You might be right about these not being sci-fi, but sci-fi can take place in the period in which it was written. Alternative history plus sci-fi can definitely be a thing. Or writing sci-fi that’s supposed to take place in just a few years.
In this case, yes. It’s not a serious question. It’s poking at me. Of course I don’t find the DaVinci Code to be sci-fi. The question makes no sense and comes across as aggressive.
It explores alternate history but doesn’t contain any sci-fi elements. At least not that I recall. So that made the question seem very unserious to me. Especially since I had already agreed with you that it wasn’t sci-fi.
You might be right about these not being sci-fi, but sci-fi can take place in the period in which it was written. Alternative history plus sci-fi can definitely be a thing. Or writing sci-fi that’s supposed to take place in just a few years.
And I addressed that. I wouldn’t even feel comfortable calling said title alt-history.
Do you think a title like the DaVinci Code is sci-fi because it altered history?
These sound like fictional drama/thriller books in a period piece setting to me.
Wow, I didn’t expect such a rude response.
You find a question, rude?
In this case, yes. It’s not a serious question. It’s poking at me. Of course I don’t find the DaVinci Code to be sci-fi. The question makes no sense and comes across as aggressive.
The question is because the DaVinci code fits that authors reasoning for why Blake should be Sci-Fi, in that it explores an alternative history.
It’s a rhetorical question, but that does not belie the seriousness of it.
It explores alternate history but doesn’t contain any sci-fi elements. At least not that I recall. So that made the question seem very unserious to me. Especially since I had already agreed with you that it wasn’t sci-fi.