|
There was a short story posted here I'm trying to track down, but I can't remember the name. It starts out as a generic sci-fi space marine ooh-rah romp where Earth is fighting these unknowable lizard aliens. The main character, as he rises through the ranks gets more and more "disassembled". At one point he's just a head piloting a ship (he'll get his body back when the war is over), then just a brain in a jar. The further he moves up the ranks the more the war gets extrapolated further and further to the point where the real war is against these vast intelligences manipulating thousands of species. The main character is now in charge of vast armies, including lizard aliens, fighting a race called humanity. I seem to recall a title like "Only War" or "War!".
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
I remember when that story was first shared in this topic, pretty cool story. One passage I really liked was about how they were eventually fighting the war on a purely theoretical level or something along those lines
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:If anyone's looking for some new steampunk, Senlin Ascends is a quiet gem. Especially for a $3 self-published first novel. I sample these kinds of books compulsively and they're usually crap, but it's absolutely worth it for the rare one like this.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Snuffman posted:There was a short story posted here I'm trying to track down, but I can't remember the name. That sounds really rad.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
IMO, of the books on your list I've read, best to worst: ---Absolute classics-- Neuromancer ---Really good--- Aurora Childhood's End ---Meh--- Snow Crash Handmaids Tale Perdido Street Station American Gods Wizard of Earthsea ---Outright awful books--- Dune Foundation Foundation in particular is absolute trash and it baffles me why it's still considered a classic of the genre. It's literally nothing but a bunch of pompous old men lecturing each other. All of the Big Three authors are deeply overrated and reading them on a sci-fi tasting tour is like eating the soil the grapes grew out of on a wine tasting tour.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Foundation in particular is absolute trash and it baffles me why it's still considered a classic of the genre. It's literally nothing but a bunch of pompous old men lecturing each other. All of the Big Three authors are deeply overrated and reading them on a sci-fi tasting tour is like eating the soil the grapes grew out of on a wine tasting tour. While stating that I disagree with you about it being bad, I do want to jokingly point out that hey! It's absolutely emblematic of the sci-fi genre - one that's been dominated by pompous old men in STEM fields who lecture each other. Why not give him a showcase of that? 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
If I seek my fortunes on the goldfields and ask a local where the gold is to be found, I don't want them to instead give me the "true goldfields experience" by shoving my face into the mud edit - I just went over my old review to remember why I disliked it so much, and was reminded of something Asimov had in common with Heinlein: they both have a habit of writing scenes in which Smart Men Are Right and Foolish People (Women) Are Wrong. All of their protagonists are exceptionally wise Mary Sues, without an iota of self-doubt or self-questioning. That strikes me as a particularly unscientific attitude. freebooter fucked around with this message at 00:57 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
freebooter posted:If I seek my fortunes on the goldfields and ask a local where the gold is to be found, I don't want them to instead give me the "true goldfields experience" by shoving my face into the mud Haha, fair enough. I personally think Foundation is worth reading - if the style clicks, Asimov wrote a zillion of the things. He also wrote stuff that influenced the genre to an obscene amount, and wrote quite clever ideas. So even if the reader bounces off, it's still one of those works where you just gotta try it at least once. Like 1984 in the Dystopian genre, or Catch-22 --- or to use another one on the list, Neuromancer! That reads more like pulp than an actually good book (I say this as someone who likes it) but it's again so influential that he could honestly read it and leave Snow Crash behind. As for 100% guaranteed quality, he's got Cyteen on his list he's set.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
Reading Bester after Asimov reminded me that I was supposed to enjoy books, and that science fiction was supposed to be interesting. One should still read some Asimov though, if one is trying to understand the genre. He looms inordinately large.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
