The Evolution of Science Fiction discussion

I read Cloud Atlas recently and here, I was forewarned by other members of the group. The book cover has 101 great reviews but for me it just didn't match the hype. In fact it took all my will power just to finish it. David Mitchell is a good author but this one just didn't work for me. Just got me interested in hearing about which acclaimed sci-fi books people didn't like and why.

I share your opinion about Cloud Atlas.

The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury is a widely acclaimed book that didn't do a lot for me when I read it years ago. I reread it recently to see if I would like it better. I didn't. It's not that I disliked it - I just don't get what's so great about it.

Buck wrote: "I share your opinion about Cloud Atlas.

The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury is a widely acclaimed book that didn't do a lot for me when I read it years ago. I reread it recently..."

I have this one sat on my bookshelf waiting to read, it has been there quite a while. I had heard a lot of good things so I will be interested to see now.

How about Rendezvous with Rama? It's obviously hard looking back at some of the classics and being able to mentally rewind yourself 40 or 50 years to try to take it in in context; I'd like to think I'm normally pretty good at this. Rama just did almost nothing for me; it's all stage dressing and no substance.

I thought Rendezvous with Rama was about as good as anything else I've read by Arthur C Clarke.

Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey - The movie was better than the book, but the book at least did explain the graphic gibberish at the end of the movie.

It's interesting, actually, because I just finished Childhood's End and I'd say Clarke couldn't be further apart in approach than Rama and Childhood's End. Rama it's all - "WOH! Crazy BDO - ooh shiny, check this out!" with absolutely no bother in explanation etc... Childhood's End is all "Woh! (view spoiler)[ Aliens! And they also look like demons! (hide spoiler)]" and here's exactly why they're here and what they're doing.

In retrospect this shows a clear prejudice on my side and a definite preference to at least GET SOME DAMN ANSWERS AFTER ALL THE MYSTERY!!! haha

Everybody loves The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, except me. It was amusing at first, then it got dumb. Douglas Adams' humorous writing style only goes so far - I got annoyed with it and couldn't finish the book. It was like overdosing on sugar.

Me too, Buck. I could never get past the quarter mark (if that far) on the book, movie, or British TV mini series. I made it about as far on "Cloud Atlas" & while I read "The Martian Chronicles" & "Rama", I never understood what the fuss was about. I thought the other two Clarke books were pretty good, but I saw '2001' at the World's Fair on the big screen. It has a lot of memories for me, so I can't judge it fairly. Besides, I like books that don't sum it all up & leave the reader wondering what happened. 2 of my top 3 are like that; Lord of Light & The Einstein Intersection.

I've never seen what the fuss was about "The Hunger Games". It was OK, but I couldn't stomach the second book & quit.

I have Lord of Light sitting on the TBR shelf by my bed - glad to hear a high endorsement!

Zac, I compared our books & can't decide if you'll like LoL or not. I didn't see any other Zelazny books on your shelves & he can be a bit of an acquired taste. He typically writes on several levels & requires the reader to fill in a LOT of gaps.

LoL was also written as a serial with different styles in each section. If you do decide to read it, you might want to check out the topic on it in the Zelazny group.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

You might notice I started the group & figure out that I'm pretty thrilled with his writing. He tends to engender strong feelings one way or the other.

Jim -
I am now downloading This Immortal by Zelazny, an audiobook. It's the only Zelazny my library has for download. I'll begin it today. I know I read Zelazny many years ago, but I can't recall what I might have read. The titles have all dissipated into the fog of time.

Jim wrote: "LoL was also written as a serial with different styles in each section."

Similar approach as Dan Simmons took to Hyperion?

The only Zelazny I've read was the 'He Who Shapes' novella that preceded/evolved into The Dream Master.

Buck, I hope you enjoy it. This Immortal is the other of my top 3 books.

Zac, I've never read Simmons or Hyperion nor know how or why he wrote it the way he did. Given that it wasn't published until 1989, I doubt that it is quite the same. When Zelazny published LoL in 1967, pulps were still around & novels were sometimes published in parts. Each part had to stand alone &/or fill in the background well enough so that readers could enjoy the story whether or not they'd read the previous pieces.

"He Who Shapes" or the novelization, The Dream Master isn't one of my favorite novels. Actually, I don't care for it much at all. I've read both, but wound up skimming.

