james_davis_nicoll (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
james_davis_nicoll) wrote2009-03-15 12:52 pm
james_davis_nicoll) wrote2009-03-15 12:52 pm
On a related note
What should go on a Top Ten "In retrospect, what the hell were we thinking" list of once-popular SF?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Was They'd Rather be Right ever actually popular? It's certainly got to head some sort of "what the hell were we thinking" list.
Critical darlings, award winners, or slaps in the face to mundane taste?
I think people will likely look back at Ender's Game and wtf.
I think people will likely look back at Ender's Game and wtf.
Was there something exceptionally wrong with it that I don't remember since I read it half my life ago?
I don't. I've given that book to too many people (even people who don't generally read SF) and had them devour it.
I vote for Stranger in a Strange Land, which is already only of historical interest.
I vote for Stranger in a Strange Land, which is already only of historical interest.
It was 100% over the top ridiculous. It's what Bruckheimer would have written if he were a novelist.
But I like it anyway.
But I like it anyway.
Ender's Game, absolutely.
I'm already at that stage with most of Heinlein. Oh, and The Stars My Destination - it's the Count Of Monte Cristo, in spaaaaaaace, and badly written. And yet, somehow, it's a classic?
I'm already at that stage with most of Heinlein. Oh, and The Stars My Destination - it's the Count Of Monte Cristo, in spaaaaaaace, and badly written. And yet, somehow, it's a classic?
Yeah, sounds good to me. But, then, I like a lot of the mid-period Tom Clancy, too.
I remember being rather surprised on rereading Space Viking that the casual acts of mass [1] murder carried out by the protagonist never really registered as somewhat morally iff when I read the book as a teenager.
1: On a scale perhaps an order of magnitude higher than anyone on Earth has managed.
1: On a scale perhaps an order of magnitude higher than anyone on Earth has managed.
Ender's Game is horrifyingly powerful; it is very like 1984. My college freshmen last semester found it timeless and frightening.
And hooooo, doggy, do I agree about Stranger.
And hooooo, doggy, do I agree about Stranger.
Wandering hordes of negro cannibals?
They were specifically black?
But yeah, okay, I didn't remember those.
But yeah, okay, I didn't remember those.
I'd suggest the Gor series...but of course, we all know what they were thinking.
Some embarrassing trends, like Laurenn J. Framingham, haven't even crested yet. But I think these two are in a persistent vegetative state:
John W. Campbell's editorship. Because what science fiction really needed was an injection of Confederate Psychic magazine!
The Star Trek novel. There have been, what, two good Star Trek novels? out of six hundred sixty-six? and now you can't even give them away at rummage sales?
John W. Campbell's editorship. Because what science fiction really needed was an injection of Confederate Psychic magazine!
The Star Trek novel. There have been, what, two good Star Trek novels? out of six hundred sixty-six? and now you can't even give them away at rummage sales?
I agree about Ender's Game, but I think there's still potential for looking back with wonder and confusion, not based on the book but the writer. I don't think that counts here, though.
Never did understand the people to whom Stranger was a big deal. They seemed not to be people from SF fandom.
I was about to suggest the same, though I suspect it may retain its potence given the continued existence of sufficiently cloistered teenagers. I and my friends found it inspiring way back in the late 90s.
It's a very popular book, and Card creates a very strong sense of reader participation.
And two steps back, it looks insane. In 2030, people will say, that guy had issues with kids. Which, of course, he does.
And two steps back, it looks insane. In 2030, people will say, that guy had issues with kids. Which, of course, he does.
More than two, at least in my opinion. But central to that--it's arguably not fair to relegate all Star Trek novels to the bin together; short of relegating all tie-in fiction, that is. Nothing is inherently bad about a Trek novel except insofar as something is inherently bad about a media tie-in (a claim I will not make).
Its handling of gender and race hasn't worn too well, as I recall.
There have been, what, two good Star Trek novels? out of six hundred sixty-six?
Diane Duane, _The Wounded Sky_ and _Spock's World_
Barbara Hambly, _Ishmael_
John M. Ford, _The Final Reflection_ and _How Much For Just the Planet?_
That's five. I'm guessing you're using a different value/standard of "good" than I am, but sure, tastes vary.
What are your two picks?
Diane Duane, _The Wounded Sky_ and _Spock's World_
Barbara Hambly, _Ishmael_
John M. Ford, _The Final Reflection_ and _How Much For Just the Planet?_
That's five. I'm guessing you're using a different value/standard of "good" than I am, but sure, tastes vary.
What are your two picks?
Who or what is Laurenn J. Framingham? Googling revealed nothing.
It's still the minority opinion.
Science fiction sure has a lot of books for young adults by people you would never want to babysit.
Science fiction sure has a lot of books for young adults by people you would never want to babysit.
Page 1 of 8