Almost Good

I won't be specific but I just finished a book that was interesting enough to keep me reading while being saddled with enough unnecessary flaws to make me want to beat my head against a wall.

Two issues that leap to mind. No, three, but two are related:

If your story is set 9000 years in the future, the names should probably not all sound like they came from the Philadephia phone book circa 1970, particularly if there have been a number of dark ages in between (although then we get into the issue of "Have any dark ages been universal?").

In a related matter, stuff probably happened between 2000 AD and 11000 AD. It's a bit odd when a lot of (or even any) references to the 20th century turn up in a book like this.

One unlikely astronomical event is OK. Two, particularly if the second one appears to be physically impossible, is probably one too many.

Almost Good

I won't be specific but I just finished a book that was interesting enough to keep me reading while being saddled with enough unnecessary flaws to make me want to beat my head against a wall.

Two issues that leap to mind. No, three, but two are related:

If your story is set 9000 years in the future, the names should probably not all sound like they came from the Philadephia phone book circa 1970, particularly if there have been a number of dark ages in between (although then we get into the issue of "Have any dark ages been universal?").

In a related matter, stuff probably happened between 2000 AD and 11000 AD. It's a bit odd when a lot of (or even any) references to the 20th century turn up in a book like this.

One unlikely astronomical event is OK. Two, particularly if the second one appears to be physically impossible, is probably one too many.

Almost Good

I won't be specific but I just finished a book that was interesting enough to keep me reading while being saddled with enough unnecessary flaws to make me want to beat my head against a wall.

Two issues that leap to mind. No, three, but two are related:

If your story is set 9000 years in the future, the names should probably not all sound like they came from the Philadephia phone book circa 1970, particularly if there have been a number of dark ages in between (although then we get into the issue of "Have any dark ages been universal?").

In a related matter, stuff probably happened between 2000 AD and 11000 AD. It's a bit odd when a lot of (or even any) references to the 20th century turn up in a book like this.

One unlikely astronomical event is OK. Two, particularly if the second one appears to be physically impossible, is probably one too many.

Actual science in science fiction

Not applied sciences, I mean, or feats of engineering but the actual process of science. Is this a suitable topic for SF, by which I mean "can it be the seed for a story?" Or maybe better yet, "how does one use it as the seed for a story?"

One example would be the Steerswoman books. I think part of what makes that possible is that the protagonist is discovering scientific models that we are already familiar with, so the author is not saddled with the problem of coming up with a new scientific model.

I am not fussy about "Yes, this was cutting edge science 200 years ago and it still is today" stories, where whatever bit of pop-science that made the cover of DISCOVER is still new and exciting centuries from now.

Actual science in science fiction

Not applied sciences, I mean, or feats of engineering but the actual process of science. Is this a suitable topic for SF, by which I mean "can it be the seed for a story?" Or maybe better yet, "how does one use it as the seed for a story?"

One example would be the Steerswoman books. I think part of what makes that possible is that the protagonist is discovering scientific models that we are already familiar with, so the author is not saddled with the problem of coming up with a new scientific model.

I am not fussy about "Yes, this was cutting edge science 200 years ago and it still is today" stories, where whatever bit of pop-science that made the cover of DISCOVER is still new and exciting centuries from now.

Actual science in science fiction

Not applied sciences, I mean, or feats of engineering but the actual process of science. Is this a suitable topic for SF, by which I mean "can it be the seed for a story?" Or maybe better yet, "how does one use it as the seed for a story?"

One example would be the Steerswoman books. I think part of what makes that possible is that the protagonist is discovering scientific models that we are already familiar with, so the author is not saddled with the problem of coming up with a new scientific model.

I am not fussy about "Yes, this was cutting edge science 200 years ago and it still is today" stories, where whatever bit of pop-science that made the cover of DISCOVER is still new and exciting centuries from now.

Agatha Christie's lesbian characters

In a recent discussion about the new adaptations of the Miss Marple stories, I commented that I didn't recall the original stories having as many lesbians as the TV movies do, where "as many" = "any"*. The person I was chatting to suggested that perhaps they were there but as a young lad of 10 or so, I did not understand the significance of, eg, two spinster ladies living together. Can anyone who has actually read the books recently tell me if the movies have introduced a new element or if I just missed something when i read them 30 years ago?


* Or as many sword fights as the Margaret Rutherford version of Miss Marple.

Agatha Christie's lesbian characters

In a recent discussion about the new adaptations of the Miss Marple stories, I commented that I didn't recall the original stories having as many lesbians as the TV movies do, where "as many" = "any"*. The person I was chatting to suggested that perhaps they were there but as a young lad of 10 or so, I did not understand the significance of, eg, two spinster ladies living together. Can anyone who has actually read the books recently tell me if the movies have introduced a new element or if I just missed something when i read them 30 years ago?


* Or as many sword fights as the Margaret Rutherford version of Miss Marple.

Agatha Christie's lesbian characters

In a recent discussion about the new adaptations of the Miss Marple stories, I commented that I didn't recall the original stories having as many lesbians as the TV movies do, where "as many" = "any"*. The person I was chatting to suggested that perhaps they were there but as a young lad of 10 or so, I did not understand the significance of, eg, two spinster ladies living together. Can anyone who has actually read the books recently tell me if the movies have introduced a new element or if I just missed something when i read them 30 years ago?


* Or as many sword fights as the Margaret Rutherford version of Miss Marple.

Weird Synchronicity

I just read two books, written 50 years apart, whose background shared many elements. I don't think the recent one was borrowing from the older one and even if they had, the story they told was completely different. I think both authors hit on the same initial conditions by reasoning backward from the places they wanted to end up.

I keep getting strings of similarity like this. One week it will nothing but Lost Colonies and the next it will be Horribly Abusive Families, followed by Bad Astronomy [1] and Strained Analogies to the Mongol Empire. Aside from the similarity of details, the books involved usually have nothing in common otherwise, not in terms of when they were written, who wrote them or anything else. Does this happen to anyone else? I feel like I'm in ROSENCRANTZ AND GULDENSTERN ARE DEAD, flipping that damn coin.


1: Actually, that's kind of a constant....

Weird Synchronicity

I just read two books, written 50 years apart, whose background shared many elements. I don't think the recent one was borrowing from the older one and even if they had, the story they told was completely different. I think both authors hit on the same initial conditions by reasoning backward from the places they wanted to end up.

I keep getting strings of similarity like this. One week it will nothing but Lost Colonies and the next it will be Horribly Abusive Families, followed by Bad Astronomy [1] and Strained Analogies to the Mongol Empire. Aside from the similarity of details, the books involved usually have nothing in common otherwise, not in terms of when they were written, who wrote them or anything else. Does this happen to anyone else? I feel like I'm in ROSENCRANTZ AND GULDENSTERN ARE DEAD, flipping that damn coin.


1: Actually, that's kind of a constant....

Weird Synchronicity

I just read two books, written 50 years apart, whose background shared many elements. I don't think the recent one was borrowing from the older one and even if they had, the story they told was completely different. I think both authors hit on the same initial conditions by reasoning backward from the places they wanted to end up.

I keep getting strings of similarity like this. One week it will nothing but Lost Colonies and the next it will be Horribly Abusive Families, followed by Bad Astronomy [1] and Strained Analogies to the Mongol Empire. Aside from the similarity of details, the books involved usually have nothing in common otherwise, not in terms of when they were written, who wrote them or anything else. Does this happen to anyone else? I feel like I'm in ROSENCRANTZ AND GULDENSTERN ARE DEAD, flipping that damn coin.


1: Actually, that's kind of a constant....