X-MAN@SRI-NIC.ARPA (09/02/85)
From: Jeff Thompson <X-MAN@SRI-NIC.ARPA>
One of my friends is generally derisive of sf. I think that she has been
exposed to too many "Creature Features" to take the genre seriously.
Recently, however she agreed to read one sf novel of my choice to "Give
the stuff a chance". I suggested "Lord of Light", which she is reading
now.
My question is this -- Was that a wise choice for a representative of all
that is good in the field? If not what would you suggest to your friends
given the same opportunity?
-- Jeff T.
-------jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) (09/03/85)
In article <3502@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> X-MAN@SRI-NIC.ARPA writes: >My question is this -- Was that a wise choice for a representative of all >that is good in the field? If not what would you suggest to your friends >given the same opportunity? > -- Jeff T. Having thought about this problem a long time, my answer is "Flowers for Algernon" (by D.Keyes). It is inventive, well-written, effective, and approachable. It is undeniably SF, but a far cry from space opera, almost sure to dispel any mistaken beliefs about what SF has to be. In addition, it does not require any background in the field -- for example, you don't have to know what FTL is and why it's important to many stories. Besides, the story is a great tear-jerker without being sucky about it. Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo
Alfke.PASA@Xerox.ARPA (09/05/85)
From: Peter Alfke <Alfke.pasa@Xerox.ARPA> Jeff Thompson <X-MAN@SRI-NIC.ARPA> writes: >My question is this -- Was that a wise choice for a representative >of all that is good in the field? If not what would you suggest to >your friends given the same opportunity? Not having read Lord of Light (sorry!), I will instead present an unabashed rave for a book that I would certainly suggest . . . At the moment I would recommend John Crowley's "Engine Summer", my (again, at the moment) favorite sf book. As far as micro-plot-synopsis: it takes place many centuries after the (non-nuclear) general collapse of our civilization, and follows a boy of a tribe that have an *exact* science of sociology, but no other scientific knowlege, in his journeys in an attempt to become a saint. This book is suffused with a "sense of wonder" -- the super-scientific devices of our near-future (and they are *original* super-scientific devices) are seen as quite magical by the characters in the story, and are presented through their eyes. Crowley lets one see these as magical holy relics, while simultaneously one realizes what they must 'really' be. The sense of wonder is one of the best and most important features of SF; it is certainly an essential feature of a "first" SF book. "Engine Summer" would make a wonderful first book, and in fact I strongly recommend it to anyone, no matter how SF-jaded they may be. Then, when you've finished it, read his "Little, Big"... --Peter Alfke PS: How else can you find out: Who are Dr. Boots' List? What is the Filing System? Who are the Four Dead Men, and why aren't there five, and are they the same Dead Men as the ones carved on a mountain? What do the silver ball and glove do? . . .
allison@mitre.ARPA (09/05/85)
From: Burgess Allison <allison@mitre.ARPA>
Particularly for would-be newcomers who are pre-disposed against BEMs,
Wierd Science, and stream-of-bizarre-consciousness writing styles,
I strongly suggest "The Stainless Steel Rat."
A good read, well-written, starts fast, has a plot, and doesn't dwell
on the bizarre or arcane. Harry Harrison could have just as easily
written Slippery Jim into a completely different setting and it still
would have been a good book. The SF setting enhances the story, and
sparks the reader's imagination to go beyond what's written on the
printed pages.
That's my vote for best-in-an-introductory-role.
Burgess Allison <allison@mitre>davidl@teklds.UUCP (David Levine) (09/05/85)
In the subgenre of HARD SF, I'd recommend that the first book to give to a non-SF reader is "The Mote in God's Eye." It was specifically written by Niven and Pournelle to be understandable without an SF background, to increase its public acceptance, and I believe it was one of the first SF books to make the New York Times' best-seller list. I think it also won several SF awards (sorry, I don't have my reference works handy). "Mote" has some of the most well-developed and believable aliens I know of, examines the impact of technolgy on societies, delves into the "joy of discovery" that is a major theme of hard SF, and is considered by many to be a classic of the field. It also has the advantage of not being part of a trilogy. David D. Levine (...decvax!tektronix!teklds!davidl) [UUCP] (teklds!davidl.tektronix@csnet-relay.csnet) [ARPA]
chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) (09/07/85)
The big problem I have with this discussion is that it is impossible to
give ONE book that can even start to come close to defining SF. By trying
to, you end up showing only a small and biased subset of the genre, and
there is no guarantee at all that the person will like that part of the
genre. If that happens, you turn them off to all the other works that they
might otherwise have enjoyed because SF 'isn't for them'. I prefer to hand
out a group of books, ask them to try them all and stop those that don't
interest them. Once you get an idea what they like, it becomes much easier
to turn them on to other similar books and slowly expand their horizons
later...
