What are you reading Q1 '08?

Happy New Year.

The first three novels I have lined up for the new year are The Last Colony, The Hidden Family, and The Gate of Gods.

Working on Ringworld right now.

Just started working on a new piece myself, so I usually try to avoid anything while I'm in the middle of a project, to avoid "contamination." However, I'm considering reading something from Foundation Series or even Heinlein, since I've never read either author before (believe it or not).

My wife and I are also trudging through The Dark Tower together in the evenings; we're about a third of the way through Wolves of the Calla, but our new baby boy has prevented us form making much progress lately!

Finishing up The Star Dwellers - a YA novella by James Blish. Turns out to be more fun than I expected. I might move right on to the sequel - Mission To the Heart Stars

The last three chapters of Harry potter and the half-blood prince (to my 11 year-old son).

Other than some non-fiction light reading, I have a blank slate and a $50 Barnes & Noble gift card burning a hole in my pocket.

@geoffrey: I would recommend getting a Heinlein short story collection, such as the past through tomorrow. You can enjoy some great Heinlein writing without having to make the mental investment in a long novel.

Thanks, drmamm. I will consider it. What do you guys recommend in terms of full-length, long stuff? I was thinking about starting Ender's Game. I actually want to get a new audio book for my iPod, because I do a lot of sitting and holding my newborn son these days, so physically holding a book is kind of out of the question right now, and I'm going stir crazy without something to fill the long, precarious moments when he's sleeping!

Congratulations on your new son, Geoffrey! Ender's Game is a great book, and so is Speaker for the Dead, the next book in the series, but I haven't read any of the other ones. I want to someday, when I can work them into my TBR list.

I am reading Blind Assassin by Margaret Atwood now, which is sort of science fictiony, in that there is a novel within the novel that is science fiction. I bought a bunch of new sf with the gift card I got from my brother for Christmas, so I will have more to add here shortly, I am sure.

>6 geoffreyg1978:

I love Ender's Game and the rest of the Ender and the Shadow series, but I always warn people that Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow are very different books from the series that follow them. EG and its parallel telling in ES are Kids in Space with some thought-provoking stuff going on. Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, and Children of the Mind are much more about ethics and bioethics, whereas the later Shadow books are much more about international politics. They're all great books, but it's completely understandable why many people who like Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow hate the other books if they read them wanting more of the same. I'd recommend not spending money on more than the first two in either set of four until after you find out if the second is still to your taste.

Thanks for the advice, everyone. Fortunately, these days, I don't spend money on anything much. I try to borrow everything from the library, with the occasional purchase of an audiobook when I know I'll listen to it and have pretty safe reviews about it.

I am reading Connie Willis' short story collection Fire Watch

I'm rereading some SF anthologies. Right now, I'm working on Star of Stars. My favorite from this one is "Daybroke" by Robert Bloch.

I just read Radio Freefall by Matthew Jarpe. A solid competent debut novel that is near-future.

Finally finished Justina Robson's Keeping It Real. Also read Kristine Kathryn Rusch's Paloma and Recovery Man. Will start James Patrick Kelly's Rewired: The Post Cyberpunk Anthology tonight, but I am waiting for my Amazon order of Greg Frost's Shadowbridge and Cornelia Funke's Inkheart.

Currently I am read Halting State great book so far about 3/4 of the way thorough it now hopping to finish by this weekend. Last week I finished Neuromancer my first real foray in cyberpunk and loved it so I pickup the mirrorshades the other day so I think read that one next.

I've just finished rereading some of the stories in Nebula Award Stories Number Three.

Reading Brasyl by Ian McDonald and really enjoying so far. Read a The Dreaming Void by Peter Hamilton which was disappointing.

Read and reviewed Old Man's War this month, and half-way through The Ghost Brigades this week. The Last Colony is next, on my TBR shelf. Added Scalzi to my short list of favorite SF authors.

Reading an oldie - Outpost Mars by Cyril Judd (AKA C M Kornbluth and Judith Merril. I also have the Beacon Books edition, Sin in Space, and plan to read that afterwards to compare the two :-)

Well I have just finished reading Fuzzy Dice by Paul Di Filippo. Lots of fun weirdness and I don't think it would have worked half as well as it did if it wasn't episodic. Currently reading some non-SF.

Maybe Streaking by Brian Stableford will be next or depending on when I buy them maybe Weaver by Stephen Baxter or The Margarets by Sheri S. Tepper.

I'm still working my way through Fire Watch (3 great stories, 3 so-so stories so far), but I found myself at the airport with nothing to read yesterday, so I picked up Spin.

#19 - Streaking has been picking up some bad reviews, despite being shortlisted for the Arthur C Clarke Award. In fact, I don't think I've seen a good word said for it.

Yep I know but it is sitting on my shelf so I may as well read it. BTW Claude Lalumière thought it "Another fascinating and quirky release" and awarded it A- in his review for SciFi Weekly but he seems to be the only one that positive.

Does anyone else ever agree with Lalumière? :-)

Finished The Last Colony this evening and I'm giving it a solid 'A' even if there some matters that I would have like to have seen Scalzi write some more about.

I finished reading The Ghost Brigades tonight, and I'm tracing the pretty raised gold letters of the title on the front of The Last Colony, not starting to read it right away, because it will be over too soon.

#25 You'll like it, but I also think TLC is the least tightly plotted of the three.

#25 Thanks -that is good motivation - I'm holding The Last Colony out there like a carrot, promising myself I can start it as soon as I finish doing all the filing that has piled up. If I didn't make myself work for reading time, I'd have my nose in a book 24/7.

Just finished Endymion - I became a fan of Dan Simmons after reading The Terror. But I'm not sure I have enough steam to tackle anymore of the Hyperion series. I've also got A Canticle for Leibowitz and and The Singularity is Near.

I am currently reading Wastelands Stories of the Apocalypse by various authors.
I just finished Towing Jehovah by James Morrow.

I'm currently reading Dangerous Space by Kelley Eskridge. I just finished Outpost Mars by Cyril Judd - colonies on Mars with typewriters, Morse, and propeller-driven aircraft! And it's not steampunk! :-)

Next on my list is Iron Sunrise by Charles Stross. Picked it up months ago, but it was buried underneath a few other things in the pile.

I'm currently reading Kat Richardson's Greywalker.

I`m well on the way to finishing Cosa Nostra byJohn Dickie. It`s a fascinating account of how the mafia started . The book is mainly about the Sicilian Mafia but touches on the American side as well .Excellent.

Just finished Agent to the Stars after finding it posted on Scalzi own website. All I can say is WOW it was a really fun story that I could not stop reading, it ties in nicely with my other "hobby" of watching movies. Now to dip back into Mirrorshades and maybe start Bruce Sterling novella Kiosk free online at F&SF website.

I just finished Altered Carbon last week. Big, meaty story. Then I moved on to Vance's Trullion: Alastor 2262. What an offbeat thing that was!
I'm three quarters through Vonnegut's Galapagos right now. I was a little hostile and resistant to it initially, but now I'm "getting the joke". It's different enough from his earlier works in tone to have thrown me.
Charles Harness' Wolfhead is waiting in the wings, and possibly I'll get to Ballard's The Unlimited Dream Company before the month is up.

I just started the Doomsday Book by Connie Willis and A Fire Upon the Deep by Vernor Vinge, the latter of which was a recommendation from somewhere in this group. So far I like them both. Also recommended by the SciFi group is Red Mars, which I am not enjoying so much, but it's early pages yet.

I preferred K.S. Robinson's stuff from the 70's, when he seemed to be following in the footsteps/tradition of Philip K. Dick. And then he morphed into this hard SF writer with all the attendant flaws (info dumps, endless tech talk, plastic, one-dimensional characters, overlong novels in desperate need of editing) and I lost interest. The MARS trilogy a case in point...

I liked the Vinge book you cite, arrr, and DEEPNESS IN THE SKY is a good one as well.

Red Mars is the best of the trilogy. After that it gets bogged down as various political factions fight it out.

Ian:

The first book was just OKAY to me and then...bor-ing. I still think Robinson's trilogy from the 70's was far more likable--WILD SHORE, etc.--and he's taken a wrong turn with the hard stuff. Would like to see him veer back on his proper course but he's received positive reviews and nominations/awards for this newer stuff so he's likely headed that way for the long haul. Too bad...

The Mars Trilogy seems to be another that elicits wide ranging responses. I know some people who've found the series utterly boring. I liked the first two books (including the political machinations of book 2), but I had kind of lost interest by the time I finished the third book.

Cliff, The Wild Shore was published '84 I think.

BTW I still think you can see a lot of PKD's influence in KSR's later books such as the Mars trilogy and the Capital City trilogy. As for the length of the books KSR has said that form him "form follows function". That a book examining the terra-forming of Mars had to be a long book, a very long book.

I liked the first two books of the series but got about seventy pages into the third book and tossed it aside in irritation, as KSR's old guard characters were just getting on my nerves I should probably revisit it at some point in time just on general principle.

I do intend to give the new trilogy a try this year, having been impressed by the man at a convention.

Andy: you're quite correct re: the timeline of the WILD SHORE trilogy (1984, etc.) and I'm off by at least 5 years. Thanks for setting that straight. I would have had to run downstairs to grab my copies--because I would never think to Google to check. A bit short in the brains department.

I didn't see much of PKD in the MARS trilogy but I gave up halfway through the second. Can't imagine Phil spinning out a trilogy built around terraforming--his drug-depleted attention span would've played hell with that project, methinks.

I enjoyed this, thanks...

I didn't mean in plotting or that PKD could or would attempt such a long work as even one of the books let alone the entire trilogy. I was more thinking about the way the book slides between multiple POVs, often pulling focus away from the big players in the imagined world and the main thrust of action and onto the less important people who are not entirely in control of their own destiny. The entire picture of what is going on built up in almost a patchwork manner from all the often conflicting viewpoints. I admit this because more obvious once we are on Mars in the second and third volume.

Oh and just to post some content on topic I have recently finished a copy of Mat Coward's So Far, So Near which is a collection of short stories.

Andy: Okay, I think I see what you mean. D'you think Phil's multiple POV's had something to do with his mental state?

Yup, I do too...

KSR's PhD (I think that's what it was for) dissertation on PKD is available on Amazon or at least it used to be.

Read John C. Wright's Chaos trilogy, as well as the three Scalzi war novels. Both are quite good, though for very different reasons. Don't know where I'll go next SF-wise, but will now concentrate on finishing The Last Cavalier by Dumas.

I tried John C. Wright's sf trilogy - The Golden Age, The Phoenix Exultant and The Golden Transcendence - and thought they were terrible. Everyone was praising them to high heaven, and I couldn't see what was so good about them. I didn't even bother with the third book, and I often wonder why I even read the second one...

I bought the first Scalzi book largely because I liked the grumpy attitude he displays in his blog postings. The first one was okay for me, the second one didn't work and I stopped after that. The only series I've really followed with any enthusiasm over the past X amount of years is John Barnes' MILLION OPEN DOORS, etc. And, of course, I adore Iain Banks' "Culture" books...

Again, series tend to drag on and on: every writer and agent with any brains knows you can make more money selling a three book deal than a stand-alone novel. Often a series is little more than a cash-grab, milking fans, stuffed with filler and exposition and cardboard characters. Usually I avoid them like yesterday's trash.

And don't even get me STARTED on fantasy...

Banks's last sf (non-Culture) novel The Algebraist was disappointing. He has a new Culture novel out in a week or two - Matter. It's getting good advance reviews already.

A...new...Culture...novel?

Whoo-hoo-hoo...(gleefully rubbing his hands together).

Is it just being released in Britain or is there a North American edition in the offing too?

I saw ALGEBRAIST at the Saskatoon library and picked it up--but it was such a hefty bugger and I was hard at work editing and put it back. Kind of regretted it but...now you say it wasn't that great so maybe I'll let it lie. There was another Banks novel that didn't work for me at all and, of course, now I shall have to Google it because I can't remember the damned--INVERSIONS, that was the bugger. And I see MATTER will be released over here on Feb. 28 so I shall move that one to the tippy-top of the LIST.

Thanks for the info...

Didn't care for "Inversions" myself but I did like "The Algebraist," even if I thought that book flagged in the last fifth or so of the text.

It's funny but I FAR prefer Banks' SF to his mainstream offerings, which seem ponderous at times. I don't include WASP FACTORY in the "mainstream" --that's a big favorite of mine too, one of the finest debut novels I've ever come across. I've always been proud of the fact that the hardcover of EXCESSION I own sports a blurb from a review I wrote for THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS.

But then the NYROSF editor David Hartwell mangled a negative review I wrote re: Michael Swanwick's THE IRON DRAGON'S DAUGHTER and I wouldn't go near the place again.

For a change I don't feel like I'm out in left field somewhere, reading older sci-fi (stuff that was 30 and 40 years ago) I seem to be in sinc with a few peaple, by reading Old Man's War last month and am now almost done with The Ghost Brigades and lookong forward to The Last Colony (as soon as I locate a copy).
Also read all three of the Lost Fleet series by Jack Campbell and have pre-ordered the 4th.
My next one will be a re-read of an old classic Greybeard byBrian Aldiss (there I go! back to to the old stuff again).

Usnmm2, those books are great! I just finished up the Scalzi series at the end of last year.

I re-read The Handmaid's Tale this past Sunday. As always, I found the historical notes section at the end the most creepy and realistic to apply to our society today.

