Science Fiction Aficionados discussion

List your least favorite(s). If you feel compelled, explain why.

I find the love for Leviathan Wakes, Snow Crash ,and CJ Cherryh's Foreigner to be inexplicable. I gave up on all three.

however my least favorite science fiction novel of all time (possibly because I did read it until the end) was Doomsday Book. man that was a slog.

Oh, no, that one is soooo close to being on my top five!

(Serious theme of dark and grim favorites emerging here that I wasn't really aware of!)

ha! well we love what we love.

I am such a minority on that one. people love it! even more mysteriously, people whose tastes I admire love it!

Things I've hated: Divergent, The Demolished Man, Stardoc, Naomi Novik's Temeraire series.

oh God, Divergent. UGH

I recommend Stardoc if you want something truly awful!

How's this for a category, books that I'm ashamed to admit I love - I get such a guilty pleasure out of Lee and Miller's Liaden Universe.

I just took a brief scan of my scifi shelf and am pleased to announce I have no guilty feelings about any of the books there! I'm surprised.

I think the genre where I have some guilty favorites is Horror. specifically the books of Richard Laymon.

I can't come up with any sci-fi books I've truly hated. The only one I can think of that I didn't like, When Gravity Fails, was still entertaining.

As for guilty pleasures, I think I enjoyed Max Barry's books more than they deserved to be enjoyed. And The Blue Nowhere by Jeffery Deaver. They were good books though. I just remember finishing Jennifer Government and thinking "this wasn't written well but I loved it anyway."

mark wrote: "I find the love for Leviathan Wakes, Snow Crash ,and CJ Cherryh's Foreigner to be inexplicable. I gave up on all three.

however my least favorite science fiction novel of all time (possibly because I did read it until the end) was Doomsday Book. man that was a slog. "

Heh, I haven't read Snow Crash, its on my TBR, but I had similar feelings for Stephenson's Baroque cycle. I like the remaining three, though: Foreigner is one of my favourites, at least the first 6 books in the series. The rest I don't care that much about and I stopped reading the last installments. Leviathan Wakes was fine with me, and I mean to read the next books in the series soon. As for Doomsday Book, well... I guess you probably don't like historical fiction a lot, right? Because I thought this book was much more HF than it was sci fi, and personally the 'travel in time' topic is one of my least favourites (or maybe even the least favourite) one in sci fi. However I liked that book, and I know right now it's nominated in Historical Ficcionistas group here in GR for their monthly read... I wonder if they'd like it :).

I mostly dislike very long military sci fi series that drag on for 20+ volumes and everybody is so enthusiastic about them.. but as I tend to skip them usually after 1st volume I won't mention any specifics here because it wouldn't be fair. I don't think there are books I hated, usually I don't finish them and if I don't finish a book I don't talk about it since I don't know if it improved :) I remember that I thought Falling Free was one of the most tedious and naive sci fi novels I finished and I couldn't picture why would anyone nominate it for anything except that it featured disabled quaddies, and Ethan of Athos was only a bit better, but I like Lois McMaster Bujold as an author of other novels. Temeraire by Naomi Novik is certainly one of the silliest series I've read, but I thought it was fantasy not sci fi?

As for the authors, I think Robert Heinlein is overrated by older generation of American sci fi fans, because his books (especially the juveniles some readers are vevry fond of) have aged a lot. Right now I'm reading Starship Troopers which seems to prove my point.

Everybody loves The Windup Girl but I got about 50 pages in, still had no idea what was going on or who anybody was, and gave up.

actually I'm going to call A Canticle for Leibowitz overrated. The first 2 stories were excellent, but the last one was really bad and ruined it for me. The whole tone of the story changed and not for the better.

Since I am to 'blame' for this latest thread then here's a contender - Dhalgren by S.Delaney. I always finish a book(I admire those that can just stop and say 'enough')but this is the one that almost broke me.I put it aside after 100 pages and just left it for 3 months,finally guilt overcame me and I slogged through it.At half the length and in different hands there was scope for something good but it was just impossible to get engaged with the story.

Scott wrote: "Everybody loves The Windup Girl but I got about 50 pages in, still had no idea what was going on or who anybody was, and gave up."

I don't like it so much, but mainly because of its message - that we should basically fear all genetic manipulation, something that I disagree with. But it was very well done, also from the scientific point of view.

Dhalgren and A Canticle for Leibowitz are both on my TBR pile.

Pournelle & Niven's abismal Footfall and Lucifer's Hammer. Double the sludge, double the slog. A waist of paper...and my precious reading time. Mehh

And Brunner's chaotic, schizophrenic Stands On Zanzibar...the only book I threw across the room :[

Bill wrote: "Since I am to 'blame' for this latest thread ..."