I agree that "Flowers for Algernon" ought to be on that list, I quibble
with "Mote in God's Eye" (I prefer "Dragon's Egg" and "Ringworld" for
hard but accessible SF), but those two books don't even start to show
the possibilities of the genre. What about "Martian Chronicles"? What
about "Tea with the Black Dragon"? The "Once and Future King"? You
can't go wrong tossing a copy of "Adventures in Time and Space" at
them, or "Shadow of the Torturer", or "Canticle for Liebowitz", or
"Something Wicked This Way Comes", or "Time Enough for Love", or
"Persistence of Vision", or "Footfall", or "The Time Machine", or
"Callahan's Crosstime Saloon", or "The Deathbird Stories" or "Myth
Adventures" for that matter. Every one of those really defines a
different feel and flavor within the genre, and you can hate a good
subset of that list and love the other subset just as strongly (I
happen to love all of them, which is why they popped in off the top of
my head. I could double the list with a little research). The point is,
if you choose any one of those books as the introduction to SF and they
hate it, they lose out on a wide variety of stuff they may well have
liked. Give them a bunch of books and help them find the parts of this
thing we call SF (and I am including fantasy in here at the moment,
just because I feel like it) and avoid the parts they don't like.
Hmm... maybe its time for another 'what are your favorite books' survey, or
better yet, 'what are your favorite books in each subgenre' survey...
--
Chuq Von Rospach nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA {decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4}!nsc!chuqui
An uninformed opinion is no opinion at all. If you dont know what you're
talking about, please try to do it quietly.laura@l5.uucp (Laura Creighton) (09/08/85)
I would opt for a good collection of short stories by a variety of authors. This is how I got my father (long time science fiction hater) hooked. There is much more variation between science fiction stories than, say, mysteries, and it is difficult to predict what sort of science fiction someone is going to like. My father turns out to be a great fantasy lover who can tolerate not-hard science fiction -- but how to know that? I ended up being lucky -- we were stuck on a 12 hour plane flight and he was out of reading material and so started on mine -- beginning with a collection of Fritz Leiber short stories. Since he loved that, I gave him the Hobbit, and Lord of the Rings, and The Eternal Champion and... If I had to select, though, I would get a Conklin collection. Ihave friends who love science fiction ala Hogan, Niven and Asimov who have never managed to see what I saw in Fafrd and the Grey Mouser. I would want a collection that spans both the fantasy and the hard sf end of the spectrum. Also, I think that short fiction is more technically brilliant than long fiction (on the whole! not in every instance!) because there is no room to screw up in short ficiton and recover -- either it is great or it flops. Lord of Light is one of my favourite books, but it took me three times to actually get down and read it -- the level of confusion hit a certain point before it all was put together and I wasn't patient enough until ... goodness! I finally read that ont he same plane trip I mentioned before! Weird... Okay, question time. Of the people out there who have read both Lord of Light and Creatures of Light and Darkness -- how many of you liked the first one you read (whatever that was, unless you read them at the same time) better? So far every single person I know who has read both of them likes the first one they read better. I don't know why....... -- Laura Creighton (note new address!) sun!l5!laura (that is ell-five, not fifteen) l5!laura@lll-crg.arpa
chai@utflis.UUCP (Henry Chai) (09/08/85)
Why not a book of short stories ?? In this way one can be exposed to
different authors, diverse styles, etc. I don't have one to recommand,
though. By the way, MY first SF book was indeed a collection of short
stories. It was a compulsory reader during my Form 2 year (= grade 8)
in Hong Kong. I remembered that it's got stories by Bradbury(sp?),
Clarke and Asimov.