Now I am reading Eifelheim for the board group read, and I am loving it. I find the quest of the main priest to understand both his own world and the alien visitors fascinating, especially as he is an educated man, not a wholly superstitious one. It is interesting to see how even someone with a questioning, scientific mind has certain areas where he assumes that he already knows what is going on, and there is no need to question.

I just finished reading The Handmaid's Tale, too. I'm using it for a Readers' Advisory class that I'm taking this semester in library school- and since I can count it as Literary Fiction for this week's class, that means I get to read more SF for class than if I read it for the week we specifically dedicate to SF in several weeks.

#55 sussabmax,

I read Eifelheim a while ago a little slow in parts but still a good story.
Michael Flynn is one of my favorite Sci fi authors. His Firestar series is a nice read, no brainers just read and enjoy.

Estelle, that is a great way to game the system, ha ha.

Eifelheim is another one I have seen in both the science fiction and general fiction sections of the bookstore. I am really enjoying it, but it is a bit dense for reading while I am laying around sick, as I am today. I think I may pause and read something more mindless and come back to it.

Eifelheim was different, anyway. I agree, slow in parts, but still fascinating.

I just read Fearless--The Lost Fleet, book 2 by Jack Campbell, which I enjoyed very much, as I did the first book.

I read Hammerfall by C. J. Cherryh this week. I have twenty-four of her novels, ranging from the second one she wrote, Hunter of Worlds to the most recently published, #9 in the Foreigner series: Defender. I thought by now I knew Cherryh's writing, always something special - but somehow Hammerfall just knocked me out of my socks. I don't know if anyone else feels the way I do, but I think it is one of her very best, and since I think Cherryh's average work rates at least four stars, I'd give Hammerfall eight stars if it were possible.

(umm, did I mention I like it?)

Finished Glasshouse by Charles Stross. It was... interesting. The idea of using networking as an architecture for a civilisation sort of worked, although he had to stretch the metaphor in several places. There were, perhaps, a few too many info-dumps, and he never really engaged with his central premise. Nor was the resolution of the puzzle set up by the plot quite as inventive as promised. The ending was weak - just a big shoot 'em up. An entertaining read, but too many missed chances, I thought.

#61 I liked it, but basically have to agree with you. The "everything you know is wrong" book is probably harder to write than it looks.

I'm also on the verge of knocking off The Dark is Rising, which was chosen by my book group behind my back. While it has its virtues, I have a hard time reading YA material that I didn't read back in the day when I was the proverbial young adult! Let's put it this way, I had probably read all of Tolkein at least once by the time the book in question came out (I was in junior high), and was already reading adult history.

Finished James Patrick Kelly's Rewired: The Post Cyberpunk Anthology (good, but I've read them all before), Eclipse 1: New Science Fiction And Fantasy edited by Jonathan Strahan (Really, REALLY excellent, especially the Peter Beagle story) but couldn't finish Elemental: The Tsunami Relief Anthology: Stories of Science Fiction and Fantasy edited by Steven Savile. Read Gregory Frost's Shadowbridge (terrific, best book of 2008 {I know, it's early.}) and Cornelia Funke's Inkheart (ah, not so much). Also finished Hunter's Run by George R. R. Martin and others (meh) and Justina Robson's Selling Out (better than the first book in the series). Starting The Dragons of Babel by Michael Swanwick now, but waiting for my Amazon UK copy of Iain M. Banks' Matter to arrive.

The novelization of Nightfall by Isaac Asimov. Believe it or not, this is my first Asimov book, but obviously it will not be my last.

I'm re-reading Jeff Noon's Vurt, Pollen, Nymphomation, and Automated Alice and possibly Needle in the Groove and Pixel Juice as well as the Rudy Rucker Ware Tetrology: Software, Wetware, Freeware, Realware.

I read the Vurt collection and the Ware collection about once every two years now.

Since I have to wait till June for the next Jack Campbell book and the copy of The last colony I ordered from E-bay hasn't arrived yet. I decided
to start different series, On Basilisk Station (book #1 of the Honor Harrinton series) by David Weber. so far its seems like it's going to be a good story.

kd9, I was soooo tempted to buy Shadowbridge but I knew I wouldn't get to reading it anytime soon, but do tell me why you thought so highly of it (please)?

I started World War Z by Max Brooks, but then I remembered that I stopped halfway through Eifelheim and got back to that. I was sick last week, and Eifelhiem was a bit dense, so I switched to a more mindless mystery. Whenever I stop in the middle of a book, I find it hard to get back to it, even if I liked it. I picked it back up today, though, and I am enjoying it again.

On World War Z, I like the oral history idea, and even though the idea of zombies as a medical plague is a bit far-fetched, the examination of what kind of world response it would engender is interesting (actually, eerily plausible, and rather chilling). I am not usually into the idea of zombie books, but this one looks enjoyable. I hear from a friend that it is actually part of a series of books on the Zombie war (how out of touch am I?), but I don't see myself reading more. There is only so much zombie-ism I can take!

I finished up Selling Out ('A') this evening.

I'm reading through a stack of old The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction issues I picked up from a closing sale at a used bookstore. Some good Turtledove, Brin and Robert Reed stories so far.

touchstones refuse to load

I read a whole bunch of graphic novels - Tom Strong Book 5 (not as good as the preceding 4, but still bloody good), The Authority: Earth Inferno and Other Stories (one of the better superhero groups out there), Scarlet Traces (follows on from H.G. Wells'* War of the Worlds; bloody excellent) and Scarlet Traces: The Great Game (sequel, and actually even better).

Then I read Starship Troopers and, yes, it is fascist.

Now I'm reading Into That Silent Sea, a non-fiction work about early astronauts and cosmonauts. I've noticed a disturbing trend towards hagiography in books about astronauts. Let's face it, they were unlikely to be paragons - in fact, I suspect they were pretty arrogant.

(* these touchstones are crap - how can there not be one for Herbert George Wells?)

so far have read Old Man's War and The Ghost Brigades.And have bought The Last Colony on E-bay and waiting for it to arrive.
Also read all Three of The Lost fleet
books.( #4 is coming out in June). I enjoyed them so much I've also ordered STARK'S WAR STARK'S COMMAND and STARK'S CRUSADE by John G. Hemry AKA Jack Campbell
Right now I'm reading On Basilisk Station (Honor Harrington series #1) by David Weber and so far this has been a pleasent surprize will check out a feww more to see how Commander Honor Harrington makes out.

Ian: STARSHIP TROOPERS fascist? Nahhh...

Haven't you heard (from Heinlein apologists): he was a libertarian thinker.

In terms of non-fiction works on astronauts, have you read MOONDUST: In Search of the Men Who Fell To Earth? I loved that one and it certainly ain't hagiography. Think you'll like it.

http://www.amazon.com/Moondust-Search-Men-Fell-Earth/dp/B000GG4LV2/ref=pd_bbs_sr...

Astronauts were among my first heroes and I remember distinctly (I was 5 3/4) when Armstrong gave his famous signal from the Sea of Tranquility. Those were golden days...

Yes, I've read Moondust, and I enjoyed it a lot. I've also read Starman, which was also very good. Um, both of those books are by Brits, whereas the hagiographic ones are by US authors...

(Of course, I've not read enough of these sorts of books by US authors, but you know what they say... all generalisations are true...)

Ian: Glad you liked MOONDUST.

STARMAN, I don't know--the cosmonauts are a grey area for me, they weren't publicized (and lionized) to the same extent here in the west. I shall check that one out...

I'm not reading it at the moment, but I will be in a few weeks... however, I did receive it only yesterday: Lawrence Durrell's first novel, Pied Piper of Lovers. Published in 1935, and very, very, very hard to find.

Lawrence...Durrell...

Tried the ALEXANDRIA QUARTET years ago but just couldn't get into the prose. Too dense, descriptive--I admit it, I'm a lean, mean kinda reader. I just started re-reading James Cain's POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE for the hard-boiled prose, to help set the tone and rhythm of my editing. Nasty, nasty book for 1934...

I love Durrell's books. The man is the master of descriptive prose. Two of my favourites images from his books are:

A white sailing boat lay like a breathing butterfly against the white mole.
(The Dark Labyrinth)

In that clear hard enamel air the human voice carried so far...
(from Tunc)

Nice lines...

Ian,

Have you ever read any of Gerald Durrell's work, specifically My Family and Other Animals? Vastly different, but he does talk quite a bit about brother Lawrence, and it covers their time in Corfu in a way that gives you a glimpse of their family life. Very entertaining.

I'm taking a little break from SF as well; just rewatched Last Year at Marienbad so that's prompted a reading of Robbe-Grillet's Jealousy and In The Labyrinth

Arthur:

I've got a copy of a book that lists the worst movies of all time and "Last Year..." is one of the films cited. So you're a fan? Have to say, that citation has kept me away from the film for years.

Robbe-Grillet? Christ, mate, that's wayyy beyond my reading level. He's one of those authors that's just too smart for me (and I have no trouble admitting as much). Is LABYRINTH his sort of existential detective novel? Or maybe I'm thinking of a different one...

Well if you're a Beckett fan, Robbe-Grillet is defintely along those lines. The difference is Robbe-Grillet is not interested in conciousness, he's interested in the measurement of time through the meticulous observation of objects. The juxtapostion of elements to produce tension. That's why his movies are almost exactly like reading his books-it's all about what you're looking at. Ballard's exercises in hyper description (like the description of the slow motion crash test film in Crash) owe a lot to Robbe-Grillet's approach.

His books clean out the cobwebs for me;I find it fascinating how much drama he manages to generate by the juxtaposition of flatly described elements and events. It has a tension and release thing going on, like in music.Many of his books have a detective theme to them-I'm not sure about In The Labyrinth -I'll let you know when I finish it. The Erasers was a detective story. The Voyeur was a murder book. That was a very creepy book.That might be a good place to start if you're interested.
The other thing I like about him is despite this deadpan clinical description of objects, and the use of repetition, like Beckett, he's funny. Stephen Wright the comedian often feels informed by writers like this. They sort of deadpan pull your leg at times. That their flatness will piss people off is deliberately done and it's part of the joke.The Voyeur is less an example of that than The Erasers

Those Golden Turkey guys are way out of their league about LYAM. It's a landmark of modern cinema. They also had Antonioni's Zabriskie Point as one of the worst movies ever. Not one of Antonioni's best, but not one of the worst anything. Those Golden Turkey guys are at their best nuking fish in a barrel- Plan 9-Robot Monster etc.
On a side note, the MST3K guys have made the Golden Turkey guys irrelevant. Tom Servo and Crow are way funnier.
Life is cruel, but there it is. Poetic justice as far as I'm concerned.

Arthur:

ERASERS is the one I was thinking of--it's on my list (do you recommend it?).

I do love Beckett, the compression of language, the austerity of the prose. How he says so much with so little.

So you know the "Golden Turkey" book--it's down in my basement, stuck away so I can't get at it easily but, yes, "Zabriskie Point" was on there along with "Plan 9" and "Eegah!" (I'd get that one for the title alone). That's as far as my memory goes.

"Mystery Science Theatre" at its best is one of the funniest things I've ever seen. Hard to find old episodes here in small city Saskatchewan but I do have a couple. Also think I've YouTubed some scenes and had to stop watching at various points because I was experiencing symptoms similar to a brain aneurysm. Literally crying with laughter. My kind of dopey, sick humour. Shot on a budget of $1.39 and no CGI in evidence.

Good chattin' with ya...

I liked The Erasers. It's his first novel. Do you know that Monty Python routine where there's this over the top voice over narration for some lurid crime drama, and the events that are actually occurring are just some guy going to the tobaconists and then to the office? That's the kind of humor this book has.
The ultimate turn of events is somewhat fascinating- and the novel has an amazing sense of place -read the reviews on Amazon and see what you think. If you've read something like The Unnameable,Molloy or Malone Dies for example, by Beckett, I can't see how this novel could possibly bug you.

MST3K is classic. They can be hilarious. I still think using This Island Earth for the film was a little harsh, but that's life. The series is on DVD now.

Yes, "This Island Earth" isn't nearly as execrable as "The Crawling Eye" or the aforementioned "Eegah!" Beware the Metaluna mutants...

>>Message 67: avaland

Language, Language, Language. That's why I liked Gregory Frost's Shadowbridge. There are compelling characters. There is a desperate escape from we know not what. There is mystery and magic, but for me, it was the STORIES. Every page or two one of the characters sits down and tells or listens to a new story. Some are about the creation of the world, some about its stranger inhabitants. All of them are beautiful and terrible and wonderful. For the action/adventure junky there is probably too much prose (and too little action), but for me the prose was as magical as the situations in the stories.

I just read Melusine by Sarah Monette- a bit violent at the beginning, which almost put me off, but I got hooked on the characters and had to see how the story turned out. I had initially read her excellent story Three Letters from the Queen of Elfland in The Best of Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet. LCRW is a zine, the joint venture of Kelly Link and husband Gavin Grant. I haven't really read much by Grant, but Link's 2 books Magic for Beginners and Stranger Things Happen are excellent. I just bought and am looking forward to reading Water Logic by Laurie Marks, which is the third in her Elemental Logic series.

I think Last Year at Marienbad divides people into two camps - those who think it's genius, and those who think it's pretentious twaddle. I fall into the latter.

