China Miéville a été interviewé par le site scyfilove. Il en découle un article avec pas mal de citations qui se lit ici.

Extrait :
Mieville was similarly exercised when an audience member asked him about the importance of science in his science fiction.

“I couldn’t care less,” he replied. “I mean, I like some aspects of science, but as an organising paradyme for story-telling, it’s cobblers. In fact I’m astounded that over a century into this genre we can perpetuate this drivel about science fiction should be based on the possible.

“Famously there was an argument between Jules Verne and HG Wells, who both wrote books about going to the moon. Verne spent a long time working out the ballistics of a trip and by the science of the time he was very accurate.

“Wells on the other hand came up with an anti-gravity material which somebody made a spaceship out of and Verne was so angry about that, saying it wasn’t true. But in terms of longevity it is Wells’ story we remember as it is much more concerned with narrative shape and themes.”

He added: “Wells said his job as a writer of scientific romance (or whatever the contemporary term was) is to help re-domesticate the impossible.

“Domestication is the key and it doesn’t matter if it’s real or not. Think of how many laboratories you’ve seen in films with silver balls that have electricity flashing off them. What is that for? I don’t care – it just looks cool!”