The book isn't a comedy but I think it's a feel good one.

>6 LShelby: LShelby
I agree dystopias often seem to be written to be tragic for the sake of it; ie horrific law in the future about spacing people for small crimes...really, they can't find a better way?
We've gone to the moon, put bots on Mars, made multiple functional vaccines in record time -- we can find ways to survive, and have some fun doing it.
It's not just dystopias that make too much effort to "send the reader a MESSAGE." It's great to have things to think about and debate, possibilities to spark the imagination, but even beloved Star Trek episodes made me gag a bit in places when they blatantly preached.

>2 paradoxosalpha: paradoxosalpha
I don't think it's naïve to write optimistic future science fiction. As you say, it's set in the future, which means the pandemic is over, and as a species we survived (which we are and will.) You might be also thinking of the climate situation, and yes, that's dire, but throughout history, we've overcome one disaster then another. Even if we humans die out, there would be some very happy cockroaches. The sub-species would battle it out for a while for dominance or survival, and eventually they would grown in size and walk the Earth. In the far future, they could evolve intelligence and build ships, planes... and heh heh, nuclear weapons. The cycle would start again. There will always be conflicts, but humans (or future cockroaches?) are just too fond of fun to live in a society bereft of it.

>3 reading_fox: reading_fox
Thanks for the recommendations! They sound good the way you describe them.

>4 Denscott: Denscott
There are many ways of giving the reader something to root for and sympathise with that doesn't have a depressing, desolate atmosphere throughout the bulk of the story. Personal tragedies, specific disastrous events...one needn't delve into the world of ludicrous romances with a few too many coincidental meetings and frustratingly bad choices made.

Many of us don't view sf as an escapist genre, at least at its best. It is instead exploratory, considering possible outcomes and alternatives to our present society.

Still, it's a legitimate beef to say that the naive optimism of much early sf has been latterly replaced by a hip pessimism.

>9 WendyGamble:
You have a good point there. In it's pure form, science fiction is not too far from real science. Most people, I've found, prefer a bit more fiction in their science fiction though.

>9 WendyGamble: "horrific law in the future about spacing people for small crimes...really, they can't find a better way?"

Exactly.

What always gets me is people saying that the depressing books are more "realistic" and that speak of optimism in a slighting way.

All over the world laws have been getting more reasonable, and more humane. Why is it "realistic" to assume the trend will reverse itself?

BTW, apparently optimists are generally happier, healthier and richer. There was some article telling me so earlier this week. "Oh, naivety, where is thy sting?"

>8 LShelby: "Many of us don't view sf as an escapist genre, at least at its best. It is instead exploratory, considering possible outcomes and alternatives to our present society."

I always consider thoughtful world-building a plus, but deliberately ignoring all positive societal trends in order to focus on just one or two negative ones, has never struck me as being all that clever.

Rather than dystopias, I prefer science fiction that depicts many different societies, each with their attendant strengths and weaknesses.

I remember when I was first reading Bujold's Shards of Honor I wasn't sure I was buying into the wonderfulness of the Betan culture, which at the start of the book was being depicted as the "civilized" and "good" culture. And then Bujold's story ran up hard against precisely the issue that I run into with "Betan" style thinking in real life, and it was a huge relief for me. The author wasn't expecting me to choose up sides. Instead both central cultures were depicted as being realistically flawed while still mostly holding together and working as intended.

We'll have to rename a bunch of sci-fi

Arrival: Making Buddies With Aliens
Blade Runner: The Adventures of Rickie Deckard: Scissors Runner
Dark City: Gotham City

Acquaintance in a Vaguely Familiar Land?
Small Hill of Sand?
I ChatGPT?
Right Hand of Dimness?

>14 LShelby: ???

As a speculative fiction author, my work is heavily influenced by classic works such as 1984 and Brave New World. Yet, I found the endings of both these books very depressing. The third book, Antunites Unite, in my recent trilogy, The Antunite Chronicles, is a dytopian work in the mold of these classics, but includes a group of spies that endeavor to take down the oppressive regime. That the story takes place on another planet, with non-human species also reduces its threatening nature, allowing readers to distance themselves from the potential dread, yet still see allegorically how current trends could lead to serious political problems.

>15 MythButton:
I thought it would be more fun if people had to figure out which SF Classic I was "optimisticizing".

>16 TBird58:
Awesome. That sounds like an another "optimistic" way to approach societal problems.

If you think about it, coming up with solutions is more important than just noticing problems. A book that does both, is a worthy addition to the sf genre.

...
Terry, just as a helpful hint, when discussing books in Talk, if you put square brackets around the title of the book, the system will do its best to create a link to that book, making it easier for your readers to check it out if they are unfamiliar with it. For series, use triple square brackets. After you do so, the result is:
The Antunite Chronicles

>17 LShelby: The first two are Stranger in a Strange Land and Dune, and then I Robot and Left Hand of Darkness.

>17 LShelby: It's not so obvious when you read my books, only when I talk about them.

>18 LShelby: Yes, it was fun to incorporate espionage into a dystopian fiction; not something you see too often. Also, the society involves red ants subjugating black and brown ants, something you see in nature (slave-maker ants); a little-known, freaky parallel to our world.

Oh, and thanks for the comment about the brackets, which I have now added.

>21 TBird58:
I knew about the ants, because I read your book blurbs. I found the natural tie-in totally cool. :)

I'm thinking about this, and Star Wars is an example of a story about a group of people taking out a distopic regime, but the solution seems a bit impractical. (Wait for the chosen one with awesome powers.) So I guess it's fair not to count it as great intellectual literature.

I just read a fantasy called The Hands of the Emperor where what sure sounded to me like a distopian regime had already fallen apart, and they were instituting government reform in order to create a new better world out of the rubble. It might count as great intellecual literature, but not as optimistic sf.

Can anyone think of examples of sf stories where a distopia is taken out of commission by practical means, rather than by a chosen one with super-powers?

The only special powers the ant spies in Antunites Unite have is the ability to change color (chameleants). That is how they infiltrate the ranks of the enemy, by changing color from black to red. Otherwise, it is all through their cunning and elaborate schemes that they take down the dystopian regime. Of course, ants on this far-off planet are intelligent and have evolved into human-size cyborgs, but both the spies and draconian leaders share these characteristics.