I know it's always subject to debate, but I've been curious for a while now about what books every SF fan should read. The kind of thing people look at you askance and say "You haven't read *that*?!"

I tend to think of SF more in terms of authors than titles--Asimov (Foundation or I, Robot), Clarke, Heinlein, Wells--but then I remember: 1984. Fahrenheit 451. Frankenstein.

Contemporary or classic, obscure or popular--what are your must-read science fiction books?

Quickly, off the top of my head:

1984 and Fahrenheit 451 should just plain be required reading by everyone once a year

The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress by Heinlein
The Man Who Never Missed by Steve Perry
Mindkiller by Spider Robinson
Neuromancer by William Gibson
Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy by Douglas Adams
A Wrinkle In Time by Madeline L'Engle

There are more but I'm starting to draw a blank.

None of the above. Unless you're interested in the history of science fiction, you're better off avoiding Golden Age sf because it is mostly rubbish.

Message edited by its author, Jun 23, 2009, 4:09am.

#2

A quick look at that list

- 1984 - far, far overrated. Orwell tells you everything that happens in 1984, through dialog. Never shows something, never hints. Animal Farm is much better.
- Fahrenheit 451 - felt like another version of 1984. Except without Orwell's writing skill. Oh, and very badly cliched. I kept on predicting the next part of the book, which never bodes well.
- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy - I don't know about the movie or the radio series, but the fiction series was average at best, and quickly went downhill. Patchy humour, large plot coincidences, shakey character development. Why this got such a cult following, I have no idea.
- Neuromancer - I will be re-reading this soon, and the rest of the series, possibly for the next Group Read. I read this some time ago, but thought it had some decent ideas and story at the time.
- A Wrinkle In Time - awful characterisation, awful plot, cliched, and major plot inconsistencies. The fact that it was written for children is not any sort of excuse - kids should not be subjected to such poorly-written fiction.

I haven't read Moon is a Harsh Mistress, which I will endeavour to do when I get the chance. As for Mindkiller, and The Man Who Never Missed... I haven't even heard of either author who wrote the novels, but that doesn't mean too much. Anyone else wish to discuss the merits of the two novels?

Spider Robinson is best known for his Callahan's Crosstime Saloon stories, and if there's one sub-genre of sf I hate it's stories set in pubs and bars where one customer tells another a "strange" story...

The Man Who Never Missed is the first book in the Matador series - um, I just looked on Wikipedia and there's nine books in it! - and from what I remember it's very ordinary mid-1980s sf.

You've never heard of Spider Robinson?

Anyway Mindkiller is OK, characterisation is a bit weak. However it always read to me as if it had been written in the early 70s and not early 80s (a lot of Spider Robinson has that feel of being a little out-dated). At the time Spider Robinson was hailed as Heinlein's successor.

Steve Perry - haven't read but the cover looks and synopsis sounds like it is just generic extruded product for teenage US boys.

>5 Ian,
Why did you go to Wikipedia to learn that there are nine books in the Matador series when LT could tell you just as easily? Just askin' is all.

Good question. Probably because I consider Wikipedia a more accurate source of data than LT. I've had to correct the spelling of titles and authors, and other publication data, in LT several times...

The original poster might want to take a look at a thread from last year - Your Essential Science Fiction List - where members posted their 25 'essential' works.

The top five vote getters:
Dune – Frank Herbert
Childhood’s End – Arthur C. Clarke
Forever War – Joe Haldeman
Mars Trilogy (Red Mars/Green Mars/Blue Mars) – Kim Stanley Robinson
Ubik – Philip K. Dick

I'd agree with all of those as well worth reading - although I only liked Red Mars in Robinson's series. They're a bit old but I think they hold up well.

Message edited by its author, Jun 23, 2009, 9:38am.

I have a hard time evaluating the 'classics' as works of fictions, separate from their influence on latter work, and originality at the time of publication, so I am not up for a discussion of quality, but if you mention 1984, you have to have Brave new world on the list as well, IMO.

I'm not sure about "should" read...but I enjoyed The Stars My Destination by Alfred Bester very much - more than I expected. I read it and was surprised (in some ways) how old it was; it felt much fresher to me than a much newer work like Neuromancer by William Gibson.

Though I have found them hard work in places, I have enjoyed the Alastair Reynolds Revelation Space books I have read so far. Just so many ideas and characters - it was all interesting but hard to keep track of.

Just finished Fall of Hyperion, the conclusion to Hyperion and was very impressed, though somewhat overloaded on a first reading. That's going back on the shelf for a future re-read.

