Overall: 3/5. A mildly interesting collection of stories from a pivotal point in sf's history, i.e. the New Wave between the Golden Age and the wretched era of doorstoppers that began in the 80s and that plagues us to this day. Skip Niven and the essays, and use discretion when approaching Le Guin, Sturgeon, and Delany, but the Ellison and Silverberg here are fantastic.
A Boy And His Dog (Ellison): 4.5/5. Gripping and dark but ultimately satisfying on a deep level. Contrary to Blish’s amusingly quaint warning, it is the sexually depraved protagonist rather than the occasionally blue language that will put off modern readers. But if that doesn’t throw you off, you’re in for a tightly written, idiosyncratic, and paradoxically humane parable about the dangers of repressing one’s more animalistic motivations.
Nine Lives (Le Guin): 2/5. An interesting premise that never really goes anywhere. The “message” is banal and on-the-nose. Skippable.
Passengers (Silverberg): 4/5. A slow start gives way to an aching, archetypal portrayal of the vicissitudes of fate and determinism. The ending seems slightly off, but it’s well worth the journey. Fantastic fiction.
Not Long Before the End (Niven): 2/5. A reasonably engaging but ultimately shallow and trivial tale, too cute and on-the-nose to be taken seriously. It’s clear Niven has no interest in the possible depths of storytelling, and just says words that paint mildly interesting images. There is a serious disconnect between his work and the human soul, and it is troubling.
Time Considered...Helix (Delany): 2/5. A lot of sizzle and not a lot of steak - about what you’d expect for Delany. The start is propulsive, with eyeball kicks on every line and wonderfully evocative worldbuilding. Then it all kind of meanders around and trails off - perhaps because the New Wave cares not for satisfying endings. An interesting product of its time, but not worth the read now.
The Man Who Learned Loving (Sturgeon): 3/5. A fun little morality play with some exploration of male/female archetypes. Compelling but not overly so.
Essays: 1.5/5. Pretentious gatekeeping by two seemingly unqualified experts. Still, there's some mild value to be had - one gets a view of sf's past and future in 1969 that seems quaint and parochial now. It also usefully introduces the interesting definition of sf as "the literature of cognitive estrangement," which is thought-provoking