I may not have been too happy with your post in the other thread, but who cares. you gave me a great idea for an interesting new thread. that makes me happy.

Teanka wrote: " As for Doomsday Book, well... I guess you probably don't like historical fiction a lot, right?..."

actually I do, and I used to read that genre a lot back in my 20s. my problem was not the historical fiction component, but rather the sheer tediousness of the narrative. to me at least.

spikeINflorida wrote: "Pournelle & Niven's abismal Footfall and Lucifer's Hammer. Double the sludge, double the slog. A waist of paper...and my precious reading time. Mehh"
Ouch,these are good reads albeit well below Niven's best work.However I do think they played a big part in the increasing 'jumbofication' of modern SF. I clearly remember when first reading Silverberg's 'Time of Changes'(very good) the point is it literally was the first paperback I'd ever read over 200 pages! How did they ever tell stories in so few pages,people would feel short changed now.

Well, all I can say is that the responses in this thread show that we certainly have different likes and dislikes! I won't waste time noting that I really liked Snow Crash, Stand on Zanzibar and others disliked by others but just move to the sci fi books that get high ratings that I just did not like. The two at the top of the list are:
Consider Phlebas by Iain M. Banks and Broken Angels by Richard K. Morgan.

Farnham's Freeholdby the sainted Heinlein was a reactionary pile of poo that made me wince even at the tender young age at which I read it. I was plowing through much of his work at that time-- enjoying most of it-- and am still amazed at all the arguments to-and-fro in regards to him. Some titles, particularly the early novellas, are masterpieces but the silly I Will Fear No Evil almost destroyed his reputation! Apparently there were no actual editors for his later works, since he himself did no editing beyond what the publisher insisted.
I'm daring myself to try The Number of the Beastsince I've heard so much about it in the last few decades-- I'd read the previous Future History stories and wanted to see what he did with it, and was surprised to read the original Analog review in which the reviewer admitted he had to skip pages to get to the end! Not every novel needs to have hundreds of pages of pointless dialog (which is what damn near ruined Time Enough for Lovefor me, a book I actually liked otherwise!)

Dune Oh God do I hate this book. Reading Dune makes me think of those awful 70s and 80s sci-fi movies. However, the difference between the two is, I can get up and clean while I watch the crappy movie and pop jokes at the cheesiness of the movie. I can't do that when I read a book, so reading Dune makes it feel like I'm being tortured.

I truly do not understand why the book gets so much love. I actually would like to hear from someone explaining why it's considered a classic and why it is such a great book.

mark wrote: "oh God, Divergent. UGH"

I stopped reading Divergent when I got to the part the society is split into cliques like a Freddie Prinze Jr. high school movie. That was only about 6 pages into the book.

The Caves of Steel with its naive or ridiculous characters, bad world-building, and 20times Jehoshaphat exclamations.
Academ's Fury, but that is fantasy.

Teanka wrote: "mark wrote: "personally the 'travel in time' topic is one of my least favourites "

How about a thread on themes we like and dislike? I'd start one, but I'm not sure where to put it.

When I got my first free audiobook from audible I had to choose something with an easier language, so I don't struggle with unknown words. I chose Laruen Oliver's Delirium. I just can't get over the plot holes.


spikeINflorida wrote: "And Brunner's chaotic, schizophrenic Stands On Zanzibar...the only book I threw across the room "

I decided I will be reading no more of Brunner after I tried reading The Sheep Look Up. It might be a great book but I couldn't keep with it.

I read Jonathan Livingston Seagull and people might argue I am not understanding it, but that is not why I don't like it. I find it simplistic and delusional.

Metaphorosis wrote: "How about a thread on themes we like and dislike? I'd start one, but I'm not sure where to put it. "

always feel free to start threads! I think that particular thread would go under Books.

spikeINflorida wrote: "Pournelle & Niven's abismal Footfall and Lucifer's Hammer. Double the sludge, double the slog. A waist of paper...and my precious reading time. Mehh"

Bite your tongue! My dad considered The Mote in God's Eye and Lucifer's Hammer as required reading for me.

Jonathan wrote: "Dune Oh God do I hate this book. Reading Dune makes me think of those awful 70s and 80s sci-fi movies. However, the difference between the two is, I can get up and clean while I watch..."

It took me 3 tries to finish that one. It's my mom's favorite book. It's not my favorite but I can see why it made such an impact at the time.

You know, this thread reminds me of people in my classics group. It makes me wonder if it breaks down by age. In other words, are modern readers different than older readers? After all, modern readers - post 90s - had the internet and a more immediate need. I guess.

I can still really enjoy the older novels. But I find a lot of people calling classic authors as boring.