As for Hitch-hiker, I ended up enjoying the radio version much more than reading the books. I think that was down to voice tones and comic timing.

Read Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World several years ago, but I don't remember too much about them at the moment.

I'm reading The Left Hand of Darkness, and enjoying that, particularly the social ideas.

I read Glasshouse and thought that had some great ideas - not just gender dysphoria but body dysphoria, the upload virus - and the whole skewed critique of 20th century society. I'd have to read it again to work out whether it is more like an American society or a British one, gone wrong, but anyway it was good.

I have read Glasshouse and I finished Accelerando two nights ago. Stross, a Brit, seems to regard himself as enough of an expert on what he calls "uptight America" (that's from Accelerando)to constantly criticize it. It's too bad, because this insufferable habit really detracts from what is many ways very good sf. A pity.

(The "uptight America" comment comes, iirc, many light-years away from Sol and several centuries after all of planet Earth has been disassembled and converted to computing elements of a giant solar-system-wide singularity intelligence. But we've still got to find some way of straining to work in a dis on the US!)

The Left Hand of Darkness and The Dispossessed both deserve to be included, I believe--UKL made such a difference in introducing social science into SF (not the first to do so, I'm sure, but the first to take it seriously?), not to mention gender issues and Taoism, and we even get to see the ansible invented. I would want someone to read a Gene Wolfe, just to see that there is excellent writing in SF along with all the sludge; probably The Fifth Head of Cerberus. I think The Stars My Destination is a great example of an SF twist on an old story (the revenge story a la Count of Monte Cristo) that is also an excellent story on its own terms, and holds up very well, as Flit mentioned.

If a person is a fan, she should try stuff and follow paths that she enjoys. If she wants to study SF, she should read mopre of the older stuff to understand the progression. Asimov needed an editor desperately, but the first three Foundation books are important. I would read The Man in the High Castle as an example of alternate history, and Woman on the Edge of Time as an example (beyond LeGuin) of feminist SF.

Carnophile, interesting comment on Stross. Being a Brit, I obviously didn't notice that in Glasshouse - the only Stross novel I've read, although I do have Halting State somewhere on the TBR pile. Oh wait - I do have a PDF of Accelerando as well.

Have you tried reading Richard Morgan's Black Man (AKA Thirteen)?

#13 Why are the Foundation books important? I've never understood that. They were popular, but that's no indication. They weren't the first sf novels to feature a galactic empire, or the grand sweep of history. EE 'Doc' Smith beats Asimov on both those counts, and I'm fairly sure he wasn't the first.

iansales - no, but I'll make a note of it. Thank you for the tip.

#17

You'll probably consider it more American bashing.

As for Glasshouse I just don't see it. The knowledge of the US (and the 'community' depicted) comes from from patchy and falsified records thousands of years hence. Also examine everyone's motives - I think that everyone was unreliable (as regards the truth) to a certain extent in Glasshouse. The experiment wasn't set up to be 'fair' to the USA, the extant records, or the participants,

Also it certainly isn't common to some of Stross's other books. The Merchant Princes series depicts the US in a less antagonistic light.

Er, Andy, that was why I asked if carnophile had read it...

Well, in my experience, admittedly short, I've only lived in the US for 60 of my 64yrs so don't take me as an expert, but America IS uptight. We're a country run by FOWMs (Frightened Old White Men). Where's the criticism in that? The truth sometimes can be painful. We haven't figured out, as a nation, that if you want to grow something you proscribe it. Psychologically, America is a mess.

Jim, I tried to read The Book of the New Sun for the SF group read some months back. I got through the first book but could not proceed. I just couldn't face slogging my way through more sludge. Maybe it would have got better as it went along, but it was so hard just to finish one, the thought of reading three more was just too daunting.

I used The Book of the New Sun to inaugurate my new collection entitled "Unreadable".

Always keep in mind, taste and preference is very subjective. That book was not to my taste. I felt like I was strolling through the Renaissance Faire down here at Waxahachie. Not one of my favorite ways to spend time regardless of the bustiers and sea of cleavage.

Message edited by its author, Jun 24, 2009, 10:26am.

Gene, there are nations where gays are stoned to death.

My woman friend who was in the peace corp in Africa said she got hit on a lot because of the perception that American woman would hop into the sack a lot more easily than the native women. I don't know whether this is due to reality or simply the perception created by US movies and TV, but in either case, it doesn't support the "uptight US" picture.

Where do peop e get this notion that the rest of the world is on e big group orgy, with only those US prudes refusing to join the fun?