I wouldn't bother with Eegah!. It's shite. See here: http://justhastobeplausible.blogspot.com/2008/02/i-did-this-so-you-dont-have-to....

Ian: I find it hard to imagine a movie with the title "Eegah!" could possibly be shite. I clicked on your link and found myself pining for half of the movies listed on your post. I love that stuff--where you can see the zippers on the monster outfits and the wires holding the models up. I remember there was one movie I saw, years back, where it was supposed to be this post-apocalyptic setting and at the top of the frame you could see cars driving past in the distance, oblivious to the fact that the world had been destroyed. Lovely, lovely.

I wrote a piece that talked about my love of the old, pre-CGI SF stuff--here's the link to "In Praise of Men in Rubber Suits" on scifidimensions.com:

http://www.scifidimensions.com/Apr04/rubbersuits.htm

I just put in an order for a couple of old SF flicks I found on eBay, "Tarantula" and "Conquest of Space". And I've been trying to lay my hands on a copy of "Phase IV", which I saw years and years ago but that one is pretty hard to find. So I still have the bug. Thanks, as always, Ian...

Cliff: I can recommend Queen of Blood, Voyage to the Prehistoric Planet*, The Humanoid and Starcrash. All crap films that are actually quite good. Or "interesting", as we say over here.

* But not Voyage to the Planet of Prehistoric Women - which is the same as Voyage to the Prehistoric Planet (i.e., cobbled together from Soviet sf film Planeta Burg), but with the entirely pointless addition of Mamie van Doren and assorted other bathing beauties lounging about on a rocky shoreline and talking telepathically to each other.

Ian: And what's WRONG with Mamie Van Doren in a bathing suit? You...purist.

"Starcrash"--now that one rings a bell. My old flame Caroline Munro, perhaps? And ex-preacher Marjoe Gortner (see his documentary "Marjoe", all you evangelical types). Made in Italy on the cheap. Poor Caroline died fairly young, methinks, and broke my heart. Lovely, lovely lass...

Cliff: I have no problem with Mamie van Doren lying about in a bathing suit... but it all seemed so dull and completely unrelated to what little plot there was in the film. Oh, and the director of this film? Peter Bogdanovich. He also provides the dubbed voice for the main character.

David Hasselhoff is the best thing in StarCrash... which tells you how good it is.

Classic lines from the film include: "Look! Amazons on horseback! I hope they're friendly" and "Imperial Battleship, reverse the flow of Time!"

But did Bogdanovich direct or just edit some semblance of a film together? Be fair, this is the guy who brought us "Last Picture Show", one of my faves. Was this for Roger Corman's company? I seem to recall he used to buy up foreign films, re-edit and re-dub them, release them under new titles--am I getting warm? Bogdanovich's "Targets" (with Boris Karloff) is another one on my wishlist but I haven't made great efforts to secure it owing to its so-so reputation.

Anyway, this is all pretty off-topic and I'm sure there's folks out there scratching their heads, saying "what are these two arses going on and on about?"

And they're probably right: you wanna start a thread on "Guilty SF pleasures" or what have you, be my guest. I'll be right in the thick of things--and I'll expect Arthur to drop by with a spirited defense of "Zardoz" (good luck on that one, Art)...

I'm presently reading The New Space Opera, because I grew up on Edmond Hamilton and Doc Smith. The first few stories in the anthology are a bit too dense for my liking (too many thoughts and words, not enough ZIP and BOOM to satisfy the Inner Child I Still Nurture), but a few of the stories proved to be worthy for my tastes. The Emperor and the Maula by Robert Silverberg, The Worm Turns by Gregory Benford, Send Them Flowers by Walter Jon Williams, Art of War by Nancy Kress and Muse of Fire by Dan Simmons. (Alright, for those who've read it- I am sort of reading the book hop-skip. I do that with al anthologies.)

I just finished Anywhen by James Blish, I have been on a short story kick here lately.

Started reading Non-Stop by Brian Aldiss
A story of a people living in a space ship and not knowing that they are.
Will be interesting to see how this compares with Heinleins Orphans Of The Sky

When Non-Stop was first published in the US, some smart editor changed to its title to... Starship.

Actually my copy was printed in 1989 by Caroll $ Graf Inc., New York as a book club edition. But it doesn't say if it follows the oringinal script or the the one with the textual differences of the US 1959 title of "Starship". I'll have to find and old copy and compare.

I think the point is that the reader is not supposed to realise the story is taking place on a generation starship until some way into it. So titling the novel Starship sort of ruins the surprise...

That Readers' Advisory class will be getting to Science Fiction on the twenty-second, so sometime this weekend I'll start reading Friday. Since I'm trying to read all of Heinlein, I might as well do that and my homework at the same time.

> 101 "Since I'm trying to read all of Heinlein..."

Why?

Ian: Retitling Aldiss' NONSTOP is like retitling "Citizen Kane", "Rosebud Was a Sled"...or calling PRESUMED INNOCENT (book/movie) THE WIFE DID IT.

Estelle: Ian is quite right: why BOTHER reading all of Heinlein? No sentient mind deserves that kind of abuse. Why not tackle Iain Banks' latest (MATTER) or go back and read all of his "Culture" novels, starting with the stunning CONSIDER PHLEBAS? Once you do that, you will find it simply impossible to open a book by Heinlein without breaking into gales of laughter...

"Once you do that, you will find it simply impossible to open a book by Heinlein without breaking into gales of laughter..."

I know you two guys don't like Heinlein, but you're not actually not going to try and start talking people out of reading him, are you? He's written a number of important SF books, warts and all. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress remains a very interesting novel. I liked Farmer in the Sky a lot. I don't see reading Banks instead of reading all of RAH. What about reading all of both writers if one wants? That's probably what I'm going to do. Reading RAH is not like reading EE Doc Smith -his prose is not that bad.
He just has a limited group of narrative tools at his disposal.

Heinlein wrote some good juveniles, but I don't hold a high opinion of his "adult" works. And those juveniles, while fun, have to be read with their date of publication in mind.

Thing is, I've never understood why an sf fan will immediately suggest a 50-year-old book when asked for a recommendation by a non-sf reader. It's not as if they do so while pointing out the age of the book. They seem to think Heinlein, Asimov or Clarke are characteristic of the genre as it now is. Which plainly not true. And, let's face it, some of those old novels aren't very good, and have very little relevance to 21st Century reader.

Er, not, I hasten to add, that I'm accusing anyone here of the above...

Because I like his prose and because he's the only author who's ever managed to lecture at me for half a book (or more) and make me like it. I might think his ideas on any given subject are crap, but it's interesting crap and I don't need to agree with it to read it. Weirdly, it's usually when he stops lecturing for a book (the juveniles) that it goes on the pile for the used book store. The more preaching and potentially offensive he gets, the more I want to reread it. Actually, I misspoke a bit when I said I'm trying to read all of it: I've taken the juveniles off the list because they didn't seem to be what I was after from him.

"They seem to think Heinlein, Asimov or Clarke are characteristic of the genre as it now is. Which plainly not true."

Why in recommending anyone a book, would it be necessary to recommend it with the current state of a genre as a primary consideration, unless that was requested?
I recommend books to people I think they personally might be interested in, regardless of when they were written. I rarely get a request for "what's going on now?"

And something like Rendezvous With Rama, remains for me, a safe, perennial recommend to the uninitiated.

If I was approached by someone to suggest a SF novel I, similar to Ian, wouldn't go anywhere near most of the "Golden Age" authors--that person might never trust my recommendation again. So much of the "classics" of SF seem trite, dated, clumsily written, inexpertly plotted, with characters as flat and one-dimensional as the paper they're printed on. Of Clarke's books--the best author of the trio you mention--I wouldn't go with RAMA, I'd pick CHILDHOOD'S END or maybe a collection of ACC's short stories.

I disagree with Ian in that I think ALL of Heinlein's work should be regarded as juvenilia--juvenile writing, juvenile themes, juvenile sexuality. I just don't see ANY sophistication in anything I've read by the man. He may appeal to the eternal 14 year old in some people but not me. Mine has grown up and moved out of my parents' basement.

Were I asked to pick 5 SF novels for a novice or neophyte to read, I might take:

NEUROMANCER by William Gibson
CONSIDER PHLEBAS by Iain Banks
DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP Philip K. Dick
TOWING JEHOVAH by James Morrow
STEEL BEACH by John Varley

That list is not, I hasten to add, definitive--those are merely the ones I can come up with off the top of my head. At least those offerings wouldn't drive the prospective reader away from the genre forever.

Actually, this might make for an interesting thread. "If you could pick 5 novels that you would recommend to someone who claims never to have read SF..."

Just finished my first Science Fiction book of the year. Vorpal Blade by John Ringo and Travis Taylor. The second book in the series (or first . . . maybe, I've seen the first book in the series listed as a prequel).

The first book in the series was quite interesting, but this one seemed to have way too much in the way of "fake" science gibberish. It went way past the "if they start talking one more time about" gibberish threshold (oh, I know some of that gibberish was real science, but a lot of it was gibberish cooked up for the series itself).

Granted, the action was interesting. When it occurred.

> 107 "Why in recommending anyone a book, would it be necessary to recommend it with the current state of a genre as a primary consideration, unless that was requested?"

Because when most people say, "Okay, I'd like to try some science fiction," they're expecting to see something that is characteristic of the genre. And the genre as it now stands, as it now exists in book shops around the world, is chiefly current and of relevance to present day readers. I don't think people would be interested in something that isn't relevant to them. Nor would I like them to get the impression the genre is not relevant.

What book I would actually recommend does, of course, depend partly on the person asking. If I knew they liked so-called literary fiction, then I might suggest Paul Park or Lucius Shepard or M. John Harrison. If they preferred fiction that was a little more... cinematic, then perhaps I'd recommend Iain M. Banks or Ken MacLeod or Alastair Reynolds.

108> I've read three of those five books. You really like the noir/cyberpunk science fiction, eh? Well, those three that I read have that similar vibe - Neuromancer, Steel Beach and Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep.

If I knew the reader, and if they claimed they didn't read science fiction, there are many books that I could point to and note that it is science fiction, even if it wasn't sold in the science fiction section of the bookstore (I have one specific person in mind when I say this little note).

If I had to pick five to recommend? I'd need to know the reader and try to fix them up with something. If they like military fiction, or mystery, or . . . there are books that have those elements in science fiction and I'd steer them that direction to test the waters.

I'd not necessarily suggest the five you suggested in 108, at least the 3 I read. Very depressing, those books. :) I might go for the wonder of exploration angle, myself. As opposed to the Earth is basically dying/the earth is under the control of aliens and the humans live on the moon, or the like.

#108

Cliff,

A good list. Although some things are obviously missing but that is always going to be the case with just 5 books. At least each of the five you suggest give a different flavour in their SF. The only one I haven't read is Steel Beach, and I find that an interesting choice as Varley seems to me a writer who shows his Heinlein influences very strongly.

If I was to choose a Heinlein novel it would be The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress - it is less overtly preachy and less wandering than his later works. I could think of hundreds of books I would recommend for a Readers' Advisory class before Friday would pop into my head.

Andy:

Yeah, I've heard the Heinlein-Varley comparisons and that has always set me back on my heels a bit. Varley is just SO far beyond Robbie in terms of the quality of his craftsmanship, the themes and ideas. I've read some of Varley's stories from the mid-late 70's and they don't seem to have dated at all. PERSISTENCE OF VISION is a fine collection of JV's stories.

Mike: Depressing? Yeah, I guess my selections are at that. But I think Banks' PHLEBAS has some of that wonder of exploration you spoke of. It's a big, galaxy-spanning vision.

I'll admit that coming up with a mere 5 novels is a tough call and everyone's list would, of course, vary. But I was thinking of work of a sufficiently high quality, representative AND would hold contemporary readers' attention. In that sense, I think it's a pretty good roster...

I'm a fan of John Varley's fiction too, although I was a little disappointed with Steel Beach. Despite its opening line... The Ophiuchi Hotline remains a personal favourite, although it's a bit slipshod on the characterisation, and the best idea in the whole book is thrown away in a line at the end of the book...

I've just read The John Varley Reader which had 18 of his best short stories - which is the volume I would recommend. It is amazing how quickly he hit his stride.

I would say that Heinlein was at his best in his short stories. A number of those are still readable.

Well, >112 andyl:, I've read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and the only requirement for this class is that it be something I've not read before. That's probably the least preachy Heinlein that I've still liked, actually, although my soft spot for sentient computers might be making up the difference. The idea is to learn how to talk about books to describe why the people who like them do like them, not to find stuff that everybody is going to like, or even that we like (although it certainly makes the reading easier if we do like the book). That way when the person who would like that book walks into the library and asks me for suggestions, I know what questions to ask and what kind of description to give to get the right reader and book together.

If somebody who never read science fiction before asked me for recommendations, first I'd wonder to myself how this person never read 1984, if only because a teacher really should have told him to at some point. Then I'd do exactly the same thing I would do for any other Readers' Advisory session: ask him what he likes. Since he hasn't read SF before, I'd have to figure out from other genres what SF might appeal to him. Nonfiction science, adventure, fantasy, humor, or horror books would result in completely different suggestions about what kind of SF he might like. It won't matter how "representative" or contemporary a book is if it's not something the particular person I'm talking to would enjoy reading.