Speaking of Simmon's Hyperion, that's one I would list as a book many seem to think highly of, but I had to force my way through. I got through both Hyperion books but didn't really enjoy them much. I liked Song of Kali a lot better. And at the risk of attracting everyone's ire, I didn't care much for The Lord of The Rings. I found Tolkien's writing impenetrable for decades. I tried to watch the first film while multitasking figuring at some point the film would draw me in and I'd stop multi-tasking. Next thing you know, the credits are rolling and 3 hours and change are gone and nothing much really happened in the film to grab me. It took getting really sick to finally marathon the three films back to back to draw me in. Then I was finally able to read the books. I got through the first two and most of the third, but never finished.

Though I'm not sure if I would call LOTR or Hyperion overrated. Clearly a lot of people love both, they just aren't to my taste.

David wrote: "Speaking of Simmon's Hyperion, that's one I would list as a book many seem to think highly of, but I had to force my way through. I got through both Hyperion books but didn't really enjoy them much..."

But of course, LOTR isn't science fiction.

The one thing I didn't care for in the Hyperion tetralogy is the heavy reliance on Catholicism. It went into way too much detail into the rituals and culture of the church. Sometimes it gets a little heavy. They are rather literary for science fiction. Being different from one another some may appeal more than others. I enjoyed the Endymion pair more than the Hyperion pair.

Buck wrote: "David wrote: "They are rather literary for science fiction "

I expected to like them for this reason. I also tend to like science fiction that involves religion. I think it was the rest I didn't care for. The mix for some reason left me having trouble distinguishing characters and following plot. Maybe I'll try one of the Endymion books sometime, but I think I'm more likely to try something unrelated of his, if I ever go back to his writing again.

Here's an interesting list compiled by AbeBooks (a site that lets book stores sell on the web) for The top 100 most searched for out-of-print books in 2013
http://www.abebooks.com/blog/index.ph...

I was surprised by some of them & I own 3 or 4. IMO, The Colorado Kid by Stephen King is the biggest surprise. It was the only book from Hard Case Crime that I gave 1 star to.

Jim wrote: "Here's an interesting list compiled by AbeBooks (a site that lets book stores sell on the web) for The top 100 most searched for out-of-print books in 2013
http://www.abebooks.com/blog/index.ph......"

This list contains such a strange mix of books. I must admit there are quite a few I don't know but some on the list I find quite difficult to believe anybody would want to read. Shows what a variety of tastes there are in the world I guess!

Jo wrote: "Jim wrote: "Here's an interesting list compiled by AbeBooks (a site that lets book stores sell on the web) for The top 100 most searched for out-of-print books in 2013
http://www.abebooks.com/blog/..."

I think since it's a "most searched" list we're not necessarily seeing a list of books people are actually reading or buying. I can say I once searched the Madonna book after hearing about the going price, just to see what it was on Abebooks. I had no intention of buying it. There are lots of reasons to search a book that wouldn't stem from a desire to purchase it or read it.

David wrote: "Jo wrote: "Jim wrote: "Here's an interesting list compiled by AbeBooks (a site that lets book stores sell on the web) for The top 100 most searched for out-of-print books in 2013
http://www.abebook..."

Good point, I was assuming everyone wanted to buy them. It's such an eclectic list, It makes me wonder how many times a book was searched for to make it on the list.

Buck wrote: "Everybody loves The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, except me. It was amusing at first, then it got dumb. Douglas Adams' humorous writing style only goes so far - I got ann..."

I had the same impression. I loved the BBC Radio series, but the books left me cold.

Different books for different nooks. Hyperion 5 stars. Lord of Light whaaaa?...2 stars.

I'm going to add The Penultimate Truth by Philip K Dick. I'm usually a fan of his books but this one was not one of his best. The reason i'm putting it here is it's in the SF Masterworks series and I don't think it deserves to be.

I'm a PKD fan. Occasionally I've come across a work of his that seems not up to his usual.

Jo wrote: "I'm going to add The Penultimate Truth by Philip K Dick. I'm usually a fan of his books but this one was not one of his best. The reason i'm putting it here is it's in the SF Masterwor..."

In my opinion his worst Dr. Futurity. The Penultimate Truth doesn't even come close.

David wrote: "In my opinion his worst Dr. Futurity. The Penultimate Truth doesn't even come close. ."

That's one i've not read and it's not in the SF masterworks series either so maybe one I should avoid!

Jim wrote: "Here's an interesting list compiled by AbeBooks (a site that lets book stores sell on the web) for The top 100 most searched for out-of-print books in 2013
http://www.abebooks.com/blog/index.ph......"

That is funny because I really enjoyed it. I understand that many do not like it because of how it does end, but that is what the story was about, not the answer, but the mystery itself.

Papaphilly wrote: "Jim wrote: "Here's an interesting list compiled by AbeBooks (a site that lets book stores sell on the web) for The top 100 most searched for out-of-print books in 2013
http://www.abebooks.com/blog/..."

