patcl@tekecs.UUCP (Pat Clancy) (09/21/85)
> I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one who didn't like Startide > Rising. Can't figure out why it won the Hugo and Nebula. If this was > the best of the year it must have been a very bad year. Agreed! Startide Rising was awful, with one of the most unconvincing, most cliched, and generally worst depictions of aliens I've come across in some time. Possibly tied for "most overrated" with Gene Wulf's (sp?) extremely bad novel "Shadow of the Torturer". I just got a copy of Carl Sagan's new sf novel, "Contact". So far (about 1/4 through) it's quite good. As you might expect, the science is accurate, and explained in some detail; far more so than other works in the "sf by scientists" genre that I've come across (eg.: Forward's "Dragon's Egg" or anything by Scheffield). And as an additional bonus, he proves to be a good novelist (convincing characters, etc.). Another recent "hard sf" (ie., "real sf") novel I'd highly recommend is Eon, by Greg Bear. Pat Clancy, Tektronix
jimb@ISM780B.UUCP (09/23/85)
>> I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one who didn't like Startide >> Rising. Can't figure out why it won the Hugo and Nebula. If this was >> the best of the year it must have been a very bad year. >Agreed! Startide Rising was awful, with one of the >most unconvincing, most cliched, and generally worst depictions of >aliens I've come across in some time. Possibly tied for >"most overrated" with Gene Wulf's (sp?) extremely bad novel >"Shadow of the Torturer". Aw, c'mon guys. Let's start a "Tastes Great" vs. "Less Filling" argument. It depends on what you read SF for. Personally, I'm happy to sit down with a text book when I want to learn science. For reading SF, I like an engaging plot with plausible characters, and I can even be convinced by the author to like a story that I knew I'd hate, e.g., NEUROMANCER. Brin and Wolfe render pleasant dreams in mutually different but fresh ways that allow me to share the dream by that marvelous translating device, the book. As far as details of science, which are the more important details to get right, quark-quark interactions and alien respiratory systems or the examination of what happens to individuals and cultures as a result of certain scientific/speculative conditions occuring? Again, strictly personal opinion, but I prefer absorbing the gestalt of the forest to the minutiae of the trees -- feels more liberating and expanding, don't you know? I happen to agree with you about Greg Bear; he paints nice pictures that have a high degree of technical verisimilitude. (I've talked to the man and he has a manic sense of research and does *not* have a science degree or job. As far as I know, he's a full time fiction writer, which is a truly endangered species.) But as nice (and moving!) as the pictures are, they haven't (yet) approached the breathtaking grandness of Brin or Wolfe. Admittedly, STARTIDE is direct descendant of 50's and 60's Heinlein-style SF, but there is a depth and texture to it that Heinlein acheived but rarely and most others of the era not at all. The Wolfe is almost *sui generis* , but it, too has a richness of plot and character that is hard to match. To not like something is one thing, but to dismiss it as "bad".... I wish more people would swallow the idea that it is possible not to like a good book and to love a mediocre one. -- from the bewildered musings of Jim Brunet decvax!cca!ima!jimb ucbvax!ucla-cs!ism780!jimb ihnp4!vortex!ism780!jimb
gail@calmasd.UUCP (Gail B. Hanrahan) (09/27/85)
In article <27800018@ISM780B.UUCP> jimb@ISM780B.UUCP writes: >I happen to agree with you about Greg Bear; he paints nice pictures that have >a high degree of technical verisimilitude. (I've talked to the man and he >has a manic sense of research and does *not* have a science degree or job. >As far as I know, he's a full time fiction writer, which is a truly >endangered species.) But as nice (and moving!) as the pictures are, they >haven't (yet) approached the breathtaking grandness of Brin or Wolfe. If you haven't read them yet, read _Eon_ (just out in hardback), or _Blood Music_ (also just out in hardback), or _The Infinity Concerto_ (paperback, 1984), all by Greg Bear. Dave Brin's books are lots of fun, I enjoyed them tremendously, but Greg's books consistently have more depth, and are still entertaining. _Eon_ in particular really blew me away. _The Infinity Concerto_ deserves a second reading. I suppose I should mention that these folks are both good friends... -- Gail Bayley Hanrahan Calma Company, San Diego {ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!gail
brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust) (09/30/85)
It could be argued that it is a waste of resources to respond over the net with agreement that doesn't carry anything forward, but I just couldn't let this go by without shouting, yea, verily! > > Aw, c'mon guys. Let's start a "Tastes Great" vs. "Less Filling" argument. > It depends on what you read SF for. Personally, I'm happy to sit down > with a text book when I want to learn science. Yea! Verily! > > Brin and Wolfe render pleasant dreams in mutually different but > fresh ways that allow me to share the dream by that marvelous translating > device, the book. Yea! Verily! > > I happen to agree with you about Greg Bear; he paints nice pictures that have > a high degree of technical verisimilitude. (I've talked to the man and he > has a manic sense of research and does *not* have a science degree or job. > As far as I know, he's a full time fiction writer, which is a truly > endangered species.) But as nice (and moving!) as the pictures are, they > haven't (yet) approached the breathtaking grandness of Brin or Wolfe. Yea! Verily! > Admittedly, STARTIDE is direct descendant of 50's and 60's Heinlein-style SF, > but there is a depth and texture to it that Heinlein acheived but rarely and > most others of the era not at all. The Wolfe is almost *sui generis* , but > it, too has a richness of plot and character that is hard to match. > Yea! Verily! > To not like something is one thing, but to dismiss it as "bad".... > > I wish more people would swallow the idea that it is possible not to like a > good book and to love a mediocre one. > > That is exactly what I have been trying to find a way of saying (and failing at) for some time now. Thank you.
jimb@ISM780B.UUCP (10/02/85)
Greg Bear *is* one of my favorite writers and based on your recommendations,
I'll add Eon and Infinity Concerto to my already long to-be-read queue. (If
I had a matter transmitter that made me a duplicate of me, I'd try to send
him out to earn a living while I stayed home to read and write. And loaf.)
My comment about Brin should be read as "the best of Brin." While the Bear
that I've read so far has been exquisite, it has not been the tour de force
that STARTIDE RISING was. Some of the rest of Brin's work ranges from
average to merely good, though I have high hopes for THE POSTMAN and,
especially THE UPLIFT WAR.
I suspect some of the commentary on I've read on the net concerning dolphins
while partly directed at Brin, has more to do with the knock-offs and
imitations. Brin did the dolphin's well, with good characterization
(Takkata-Jim was one of my favorites in the whole book), a reasonable social
structure, and in a stroke of inspired brilliance, the dolphin linguistic
system, including Trinary. Brin did a high-wire act, without a net, and in
my opinion, pulled it off, which makes SR a tour de force.
Bear writes beautifully, but -- and no criticism implied -- in the work's
I've read he's never gone out on the high-wire.
Greg Benford is also friends with both Brin and Bear. The San Diego Bees as
Shawna McCarthy called them. I'm almost willing to move a hundred miles
south just to see if some if it would rub off on me.
Cheers.
-- from the bewildered musings of Jim Brunet
decvax!cca!ima!jimb
ucbvax!ucla-cs!ism780!jimb
ihnp4!vortex!ism780!jimb