Sometimes people describe books they've never heard of before without knowing it. I haven't seen an example in SF before, but here on LibraryThing, somebody in the Fantasy Fans described George R. R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series perfectly while explaining what kind of book they wanted. So if, for example, I get a patron talking about the sort of hero he likes and it sounds just like Lazarus Long, then I'm going to start talking about Time Enough for Love, no matter how old it is.

The main thing, Estelle, is to keep reading, whatever strikes your fancy. Opinions are like belly buttons...and all that. I'm pleased to see anyone with a book in their hand, clearly enjoying themselves.

That's good enough for me.

"The idea is to learn how to talk about books to describe why the people who like them do like them, not to find stuff that everybody is going to like, or even that we like (although it certainly makes the reading easier if we do like the book). That way when the person who would like that book walks into the library and asks me for suggestions, I know what questions to ask and what kind of description to give to get the right reader and book together."

I agree. It's all about you trying to match a specific book to a specific reader. That's the game for me. If I give recommendations at all , it's only because I think someone I know will either be delighted or interested in the book I'm recommending to them. I'm not trying to recruit them .

Science Fiction read so far this year:

The Engines of God by Jack McDevitt
Hunters of Dune by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson
Sandworms of Dune by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson
Neuromancer by William Gibson

Next up for me is a big fat fantasy, To Green Angel Tower, Part 2, by Tad Williams. I read much more Science Fiction than Fantasy, but both are delicious.

Finished The Dragons of Babel by Michael Swanwick, Shift by Chris Dolley, and New Amsterdam by Elizabeth Bear. Now I can finally get started on Matter by Iain M. Banks, followed by Jon Courntney Grimwood's latest. Thank you Amazon UK!

kd9: Please drop in a post re: the new Iain Banks. It gets released here in North America the end of February and I'd like to know just how good MATTER is.

JCG's latest? Do you mean End Of The World Blues? That's quite an old book - August 2006 I think.

I also have Matter in my reading pile but first I will read Weaver which concludes the Time's Tapestry series by Stephen Baxter.

Cliff - as soon as I've ploughed my way through For Whom The Bell Tolls, I'll be starting Matter. Can;t say I'm enjoying the Hemingway, so I might be on the Banks by this weekend.

Ian: FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS is my favorite Hemingway but it's been years since I read it. Make sure you let me know about MATTER--it will determine if I wait and let the library bring in a copy for me (6 months from now) or make efforts to secure one sooner than that...

What's coming up in the SF TBR pile. Two debut novels, I think they're debuts.
Debatable Space by Philip Palmer and Singularity's Ring by Paul Melko. I try to read about six debuts a year. Somebody's got to give them a leg up.

Then the old standbys coming soon:
Matter by Iain M. Banks
The Dreaming Void by Peter F. Hamilton
The Philosopher's Apprentice by James Morrow
Incandescence by Greg Egan
The Prefect by Alastair Reynolds
Saturn's Children by Charles Stross

Here's a review of Iain Banks' MATTER from the GUARDIAN REVIEW OF BOOKS. Not exactly an overwhelming endorsement but not a pan either. Touches on some of issues I've had with Banks' books in the past. He does take his time to get to the story and there is a surfeit of world-building, descriptive passages dredged from his admittedly impressive imagination. Often as I'm reading Banks' books I find myself wishing he would employ the services of a really good editor to help him trim and pare down his offerings, make them leaner. Will wait and see what other folks say about MATTER. Let's hear from you...

http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/generalfiction/0,,2254874,00.html

#125

Yep Debatable Space is a first novel. Palmer is a script-writer for TV amongst other things so isn't a complete novice at plotting out a reasonable story. From a review it seems that the entire book is written in the first-person albeit from multiple view-points so that will be interesting.

Heard mixed things about Debatable Space. Eric Brown in the Grauniad loved it; Paul Raven at Strange Hosrizons disliked it. It's on my to-buy list, although I think I'll wait for the A-format paperback (Palmer and I have the same agent).

Bah. Double-posted the above.

I just finished The James Tiptree Award Anthology 3 today. Some excellent ideas in there. Now I am reading The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell.

As for recommendations, I would also have to say that it depends on the person, but if pressed, these are my top 5 to recommend:

The Gate to Women's Country by Sheri S. Tepper
Dune by Frank Herbert
The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin
Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card
something by Greg Bear

The top three are just my favorite books, and the next two (or more) just seem relatively easily accessable without being simplistic.

after a heavy dose of hi tech sci fi it's time to go back to first century Rome with Gordianus the Giver in Steven Saylor's book The Jugment of Caesar: A Novel of Ancient Rome. I've been reading some good reviews of his work so I'll try one.
After that it will be back to sci fi The Last Colony by John Scalzi

>131 usnmm2:

I started reading the Roma sub Rosa series as an undergrad Latin student, when my class translated a defense speech Cicero gave for a trial that was the subject of the first book in the series, Roman Blood. I'm not sure The Judgment of Caesar is a good one to start with, since it involves a lot of Gordianus' family history from earlier in the series, but I hope you enjoy it.

It was the only one at B & N had in stock. Started reading it last night (ch 1) any way. seems good so far.
Just up to the part when they get intercepted by Pompy's fleet. So if this one is OK then I'll look up some more.

Just finished Eros Ascending by Mike Resnick, now starting The Fall of the Towers by Samuel Delany.

VisibleGhost, I was at Context in September, a writer's convention in Ohio, and met Paul Melko. He was really nice and excited about his first novel. He's had some short stories published. I ordered the book from Amazon and can't wait to get it. Also, like you I'm excited about The Dreaming Void by Hamilton, but I have his works in paperback, so I have a while to wait.

#135

The Dreaming Void is due out in paperback in May in the UK. I read it on its UK hardcover last August. It is fair to say that it is the first part of a trilogy and the plot is left pretty unresolved at the end of this book. The story isn't self-contained. It seems to me that it is one huge novel - chopped up for publication based on reading the first volume. So we are introduced to lots of plot-lines which are irrelevant or seem to be dropped without explanation. I can only assume that Peter returns to these and weaves them into the story in the later volumes.

As I'm still relatively new to science fiction, having my tastes changing on me, I barely read anything in the field. So I can fully explore, even though I'm not yet accustomed to the names.

I'm now reading The Locus Awards : Thirty Years of the Best in Science Fiction and Fantasy, which has it's ups and downs, but is mostly very enjoyable. Just read one of the stories entitled "Even the queen" by Connie Willis which was funny and refreshing. I didn't care for "Buffalo" by John Kessel at all. Even though it was really short, it took me at least three tries to get through it. Also, "The Scalehunter's beautiful daughter" by Lucius Shepard was not a story I enjoyed. "Jeffty is five" by Harlan Ellison and "The Persistence of vision" by John Varley thoroughly enchanted me! "Bloodchild" by Octavia E. Butler simply blew me away. I also really enjoyed "The only neat thing to do" by James Tiptree Jr, so all in all not bad at all!
Only have 2 stories left, but this was a book that was definitely worth it's price and it was a good way to get aquainted with writers in the field.

Oh, and I discovered it contained one story that I already read in another collection, a sure sign that I'm getting comfortable in science fiction ^^ Yay for me! :)

I must admit I'm not a big fan of Peter Hamilton. I read the Night's Dawn trilogy - I have the muscles to prove it - but I wasn't that impressed. Big, yes. But I wasn't convinced by his Little England world-building.

I much prefer Iain Banks, and yet I know people who think Hamilton is a better writer than Banks...

#137

You might want to look at A Science Fiction Omnibus edited by Brian Aldiss (published by Penguin). It covers a fair bit more older stuff as well as some more recent stories. There is absolutely no overlap in contents as far as I can see.

> andyl

Tnx for the suggestion, that looks yummie! And I can even get it in the Netherlands, that's great! It's definitely going on my wish list! ^^

I just finished Joyleg by Ward Moore and Avram Davidson, and really I can't say anything about it.

Ok I will say something, the picture on the cover is a man "from the hills of Tennessee", dancing on a pile of rockets with a moonshine jug in his hand.

PS... He had a secret that changed the history of the world!!! With the right kind of Moonshine you can live a really long time. (Now look I've gone and spoiled the ending for you!!)

So I assume you're saying it's not worth the trouble. I have that book so, I'd like to know if it's a turd before I bother to read it.

I'm currently reading Sleepwalker's World by Gordon R Dickson.

I am reading Mary Doria Russell's The Sparrow now--so far, it is really good. I have had this on the TBR shelf for awhile now, I am glad I picked it up.

If you're going to read Heinlein I'd say read Starship Troopers, which I avoided for years and when I did read it I found it not to be the joke that people often suggest that it is. Right after that I'd read The Forever War as a counterpoint. Then read Foreigner, Startide Rising, and Old Man's War. All that will at least give you a good taste of SF as space fiction and of military SF.

As for what I'm reading right now, I just started Sun of Suns, though I'm finding non-fiction more interesting at this moment.

"If you're going to read Heinlein I'd say read Starship Troopers, which I avoided for years and when I did read it I found it not to be the joke that people often suggest that it is."

There you go - I found the exact opposite. Finally read it after many years, and thought it was an even bigger joke than I had expected.

Thats not an uncommond reaction to Heinlein if people give him a chance.
Being a Heinlein fan since 19** I will say that his later stuff is a little hard to take if you are not well versed in him.

If you are reading all these military Sci fi you might like to try The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. About a revolution on the moon, lead by a computer, who wanted friends and to tell jokes.

"There you go - I found the exact opposite. Finally read it after many years, and thought it was an even bigger joke than I had expected."

I found Starship Troopers to be interesting as well. Of course I don't agree with a number of conclusions in the novel. I also read your blog and don't really agree with that either. I think if you haven't read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress you have to before coming to the conclusion that Heinlein is a fascist. TMiaHM is an antiauthoritiarian novel about a revolution in which the American Revolution and the Russian Revolution are both cited as equivalent models to the "Looney" rebels.

>142 arthurfrayn:

Joyleg is a turd of a book, but at some point in your life you should read it. It is about a Moonshiner from Tennessee and how many science fiction books are written about Moonshiners?

arthurfrayn ;

Even if he was a fascist, so what! I'm the first to agree that his later work was a little strange. And many people who come to him from that direction find him hard to take. If I had read The cat who walks through walls : a comedy of manners I don't think Heinlein would have been a pleasent surprize for me. He is one author that you must place in his time and read more or less in order. Sort of grow in to him.

I like Shrike's suggestion of reading STARSHIP TROOPERS and Haldeman's FOREVER WAR back to back. It will reveal just what a poor craftsman Heinlein was. FOREVER WAR is far superior.

And let us not forget, Heinlein received a disability discharge from the navy and never, as far as I know, heard a shot fired in anger. Haldeman fought in the central highlands of Vietnam and won a Purple Heart. Who do you think has a better grasp of the horror and thrill of battle? Heinlein's take on military was vainglorious, juvenile and colored by his political views. Haldeman's was realistic
and based on actual experiences, immersed in blood, sweat and tears.

Yes, by all means, do read them both. With a critical, discerning eye...

"Heinlein's take on military was vainglorious, juvenile and colored by his political views. Haldeman's was realistic
and based on actual experiences, immersed in blood, sweat and tears."

I really don't think Heinlein is gung-ho the way Jerry Pournelle is, I just think he's interested in the concepts of citizenship, duty and freedom. And he puts discussions of those things in different contexts. I'll admit in general he's an idealist, and does not take into consideration the innate perversity of human beings. And yes, it's true, Heinlein is a Libertarian.
What's great about Haldeman's novel, is that it goes into how things don't work and I share his views. It's a satirical novel, and I might add one of my favorite SF novels of all time.Yes, I agree The Forever War is the better book, but I think it's important to read Starship Troopers. I just reread it for the first time since I was a kid, last year.
And keep in mind that Haldeman is a member of the Board of Directors for The Heinlein Society. ;)

Arthur: I agree, Jerry Pournelle is downright SCARY.

That THERE WILL BE WAR series...man, you could practically hear the goose-stepping in that one.

"Joyleg is a turd of a book, but at some point in your life you should read it. It is about a Moonshiner from Tennessee and how many science fiction books are written about Moonshiners?"

Well, that's a helluva recommendation, and I think the reading of that one can wait for a moment of as of yet unimagined desperation. ;) Thanks for the heads up.

"He is one author that you must place in his time and read more or less in order. Sort of grow in to him."

That was the game plan, but so many people talk about how bad Friday is, I don't know how long I'll be able to resist seeing if it's true. ;)

No, Arthur, it's NUMBER OF THE BEAST you should really be worried about.
Even when I was twenty (or so), that novel registered as a complete clunker.
Unbelievably bad. Actually, I don't think many of Heinlein's post-STRANGER books have much stature, even among fans of RHH. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but that's the impression I have...

Back to the thread: right now, I'm wading through Hartwell and Cramer's anthology The ascent of wonder ; the evolution of hard sf. Been on my 'to read' shelf for yonks. A mix of stories from the Golden Age and more recent stuff; second story in is Bob Shaw's 'Light of other days', so this gets my seal of approval. Also includes Kuttner and Moore's 'Mimsy were the borogroves', which I'd heard of and probably read once very many years ago, but it came over as pretty fresh to me. Some of the characters have attitudes very much of the time the story was written in, but nothing one can't handle.

I've never read Starship troopers, but I have read The moon is a harsh mistress and consider it the best of Heinlein's work - and I read quite a lot of Heinlein when I was younger, both good and not so good.