My sisters and parents have collectively lived in, probably, around 7 countries. And I don't mean visited, I mean lived for years at a time. Collectively, they've probably spent ~15 person-years in other countries. None of them has ever said anything about the US being "uptight" compared to mellow natives elsewhere. I think, Gene, you're just looking for an excuse to cue up your standard "uptight old white men" editorial.

Message edited by its author, Jun 24, 2009, 11:14am.

Use of weapons
Reality Dysfunction
Hyperion
More than human
Dune
The Mammoth Book of Extreme Science Fiction

Have always enjoyed dark humour, so Iain M Banks is a favourite; but am getting into some of the older stuff - especially Theodore Sturgeon and Harlan Ellison, thanks to the last book listed; one of the best Anthologies I've read.

> 4 & >11: Douglas Adams' books got popular because they were picked up and read by people who don't normally read sf but who do listen to BBC Radio 4 comedy shows (in short, middle-class English literati) who therefore thought this was all very cutting edge. I agree that he wasn't a great writer, or even humourist; his reputation really hinges on the radio shows (which were innovative, but as much for their acting, comic delivery and use of funny sound fx). As Dave Langford once said, "Not even Douglas Adams does good Douglas Adams one-liners every time."

The BBC tv series was hampered by cheap BBC special effects, but at least had the oiriginal cast. (The Book was illustrated in the tv show by graphics. "How did you do such fast, colourful, complex computer graphics?" asked everybody in the industry, because for their day they were VERY advanced. "Er, we cheated and drew them" said the BBC.)

If you can access the BBC's iPlayer, see if you can get to listen to 'I was Douglas Adams' flat-mate', broadcast on Radio 4 on 24th June at 18:30 hours. It is quite an eye-opener.

The film looked absolutely gorgeous, but the cast were nowhere near as good. I predict at some point in the future, when all the principals are safely dead and buried, someone will digitise the original cast and insert them seamlessly into the film, replacing the film cast. Then we might have the best of all worlds.

When I heard the names of some of the characters I thought the radio shows, played over here by NPR, was just silly and stopped listening after an episode or two. Ford Prefect (a kind of car?) and whatsisname Beeblebrox, or whatever, just sounded like reaching for humor the way boys telling each other jokes reach. I have no patience with that kind of juvenile dumbness.

Message edited by its author, Jun 26, 2009, 10:34am.

Gene, I hear ya. I know Wolfe isn't for everyone. He requires a certain appreciation for I'm not sure what, a willingness to work pretty hard while reading him, but not just that. I find a lot of his stuff exhilarating and very rewarding of my efforts. I suggested Fifth Head because it's a single volume and well regarded even by many who find the Sun books to be a bit much.

Enders Game, Orson Scott Card
The Forever War, Joe Haldeman
Invitation to the Game, Monica Hughes
submitted by Ted Magnuson, author 'The Moses Probe.'

> 4 ROSJE

1984 is far far over-rated?

First, I'm not sure whether is should really be classified as science fiction, in the most commonly understood manner.

1984 is quite probably one of the most influential and important books of the 20th century. One only has to think about the impact it has had on general, day to day life and the English language. When last did you use or hear any of the following phrases?

- Orwellian, Big Brother, Newspeak, Thought Crime, Thought Police, Sex Crime etc?

The fact that it uses dialog more than flash/bang descriptive scenes is that is about *people*, and *politics*, not about things.

Anyway, just my personal feelings.

With regards to the original topic, what should be read? I don't think there's any such thing really. There are certainly classics, many of which have been listed here. I am a fan of SF, but I find 90% of it crap, replete with poor characterization, terrible dialogue and ridiculous plot themes. I do recommend Iain M Banks, and I have a soft spot for Vernor Vinge. Many folks recommend Jack Vance's Dying Earth series, but be warned that the dialogue is a bit stylized and it's almost proto-fantasy. I recently bought some Gene Wolfe based on nothing more than the recommendations on the back cover (a terrible risk I know!).

#27

I don't deny the influences that 1984 had on science fiction, or wider culture. However, I thought that Animal Farm was the better book of the two dystopian novels that Orwell created, for a number of reasons. The chief difference to me was that in 1984, Orwell told you that everything was wrong, and you knew it was wrong, while Animal Farm told you everything was going great, while you knew it was not.

Oh, and writing Animal Farm as a children's novel was a stroke of genius, too. It works quite well as a children's story, but there's an entirely different story there for adults.

If someone came to me and said, "Wow, I've just started getting into Science Fiction... what do I absolutely HAVE to read?" I would tailor my answer based on the person doing the asking. I would try to find out what it was ABOUT science fiction that he or she liked, and my answer would depend partly on that, as well.

