: Re: How do sci-fi stories hold up if their premise or details become discredited? I've been playing with the idea of writing a sci-fi story that would resemble those written roughly 50-100 years
The number one rule in making things believable is detailing. This applies to outlandish theories just as much as world-destruction type stakes. None of it will seem real without the details that lend it credence.
It is admittedly a bit more difficult with things we know to be false. I think in order to make these particular things seem realistic, you have to ask yourself the question, "what if we were wrong?" Research how we know something is false. Then ask yourself what small detail you could tweak, what small fact you can call into doubt, and how. The bottom line is that you have to explain why we were wrong (or why the impossible is now possible), and/or how we missed the truth (Via new technology, discoveries that 'disprove' the truth, etc. See comment by dmm below for details.).
With things that we know to be false, and indeed just about any kind of stakes, you will have to tweak things a little. Believability starts with the truth, and then uses details to show how the exact right events played out.
Note: Though I find it likely, I do not know if the authors of the examples you mentioned used this technique to build credibility, having not read the books.
More posts by @BetL639
: Avoiding passing time by switching PoV - Viable method? I once wrote a short story that was around ninety pages. It encompassed approximately a month. Since it was a short story, there were
: What does being "heavy handed" mean? And how does one avoid it? I've come across the term "heavy handed" before, and it seems to be one of the more egregious mistakes that one can make while
Terms of Use Privacy policy Contact About Cancellation policy © selfpublishingguru.com2024 All Rights reserved.