The handmaids tale: Why does this book even end up on sci-fi lists? It's basically a grim cross between the Salem witch trials and the worst of islamic repression with absolutely no sci-fi, any plot or even present day relevance to redeem it. Did it even have a plot, explanations of which societal trends we should avoid or was it just an unnecessary long montage of misery? Nominated for Nebula award.

Foundation series: Uber-positivist sci-fi author come up with the idiotic idea of "psycho history" which is an insult to any intelligent human, obviously impossible for anyone who know anything about the humanities, and a really bad basis for creating plots with any surprises. Proceed to write an incredible amount of books with uninteresting characters, virtually the same lame plot except some twist at the end (that you can either see coming a mile away. Or if you didn't, you don't really care after all, because it doesn't make any difference because psycho history). Hugo award winner.

Dune: No plot that I can remeber (was it some fate-driven plot with zero surprises again?) and some perverse fascination with nobility of the absolute dictatorical kind/übermenschen/becoming a god. Won Hugo and Nebula awards, stay clear of these.

The Ender Quintet: Long family drama making you wish somebody would just wipe out the hoplessly dysfunctional Hesse family, that annoying family is reason enough alone to destroy Lucitania. Only surpassed by the lame ramblings of the intricacies of Card's utterly anti-important made up physics in later books. Only redeeming element: The Peccaninos was quite intersting, but otherwise another good reason to avoid Hugo, Nebula and Locus award winners.

Every time someone posts something I seem to be shaking my head, "no,no, you don't understand..."

Just proof we're all different. (Maybe too different.)

I've not read Ender's Game so I have no opinion; Handmaid's Tale is getting farther and farther from sci-fi and closer to being part of the Republican Party's political platform and is one of my very favorite books; I've read Foundation and I didn't hate it, but didn't love it; and Dune is a classic any way you cut it, if you don't see the plot, maybe you should re-read it.

Niels wrote: "The handmaids tale: Why does this book even end up on sci-fi lists? It's basically a grim cross between the Salem witch trials and the worst of islamic repression with absolutely no sci-fi, any plo..."

Had a good laugh at this! :D

I actually agree on Foundation. It’s simply bad by standards of any time.

You rated Ender's Game 5 stars, so I guess I made the right choice not to go further in the series. I may read Speaker for the Dead some day though.

Dune borrowed many themes from the fantasy genre, the chosen one, the aristocratic nature of worlds, prophecies etc. I read it as a child, and need to reread it to make up my mind about it.

Niels wrote: "The handmaids tale: Why does this book even end up on sci-fi lists? It's basically a grim cross between the Salem witch trials and the worst of islamic repression with absolutely no sci-fi..."

It is certainly speculative fiction, though.

Kirsten *Dogs Welcome - People Tolerated" wrote: "I've not read Ender's Game so I have no opinion; Handmaid's Tale is getting farther and farther from sci-fi and closer to being part of the Republican Party's political platform and is one of my very favorite books; I've read Foundation and I didn't hate it, but didn't love it; and Dune is a classic any way you cut it, if you don't see the plot, maybe you should re-read it. "

Of course we are all different ;)
And my preferences are definitely leaning to the action side of action versus character development dimension.
I'm living in Scandinavia so the risk of my society turning into ISIS anytime soon is virtually nonexistent, thus the whole concept is "ok whatever, what interesting stuff can you do with it?" to me. Nothing, it turned out.

Nothing, besides women gossiping about mundane stuff in such vailed terms that it was almost unintelligble, and a couple of nasty episodes, which are kinda brushed off as "this world sucks, it happens all the time". Leaving me with a big "hey author, why did you drag me through this depressing desert, expecting me to care about these made up characters (character development), when they are doing absolutely nothing interesting (action)?"
It's like the Foundation series: The author come up with some semi-interesting world-building concept, populating it with characters of no plot-changing capabilities whatsoever, and then proceed to bore you to tears and possibly get you into a really foul mood, and then leave you with an even fouler mood because you were too stubborn, too optimistic or simply too stupid to just fling the damn thing at the wall and do something else, anything else.

I may consider reading Dune again at some point, because I can't remember very much about it, but I fear that I'll just rediscover that its only redeeming qualities are a couple of computer games made in the early '90ties.

It's hard to argue with that criticism of the Foundation series. Psycho-history was interesting enough to carry maybe 1 novel through. In the end I liked the books of his Robots series better.

I'm also surprised that "Foundation" itself is considered such a much-read classic. Does it even make sense without the prequels? Even having read them all in order and understanding all the back-story, I still felt that I was being overly generous giving it 4 stars.

