You hear this sentiment from literature lovers all the time, but not in so many words.  They’re the ones who have read every modernist and post-modernist classic, though maybe they are lying about finishing Infinite Jest.  When I tell them I read fantasy and sci-fi, they respond with an ominous “oh,” and that look, half distain and half dismay.  Everyone knows, fantasy and sci-fi aren’t real literature, but poor pulpy substitutes.

Really?  Sure, most SF/F is terrible, but most realistic trying-to-be-literature fiction is terrible too.  Great authors of any genre are rare.  The Telegraph’s list of the 100 greatest books and other book rankings include a strong showing of SF/F.  Maybe the average lover of modern literature doesn’t consider SF/F worth their time, but the experts do.

SF/F is essential because it fills a gap in literature that realistic fiction cannot.  Don’t believe me?  Let’s do a thought experiment.  If literature doesn’t need SF/F to cover all themes, then we should be able to rewrite SF/F classics as realistic fiction just as good as the original.

Lord of the Rings is one of the top selling novels of all time (it was originally a single book) and it’s about as classic as fantasy gets.  Thematically, a lot happens in Lord of the Rings, but its main point is the temptation and corruption wrought by evil power.  Sauron represents Satan, or if you prefer a non-religious interpretation, evil personified.  The One Ring contains power, but it is the tool that Sauron uses to warp characters to his will.  This warping is most obvious with Sméagol, who murders his cousin to possess the Ring and becomes obsessed with it, transforming himself into the pitiful Gollum.  Though Gollum tries to reform, his efforts are too late and he literally plunges into the fires of Mount Doom because of his inability to lose the Ring.

Fantasy communicates concepts to the reader symbolically, though some realistic fiction does too.  However, fantasy first transports readers into a new world, allowing us to let go of preconceived notions about life.  Sméagol’s actions are obviously immoral and his “reward” not worth the cost.  In real-world scenarios, it’s easier for readers to rationalize away a character’s bad action, such as tarnishing another’s reputation to get ahead at work, because “everybody does it.”  Society tends to emphasize getting what we want over making sure our actions are justified.  Smeagol physically transforming into a disgusting creature because of his actions viscerally grabs the reader’s attention.  Though realistic fiction also has symbolism, fantasy symbolism is more vivid and engaging, and often makes for a more compelling argument to the reader.  A realistic version of Lord of the Rings would not be as powerful or convincing.

Now onto sci-fi.  Sci-fi has had an undeniable impact on our culture.  The Museum of Science in Boston even has an exhibit about sci-fi literature’s influence on technology.  For example, Ray Bradbury predicted the existence of earbuds in Fahrenheit 451… 47 years before they were in popular use.  The best sci-fi writers have an uncanny ability to envision our technological future and discuss the consequences.  Realistic fiction can’t hack that.

Sci-fi illuminates human nature, social issues, and our understanding of reality.  In the first chapter of Phillip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, Deckard argues with his wife, who is depressed and angry at Deckard for “retiring” androids.  Instead of approaching his wife with empathy, Deckard tries to get her to use a brainwave altering device to change her mood.  She refuses, and their fight continues.  In a few pages, PKD knocks out a searing social criticism both of our desire to ignore bad feelings and gender relations.  Realistic fiction could handle these two themes, but would probably take an entire novel to say what PKD did in one chapter.  Less is more.

Do Androids Dream uses its first chapter to launch into an exploration of our relationship with reality and what it means to be human.  Owning a live animal is a symbol of wealth, and those who can’t afford one buy an electric sheep to appear to keep up with the Joneses.  Androids look and act human, but experience no empathy and are inherently selfish, yet Mrs. Deckard feels empathy for them, just as we anthropomorphize everything we can.  Of all the characters, Deckard tries to change or cover over reality most often.  Multiple androids trick Deckard into thinking they are human, and by the end of the book he is unable to tell electric animals from real.  The most human, empathic character in the book is considered subhuman because of his radiation-damaged intellect, and he is shunned by fellow humans, just as our society often values intelligence over goodness.  Without sci-fi concepts, I don’t see how realistic fiction could pull off a novel like Do Androids Dream.

As a wise psychology professor told me in college, fish aren’t aware of the water they swim in.  SF/F shows us the water we swim in using symbolism, abstraction, and metaphor.  Sci-fi also employs the writer’s intellect and intuition about human desires to foresee the future.  Those who don’t see SF/F as literature should take a closer read.  They are missing out on some important themes.