finnegan%uci-icsc@sri-unix.UUCP (10/11/84)
From: Greg Finnegan <finnegan@uci-icsc> (I hope that these kind of flames are not getting tedious, but here goes...) After reading various negative comments about some of the authors (Herbert, Anthony, Niven) and their works (Dune, Adept series, Ringworld,etc.) that I have enjoyed greatly, I felt I should argue in favor of the aforementioned. But I didn't feel that I should answer in rebuttal to each argument posted, until I was inspired by a foreword by Isaac Asimov that appeared in an old anthology. This should sum up why I feel some opinions of these books is unfair (everyone is entitled to their own opinion - even if they are wrong...). Science fiction (this include fantasy in my mind) is the only printed arena where authors can get away with such far (and not so far) reaching ideas as they do (unless you want to count some of the off the wall works of Gore Vidal -- Duluth, and such). Since the author is not usually dealing with such well known facts that objects fall when you drop them, dogs bark, and fire trucks are red (in my town), he must spend much of his time describing the background - social, political, biological, etc. aspects. This leaves very little room to expand upon characterization and minute plot details that writers of 'normal' fiction delve into. Sure the characters in Dune are shallow and sometimes boring, but the political web that is woven by Herbert is immense. And sure, Niven's Integral Trees is just a shoot-em-up travelogue, but he gave us a novel (no pun...) setting that is unparalleled in any of the reading I have done lately (read LATELY! - and I will accept suggestions). This may sound rude, but if you want thoughtful characterizations and intricate plots all of the time - read a few of the classics recommended by the national library association. I admit that there are sf novels out there that meet these requirements, but that doesn't mean that the others can't be enjoyed for what they are. -- Greg finnegan@uci-icsc