StrixNebulosa posted:Like 1984 in the Dystopian genre, or Catch-22 --- or to use another one on the list, Neuromancer! That reads more like pulp than an actually good book (I say this as someone who likes it) but it's again so influential that he could honestly read it and leave Snow Crash behind. I'm not trying to rag on a book you like - to each their own - but Gibson is simply an objectively better writer than Asimov in terms of plot, characterisation, prose style, everything. Asimov was a classic example of early science fiction writers who put their idea first and their story second, if at all, which always made me wonder why they didn't just write a journal article and be done with it. (Though I should clarify Foundation is the only book of his I've read.) Nowadays it seems more common that a lot of sci-fi authors put their whiz-bang blow-up-spaceships plot first and their characters and style second, if at all. Does any major author apart from KSR actually write hard sci-fi anymore? And even KSR is leagues ahad of the hard sci-fi authors of the 50s and 60s. edit - another point about the objective quality of SFF writing is to say that there's a reason, in my opinion, that certain authors like Gibson, Dick, Le Guin, Pratchett, Susannah Clarke, Lev Grossman and even (to an extent) GRR Martin have become accepted and respected by the literary mainstream, while others have not - and it has nothing to do with snobbery. Although that debate is a whole different can of worms I guess. freebooter fucked around with this message at 01:20 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
freebooter posted:I'm not trying to rag on a book you like - to each their own - but Gibson is simply an objectively better writer than Asimov in terms of plot, characterisation, prose style, everything. Foundation is like the first sci-fi book (well collection of short stories) Asimov wrote like a decade before they were collected and published in the 50's and a few years before the Robot series was published. While not perfect he does improve on the "smart guys talking" and adds a little more characterization in his books and even and while not perfect he does flesh out some female characters who have their own agency. The First Foundation book is essentially everything according to Hari Seldon going right, the later books explore how Pyschohistory can and does fail. He does fundamentally remain an idea's first author however I don't necessarily see that as a terrible thing and the books he wrote aren't terribly difficult I remember burning through the Foundation Trilogy + Sequels in a week or two in High School. In regards to Hard Sci-Fi Alistair Reynolds gets lumped in to that category too even if he generally goes more fantastic and speculative with his stuff than KSR. Chasm City is probably my top five personal favorite Sci-Fi books of all time. Finally back to Phillip K Dick, Read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep if you like Bladerunner Read Man in the High Castle if you like Alt-History/ Watched the TV Show Read A Scanner Darkly if you like doing drugs Read Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch if you like books that explore religious themes (and lots of drugs) Read Ubik if you like books that explore religious themes (and lots of drugs) Also a metric ton of short stories that are pretty good too and have been made into movies like Minority Report, We can Remember it for you Wholesale, Adjustment Team, Paycheck etc. Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 01:44 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
Snuffman posted:There was a short story posted here I'm trying to track down, but I can't remember the name. I remember that but don't remember the author or title. Maybe try the book/story identification thread? I think it's come up there before.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:In regards to Hard Sci-Fi Alistair Reynolds gets lumped in to that category too even if he generally goes more fantastic and speculative with his stuff than KSR. Chasm City is probably my top five personal favorite Sci-Fi books of all time. I did think of Reynolds but then reconsidered. His fictional universes always obey the laws of physics, but it's still stories about creepy abandoned alien installations and frightening monsters and space adventures and so on. That's what we read them for. People just call them him hard sci-fi to differentiate him from the Star Wars/Dune-style narratives which are basically just fantasy in space, or the Peter F Hamilton schlocky pulp sort of stuff. KSR on the other hand is hard sci-fi in the sense that he's an "ideas" writer; we're reading his books very specifically to read an exploration of 200+ years of future history about colonising Mars, or about the scientific, sociological and moral problems inherent in a generation ship, or how rising sea levels might affect New York. Not because we actually expect a tightly plotted and exciting adventure story. (I very much like both Reynolds and KSR, if that's not clear.)