In #130, sussabmax recommended anything by Greg Bear (which is a view I endorse pretty much) and I'm reminded that earlier in this thread, there were complaints about publishers givig away the plots and twists of stories. Bear had a gem here - the original Avon mass-market paperback of Eon had a two-page blurb that gave away the major plot twist (and for those who haven't read it, it's about as big a plot twist as you can get involving a Big Dumb Object). It's not just that they gave the plot away - but they actually took two pages of densely-packed text to do it with, continuing the back page blurb inside the book!!! They don't just hint at it, they spell it out in black and white. At length. Aargh!

> 147

Arthur - you don't agree that the Terran Federation in Starship Troopers is fascist? As described in the novel, it clearly fits the definition. Whether that makes Heinlein fascist... I only suggested as much because Starship Troopers has little or no plot, so I could see no other reason for Heinlein having written it.

#157

No, the book is not fascist, but it does take to its logical conclusion the aphorism that he who is not willing to defend himself has no rights (which on second thought sounds Heinleinian). The depiction is that of an authoritarian republic; to get true fascism you need racism (which this book is certainly not), you need enforced mass-participatory political action (which this society does not have), and you need violence as a tool of domestic politics (which is at least not in evidence).

Also, give the devil his due, remember that the political system in this book was sparked by a military revolt over the mishandling of a POW/MIA crisis, which is rather farsighted considering how politics has played out in the U.S. since Vietnam.

"An Officer and a Gentleman" would have been a better title, as once you get past the battle scenes at the beginning and end of the book it's mostly a right of passage novel as Johnny Rico goes from being feckless playboy to serious man of affairs.

#158

I would disagree with the statement "to get true fascism you need racism". I also would dispute that there is no racism involved - I think it is there under the surface throughout the book. The very name 'bugs' and the idea that there are automatically inferior to the Terrans seems to indicate that.

There's violence there too - in fact, every crime is "punished" by violence. There's even a long rant on how a failure to spank children led to lawlessness in earlier centuries. Not to mention the lethality of the Mobile Infantry's training regime. There's a definite fascist assumption in the fact that those who fail to make the grade deserve death.

"... ti does take to its logical conclusion the aphorism that he who is not willing to defend himself has no rights..."

Er, Rico isn't defending himself. He's not defending anything. He's attacking the Skinnies and the Bugs. In fact, the system in the book ensures that only those who buy into the objectives of the Federation - i.e., the military - get the vote. And so perpetuate those objectives. And, as outlined in Starship Troopers, those objectives are expansionist, aggressive and militaristic.

Weird parallel: "skinnies" was the derogatory term U.S. soldiers used when referring to Somalis during the time they were stationed in and around Mogadishu (a conflict so well documented in the book BLACKHAWK DOWN).

"As described in the novel, it clearly fits the definition."

Re the definition you give on your blog:
"Any society which is authoritarian, elitist, militarist and nationalist fits the characteristics of a fascist state. ."

By this definition The Soviet Union would be a fascist state. The Soviet Union is not a fascist state. The distinction when using these terms is important. Actually important aspects of classic fascism-dictatorial rule, nationalized industry, are not discussed in the novel as far I can tell.

I can't help feeling you want to use the term for it's pejorative, dismissive power, not for it's accuracy. ;)

I think Heinlein is using an authoritarian state where rights have become restricted, to make a point about respecting what your rights and freedoms are all about; not to take them for granted, and to link them to a sense of civic duty and responsibility.
It's a deliberately provocative warning about what can happen when you take what you've got for granted.
I reiterate -if you haven't read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress you should do so. You might feel a whole lot better about this guy.

Man, I can remember getting into these discussions years ago--usually over a six pack of beer and various other substances.

I think I eventually came to the conclusion when you go far enough to the left or right of the political spectrum, there's very little to distinguish between them. One of the definitions of fascism is a "rigid, one-party dictatorship"--doesn't that cover BOTH the Nazis and Russia under Lenin, Stalin, et all? And when a nation (or planet) goes into preparation for war, the most efficient form of governance is a one-party state that denies a voice to the opposition, quells dissent and eradicates civil rights. Such infringements on personal liberty may be of finite duration (as long as the crisis lasts) or can stretch into perpetuity.

Arthur, it isn't Heinlein's message/politics that bugs me most (though it certainly factors in); he just wasn't technically a very good WRITER, the composition of his sentences, his word choices--very facile (which is why he appealed so much to adolescents). I guess it can be claimed that what qualifies as "good writing" is subjective but place a few of his paragraphs against more literary talents and I think the dichotomy between them would be starkly evident. Again, it's the difference between being an effective story teller and a writer who composes brilliant prose. Some choose the former, some the latter. But they are very different things...

Heinlein wrote Starship Troopers as a response to and a warning to the plan that Eisenhower approved to keep testing nuclear bombs. That this could be a possible furture. Also the Idea of corperate punishment at all levels is an extention of this.
Also The definition of a fascist state also includes that corperations have the same rights as people. Which leads to people being secdary to the corperations.

"One of the definitions of fascism is a "rigid, one-party dictatorship"--doesn't that cover BOTH the Nazis and Russia under Lenin, Stalin, et all?"

No, it doesn't. The term fascism is not the all purpose-one- stop -shopping word for describing all governments with an authoritarian or totalitarian leaning. Used in that fashion, the term becomes meaningless. The term comes from a specific moment in history and it means specific things. Nobody calls Stalinist Russia -fascist, and if you said that talking to anyone with a Poly-Sci background, they would correct you.

"it isn't Heinlein's message/politics that bugs me most (though it certainly factors in); he just wasn't technically a very good WRITER, the composition of his sentences, his word choices--very facile (which is why he appealed so much to adolescents). I guess it can be claimed that what qualifies as "good writing" is subjective but place a few of his paragraphs against more literary talents and I think the dichotomy between them would be starkly evident."

I got that from your other posts, although considering that the guy writes in a conversational tone- first person narrative nine times out of 10, with little or no descriptive indulgence; I don't see why a discussion of his prose is so important. To me, it's a non issue. Granted, as a narrative approach it can become wearying, and when he does have to describe something, he can fall short. The actual combat sequence at the end of Starship Troopers is not what I would call pulse pounding. Anticlimactic, more like. And as I've said here ( I think), his narrative pace doesn't have any gear shifts. ;)

Okay, Arthur, we'll leave it there.

Oh and I feel the need to point out, Phillip K Dick is not what I would call the most impressive prose stylist, nor is he the greatest when it comes to plot mechanics. I think when you're reading SF in general, you're not necessarily looking for the finest prose. I think that's what I find so interesting about reading it. It's not easily qualified, and is often written by undisciplined oddballs. I get a buzz off of that. ;)

I've heard much the same things about Dick as you've endured with Heinlein. People reading one of his lesser efforts and writing him off completely. BUT...I'd be the first person to admit about 70% of his stuff is really sub-par, twenty per cent good and 10 per cent outstanding. Not a great ratio but honesty and my admittedly high standards will countenance no easy ride for anyone, not even PKD. Some of his work--LIES INC. and VULCAN'S HAMMER good examples--is nothing short of ABYSMAL. Unmitigated shite.

And then I glance at DO ANDROIDS DREAM, UBIK, THREE STIGMATA and SCANNER DARKLY and realize that when the man was on, few writers even up to today can lay a glove on him.

Perhaps it's the same with you and RAH. I dunno...

Well talking about specific Dick books, it turns out I'm not the biggest fan of Three Stigmata or Scanner Darkly, and I kind of like Lies Inc. not because it conforms to any notion of "good"-it doesn't, but because it's so absolutely unhinged. I probably like Ubik the best. I also think Valis is a fascinating novel. I could see people picking that as his best.
Then, High Castle, Do Androids Dream, Martian Time-Slip...
I really like Now Wait For Last Year. I like Crap Artist. I like Galactic Pot Healer. I like Humpty Dumpty in Oakland. I have a fondness for We can Build You. At a certain point they all become one big novel -like reading Jim Thompson. I just read Counter-Clock World two months ago. Again, interesting book, but nothing I would label as "good".


And let's not make me Heinlein's pal. ;) It's just that here it's been "He sucks, he sucks, he's a fascist-what are you reading him for?". I find him a little more interesting than that. But who knows how I'll feel after Friday and Number of the Beast if I get that far? ;)
So far I like The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Farmer in the Sky a great deal.

And, see, I think LIES, INC. is a disaster, structurally, just a train wreck. Nothing fits together, just a massive debris field. I like VALIS too and we're about fifty-fifty on the other ones you mention.

" I think LIES, INC. is a disaster, structurally, just a train wreck. Nothing fits together, just a massive debris field."

No debate. But there's something about it I found fascinating. It's him at his most nuts, most wired up, most not concerned with telling a cohesive story. Almost deliberately abstract. In a way as I got into him, it was exactly the kind of book I wondered if I would find myself reading of his one day. There's a tendency in his writing that leads to it as the fruition of a sort of null goal. It's almost like channel surfing through an idiomatic series of SF concepts. The Zap Gun comes very close to having the energy of this book, but it's a more cohesive story. Then again, the phone book has a more cohesive story than Lies Inc. ;)

>121 CliffBurns: I've posted my review of Iain M. Banks new novel, Matter. In short, wait for the paperback, or maybe the movie. And I say this as a BIG, BIG fan of Banks. I thought The Algebraist was brilliant (and I have a long diatribe somewhere where I deconstruct why it is an anti-Culture novel). Now I am going to lower my IQ a dozen points by reading the latest Stephen King, a workbook on making Art Quilts and a cookbook from our favorite New Orleans restaurant.

#172

I'm only 250 pages in to Matter and I quite like it so far. In particular I find the characters quite a bit more sympathetic than you but I appreciate that that may change as I read on. But then again I didn't find The Algebraist as great as you did - good certainly, but not great.

I just started Matter this morning, and I was very disappointed by The Algebraist.

While this edition of the eternal debate on just how fascistic is "Starship Troopers" seems to be pretty much over, one always needs to remember that the militarism in the book is voluntary, and I suggest that this makes all the difference in the world in how you classify its politics.

An interesting question is whether the society depicted could survive a general war, which would probably obliterate that bright line.

If you want your views represented in Starship Troopers, then you have to volunteer for the military. The default condition is disenfranchisement (if there is such a word).

But... no argument about the book is ever going to be resolved. One side will find evidence of fascism in it, the other side will claim that evidence does not prove it's fascist...

The other side will claim that the interpretation presented by those who claim the novel is fascist is not accurate.

What about countries with mandatory conscription - Greece, Israel, Finland and Switzerland for example. Are they fascist states?

And another thing- people here keep on talking about a one-party state as an important aspect of fascism. Where is that mentioned in the novel?

I've been keeping my eye on these MATTER reviews--Iain Banks is an author who deserves his own thread. The breadth and depth of his literary vision.

Banks can be great--but he's also prone to long digressions and (in my view) a surfeit of needless details. Not necessarily scientific gobbledegook (the bane of a lot of Sf writers), more like subplots and lengthy exchanges that could easily be pared down. Big, fat novels can sometimes reveal a dearth of discipline on the part of the author and that's SOMETIMES the case with Banks. He has a prolific (prolix?) imagination and that can hurt the overall effectiveness of his work.

CONSIDER PHLEBAS and EXCESSION, his two best works, clock in at around 450 pages. I note this new novel is 1/3 longer and that worries me.

I can't quite figure out Banks' appeal. His space opera is a great deal more sophisticated than is usual, and his prose is a great deal better than that written by much of the genre. But... his novels often read to me as though he's making it up as he goes along.

In Again A Dark Background - my favourite Banks novel, incidentally - he's used a standard quest plot... but he takes the plot coupons from his heroine shortly after she's won them. And she still makes it through to the end. The story is just a long series of entertaining set-pieces.

And Look to Windward, for me, tailed off towards the end. He set up the central dilemma, worked it through... and then we get some final guff involving nanotechnology or something.

The Algebraist... He throws in one of his trademark twists in the main character's past, but then never uses it. Instead, it's off to the Dwellers - and Banks has never been able to do aliens - some daft pantomime villain, and the final quarter of the book shifts into some weird cosmological quest.

If Banks ever manages to put together a well-structured, coherent sf novel... it'd win every award on the planet.

Ian: Did you not like EXCESSION? I thought that one very successful.

It's been a while since I read Excession - about all I can remember is lots of ships' Minds talking to each other. Oh,and the main character changed sex and had a baby. One of these days, I'll have to dig out my signed copy and reread it...

"I'll have to dig out my SIGNED copy..."

You name-dropping, signature collecting, toffee-nosed, special limited edition on every bleedin' shelf...

Ha! I was even present at the infamous massage lotion drinking incident...

Having said that, a year or two ago I decided to buy a first edition hardback of Against A Dark Background. I bid on several on eBay, but never won one. And then I won a signed copy. But the seller hadn't mentioned that the book was dedicated by Banks to someone, as I discussed when it arrived. On the title page, Banks had written, "To Ian, Hope you enjoy it," and signed it.

What a nice piece of luck. You bastard...

Here's a funny story: I recently came across a blog entry in which a chap stated that he had picked up a book in an estate sale dedicated to "Col. Theodore Roosevelt" and signed by H. Rider Haggard. When I complimented him on the find, he said he would send me the book once he finished it. Don't be bloody daft, I wrote back, that's a little piece of history you got there. Some people just have no fookin' idea...

