I also pronounce it that way. Always have. And much as I try to use the field-approved "SF," my brain won't do it.

Barely related note: an ancient Richie Rich comic I once read, revolved around our hero wanting to make a movie (obviously riffing on Star Wars) and selling it to his backers with the catchphrase: "It's not Sci-Fi, it's Sci-FUN."

Why does Richie Rich need backers?

I just like science fiction. Or SF.

"Sci fi" reminds me of the Sci-Fi Channel, which plays pretty much the worst shit I've ever surfed past.

But that's just me...

Mike, not just you. I've had too many people disrespectful to genre use "sci-fi" as a derogatory term in my presence for me not to cringe.

For me it is science fiction or SF or speculative fiction or Skiffy.

Never "sci-fi."

Sorry, David... :-)

Why does Richie Rich need backers?

Rule #1 of filmmaking is OPM, other people's money.

You don't get to be Richie Rich by writing a lot of checks, ya know.

I've always hated "skiffy". It feels too in-joke aren't-we-clever. The problem with sci-fi, though, is that you get otherwise talented and charming people going around saying "li-fi" for literary fiction, as the parallel. Which is part of why I've tended to stick with spec-fic, so that I can say lit-fic in those inevitable genre conversations.

Nick speaks wisdom of the real world; in the comic, I believe the person in question was just someone for our hero to talk to. After all, why come up with a slogan if you can't tell it to someone?

I tend to call it "skiffle" and never leave home without my cigar-box fiddle.

Good point, Nick.

See, Vera, I guess I don’t hang out in the right circles to hear people slagging sci-fi. Mostly I hear the word from well-meaning friends and family who don’t know any better — including plenty of people I would have called fans before I found out about fandom. Hell, I used it myself till I started attending conventions. As for the people who are slagging it, though, they’d slag it whatever it was called. I don’t want my speech to be hostage to their opinions.

I was indoctrinated at a very early age with the "sci-fi is a derogatory term used by mundanes" idea and the "sci-fi is what we affectionately call so-bad-it's-good pulpy or campy stuff, especially '50s movies" idea, so I have a hard time thinking of sci-fi as a generic synonym for "science fiction."

However, last time this came up I learned that there are a lot of people (especially in the under-25 crowd) who've always called it "sci-fi" respectfully, and who are bewildered by the resistance to the term. Not a matter of reclaiming, I think; more that they (like you) have just never encountered the derogatory usage and don't know there was ever an issue.

So I no longer bristle when I hear the term. But I can't bring myself to use it, either.

I'm guessing I'm in much the same boat as older gay and lesbian people who are distressed at young people calling themselves "queer" without any understanding that it used to be an insult. Language changes, but it can be hard to get used to the changes.

Some digressions:

I'm afraid I never liked the term "spec-fic" either. I used to use "sf" lowercase to mean "speculative fiction" and "SF" uppercase to mean "science fiction per se," but that's a distinction lost on almost everyone, so I no longer do that except in cases where the distinction doesn't matter.

I grew up using the term "science fiction" to refer to all that stuff, science fiction and fantasy and everything in between and everything related to them. I still find it a little baffling that some people love science fiction but hate fantasy, and vice versa. And I know a lot of people always used "fantasy" to refer exclusively to wizards-and-dragons-and-kings (oh my), what I would call "high fantasy" or "epic fantasy"; I also still get a little puzzled whenever I meet someone who feels that magical realism isn't fantasy because it doesn't have wizards and dragons and elves in it.

Welcome to the common-sense position on this burning issue, David.

I am so tired of watching as well-meaning science fiction insiders do a superiority dance on the heads of non-insider readers because they happen to call it "sci-fi." It brings out some of the worst in our subculture.

Glad to hear it, Patrick.

I think I'm still smarting from the experience of finding out that there was an inside and an outside.

David:

Don't shut up. How can we rap if you're quiet? This was a interesting conversation starter. I've seen it pop up a couple times before, but that doesn't mean you can't add in your two cents. My only disagreement was basically that for my generation (

hmm, half my comment disappeared.

I was saying that for my generation sci fi seems to have been appropriated anyway... I approve of your sentiment. Actually, what I want to talk about is people scared of using any varient, but name themselves some new movement, or try to distance themselves from the genre.

Love the genre. Revel in the genre. Be the genre.

That is the revolution I'm coming out swinging for.

I both love, and write, SF.

Just one example out of *many*:

When your day job boss -- an otherwise decent guy -- tells you with disdain "So, why do you write that sci-fi junk?" I suppose it is difficult to think of that term in any other way. Especially when no one who puts the genre down in your presence ever calls it "SF."

Sorry, that has been my experience. I am going to continue to hate the term "sci-fi" with the pores of with my skin and with every instinct screaming in protest. :-) It's like nails on a chalkboard.

I guess my question, Vera, is why you'd modify your language based on an opinion that you don't respect?

My own preference is for 'specfic.' I started using it in place of 'science fiction, fantasy, and horror,' and it just kind of bled over.

The really troublesome thing for me is figuring out what to call the stuff that isn't speculative(or mystery, or romance, or whatever). I use 'litfic,' but don't like that it implies that the other stuff isn't literary. There's 'mainstream,' but that's not quite right. And so on.