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
freebooter posted:I did think of Reynolds but then reconsidered. His fictional universes always obey the laws of physics, but it's still stories about creepy abandoned alien installations and frightening monsters and space adventures and so on. That's what we read them for. People just call them him hard sci-fi to differentiate him from the Star Wars/Dune-style narratives which are basically just fantasy in space, or the Peter F Hamilton schlocky pulp sort of stuff. I'm currently reading a Cixin Liu short story collection in which he identifies himself as a hard sci-fi writer, and yet every story in the collection has a wild, high-concept idea that doesn't seem like a reasonable extrapolation of humanity's future in any way, and most of the time the presentation does its ample best to make those ideas ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
In terms of traditional literary virtues I didn't think Neuromancer was especially good, but Pattern Recognition acquitted pretty well, so late Gibson stands up.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
freebooter posted:IMO, of the books on your list I've read, best to worst: I hadn't read a really terrible opinion in a while, thanks for that freebooter posted:I'm not trying to rag on a book you like - to each their own - but Gibson is simply an objectively better writer than Asimov in terms of plot, characterisation, prose style, everything. So really your rant translates to "I didn't like the first book he ever wrote therefore he sucks!" Maybe try some of his other stuff before writing him off completely. Kalenn Istarion fucked around with this message at 02:19 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
uberkeyzer posted:Double Star is another fun Heinlein. Or The Puppet Masters. But Moon is his best novel. Tombs of Atuan seems like the book where LeGuin found her voice., and it's probably the best of the Earthsea books. That said I think all the Earthsea books are excellent and a definite cut above other genre wizard fiction, and not just because LeGuin did the wizard-coming-of-age thing before a lot of other folks thought to, and not just because she had a brown protagonist and it wasn't set in Fantasy Europe. The Earthsea books have some of her best prose and a lot of her most resonant imagery.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I found this to be a really meaningful analysis. Thanks. Goddamn it, after all this I want to hear what you THINK after reading it!! 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 03:57
|
|
|
ShinsoBEAM! posted:If you want to read Chinese SF/F that's "authentic" take a dive into the translated XianXia or XuanHua stuff online it's vastly more authentic then some person in the west that studied Chinese culture and wrote a western fantasy with a Chinese backdrop. Best place to get these in Chinese? I'm years out of practice, but nerd-lit might be enough to get me to break out the dictionaries. Just like Chinese Style Divorce, Vancouver, and FuHua BeiHou got me watching and listening.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
Snuffman posted:There was a short story posted here I'm trying to track down, but I can't remember the name. You might be thinking of Scales by Alastair Reynolds.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
Btw, if you guys haven't caught Hulu's adaptation of the handmaid's tale, you should. Pretty good.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
Just finished Sleeping Giants by Sulvain Neuvel. Interesting book, though I'm not sure what was going on at the end. Or, for that matter, who the mysterious protagonist is - most of the book is told through an unnamed person interviewing the people involved in events, leaving the mysterious interviewer as the main character for all that you never learn much about them. On the whole, decently interesting story that didn't go anywhere I was expecting it to. Turned into a fairly standard "humanity discovers alien technology, political intrigue ensues while aliens watch and consider whether we can handle such power" plot after an intriguing beginning. The unusual structure of the book is interesting, but I don't think the story is interesting enough to make it as compelling as a more traditional writing style could have. Decent read from the library if nothing else.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:
If you end up liking Perdido, definitely pick up The Scar as well. It's another one of Mieville's Bas Lag books and is considered widely to be one of his best period. Embassytown is another book of his that is very good but is fairly different from both PSS and Scar.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:I hadn't read a really terrible opinion in a while, thanks for that Actually I forgot, I read The End of Eternity last year and found it equally tedious. But I'm glad you think my negative opinion of Asimov is ipso fact a "rant." JuniperCake posted:If you end up liking Perdido, definitely pick up The Scar as well. It's another one of Mieville's Bas Lag books and is considered widely to be one of his best period. Embassytown is another book of his that is very good but is fairly different from both PSS and Scar. I need to get around to reading Embassytown. I found all three Bas-Lag books to be a frustrating mix of brilliant imagination and an inability to know what to cut, but The City & The City was a very solid, unique fantasy novel. I'd like to see more of that kind of definition of fantasy: a completely original flight of fancy, without any particular roots in mythology or folklore or whatever, or alternate universes, and not stuff you'd really consider magical realism either. The only other example I can think of is David Mitchell's Marinus books.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 06:36
