The Martian: Hard or Soft Science Fiction? A popular interest among science lovers today is an interest in Mars, possibly because we are becoming much closer to being able to send people there. One of the most popular, and most recent, works regarding Mars is The Martian, a novel by Andy Weir that later was adapted to film by Ridley Scott. The main story is that astronaut and botanist, Mark Watney, is abandoned on Mars by his crew after being struck by flying debris in a large sandstorm. There, he must figure out how to survive on Mars with limited supplies until a rescue mission can make it back to him. There are many bumps along the way such as communicating with people so they know he is alive, figuring out how to grow food, fixing broken
…show more content…
In Gary Westfahl’s article “’The Closely Reasoned Technological Story’: The Critical History of Hard Science Fiction” for Science Fiction Studies, he examines this difference as well as some other sub-categories. First, he concluded that “the term probably stems from the expression ‘hard science,’” but also mentioned that it could also mean that these types of factual stories filled with scientific detail, “were difficult to read, especially for readers who lacked a background in science” (Westfahl 160). However, David N. Samuelson counters this by mentioning how some literary critics say the term hard science fiction “derives the label from ‘hard to read,’ because it is badly written” (Samuelson 145). With the quality of the works being ignored, both authors seem to agree that the main goal of hard science fiction is “not to make any errors” (Westfahl 162) in regards to the scientific fact, or as Samuelson describes it as science fiction in which “scientific theories and technological applications get a significant share of attention” (Samuelson 145). On the other hand, there is soft science fiction, which Westfahl also describes in his article, saying it is a “’not very precise term…generally applied either to SF which deals with soft sciences, or to SF which does not deal with recognizable science at all, but emphasizes human …show more content…
In an interview for Science with the main people involved with the film, Andy Weir, the author, Ridley Scott, the director, and Jim Green, the film’s NASA consultant, they all mentioned wanting to follow the facts of the movie, so it is safe to conclude that they believe they created hard science fiction. For instance, Weir mentions that “it really takes me out of a story when there’s some blatant error, and I didn’t want that to happen to my readers” (Sachdev). He also says, in another interview for IEEE Spectrum, Weir mentions how he “would always start with the science and work forward to the plot” (The Man behind the Martian). Scott, the director, also mentions in many different ways that the film is “all as accurate as we can possibly get,” that he “never shoot[s] anything for movie magic,” and even asks for help from Weir and Green to make sure that it was as factual as possible (Sachdev). Understanding the thoughts of these men help to provide background to whether or not this is hard or soft science fiction. These interviews provide good evidence that it would be hard science fiction, but the facts of The Martian must still be looked
In Gary Westfahl’s article “’The Closely Reasoned Technological Story’: The Critical History of Hard Science Fiction” for Science Fiction Studies, he examines this difference as well as some other sub-categories. First, he concluded that “the term probably stems from the expression ‘hard science,’” but also mentioned that it could also mean that these types of factual stories filled with scientific detail, “were difficult to read, especially for readers who lacked a background in science” (Westfahl 160). However, David N. Samuelson counters this by mentioning how some literary critics say the term hard science fiction “derives the label from ‘hard to read,’ because it is badly written” (Samuelson 145). With the quality of the works being ignored, both authors seem to agree that the main goal of hard science fiction is “not to make any errors” (Westfahl 162) in regards to the scientific fact, or as Samuelson describes it as science fiction in which “scientific theories and technological applications get a significant share of attention” (Samuelson 145). On the other hand, there is soft science fiction, which Westfahl also describes in his article, saying it is a “’not very precise term…generally applied either to SF which deals with soft sciences, or to SF which does not deal with recognizable science at all, but emphasizes human …show more content…
In an interview for Science with the main people involved with the film, Andy Weir, the author, Ridley Scott, the director, and Jim Green, the film’s NASA consultant, they all mentioned wanting to follow the facts of the movie, so it is safe to conclude that they believe they created hard science fiction. For instance, Weir mentions that “it really takes me out of a story when there’s some blatant error, and I didn’t want that to happen to my readers” (Sachdev). He also says, in another interview for IEEE Spectrum, Weir mentions how he “would always start with the science and work forward to the plot” (The Man behind the Martian). Scott, the director, also mentions in many different ways that the film is “all as accurate as we can possibly get,” that he “never shoot[s] anything for movie magic,” and even asks for help from Weir and Green to make sure that it was as factual as possible (Sachdev). Understanding the thoughts of these men help to provide background to whether or not this is hard or soft science fiction. These interviews provide good evidence that it would be hard science fiction, but the facts of The Martian must still be looked