The main problem I had with it is about 3/4 through the book the protagonist loses the motivating factor behind the plan he's set in motion. I spent the last 1/4 of the book yelling at him to just go home. He no longer needed to do what he was doing and he was putting yourself at extreme risk for no reason. I don't know if Dick had to cut the length of the book for Ace and messed it up or maybe someone else cut it, but that's probably what happened.

Zac wrote: "How about Rendezvous with Rama? It's obviously hard looking back at some of the classics and being able to mentally rewind yourself 40 or 50 years to try to take it in in context; I'd..."

Both Rendezvous with Rama and The Fountains of Paradise left me cold and unenthusiastic about pursuing Clarke any further. It's disappointing as the ideas are epic and he's supposed to be one of the sci fi biggies. I just found the actual execution quite tedious.

Edit - just realised I'm replying to a four year old comment.

Sabri wrote: "Both Rendezvous with Rama and The Fountains of Paradise left me cold and unenthusiastic about pursuing Clarke any further. It's disappointing as the ideas are epic and he's supposed to be one of the sci fi biggies. I just found the actual execution quite tedious.."

Yes, Clarke was one of the hardest in hard SF, therefore not to anyone's taste. At the same time his short stories are often quite good

Oleksandr wrote: "Sabri wrote: "Both Rendezvous with Rama and The Fountains of Paradise left me cold and unenthusiastic about pursuing Clarke any further. It's disappointing as the ideas are epic and he's supposed t..."

Thanks for the pointer. I think I saw someone say a similar thing about his short stories in another thread - if I get the opportunity I'll have a look.

My initial reaction was that it wasn't the hardness itself that put me off. I studied maths and science and would say I enjoyed the more accurately scientific aspects. But you know what, maybe you're right, maybe I get enough of the hard stuff in my work life and therefore subconsciously look elsewhere for my entertainment.

haha 4 year old post about 50 year old book? No worries, I still feel the same way. Also funny to differentiate short stories to novels - I recall feeling like Rama was only like 150 pages haha

Arthur C. Clarke is one of the giants. However his books can be indescribably dense and tough. I loved Rendezvous with Rama and read his three sequels. By the fourth, he mined it out badly. His short stories are amazing.

Buck wrote: "Everybody loves The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, except me. It was amusing at first, then it got dumb. Douglas Adams' humorous writing style only goes so far - I got annoy..."

I agree.

Also, I don't like Foundation by Asimov, though I do like his Robot novels and most of his shorts.

And I detest Starship Troopers and most Heinlein, though when I was a teen I liked them. He does have some brilliant short stories, though.

Cheryl wrote: "Also, I don't like Foundation by Asimov, though I do like his Robot novels and most of his shorts."

I liked the original Foundation trilogy when I've read it 2.5 decades ago, but re-read so far only the 1st volume. I agree that Robot and shorts are better, but for me average Asimov can be preferred to many modern authors. I also like his non-fiction

Oleksandr wrote: "Yes, Clarke was one of the hardest in hard SF, therefore not to anyone's taste. At the same time his short stories are often quite good"

I agree completely. I found his novels anywhere from "OK" to "barely tolerable" (except Childhood's End and 2001/2010 which I enjoyed) but I have always very much enjoyed his short fiction.

Ditto.

I was never a great fan of Clarke, but I thought it was just me. I used to be a great fan of his contemporaries, Heinlein, PKD, and Asimov - still am to a certain degree.

Funny. For me Clarke seems like the one who's work stands best the test of time when compared to Heinlein and Asimov. Especially Heinlein...

I've actually never been a huge fan of Azimov's fiction. My favorite books of his have always been his non-fiction works.

Michael wrote: "I've actually never been a huge fan of Azimov's fiction. My favorite books of his have always been his non-fiction works."

I know this is a bit offtopic, but which exactly books do you like? My first non-fic by Asimov was View from a Height and this was great. I liked his history non-fic too

Oleksandr wrote: "Michael wrote: "I've actually never been a huge fan of Azimov's fiction. My favorite books of his have always been his non-fiction works."

I know this is a bit offtopic, but which exactly books do..."

Perhaps even less on topic, his non-fiction essay The Relativity of Wrong greatly influenced the way I think about science:

https://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscien...

Sabri wrote: "his non-fiction essay The Relativity of Wrong greatly influenced the way I think about science:"

Thanks!

Good stuff, but it would be nice to put it in his topic so we can find it in the future. The Asimov topic is here:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

I'll post my favorite nonfiction books by him there.