>144 Shrike58:-rest of Starship Troopers discussion:

Read that already. Also The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Stranger in a Strange Land, Time Enough for Love, To Sail Beyond the Sunset, I Will Fear No Evil, Job: a Comedy of Justice, Double Star, Farnham's Freehold, Expanded Universe, Farmer in the Sky, For Us, the Living, and possibly others I'm forgetting. So there's a simple reason I'm reading Friday for class: it was the only thing left on my Heinlein TBR list that was readily available at a convenient library.

Estelle, all I can say is the best thing about FRIDAY is the cover. Anyone who thinks Heinlein deserves to be taken seriously as a literary stylist need only read that one or the aforementioned NUMBER OF THE BEAST. I don't envy you one bit...

This will drive Cliff crazy. When I go through physical bookstores I find a section or display in a lot of them that will have books required for local high schools and colleges. Three that have been showing up in several places in the US are Stranger in a Strange land, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and Starship Troopers. Sometimes all three are for political science courses but sometimes Stranger is assigned for lit classes. It just runs like water off of a duck's back for me as I'm more of an observer of the SF field not an agitator for change. What will be will be.

Back to the political idealogical battles in SF. Futurism can be shoehorned into four major groups but inside of these groups the details can splinter into near-infinite minutia. Capitalism, Socialism, Totalitarianism, and The Apocalyptics.

Capitalism- The market will pave the way and pay the way into the future. The elites and monied will advance first and can break away from the rest of humanity. Example; Verner Vinge's Anarcho-Capitalist traders.

Socialism- Inclusive approach to bringing society into the future. Sometimes cautious and bureaucratic but usually portrayed in a positive manner. Examples; Kim Stanley Robinson, and Iain M. Banks.

Totalitarianism- Besides the despots ruling with an iron fist it also includes some of the situationists, singularity enthusiasts, and transhumanists. Why? Because humanity gets surpassed and is no longer top dog. Benevolent overseers are not guaranteed. The Rapture of the Nerds might not be so rapturous. Examples; Some Charles Stross touches on this.

Apocalyptics- Humankind is going to fuck its long-term future up one way or another. Environmentally, wars, religious extremists trying to hasten their diety's return to take over the mess, out of control biotech, and the list goes on. Examples; Almost every author in the field has tried their hand at this.

Being aware of some of these and other philosophies will ping your radar when you run across them in SF. The field has always been idealogical and it probably always will be. And we haven't even gotten to the sub-themes of SF besides futurism which includes feminism, racism, speciesism and on and on. I for one like the messy chaotic battle for ideas in the field and am glad no consensus has been reached.

"Anyone who thinks Heinlein deserves to be taken seriously as a literary stylist need only read that one or the aforementioned NUMBER OF THE BEAST."

I don't think anybody does, and I think the prevailing point being made here is that being a literary stylist might not be the most important aspect of what makes a SF writer interesting to read. Appalling prose sylists like EE Doc Smith I can understand not being able to take, but Heinlein has a readable style.
Let's cut right to modern day. Skills in general have improved, but when I read Richard Morgan or Neal Asher I'm not thinking "boy, what literary stylists."

I'd certainly rate Richard K. Morgan as a better writer than Neal Asher. But, I have to admit, if you want sf and literary stylists, you have to look outside the genre. Or at short stories. Publishers of books are not looking for good writing in genre fiction, they're looking for good storytelling.

I'm currently reading The Crystal Spheres and few other David Brin short stories. He knows his job :-) When I was younger I read Uplift War and wasn't able to embark to his vision, maybe I should read it again ?

I think Paul di Fillppo a very fine literary stylist, James Morrow and Peter Watts are sound and interesting writers. I consider Morgan, Banks, Gibson, Dennis Danvers and Vinge far superior writers to Heinlein and the vast majority of the "classics" of the "Golden Age". Good writing DOES exist in the field of SF; it just gets ignored by fans who have rotted their brains with media tie-ins, share-cropping and video games. It's "harder" to read than the drek, requiring an attention span and focus. Perhaps worthy, challenging novels should come with a prescription for Ritalin.

Sorry, Robbie: David Brin's work doesn't make my roster of good ones. I think he's quite dreadful. Again, the ideas are there but the execution is clunky, lacking sophistication of language and technique. Haven't read him for years and doubt I ever will again. Just not my cup of tea.

#190 - Uplift isn't that special. It's a clever idea, but doesn't really stand being dragged over 6 books.

Currently reading Foreigner et al as I've finally managed to get my hands on deliverer which I should get to in the next week or two.

I wasn't impressed with either Banks' culture books or Heinlen for those still discussing their respective merits.

#191, #192 - you are right David Brin seems to be better at writing short fictions, as far as I remember I wasn't ready to have more of him each time I closed his books. I was just curious to see if I were the only one, it seems not.

As far as literary style goes, I'll throw Fahrenheit 451 in to represent the classics. I've always thought the opening paragraphs of that were some of the most impressive in any genre.

"I'd certainly rate Richard K. Morgan as a better writer than Neal Asher."

Agreed.

"Publishers of books are not looking for good writing in genre fiction, they're looking for good storytelling."

-is what I'm saying. ;)

"I consider Morgan, Banks, Gibson, Dennis Danvers and Vinge far superior writers to Heinlein and the vast majority of the "classics" of the "Golden Age"."

Vernor Vinge is not a literary stylist. I like him, but it's apparent that he owes a lot to Larry Niven. Another non-literary stylist. Who I don't love.

As I said above, there has been a general upgrade in overall craft, but people also write enormous books now for the current market, and that to me, is not a plus. My point there being I regard what you get today as having a built in trade-off in it, just like anything else. I don't necessarily think everyone should be writing 500 page books. Consequently I read old to new on a 5-1 ratio because I can- because each book makes so much less of a demand on my time.
Yes, I'm saying I'm not always sure when I read a current title that it was worth the time it took to read it. Yes, I'm saying I'd rather read an old school novel because it'll be finished in 150-300 pages. Brevity is a virtue that seems unmarketable today. Yes, I'm saying that in some measure those considerations supercede whether or not someone is the greatest prose stylist. Bad prose can stop me, but mediocre prose wont if it's only for 150-300 pages.

It's the guys who milk a concept into a five book series who make me see red.

I will agree, these days brevity is not exactly "the soul of wit".

I'm not saying Vinge is a great stylist but he's miles beyond RAH. No more on that though, that's a dead end alley with some nasty looking thugs hanging about...

> 172, >174 iansales:, >178 CliffBurns:

Dear Ian S. -- "his novels often read to me as though he's making it up as he goes along"

And what exactly is wrong with that? Some of those tightly plotted novels seem like a corset on a mannequin, not much life in 'em.

Let's see, I like Banks because I like future history better than past history. Being stuck on one planet is so primitive. Maybe that was why I was so disappointed in the medieval/Victorian setting of much of Matter. (Much as I like Alastair Reynolds, though his characters are much darker and more evil.) I like Banks because I am a fast (OK, very fast) reader. When you read better than a book a week, a long, well written book is better than short well written book. That is NOT to say I don't love and appreciate the classics -- Bradbury, Clarke, even Heinlein (though I could never see much of the appeal of Asimov, except for some of his early short stories). I like Banks because I do like his aliens. Sufficiently alien while being comprehensible enough to interact with. I like Banks' snarky female heroines and even some of his clueless male ones (much like John Boyd).

Books are like tuning forks. Some resonate with you and possibly no one else. Some resonate for a while, then go silent. Others are on someone else's frequency.

I like the gigantic spaceships, the A.I.'s with the oddball names. Their eccentric personalities and independent spirits. Banks isn't perfect but I prefer him to 99% of SF authors out there. Alastair Reynolds is pretty good but not quite up to Banks' stature, in my view. The deep space/far future stuff is terrific but THE WASP FACTORY is one of the ten best debut novels I've ever read. I could strangle him for that one...

Skipping over the relative merits of current and classic writers (not that I don't have an opinion, just no time to elaborate right now)...

I finished The Sparrow, and really enjoyed it. I really liked the way Russell demonstrates that encountering an alien society requires taking in so much information that misunderstandings--huge misunderstandings--are pretty much inevitable. I thought the descriptions of the Jesuits and what that lifestyle would be like interesting, too, although I am not a religious person. I will probably read the next book where Emilio goes back to Rakhat, but not right away--I need a break since it was so tragic. I am really impressed that this was a first novel, too. The writing seemed very mature to me.

Just started Krono by Charles Harness.

> 177: Arthur, Switzerland's actually a police state, albeit a very polite one.

Again, isn't that a characterization; isn't it categorized as a federal republic or something akin to that? And it certainly isn't called a fascist state.

I've always been arguing labels. Not to take this around the block yet again, my point is that fascist has become useless as a pejorative. If you go online you'll find people struggling to construct arguments on an almost daily basis to definitively label their political or ideological opponents fascist. And that's going either way, left or right.

The word is useless except when you strip it down to referring to governments that are exactly like the ones that coined the term in the first place.

On a much more pressing note -what do recommend after The Palace of Eternity for my next Shaw read? ;)

I finished Out of the Dead City (the first third of The Fall of the Towers), and quite enjoyed it (not much plot, but then plot doesn't really seem to matter all that much in Delany), and now I have started The Many-Coloured Land.

Arthur:

Labels are fluid things and political science tricky. The Nazis were fascists, which would seem to denote rightwing...but they were National SOCIALISTS. Huh? I still say when you go far enough left and far enough right, you end up at roughly the same place, where such discriminations become superfluous...

It sounds like you're arguing the exact opposite from where I'm coming from. You sound like you feel the term "fascist" should be righteously dispensed like PEZ in whatever direction one feels like shooting it...

I'm not convinced anymore as to the effectiveness of vitriolic purgation as a solution to any of the world's pressing problems or even to one's own.
Ultimately we're talking about name calling here -ya know? What good does that do really??
Don't you think it's important to understand the Liberarian underpinnings of Heinlein's fiction just as it's important to understand Brunner's Socialist underpinnings to see how they have impacted the genre?
Isn't that more interesting than name calling?
That's what I'm interested in.

But more importantly, you dig Earthly Powers that much? I have that one in a box in the attic,; really that worth a spin?

Yes! Yes! EARTHLY POWERS, my friend. Magnificent. The magnum opus of a genius.

I am not name-calling Heinlein. Not politically. He's a piss-poor artist, whether libertarian or otherwise. Tuneless and juvenile.

I name call those who are fascist, racist, materialist, consumerist, mindless, heartless, deftless, lacking in imagination, fearful and insular in vision...whether they be named RAH or PKD or ______________. Those who write to support themselves, their wives, their bloated lifestyles. Who write for any reason other than ART.

I care not one whit if Brunner a socialist--can he WRITE? Aye, there's the rub...

>202 arthurfrayn:: Arthur: indeed, Switzerland is a federal republic; and I never called it 'fascist'. It's just a place where the laws are exteremely repressive in all sorts of odd ways, and the local population are likely to be the ones who draw your attention, the community's attention and the police's attention to them, in that order and PDQ too. Hence you tend to get a mindset amongst inhabitants that whatever you're doing, it must be wrong somehow. It's the worst sort of police state - a self-policing one.

But then they go and bring forth someone like H.R.Geiger. Must be some sort of reaction.

Ah, Bob Shaw. Not knowing what you've already read, might I suggest Other days, other eyes - the fix-up novel that frames his 'slow glass' stories; Ground Zero Man/The peace machine (same novel, TPM is a very slight rewrite to update the book slightly between editions); or The Ceres solution. Who goes here? is his one good humourous novel; his last, Warren Peace: Dimensions was the other, but not a great harbinger of what was supposed to be a series.

Thanks for the heads up in all regards. :)

As to Switzerland-a nice place to visit etc. -eh?
I'm not familar with the population makeup-could what you describe be due to a very ethnically uniform population?

Thanks for Shaw recommends- I'll check out Other days, other eyes -I'm familiar with the Slow Glass concept already so that sounds like fun. I've only read Palace of Eternity so far.

Arthur,

I've been to Switzerland once, and I wouldn't mind going again. But I found it just a bit too perfect; I felt I ought to be wearing Sunday best all the time. Certainly when I went ten years ago, it was very ethnically uniform - or rather, the ethnic diversity was self-created. All German-speaking Swiss speak three types of German - Hochdeutsch (High German, for dealing with non-Swiss German speakers), Schweizerdeutsch (Swiss German, for use amongst themselves) and their local dialect (for use with the people from their village and the one next door). Plus normally at least one other of the Swiss national languages (French, Italian or Romanch) and probaly English too. I'm reasonably competant in German, and I shared a 20-minute train journey with two men conversing in their local dialect. I picked up two words in that time.

The non-German Swiss have a more outward-looking attitude with regard to their international neighbours; the German Swiss (roughly 60% of the population) think of themselves as Top Dogs but to stay that way prefer to keep the rest of German-speaking Europe out... And that's about as ethnically diverse as it seems to get.

Of course, the drawbridge mentality has served the Swiss well over the years. By threatening to withdraw to the mountains and blow up the passes and the trans-Alpine tunnels (which Hitler needed to keep Italy and the German presence in North Africa supplied), the Swiss remained safe. Morally ambiguous, but safe.