Do you like science fiction because you delving into a complete and detailed alien world, and finding out about the details of that world -- political, sociological, ecological? Read the Dune books.

Are you interested in the philosophy of alienness, and thinking about what it really means to encounter beings different from ourselves? How about the Ender's Game books.

Maybe you're a young reader. How about Ender's Game, A Wrinkle In Time, the Tripod books.

Maybe you're a young adult reader with a bit of a rebellious streak in you. I'd recommend something cyberpunk, maybe by Rudy Rucker, Pat Cadigan or William Gibson.

If you're a gay teen, I'd put "The Man Who Folded Himself" on that list, too. :-)

But I wouldn't want to foist "Foundation" on a younger reader (it moves too slowly), even though it is a fantastic, classic book. Let him discover the classics later, on his own.

The consensus around here seems to be that if you don't read the classics as a youngster, when you do read them at best you'll wonder what the fuss was all about and at worst come to actively dislike them.

Yeah, like Neuromancer. Totally overrated. And Rendevous with Rama. And don't get me started on Bradbury, who revealed in his memoirs that his goal was to bore his readers to death. That's why it's important to filter stuff with the critical distance of a few decades and be bold enough to reject the stuff that doesn't stand up.

Solaris by Stanislav Lem (polish) or The Cathedral by Jacek Dukaj (also polish) :)

#30

Let's not lump all of the "classics" together, please. I have encountered some classic SF novels as an adult that I was extremely impressed with - A Canticle For Leibowitz and The Dispossessed both spring to mind.

rojse says, "I have encountered some classic SF novels as an adult that I was extremely impressed with...."

"As an adult".

I think often that's the real deciding factor. I could not have cared less about how groundbreaking 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea was when I was a teenager. It was FREAKING BORING.... for me, at that time. Similarly, I tried reading the Foundation books as a teenager. Couldn't finish them.

But once I had more experience with contemporary science fiction, and a little more respect for history and the way things change over time in general, I went back.... and those books were AMAZING. It was COOL to see where so many ideas that now are taken for granted in Sci Fi *originally* came from.

But you need a foundation (no pun intended) first, and you need to have a mindset where you appreciate history / where ideas come from. Some teens have that -- many do not.

#34

In case I gave the wrong impression, I care very little about the historical importance of a novel. The novels I mentioned are books that impress me as an adult, even after I compare the books to the current crop of SF novels I have read.

#35

Fair enough. I guess I'm biased, because those things I mentioned are the things that *I* tend to appreciate about "classic" sci fi when I read it. :-)

Of course, the most well-written stories do not get "dated", regardless of their genre. I can read the original edition of Ender's Game and -- from a stylistic and technological perspective -- it could have been written today. (Well, except for the whole Soviet Empire thing. LOL)

But with some works, I'll admit the STYLE doesn't grab me as much as the "wow, I'm reading something that really influenced things". 1984 is like that for me.

#36

Card worked out the way to write a good YA novel from the start - have a young, plucky kid defeat bigger, stronger adversaries, using only their intelligence and wit. It always works quite well.

There is a top 100 SF recommendations thread, and there was another for YA material also to advise on what to read. Very soon, this thread will be an exact emulation of those as we keep hashing the same thoughts over and over again. There are those who think libraries should have everything from Wells and Verne to now, and a sampling from all the well known should be tried. There are those who vehemently believe that anything before 1980 was written by people who trouble with stringing not only two sentences together, but often two words together.

The interesting thing is that it takes about 300 posts to come full circle and just about when that happens someone new comes along and asks for advice all over again.

#38

Face it, the whole notion of asking a group of strangers on the internets what books to read is totally ill conceived to begin with.

It someone really wants to know what to read, he will either

1) Ask a more SPECIFIC question, like "I liked X, Y, Z, what else is similar?"

or

2) Ask a friend, or someone who knows him, who will be able to tailor the answer to the person's personality.

When you have no constraints on the system, you gravitate toward the mean. Of course any question in this format will yield the same results.

Message edited by its author, Aug 4, 2009, 2:55pm.

But there are written works, published, the 1000 books to read before you die, the 1000 places to visit. The 100 pieces of classical music. Why not have an internet list compiled by a group working together (editors) that suggest 100 SF books to read?

Surely it would be better as a community effort, then 1 person entrusted with the task. If you had a lost of my 100 I know several people in the thread who might find trouble even liking 5 of the 100. In a group compiled list, five of my favorites might be in that 100, along with 5 books I would never want to read, but still great SF.

#38 DW, What you describe is exactly why I suggested we create an LT wiki with our results the last time we went through this exercise. I would do it, but I can barely manage to spell wiki much less build one.