--
Henry Chai
Faculty of Library and Information Science, U of Toronto
{watmath,ihnp4,allegra}!utzoo!utflis!chai dca@edison.UUCP (David C. Albrecht) (09/13/85)
> I would opt for a good collection of short stories by a variety of authors. > This is how I got my father (long time science fiction hater) hooked. > I have often found short stories to be much more innovative and experimental. One could speculate as to why this is so. Since there is a smaller time investment in a short story it is easier to try things that may not work, explore ideas, and develop concepts that are interesting for a short time but not worth large scale exploration. Earl Tubb who writes the Dumarest series (and seems to write essentially the same book over and over) had some really excellent short stories in an Ace double while his novels are at best mediocre. I really enjoyed the story where a modern man on a lark tries a formula to summon a demon and it works. Rather humorous. I'm not in general a big fan of short stories but some I have read have definitely been excellent. > Okay, question time. Of the people out there who have read both Lord of > Light and Creatures of Light and Darkness -- how many of you liked the first > one you read (whatever that was, unless you read them at the same time) > better? So far every single person I know who has read both of them likes > the first one they read better. I don't know why....... > I like Lord of Light better and I read Creatures of Light and Darkness first. Or did I read Lord of Light first? Heck, I don't know it's been a long time. David Albrecht
mcb@styx.UUCP (Michael C. Berch) (09/16/85)
I'd feel sort of an obligation to try to break the spaceship/time-travel
stereotype. To that end, how about John Varley's THE PERSISTENCE OF VISION.
This is one of his best works -- perhaps the finest and most moving novella
ever written. What's more, it is the title piece in a really first-class
collection of SF novelettes and story stories. All the stories are
very accessible to casual readers; you don't have to have a background
in SF cliches or history.
Michael C. Berch
mcb@lll-tis-b.ARPA
{akgua,allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,dual,ihnp4,sun}!idi!styx!mcbchuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) (09/18/85)
In article <12459@styx.UUCP> mcb@styx.UUCP (Michael C. Berch) writes: >I'd feel sort of an obligation to try to break the spaceship/time-travel >stereotype. To that end, how about John Varley's THE PERSISTENCE OF VISION. >This is one of his best works -- perhaps the finest and most moving novella >ever written. What's more, it is the title piece in a really first-class >collection of SF novelettes and story stories. All the stories are >very accessible to casual readers; you don't have to have a background >in SF cliches or history. The only quibble I have with it is that Varley tends to deal with very adult and/or sexual images and themes, sometimes rather graphically (never in an obscene obligatory manner, though). Some groups of people prefer not to handle these kinds of work, and shouldn't be handed them unneccessarily. -- Chuq Von Rospach nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA {decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4}!nsc!chuqui Take time to stop and count the ewoks...
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (09/22/85)
>I would opt for a good collection of short stories by a >variety of authors... If I had to select, though, I would get >a Conklin collection. I would recommend Healy & McComas "Adventures in Time and Space" aka "The Modern Library Giant: Great Science Fiction Stories." Which is a little spotty but has some really good stuff. Even more I recommend "Science Fiction Hall of Fame Vol. I" ed. by Robert Silverberg. They are the two best anthologies of short stories I know. Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper
michaelm@3comvax.UUCP (Michael McNeil) (09/27/85)
[dangling morsel.] I'd like to suggest a Clifford Simak book for someone's first science fiction reading. I've long thought that *City*, among other good books of his, might be a promising candidate. For those who think that short stories are good to begin with, the book is organized as semi-independent stories on a theme. -- Michael McNeil 3Com Corporation "All disclaimers including this one apply" (415) 960-9367 ..!ucbvax!hplabs!oliveb!3comvax!michaelm Who knows for certain? Who shall here declare it? Whence was it born, whence came creation? The gods are later than this world's formation; Who then can know the origins of the world? None knows whence creation arose; And whether he has or has not made it; He who surveys it from the lofty skies, Only he knows -- or perhaps he knows not. *The Rig Veda*, X. 129