The place begs for a bank heist/caper film, don't you think? Emptying the place of all that ill-gotten Nazi loot...

Here's what I thought of Iain Banks's Matter: http://justhastobeplausible.blogspot.com/2008/02/heart-of-matter.html

Because I read a mix of US and UK editions I didn't notice the double quotes. So off I went and looked at some other recent Orbit books. Debatable Space also has double quotation marks. The Execution Channel (May, last year) and Saturn Returns (Nov/Dec last year) both use single quotation marks. So if it is an editorial change of policy it would have been taken very recently.

I suspect it's because of the launch of Orbit US. They'll set the books for the US market, so they don't have to do it twice. After all, the US market is so much bigger than the UK one, why should we be be treated preferentially? I mean, books first published in the US tend to be published in the UK straight from the American plates anyway.

Of course, the reverse doesn't hold true. Just think how confused US readers would be by single quotes for dialogue! Why, they might not even buy the book!

Ian:

Terrific and wise review of Iain Banks' MATTER. Sounds like you've nailed it. I left a comment on your site so I won't beat this to death. Suffice to say, you're the sort of reviewer I look for as a writer and a reader. You're smart enough to "get" a difficult read and daring enough to make the attempt in the first place. Well done, old son...

Problem is, I've been a fan of sf since I was a kid, and I read a great deal of it. But I want it to give me what I also get from good mainstream fiction - Lawrence Durrell, Anthony Burgess, John Fowles, that sort of stuff - as well as all the ideas and sensawunda stuff. Unfortunately, none of it really does. But Iain Banks is one of the few who comes closest, although none of his novels have quite made it yet - or perhaps, have not come as close as novels such as Coelestis or Take Back Plenty...

On reflection, I wonder if I did read Matter correctly. I take it as read (no pun intended) that Banks does not believe in interference - he did, after all, chop up his passport and send it to Downing Street in protest of the invasion of Iraq... So why would Matter seem to suggest that intereference can be acceptable?

#216

Well I think it has a complicated message on the matter of interference. Quite plainly as the book tells us a number of times "It's not that simple". It seems to me that almost everyone agrees that there are levels and types of interference that are more acceptable than others. Where to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable is the question. It may be that a society can only establish that line with hindsight.

Surely "it's not that simple" is a cop-out? Because who decides what is and what is not acceptable? Bush clearly thought invading Iraq was acceptable; Banks didn't. I don't think Matter answers the question - and not just because Banks has cheated the question with his hierarchy of civilisations...

I consider myself on the left of the political spectrum and I feel torn on the subject of military intervention, interfering in the affairs of another sovereign country/culture. I think the Iraq conflict was a mistake, a blunder...but at the same time it removed (and ultimately executed) a villain on the world stage, a human beast. Milosovic in Serbia (former Yugoslavia) was unseated and tried for his crimes. Canada is directly involved in Afghanistan, trying to rebuild that war-ravaged country, destroy the Taliban bastards who stoned women, denied human rights, extolled a radical form of Islam that was medieval and inhuman.

Lefties are constantly decrying the state of human rights but how far are we prepared to go to grant a voice to the disenfranchised, prevent genocide, stop military adventurism, the destabilization of an entire region? Sanctions sometimes work but often that's not enough.

Personally, I think the regime in China is onerous and I'm disgusted they were given the opportunity to host the Olympic Games (er, sorry, I believe the proper term is "Genocide Games"). I wouldn't cry any tears if the entire Chinese leadership were deposed and put in the dock of the World Court in Brussels. They are repellent thugs. Any country that denies basic human rights to its citizens should be cast out of the world community, rendered a pariah state (ex. South Africa in the 70's and 80's). Instead, China's power grows thanks to its cheap labor, lax environmental standards, industrial espionage, etc. etc.

How far are we prepared to go to defend our democratic ideals? Pay more for consumer products? Pay more at the gas tank? Pay with the lives of our soldiers? It's a question we wrestle with but, for the most part, our high moral stance doesn't take us very far. We talk the talk but that's it.

So I understand Mr. Banks' ambiguous stance in MATTER; it may reflect a moral quandary many of us experience when we view events in the world. Our souls are torn, the inner debate on-going and inconclusive.

It's not defending your democratic ideals, though, is it? It's imposing your worldview on others. We might found some elements of it repellent, but that doesn't give us the right to go charging in, obliterating everything in sight. If we want to keep the moral high ground, all we can do is offer a choice - say to those who don't wish to subscribe to the regime, if you leave we will find somewhere for you to live. (A place that doesn't involve invading somewhere else, of course.)

If China is bad, but too powerful to be invaded. If Korea is bad, but might have nuclear weapons, so you can invade. If Iraq is bad... Right: pick on the weak one. And ignore all the ones on "our" side who have just as bad records - like the Israelis.

We have to respect sovereignty, we have to respect people's right to live the way they choose. If they no longer choose to live that way, if they ask for help... then we can offer it. That's the message Matter should be giving - and in some respects, it does. Ferbin asks the Culture for help, asking why it hasn't intervened already. But Banks then cheats by having the Culture give covert support to Djan Seriy - sort of like the US training the Mujahideen, or providing financial aid to Al-Qa'eda... and look what happened there...

This is one of the reasons Banks remains an interesting writer - because we're discussing his space opera in reference to current real world events.

I'm not saying we always live up to our ideals (in the west) and often our sense of right and wrong are tempered by the pragmatism of national interests. Harry Truman's famous line: "He may be a sonofabitch but he's OUR sonofabitch".

I was merely discussing the inner conflict when one tries to rationalize one's beliefs in the light of the costs of warfare (short and longterm).

Strong men like Tito and Hussein can temporarily submerge or exploit tribalism, sectarian strife through ruthless methods and when their iron hand is gone, those factors are once again unleashed--Sunni vs. Shia; Serb Vs. Croat vs. Muslim. China is a country made up of many nationalities and undoubtedly many would splinter into separate states & enclaves should Beijing no longer wield the power it has at present. There would be conflict, many deaths, displacement of millions of people.

I agree it's far easier to pick on Iraq, Iran and North Korea than it is China. And impossible to take on Israel thanks to a powerful, influential and affluent lobby. Power politics is not for the faint-hearted and the naive and idealistic are quickly disabused of their quaint notions.

I intend to tackle MATTER in the coming months and see for myself how Banks addresses these topics. Certainly give him credit for being an author unafraid of painting a big picture with a deft and daring brush.

There's no such thing as "national interest" anymore. It's the interests of a small group of people who happen to wield power in a nation state. The first cncern of any government is the survival of that government, after all.

...and securing the raw materials and cheap consumer goods to keep the "sheep" happy and indifferent to the world around them.

I think our thoughts are running along the same path.

Just started The Venetian Court by Charles Harness.

I've just finished Sun of Suns (B+).

Also, not to be critical, I'd suggest that the on-going political debate probably belongs in another thread, if only because this thread will otherwise reach about four-hundred messages by the end of March!

Quite right to keep us on track but the discussion DID relate to a subtext of Iain Banks' MATTER. Exploring a perceived underpinning in a novel by one of the best authors booting about SF these days...

On Banks: I'm rather behind in my Banks reading, but might I just remind you of the Culture's intelligence/espionage arm? It was called "Special Circumstances" because although the Culture was a non-interventionist, functioning socialist anarchy, the Minds that ran it recognised that sometimes, "Special Circumstances" dictated intervention. And after all, the galaxy is big enough for that to happen sufficiently often to make things interesting if you are telling stories.

Leftist history is full of situations where 'special circumstances' applied, and Banks is well aware of this. Sometimes it's tedious, boring political stuff; sometimes it gives rise to hypocritical conduct and conflict; and sometimes it makes for fascinating reading.

And it's always hard to take a consistent line on events because they steadfastly refuse to be neatly categorised. So for instance, British republican anti-war campaigners might well be having a difficult time with the revelation that Prince Harry has been on active duty in Afghanistan..

Arthur - read The Venetian Court a while back, when I discovered that Charles Harness was still alive and publishing new novels. After The Paradox Men was reprinted in the middle 1970s, I was able to build up a reasonable selection of his work, both old and new. Try to find The Rose, The Ring of Ritornel or Redworld.

.227"Arthur - read The Venetian Court a while back, when I discovered that Charles Harness was still alive and publishing new novels. After The Paradox Men was reprinted in the middle 1970s, I was able to build up a reasonable selection of his work, both old and new. Try to find The Rose, The Ring of Ritornel or Redworld."

I've read The Rose, and Ring of Ritornel and I think I have everything else just waiting for me to get around to reading them.With The Venetian Court, I've read about eight of his novels so far. That Harness is so worth reading beyond The Paradox Men, is one of the great treats of last and this year. He's become one of my favorite SF writers. :)

I just read The Outback Stars by Sandra McDonald for the second time because the sequel, The Stars Down Under is coming out this quarter.

Is there some kind of a gender-gap in what men and women like in SF? My top five recommends for a new SF reader would be:

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card
Beggars in Spain by Nancy Kress
Stardoc by S. L. Viehl
City of Pearl by Karen Traviss
Foreigner by C. J. Cherryh

Just read Bill The Galactic Hero by Harry Harrison what a pleasent find.
He spoofs almost every major sci fi book writen at that time. Starship Troopers, The Foundation Series, Logans Run ad I'm sure there is more I don't Know about. It brought I smile to my face and even laughed out load a few times. I would say that this is a must for anyone that likes military sci and can stand a little the satire of their favorites books and stories. Besides the sign of a good story or book is a good spoof.
In fact I think I'm going to dig up a copy of Bored of the Rings which I read 20 years ago or so.

> 229 I don't think there is a gender gap in SF as much as there is a age and experience gap. I am going to open a new topic to discuss this.

#230

Harry Harrison sure is a clever chap considering that Bill The Galactic Hero was published in 1965 and Logan's Run in 1967.

When Bill was being chased by the M.P.s and the police down all the levels of he world city of Helior and he bumps into the Head of the D and S for the planet He is asked what's he looking for. Bill replays "Sanctuary'.
This brought two things to mind 1. "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" 2. "Logans run"
Seeming it's a sci fi spoof I went with the sci fi twist. It made me laugh. I didn't look up or google dates of publication. I wasn't writing an paper for a crazed teacher or book nazis. I was trying to give a little info so people would have some idea of what the story was like.

I was only being a little snarky Logan's Run was not that major a novel but a respectable mid-list book and unlikely to have inspired Harrison even if the time frame was right. My point was that it is easy to pick up on things and call it spoofing when in reality they are both mining the same source material or even just a case of consilience. I do agree that Bill The Galactic Hero was however strongly satirising Starship Troopers and all the better for it.

Harrison's other SF comic works are also worth reading if you haven't already.

I'm looking into them. They look like they would be fun also

I just finished up Three Days to Never which I thought was OK but probably would not one read it again. It just had a different style than the reviews I read of it. Next up is Mona Lisa Overdrive to finish of the sprawl trilogy.

I started The Many-Coloured Land but was having difficulty developing any enthusiasm, so I've set it aside for the moment. I'm currently about three-quarters of the way through The Towers of Toron.

I'm now reading The other side of the sky which contains short stories by Arthur C. Clarke. It's pretty good so far.

Just started Permutation City.

> 237 clong: I read the whole "Saga of Pliocene exile" ages back. I loved the concept, and I started the first novel with delight. Having read the spoiler blurb, I was impressed with the way all these characters were burbling on about how wonderful life was going to be in the distant past whilst I was thinking "Have you got a surprise waiting for you!" Anticipated Schadenfreude - loved it!

But once the story got into the realms of re-hashing fantasy tropes, it seemed to get very turgid, and apart from a bit where a high-placed Firvulag waxes lyrical about sausages somewhere in the middle of book three, I found little of merit and all four books were purged from my collection some time back.

Incidentally RobertDay-
I picked up Other Eyes Other Days as per your recommendation. I also picked up Orbitsville because I found it used, cheap, locally. :)

I knocked off Precious Dragon yesterday and had a real fine time with it. While this is not really a fault, this series has reached the point where you have to had read the first two books to make sense of what is going on in the third. This leaves me with the question of whether it was always the author's intention to create an extended series; not that I'm complaining.

I'm past half way through Fool's War. It's full of fascinating ideas about artifical intelligence, several of the characters are pretty appealing, and the plot contains a nice succession of revelations. In the middle, however, the book is getting bogged down. It has changed from a science fiction adventure story to a mystery in a SF setting. That's fine, I like that sort of thing, but the shift in approach is a little distracting. I'm sticking with it, though, because I'm still enjoying the interactions of some of the characters and I've invested enough to want to see how it comes out.

240 > I read that series a long time ago when I was in high school or college, and loved it. I am thinking now I should not re-read, so I can preserve my love for it! At the time, it was different from anything I had read before, and it made a big impression on me.

I've been on a Florida mystery kick lately, but have been trying to work my way through the entire Star Wars EU when I get tired of the mysteries.

My current read: Oyster Blues by Michael McClelland, with Shock Wave by James O. Born on deck for the next.

Just started another award* nominee - The Yiddish Policemen's Union by Michael Chabon. Happily, Waterstone's had it in their "3 for 2" promotion.

(* The British Science Fiction Association Award. Strangely, the book hasn't made it onto the Arthur C Clarke Award shortlist.)

Gotta read this one--add it to the teetering pile threatening to topple, pinning me underneath for a suitably macabre ending to my sorry-ass life...