Niels wrote: "The Ender Quintet: Long family drama making you wish somebody would just wipe out the hoplessly dysfunctional Hesse family, that annoying family is reason enough alone to destroy Lucitania."

I did like Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead, but after that, I wholeheartedly agree with your comments. On a side note, being Brazilian it is also very disappointing to see how little research Orson Scott Carr put into inserting elements of Brazil or have someone review the Portuguese he sometimes use in the dialogues, which is really poor. And the fact that Brazil would colonize a world and than call it Lusitania (in honor of Portugal) is the same as suggesting that the U.S. would name a world Britania, or the Mexicans would name a world Hispaniola. Little things that kept annoying me, aside for the Hesse family. So, for those who liked the first two books in the series, my advice would be: stop there!

Bill wrote: "Since I am to 'blame' for this latest thread then here's a contender - Dhalgren by S.Delaney. I always finish a book(I admire those that can just stop and say 'enough')but this is the one that almo..."

That one happens to be my all time favorite book, by Samuel R. Delany. People tend to add an e to his name. But then I like experimental fiction like Stand On Zanzibar too. It isn't unusual for a Science Fiction fan to hate Dhalgren, though. I think it was a lot more read and respected outside the genre. I attended a panel discussion celebrating its 40th birthday recently. A lot of the panelists and audience members found it transformative. (Including me. It made me want to write.)

The book that's popular I didn't like was John Scalzi's Old Man's War. I thought the writing was dreadful.

When I first read Doomsday Book I loved it. A rereading a couple of years later with a group made me dislike it because I saw through all the cliches in it. The biggest for me was the realization that Colin is Spritle from Speed Racer. Let's hope a bunch of incompetents like those in Doomsday Book never get a hold of time travel.

Plenty of books I dislike for whatever reason. But I don't think books or authors can be overrated. If lots of people like them, they must strike someone's nerve, even if you're not one of them.

Take Scalzi's Redshirts. Saw that on quite a few best-of-scifi-lists, but I wasn't quite as enthusiastic. Although the end was quite original I was on to the plot after the first chapter and was occasionally bored. So I disliked it but that doesn't mean that Redshirts is overrated.

The implicit part of this thread's title is noted in italics: "Authors or Books I Dislike or Who I Personally Feel Are Overrated Because We All Can Have Opinions on Authors or Books that We Think Are Overrated

I actually have a fresh one, Zelazny's This Immortal. Some books are simply beyond me.

Edwin wrote: "Plenty of books I dislike for whatever reason. But I don't think books or authors can be overrated. If lots of people like them, they must strike someone's nerve, even if you're not one of them.

T..."

I thought Redshirts was hilarious. That's why I love it. Not a literary marvel by any stretch, but damn was I entertained while reading that book.

Edwin wrote: "Plenty of books I dislike for whatever reason. But I don't think books or authors can be overrated. If lots of people like them, they must strike someone's nerve, even if you're not one of them.

T..."

I agree it kind of went downhill. But the first 1/2 was hilarious!

Do some sci-fi readers become elitist? Or am I just reading too much into some people's comments.

Sometimes I think that people expect too much from their books or movies or music. I'm just looking to be entertained. That is why most techno, cyber, or hard sci-fi just leaves me cold. They seem to spend too much time on the technology and leaves the plot behind.

Just my two cents.

I feel the opposite way, honestly. From what I've seen people expect too little from their books and movies and music. I hate when someone recommends me a movie, and I ask them if it's good, and they respond "ehhh, no, but it's worth watching." That sort of thing happens surprisingly often. Like our time isn't valuable and we're all going to live forever. I believe in holding the things that we let into our lives to the highest standards.

If the technology doesn't make sense, or the characters are poorly developed, or the writing style is clunky, or the plot has holes and inconsistencies, it lessens my regard for the book. Maybe that makes me an elitist, but if so, I'll own it. I feel that it only deepens my appreciation for the stories that are masterfully done.

I was really talking about members of the different sci-fi groups I'm in. It seems they want too much.

As to a not-good movie worth watching, I watch plenty of those. I'm a big fan of "B" sci-fi movies. Many of those were quite bad, but they were definitely worth watching.

Back to books and reading, I feel like I don't have a lot in common with people in this group and the other 2 sci-fi book clubs I"m in. I think I just stay in for the book recommendations.

Packi wrote: "I actually have a fresh one, Zelazny's This Immortal. Some books are simply beyond me."

It seems my criticisms of PKD have come back to haunt me ,how can anyone dislike this masterpiece?

Bill wrote: "Packi wrote: "I actually have a fresh one, Zelazny's This Immortal. Some books are simply beyond me."

It seems my criticisms of PKD have come back to haunt me ,how can anyone dislike..."

Haha! See my review for that. Feel free to share why you liked it.