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Already read Left Hand of Darkness in college, been about ten years though so might be worth a revisit. Do Androids Dream of Electronic Sheep is a good one for Dick. And I'd recommend reading I, Robot instead of Foundation, Foundation is a bit boring. Also, if you want to sample SF, you really should try some short fiction. User Safety Biscuits recommended Dangerous Visions and I'll second that recommendation. Pretty much all of Safety Biscuits recommendation are solid, btw. It's seems you figured this one out yourself, but you can pretty much disregard any recommendations in this thread where there is a prefix in front of "science fiction" or pretty much any post that divides SF into sub genres.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 11:58
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:BTW, whats a good Philip K Dick SF is like lesbian porn. Your collection doesn't improve by adding Dick to it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
freebooter posted:or how rising sea levels might affect New York.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:I hadn't read a really terrible opinion in a while, thanks for that Did you just skip to the end of the thread after some time away.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Snuffman posted:There was a short story posted here I'm trying to track down, but I can't remember the name. occamsnailfile posted:You might be thinking of Scales by Alastair Reynolds. You rock! Snuffman fucked around with this message at 16:45 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:Maybe this is me being a white guy, but some of the criticisms seems like nit picks and kind of explained in the story? Also maybe read the Water Knife then if you have issues with a white dude having a setting not in America or Europe? The author is from like Colorado I am sure he can handle what happens in the climate change apocalypse Southwest since he is pretty much from there. Also, nobody recommended Felix Gilman's The Half-Made World to Mel Mudkiper
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Jedit posted:SF is like lesbian porn. Your collection doesn't improve by adding Dick to it. This is a terrible opinion, Dick is wonderful.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:Also, nobody recommended Felix Gilman's The Half-Made World to Mel Mudkiper e: How about The Orphan's Tales? anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 18:21 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
I'm going through The Windup Girl and while it's solid as a first novel, I don't see how it could be Hugo material. The worldbuilding elements are oftentimes clumsy, in a way Gibson showed us how to get around decades prior. It's filled with sentences and phrases such as this: "Maybe you are swept away like Expansion plastic on a beach." "Maybe give them a taste of blister rust AG134.s." "After the December 12 coup, it seems as if General Pracha and Minister Akkarat are always circling one another" "I just like seeing all of you on the veranda looking like your dogs died from cibiscosis." It's not always so obvious, and I am interested enough to finish it, but again, that this got a Hugo (even a split one) is sort of bizarre. The plot is fun, but there's no real music in the words. I'm not sure what else was up for nomination that year; I wish Jo Walton's Hugo analysis articles run later than they do.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
Xotl posted:I'm not sure what else was up for nomination that year; I wish Jo Walton's Hugo analysis articles run later than they do. Best Novel The City & The City, China Miéville (Del Rey; Macmillan UK) The Windup Girl, Paolo Bacigalupi (Night Shade) Boneshaker, Cherie Priest (Tor) Wake, Robert J. Sawyer (Ace; Penguin; Gollancz; Analog) Julian Comstock: A Story of 22nd-Century America, Robert Charles Wilson (Tor) Palimpsest, Catherynne M. Valente (Bantam Spectra) So, tie for first with TC&TC. Other than that, generally weak year imo.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
fritz posted:Did you just skip to the end of the thread after some time away. There's lots of bad opinions but that one was deeply awful
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
I picked up the compendium Tales of the Dying Earth a few days ago and blitzed through it. I love dying Earth settings and I shamefully had not read the master until now. What else is there from Vance, or anyone really, that has the same kind of subtle humor throughout? Cugel and Rhialto's stories are funnier than any intentional sci-fi/fantasy comedy I've read.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:I picked up the compendium Tales of the Dying Earth a few days ago and blitzed through it. I love dying Earth settings and I shamefully had not read the master until now. I'd move on to Vance's Demon Princes books, they are great.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Do not look up summaries of the Demon Princes. Read them unspoiled.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
For a minute I thought you had said Salvatore's Demon Wars. Do not read those.anilEhilated posted:It's a pretty good book but I wouldn't call it great or a classic. As for Heinlein I'd double the recommend of Green Hills of Earth (which is pretty much The Man Who Sold the Moon imho), the short stories all weave together to create a very rich and interesting series of events - and I am also one of those people who hates short stories. Also I've seen Neal Stephenson recced a few times to Mel in the last couple hundred posts - gently caress that, go with Bruce Sterling, instead. His cyberpunk/post-apoc short story collections are really excellent, and most of his novels are as well. coyo7e fucked around with this message at 22:18 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Khizan posted:Best Novel Boneshaker was pretty bad.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 23:13
|
|