Philip K. Dick and sci-fi writers

If we don't count Lovecraft and Poe, Dick is the first sci-fi writer selected by LOA. Should he be the first sci-fi writer? Is he the most significant one America has produced? Who else should LOA consider in the future? Bradbury? Heinlein? Clarke? Asimov? Or, do they all have too much hack work to go with a few great ones?

First, your opening statement creates a problem. How can you not count Lovecraft and Poe as SF writers? Let's call a spade a spade and make PKD the third SF writer published by LOA.

At some point all of the writers you mentioned will have to be published by LOA. The question is, should a volume or more be devoted to the author, or should they be included in anthologies? What about E. R. Burroughs? The Barsoom stories alone would account for several volumes.

I know this is OT, but does anyone besides me wish LOA would begin publishing international authors?

Well, LOA stands for Library of America, so…

I consider Poe and Lovecraft horror writers, not sci-fi.

I remain surprised at some of the recent inductees into the Library of America. If you're going to include Phillip K. Dick and anthologies of journalism and movie reviews, you might as well include everything and everyone.

Burroughs seems like a problem to me. The bottom line is that, while he created at least one great character and wrote successful and popular books, he really isn't a truly good writer, is he?

This is slightly off topic, but I think the LOA has evolved from wanting to publish the canon in its entirety, ("all of Hawthorne, all of Melville" it reads in an early promotional jacket) to trying to get more exposure for authors considered worthy, such as Dawn Powell. I say, the more the merrier, although I might draw the line at the complete works of Zane Grey. And, speaking of Burroughs, who among us wouldn't want to see the complete works of William S.? Well, maybe not everybody.

In another thread, I asked about anthologies and said I tend to let them sit on my self. But, I could definitely see a Beat anthology putting together some of the writers who otherwise aren't getting a volume to themselves. Surely there will some day be a Ginsberg volume, but maybe not some of the other writers from that period.

Re #2:
I definitely would like to see something like LOA for world writers. Obviously, Library of America couldn't do it as so named, but perhaps the organization could create a second series.

For now, Everyman's Library has a heavy emphasis on translated works and usually in very good translations. They don't have slipcovers, but the bindings are nice, the paper is good and they have a ribbon marker in them. Folio Society out of the UK puts a heavy emphasis on English writers. Modern Library has some international writers in older translations, but I'm not wild about their design.

I for one would not care for "The Complete Works of William S. Burroughs". I've only tried to read one, The Soft Machine, and it was a totally disgusting piece of trash. There is plenty of room for iconoclasts, but filth is filth for a reason.

If the rest of his works are not so scatological as this one, then maybe a "Nearly Complete Works of William S. Burroughs"?

The inclusion of Burroughs and the Beat writers would be incomprehensible to me. There's nothing wrong with liking these writers, but if we're judging by literary merit…I don't think so. They're already fading away, except to a certain generation of readers.

Maybe I'm part of that generation, but Ginsberg certainly ranks among the best American poets and Kerouac is getting his own LOA volume this year. I'm a little mixed on Kerouac, but his place in American literature seems reasonably secure. Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Michael McClure and Gregory Corso have stood up over time and are certainly not fading away. I concede Burroughs is not for everyone, including me, but he remains an interesting figure on the literary landscape.

I'd have to (wildly) disagree with your assessment of Ginsberg and leave it at that.

I applaud the inclusion of Elizabeth Bishop and await the inclusion of Robert Penn Warren.

Well, we agree on Bishop and Penn Warren.

Other poets I would like to see: James Merrill, W. S. Merwin, James Dickey, Richard Wilbur.

I give my strong vote of support to a volume of Bradbury. What little I have read of Clarke and Asimov does not merit selection. I have not read any Heinlein.

When I first saw they had selected Dick, I was quite surprised. After reading a volume of his work, I see why he was selected. He was a superb writer.

How about Kurt Vonnegut?

But I think multi-volume anthology would probably be better, as they did with Crime novels (94 & 95) and fantastic tales (196 & 197). Ideally two volumes of short stories and two volumes of novels.

>14 scott.stricker: - Recommended him to LOA, too, and they replied that they wanted to include him, but had no set dates.

>13 jhale:

Bradbury is a great choice. Like all the best Sci-Fi writers the sci-fi aspect is not essential to the narrative, the writing is superb and he's tackling difficult ideas in a unique way. The Martian Chronicles is outstanding.

I find Dick entertaining but over-rated. Too many of his novels repeat the same paranoia about identity and reality which is a cheap trick for anyone with experience of hallucinogens.

1>

By the way, Arthur C. Clarke doesn't count - he's very British. So 'we' didn't produce him.

Thanks, didn't have a clue on that.

>8 geneg:
!! I've just finished The Soft Machine and it is a tense reading experience indeed. And yet, weird messed up William Burroughs is/was an inventive writer. Having Liked over the last few years a few books such as Portnoy's Complaint, Gravity's Rainbow, and Infinite Jest I am now seeing the influence of, of all people!, Burroughs.

It’s fun to look back at the suggestions members of this group made from years ago and see how things have changed in a decade or so.

>20 Dr_Flanders: Agree. Somebody is suggesting Ray Bradbury back in 2009 and they're finally getting around to him in 2021!

And I personally love the 50s and 60s SF anthologies, so far. (Haven't finished them yet.)

jhicks62: dude. Nothing worse than a Johnny-come-lately who complains about something already addressed. As DCloyceSmith has mentioned -- many (MANY!) times -- before, there are often issues with copyright. Since EVERYMAN's has been publishing THE STORIES OF RAY BRADBURY for quite a few years now, maybe --- juuuust may-be -- THAT might explain why LOA is "just getting around to him in 2021".

Dude, a know-it-all is MUCH worse than a Johnny-come-lately! A non-snarky comment would have been more in order.

...And I wasn't complaining -- just observing. Stop looking for things to complain about.

MichaelLOA: Yeah, it IS a curse: knowing it all. :). Thanks for the snarky comment telling me not to be snarky. REALLY made your point!

jhicks62: so glad to learn that you "weren't complaining" -- and that I, poorly read soul that I am -- mistook "...and they're finally getting around to him in 2021!" As a complaint (or even a gripe). Don't know _how_ I didn't interpret that as "just" an observation. I'll certainly work on my English and grammar interpretation skills.

As an aside: snarky know-it-all, misinterpreting soul that I am, when you wrote "they", I interpreted that to mean LOA -- and, by dint of his being a representative of LOA -- thought it might be a reflection on DCLOYCE SMITH, hardworking interlocutory LOA liaison. So I may have been a tad overprotective (even though he didn't ask for help).

All best, otherwise.