Personally, I like the way things stand now, with SF being a cultural signifier of sorts. I don't care whether someone says "sci-fi" or "ess eff" or "skiffy", but they all work as tells, which can be handy.

Hannah,

Thing is, I never had to modify my own language because I never myself used the term "Sci-fi."

I only heard it being used for the first time by people who were being derogatory, and it became associated as a put-down term. In my (admittedly small and young, in those days) circle of people who loved the genre, we all called it science fiction or fantasy, not even SF.

And another thing -- I do tend to fluidly modify my language out of respect, pity, or comfort level, for each person I am communicating with.

It is a longtime, no longer conscious habit. I use some words in the company of some people to refer to the same exact thing that I'd never use with others.

Call it wimpy or mercentary or whatever, but I find that I am a natural linguistic chameleon. I even acquire or lose accents in various languages when I am talking to certain people.

The other day I met a childhood friend -- someone I knew when we just immigrated to the US and I was in 6th grade. My English immediately gained a heavier Russian accent, and even the grammatical structure reverted slightly to a clumsier level.

She said to me, in her own now-perfect English, "Wow, you still have an accent!"

I didn't say anything. The moment she left, I was talking "normal" again. *grin*

I guess my point is, terms and connotations *do* matter. And my choice is to use such that create the most "cohesion" in the process of communication with the other person at any given point. It is also my opinion that when we genuinely love something in particular, it is our duty to get to "know it" and all its fine quirks, and to try to speak in a language of its subtle core diction and connotations.

Susan, maybe you should try telling the “li-fi” people, “Please — it’s pronounced liffy.”

Nick, maybe I just can’t stop myself from fucking with those tells.

Hannah, I think “mainstream” is the standard term inside the SF community for stuff that isn’t. Not sure if that covers mystery, Western, and romance, though, or only matte-finish trade paperbacks from Vintage.

Vera, for some reason your story makes it seem like a good time to again bring up this post from last February.

Thanks, Vera. That's certainly fair.

For what it's worth, I use 'spec fic' pretty much exclusively these days -- I generally have to explain it once to a new person, but then after that, they know what it means and it works great. Very functional term, both for people inside and outside the genre.

I also use 'mainstream' for anything non-genre (and by that, I mean also non-mystery, non-category romance, non-Western).

I reserve 'literary' for a type-modifier, which can be placed with any of the other terms, when the text seems to be aspiring to that style, i.e.:

literary spec fic
literary mainstream
literary romance
literary mystery

etc. -- 'literary' still does not necessarily denote high-quality, since some attempts at 'literary mainstream', to choose a random example, are crap.

Jed disagrees with me on this usage (I think because he doesn't think anyone else uses it, and thus that it is confusing), but so far, it's working fine for me, and has become my natural default. I encourage you all to adopt it as well -- if I can convince enough people, then maybe Jed will join us! :-)

I think I’ve figured out part of the problem: I’m more interested in being able to communicate with people outside the field than people inside it. (Maybe because the former seems to be a problem and the latter doesn’t; I don’t know.) And I’ve always had a violent reaction to the compartmentalization of language.

Interesting. I generally find most people I talk to outside the field have no problem understanding what I mean by sci-fi or science fiction and use it interchangeably themselves.

It's when I start talking about writing short fiction, as opposed to novels, that confusion sets in.

Yeah, what the hell is "short fiction" anyway? ("Poetry" we at least know from Hallmark shops.)

Interesting. I generally find most people I talk to outside the field have no problem understanding what I mean by sci-fi or science fiction and use it interchangeably themselves.

It's when I start talking about writing short fiction, as opposed to novels, that confusion sets in.

I have the same thing. Most of my interaction is with people outside the genre and I get the same thing. People don't understand anything about short stories, they think only in terms of 'you write articles, or novels? I'm confused.'

And as for violent anti-sf reactions, not that I'm putting down anyone else's experience, I've probably got just as many so called 'mundanes' signed up for my newsletter at my website as fen since I'm always pimping it and talking to people about what I do and they find it really cool and exciting. I've gotten some negative reactions (they make for amusing anecdotes), but they're maybe 1 in 10 or so, and I live in the heart of the midwest.

Usually it's self-appointed intellegencia or academia that reacts negatively I've noticed.

SHORT STORY AND SHORT STORY, WHAT IS SHORT STORY!

My issue with that is the exact opposite. Here is a sample conversation with a well-read literate and literature-minded person who I will call Exemplary Guy:

Exemplary Guy: Ever have a short story published?

Me: Sure. About 20 or so.

EG: Really? Do you write under a different name? I've never seen your work. What issues have you been in?

Me: Issues of what?

EG: The New Yorker, of course!

Me: No no, I've never published in The New Yorker. I've been in this mag and that one...

EG: !!!

Me: What's the matter?

EG: I thought every short story got published in The New Yorker!

I think “mainstream” is the standard term inside the SF community for stuff that isn’t. Not sure if that covers mystery, Western, and romance, though, or only matte-finish trade paperbacks from Vintage.

It applies to glossy-finish books, too.