#40,

You may have noticed that there are dozens (if not hundreds) of collections of 100 pieces of classical music. And, if I'm not very much mistaken, there are ALREADY collections of "best of"'s and "classic collections" and so on of science fiction works.

And everyone's "best of" selection would be different, of course.

This is why I would never ever buy or read a collection called "100 of the best" of ANYTHING.... unless I knew something about the editor making the choices, and already had reason to think that I *specifically* agreed with his or her opinions.

You say: " In a group compiled list, five of my favorites might be in that 100, along with 5 books I would never want to read, but still great SF."

Ah, my friend, your faith is greater than mine! If I were to estimate (guess) the distribution, I would predict that I would enjoy less than half of any group-compiled "best of" collection of works.

#39

But for all of that, these sort of recommendations do actually work, particularly if you start using combined recommendations from multiple members.

Greg--You and I share 15 books in common, so it would be hard to know if my recommendations will do much for you. But i think that a collective list is going to be stronger than a list compiled by one person.

Mindscape by Andrea Hairston

A Wind in the Door by Madeleine L'Engle

Dune series, Frank Herbert

My two cents...

James Wallace Harris has a web site that has many interesting essay's/articles on various sci-fi topics. One of them is on sc-fi classics. It includes his choices in 2007 and twenty years earlier and limks to serval other authors choices. I found it interesting. for thoses interested here the link;

http://classics.jameswallaceharris.com/

I had a look at those essays - they're actually analyses of the various "classic" sf lists available on the Web and elsewhere.

Message edited by its author, Sep 26, 2009, 9:09am.

47: iansales

As all of us lurkers know, iansales , you know all and see all. I put it up for those's that are not as knowledgeable as you are.

Sometimes one book suggests another. Starship Troopers is an excellent read, but comparing it to The Forever War makes both even better, especially if you know a bit about the author.

49: jimmaclachian
If I were still in school, I see the makings for a paper. Just add Orphanage (Jason Wander #1) by Robert Buettner and Armor by John Steakley.

#49 I believe that's an important notion. All the the "must reads" are just that only in comparison to all others books in the genre, and in other genres too.

So to really appreciate them, perhaps it's good to have read the bad ones too... :-)

Message edited by its author, Sep 28, 2009, 4:58pm.

# 50: usnmm2
I actually did a comparison paper in English 101 in college on the two. Steakley's Armor is another favorite, but I've never heard of "Orphange". You just added to my too big, to-read pile! I'm not sure whether to thank you or not. I've ordered it from PBS.

;-)

52: jimmaclachlan,

I did mine on Doctor Strangelove: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb by Peter George and Fail safe by Eugene Gurdick.

usnmm2, another perfect pair!

I wonder if that would be a good topic - book comparisons - or is there one? (I'm new here & haven't settled in yet.)

54: jimmaclachlan
Might have a limited appeal but could be interesting

I never would have thought to rate Steakley in the same category as Starship Troopers, or Forever War. Sure same genre, but nowhere near as good a story or writing.

56: DWWilkin

Didn't rate Armor as good. But only for comparision in terms of term papers.
The book starts with an invasion of the planet Banshee, where everything goes wrong. Felix the main character is the ultimate soldier. At this point the story is like Heinlein's Starship Troopers Men in powered Armour fighting bugs (or in this case ants).
It has a certain 'Heinleinisk' quality to it at this point. Of coarse it changes as the battle matures and the story progresses.
I think many people start reading this because of this similarity. In fact that is how the book was presented to me. If I liked Starship Troopers try Armor. I did. So I did.

We by Yevgeny Zamyatin
The Watch by Dennis Danvers
Borders of Infinity by Lois McMaster Bujold
The Colors of Space by Marion Zimmer Bradley
The Giver by Lois Lowry
Calculating God by Robert J. Sawyer

In no particular order:

Childhood's End
Neuromancer
Lord of Light
Dune
Stranger IASL
The Road
Blue Light
Forever War
Martian Chronicles
Cordwainer Smith (Space Lords, etc.)

Comments?
Thanks.
-DB

Anything by Arthur C Clarke is worth reading, I like Frank Herbert too.Tad Williams and Terry Pratchett are good reads. And Charles Stross has a few good ones too. Asimov was great for his time, but got old way too fast. He was a brilliant writer in his time.

60: Well, anything may be a bit too broad. Some of his later work isn't nearly as good as his earlier stuff - The Ghost from the Grand Banks I'm looking your way. Also, be very wary of any books that he cowrote with Gentry Lee.