and other authors put them into their own stories,including Orson Scott Card in Ender's Game (1985).That novel arguably also anticipated the use of computer games to teach,evaluate,and maybe manipulate students.Card's eerie"mind game," played by child cadets as part of their training at a grim"Battle School,"was designed both to grade their ability to think strategically and to sharpen their wits,although some students were pretty sure it was also meant to spy on and control them. "There is no science without fancy and no art without fact,"said Vladimir Nabokov,who was also a scientist (a self-taught butterfly expert and curator of lepidoptera at Harvard's zoology museum whose theories about the evolutionary history of a particular species of butterfly,once dismissed by better-credentialed colleagues,were recently vindicated by geneticists).Obviously,advances in science and technology take more than fancy.Constrained by the possible,scientists must work with heroic determination and settle for tiny steps forward amid the endless steps back.The novelist,on the other hand,may leap boldly into the future without regard for fact.But a great many science-fiction writers voluntarily hew to the laws of science,even while pushing them to their limits;it's fantasy writers who use magic, and even then,their magic has rules.And all science fiction,if it's any good,has to be plausible,if not in the sense that it might be true,then in the sense that it must feel true.Whether that happens has a lot to do with whether the writer can bring the characters to life,of course,but in science fiction,more perhaps than in other literary genres,suspension of disbelief depends on the quality of the author's"world-building," as sci-fi aficionados call it. HUMAMTIES RESEARCH 2011 24nTANKALs ES RESEARCH Illustration by Joe Wilsonand other authors put them into their own stories, including Orson Scott Card in Ender’s Game (1985). That novel arguably also anticipated the use of computer games to teach, evaluate, and maybe manipulate students. Card’s eerie “mind game,” played by child cadets as part of their training at a grim “Battle School,” was designed both to grade their ability to think strategically and to sharpen their wits, although some students were pretty sure it was also meant to spy on and control them. “There is no science without fancy and no art without fact,” said Vladimir Nabokov, who was also a scientist (a self-taught butterfly expert and curator of lepidoptera at Harvard’s zoology museum whose theories about the evolutionary history of a particular species of butterfly, once dismissed by better-credentialed colleagues, were recently vindicated by geneticists). Obviously, advances in science and technology take more than fancy. Constrained by the possible, scientists must work with heroic determination and settle for tiny steps forward amid the endless steps back. The novelist, on the other hand, may leap boldly into the future without regard for fact. But a great many science-fiction writers voluntarily hew to the laws of science, even while pushing them to their limits; it’s fantasy writers who use magic, and even then, their magic has rules. And all science fiction, if it’s any good, has to be plausible, if not in the sense that it might be true, then in the sense that it must feel true. Whether that happens has a lot to do with whether the writer can bring the characters to life, of course, but in science fiction, more perhaps than in other literary genres, suspension of disbelief depends on the quality of the author’s “world-building,” as sci-fi aficionados call it. Illustration by Joe Wilson WHAT THE FEDS FUND AT UNIVERSITIES