I have that many books on the shelves to read I've had to put together a reading list for the next few months. I could never decide which one to start next, and would invariably pick up some lightweight crap. Now I have to stick to the list - and I'm finally getting around to those books I bought all that time ago and really wanted to read...

(okay, so The Yiddish Policemen's Union was a cheat - I only bought it two days ago, so it wasn't on the reading list. But I want to read it before the Eastercon, so I changed the list...)

Cheats allowed under special circumstances...like squeezing in really good literary writers. Sometimes the library will bring in a book I ordered months before (and forgot about) and because it's an inter-library loan I can't renew it, it HAS to be read in 3 weeks. And since I have a philosophical aversion to returning an unread book, I'm forced to read it, regardless of my schedule. The convolutions book lovers get ourselves involved in...

>246 iansales:

That's on my list. The paperback release is only six weeks or so away, so I'm holding off until then. I trust Chabon enough that I'll buy his books without reading them.

The paperback is already available in the UK. That's the edition I bought. (I also bought The Road by Cormac McCarthy at the same time.)

Some good readin' ahead for you, Ian...

I am reading the Theodore Sturgeon collection The Golden Helix. Half of the stories are new to me. . . So far, two of the new ones are great and one is so-so.

I just finished The Lottery and other stories by Shirley Jackson. I am still feeling a little creeped out.

Have read Philip K Dick's Ubik - an excellent book, 10/10. I love how paranoid Dick was, the book had quite a few good ideas in it, and the twist at the end of the story was quite good.

I'm currently on Olaf Stapledon's Star Maker. I love the book, there is a lot of comment about religion and society, but it is extremely heavy going - Stapledon goes into a lot of heavy concepts.

After that, I have received a raft of suggestions for new SF novels to get onto in another thread, which I will try to start in a week or so.

So many books, so little time...

EDIT: Trying to get these tags to work!!!

I have just finished The Companions which is Sheri S. Tepper's doggy story. Not sure what is next on the menu. Little new has been released so it will be one from the to-read shelves - maybe The Empire Of Fear or Debatable Space.

I've seen mixed reviews for Debatable Space - some people seem to love it, others to hate it. Still, I suppose there's nothing unusual in that these days...

For some reason I have been drawn back into the classics. I've just read Neuromancer by William Gibson, Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein, Last Call by Tim Powers, and now Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson. I guess there aren't that many new books in my To Be Read pile.

Just finished The Yiddish Policemen's Union by Michael Chabon. Very good. Spoiled a little by a lack of impact during the final reveal, and an occasional over-calculatedness to the prose. But I think I'll give it a higher vote than Richard K. Morgan's Black Man or Ken MacLeod's The Execution Channel in the BSFA Awards next weekend.

My thoughts on Morgan's Black Man - http://justhastobeplausible.blogspot.com/2008/03/black-man-thirteen.html

I just finished reading an advance copy of The Stars Down Under, second in a series by Sarah McDonald. I was delighted that she developed the plot threads that I enjoyed the most from the first book. I gave it 5 stars out of 5. My review is posted here at LT and at my blog.

I just finished Sucker Bet and have now started Sanibel Flats. Sucker bet was a good 2-day read.

My thoughts on Michael Chabon's The Yiddish Policemen's Union - http://justhastobeplausible.blogspot.com/2008/03/mazel-tov.html

Try a new science fiction author - I recently finished Singularity's Ring by Paul Melko, and loved it. Didn't take me long to read, as I couldn't put it down. Currently I'm reading three novels: A Deepness in the Sky by Vernor Vinge, The Big Bamboo by Tim Dorsey (Serge A. Storm rocks!), and Kidnapped by Robert Louis Stevenson.

Finished up Summer Knight yesterday evening.

I'm reading Labyrinth of Dreams by Jack L. Chalker.

Coming out of lurkerville for a moment...

I just started a reread of The Squares of the City this morning. It's been so long since I last read it that it's like reading a whole new book for me.

Fading back into the depths of lurkerville...

Finished Sanibel Flats yesterday. Starting on The Heat Islands. Yeah, I'm on a Randy Wayne White kick right now.

Memory by Bujold the first of hers that IO've read. Very enjoyable so far - feels like it might be part of an series (i've checked it's 11th!) but actually works quite well as a standalone. I'll have to go and read the others now!

Wow. Someone who hasn't heard of Bujold's Vorkosigan series. Despite it winning her loads of Hugos and Nebula awards...

Easily done. I don't follow any awards at all. For anything. I haven't found a panel of judges who tastes reliably match mine. Is the nebula in any way special? There seem to be a vast slew of awards for this or that, and then shortlists and commendeds and other nearlys. Life's far too short to be bothered trying to keep track of them all, so I just ignore the lot.

I'd heard of Bujold, as an author worth reading, but not specifically of any of her work. "Vorkosigan" hardly trips off the tongue, so I'm unlikely to remember it even if it had been mentioned.

The Nebula I'd ignore. It's completely irrelevant these days. As for the rest, juried awards tend to throw up more interesting shortlists than popularity contest awards.

Bujold... given the size of her fanbase, I still find it surprising that you've not come across mention of the Vorkosigan saga before.

I've started Tales of Pirx the Pilot. Memory was also my first Bujold book, several years back.

Finished the Lem collection ("Terminus" was a truly memorable story) and started Isaac Asimov's Solar System.

Just finished Old Man's War by John Scalzi and was surprised by how much I liked it. Planning to start on the sequel The Ghost Brigades after I finish Archangel Protocol by Lyda Morehouse.

About three months later than planned I finally finished up The Hidden Family (B).

- #275 - mamajoan,

I read Scalzi's trilogy in the past few months, and enjoyed each one more than the previous. No plot spoilers, but I can say that by the end of book three, his themes had been developed to their fullest extent, with some original plot twists, and a very satisfying ending.

275: mamajoan

I also read and enjoyed Old Man's War and The Ghost Brigades. Just got The last Colony will be reading that soon.

I read the Scalzi trilogy last year and enjoyed it, too!

I just finished Rainbows End today, and it really loved it! I love that kind of connectivity from the wearable computers, and I thought the characterization was great. It's not many authors who can portray a real despicable person like Robert Gu, and then so convincingly rehabilitate them. He didn't get nicer too abruptly, and he really seemed to struggle with it. I really hated him at the beginning of the book, which made his turnaround that much more dramatic. But, the science was very cool, too. I really like the combination of the hard science of the wearables and network computing with the sociological implications of what that would do to society.

I also enjoyed Rainbows End, I just finished Forty signs of Rain by Kim Stanley Robinson, it was fair, I will probably read the rest of the series, but won't run right out and get them.

Finished with The Squares of the City. It didn't seem like science fiction, though it was a good read and I enjoyed it. This was a reread for me of a book I've had hanging around on my bookshelves for the last twenty plus years.

So is this next book I'm in the process of reading. It's War Games by Karl Hansen. Sorry I'm getting David Bischoff as the author even though I entered in Hansen and can't select him from the list. Oh well. In any case, it is a really good book.

Thanks for all the rec's on the Scalzi trilogy. I am looking forward to it.

I have only gotten about 50 pages into Archangel Protocol and am not sure I'll be able to finish it. The writing is execrable! I don't understand how this book has such high ratings on Amazon and elsewhere. Possibly it tells an interesting story (hard to judge that so early on) but the writing may be a deal-killer for me. It reads like something that hasn't even gone through its first pass with an editor yet. Anyone else have this problem with this book?

Just started The Last Colony by John Scalzi the third book in his "old Man's War" Trilogy. So far it's seems like it's going to be as good as the other two.

Finished Rudyard Kipling's Kim. It was like reading template Heinlein. Or at the very least, an archetypal sf novel - and one more US than UK. Which is a little ironic...

Just started Stealing Light by Gary Gibson.

Better than Heinlein, Ian. Don't forget, Borges was a big fan of Kipling's and he had pretty discerning tastes. I know he's been tarred and feathered as a colonialist and an apologist for British military adventurism, blah, blah, but I think the man was an exceptional prose writer AND poet (how many people can manage that feat?). I heard KIM about a year ago (got it as a book on tape after having not read it for thirty years) and thought it was a lovely spy novel, one that has aged quite well.

Not sure about the exceptional prose. I've no way to judge him against his contemporaries, of course (short of, well, reading them...), but I found his style often broke the compact between reader and writer. Occasionally it drifted into reportage, and some of the authorial interventions were too direct to sit well with a modern reader. Having said that, the scenes set in the foothills of the Himalyas were vividly drawn.

Love how eclectic your reading is--Richard Morgan and Kipling. That's a full week, muchachos...

... and the Kipling was followed with an excerpt from the Nibelungenlied - Siegfried's Murder from the Penguin Epics series...

Ver-y good.

I've got tons of bloody great reading, including the new Richard Russo (BRIDGE OF SIGHS) but can't seem to set aside a couple of hours to sink my teeth into a good read. Soon, I hope...

I've just finished rereading The Violet Hour, a sort of sf/f play by one of my favorites. (If a machine appears in 1919 without any explanation and starts spewing pages of books from the second half of the twentieth century, is that science fiction or fantasy?)

I heard the author speak at The Drama Book Shop in NYC when the play was on Broadway, and I got the impression that he didn't think the production was doing it justice. (I don't remember the exact remarks any more.) Since I had a limited amount of time and too many plays I wanted to see, I decided to skip that one and just read it instead. I'll never know how good or bad the production really was, but I think the play might be his best work - even if it can't replace Take Me Out in my heart.

Just finished Sixty Days and Counting, which was fine but not as gripping as the first two science in the capitol books were.

Reading the Hugo nominees, already read The Yiddish Policemen's Union, Halting State and The Last Colony so I'm starting on Brasyl right now.

I have only read The Last Colony of the nominees, so I should get on that! I need to purchase Brasyl, The Yiddish Policeman's Union and Halting State, though, and I am trying to stay away from the bookstore for a while. (Don't mention the library, I have difficulty with that whole returning the book thing...)

I just finished Beggars in Spain by Nancy Kress, and I really enjoyed that. It was fascinating to think through the implications of extreme genetic modifications, what makes us human, bigotry, economic impacts, and probably a few other things I am not thinking about. I am trying to cram one more sf book in the first quarter, too, so I am reading Children of God by Mary Doria Russell. Very good, although dark. It's more nuanced than The Sparrow, which makes sense, as the characters have had more time to understand the situation, and make new discoveries about themselves and their societies. Fascinating stuff.

I had a good quarter for science fiction. The first (and probably best) book I read this year was The Left Hand of Darkness. It's got several classic science fiction tropes handled well, tight writing (no bloat in need of editing), and a wonderful relationship at the heart of it.

I also read Chasm City. Despite the mixed reviews I've seen, I enjoyed it. Many of the secondary characters are pretty flat but overall I thought each of the three interwoven plots were told very well - especially the slow unveiling of the events surrounding the initial journey to and colonization of the planet called Sky's Edge.

Finished Going Postal (A) yesterday.

Read a bunch of nonfiction and the three recent magazines -- Asimov's, Analog, and F&SF. Why do I still subscribe to Analog? Their stories are practically unreadable. I guess I still like Stan Schmidt. Big Amazon order coming in on Wednesday. Hooray!

Just started The End of the World News by Anthony Burgess, which certainly qualifies as science fiction - or, as Burgess himself called it, "futfic".

I liked that one but haven't read it in AGES. Isn't it composed of three interlocked narratives? I'm trying to remember. And, of course you know, Ian, EARTHLY POWERS by Monsieur Burgess gets my vote as one of the finest novels of the 20th century.

I'm a big fan of Burgess (as you can no doubt tell from the 46 books by, or about, him I have in my library), although sometimes he can be too clever for his own good - as in MF, for example. Agree completely about Earthly Powers, though.

Oh, and yes - The End of the World News is three different narratives, but they don't exactly interlock...

It's been a long time since I hauled it out but I recall END OF THE WORLD with fondness, even if I may be mixing it up some details.

What a life and career Burgess had! How absolutely brilliant the man was, the people he knew and associated with, the range of his talent. How prolific he was (sometimes to his detriment).

Writers like Burgess make me feel stupid and inadequate. EARTHLY POWERS, my God, the book is a marvel, from the first sentence to the back jacket copy.

A novel for the ages.

From Enderby Outisde, one of the silliest but most impressive sentences in post-war British fiction...

Then, instead of expensive mouthwash, he had breathed on Hogg-Enderby, bafflingly (for no banquet would serve, because of the known redolence of onions, onions) onions.

That's...(laughing)...like something out of Lewis Carroll. Absurd and hilarious.

300 that's great. sounds as if he wrote it on a bet.

Just finished The Deep Blue Good-by by John D. MacDonald and am now starting on a submarine novel. I don't remember the name of it, and I'm too lazy to go to the other room and get it. I read the MacDonald in less than 24 hours, in between looking at chalets in Gatlinburg, eating pancakes for breakfast and good Cuban food for lunch, taking a hot jacuzzi bath and drinking some bourbon. Yeah, it was a good day and a good book.

collections...mostly
Redshift; ed Al arrantonio
The best of Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet - oddities;
Alice in Sunderland - Brian Talbot - social history of Sunderland/Lewis Carroll
again..not sci-fi, not fantasy..just wonderfully weird...The Orphan's Tales Catherynne Valente ..

We are now on to the "What are you reading Q2 '08?" thread.