My dad would blow a gasket if he saw this list, and then go on to rant for hours on end about how "the mainstream" knows nothing about the differences between sci fi and fantasy.
Well, what are you gonna do, especially with mixing and matching going on like the Pern books, Star Wars, and Dune?
There's an interesting definition of sf vs fantasy that I heard, and I like much more than the standard "if it has technology it's sci-fi, otherwise it's fantasy" division. Basically it's:
* Science-fiction focuses on the science of the story, whether it's realistic/plausible science or not. The science/technology/"alienness" of the story are significant plot drivers and focuses, and the story is in many ways *about* them.
* Fantasy, by contrast, uses alien devices - magic, fantastical creatures, whatever - to tell stories about people. In fantasy the people are the focus of the story, and you could tell much the same story if you chiselled off the fantastical elements and set it somewhere like Earth.
For some reason this definition has always really resonated with me, and I tend to use it as my yardstick now.
Interview isn't sci fi, and since when does a 'top sci fi list in the last century' EVER get written without "Lucifer's Hammer" by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle being on it.
My list is almost the same as yours, except I've never picked up Asimov, Gibson (for which I'd like to fix) or Pratchett. My list includes 451 though. Possibly one of the first books I was forced to read for school, that I ended up enjoying.
Any on that list that you want to read? OR books you think are a definite read for those that enjoy sci fi but don't have an awesome library?
Well, the list is "most significant" rather than "top", and the compilers may have felt that Niven & Pournelle's collaborations weren't significant in that sense. Niven did make it onto the list with Ringworld, at least.
Ones I particularly want to read - A Wizard of Earthsea, possibly Thomas Covenant.
Definite reads - that's tricky. I'd say LotR, Neuromancer, Caves of Steel by Asimov (not the Foundation trilogy, which is a massive slog thanks to Asimov's inability to write characters that are anything more than one-dimensional), Pratchett in general (although I think Color of Magic is one of his weakest), maybe Dragonflight, Rendezvous with Rama, and Ringworld.
LotR was better than even the Hobbit for me, and a much easier read. Neuromancer I've always wanted to read, but never looked for it in a bookstore. Asimov, it's weird. I don't think I've even tried to read anything by him before.
Pratchett is a problem for me though... his big series just seemed to 'lets mix weird shit together' for me, when I tried to read it, I was really not enjoying it at all. I read another of his where an engine turned into a chicken, and people played paintball in a garden and I just threw the book in the garbage. Maybe I read the wrong books, or maybe I just don't get it.
Pratchett in general (although I think Color of Magic is one of his weakest)
Agreed. Although to be fair whilst I enjoyed a lot of his Rincewind books and the standalone ones like the The Last Continent, I'm a much bigger fan of the Watch series or books like The Truth and Going Postal.
This looks more like spec-fic than sci-fi, which is how the horror elements like Anne Rice and I Am Legend (which I REALLY want to read one of these days) are getting in.
You haven't read Earthsea or Covenant? Tsk tsk. *G* Although, admittedly, Donaldson is always an unpleasant mindfuck, so I'm not going to harp on that one.
Comments 8
(The comment has been removed)
Well, what are you gonna do, especially with mixing and matching going on like the Pern books, Star Wars, and Dune?
CU
Reply
* Science-fiction focuses on the science of the story, whether it's realistic/plausible science or not. The science/technology/"alienness" of the story are significant plot drivers and focuses, and the story is in many ways *about* them.
* Fantasy, by contrast, uses alien devices - magic, fantastical creatures, whatever - to tell stories about people. In fantasy the people are the focus of the story, and you could tell much the same story if you chiselled off the fantastical elements and set it somewhere like Earth.
For some reason this definition has always really resonated with me, and I tend to use it as my yardstick now.
Reply
My list is almost the same as yours, except I've never picked up Asimov, Gibson (for which I'd like to fix) or Pratchett. My list includes 451 though. Possibly one of the first books I was forced to read for school, that I ended up enjoying.
Any on that list that you want to read? OR books you think are a definite read for those that enjoy sci fi but don't have an awesome library?
Reply
Ones I particularly want to read - A Wizard of Earthsea, possibly Thomas Covenant.
Definite reads - that's tricky. I'd say LotR, Neuromancer, Caves of Steel by Asimov (not the Foundation trilogy, which is a massive slog thanks to Asimov's inability to write characters that are anything more than one-dimensional), Pratchett in general (although I think Color of Magic is one of his weakest), maybe Dragonflight, Rendezvous with Rama, and Ringworld.
Reply
Pratchett is a problem for me though... his big series just seemed to 'lets mix weird shit together' for me, when I tried to read it, I was really not enjoying it at all. I read another of his where an engine turned into a chicken, and people played paintball in a garden and I just threw the book in the garbage. Maybe I read the wrong books, or maybe I just don't get it.
Reply
Agreed. Although to be fair whilst I enjoyed a lot of his Rincewind books and the standalone ones like the The Last Continent, I'm a much bigger fan of the Watch series or books like The Truth and Going Postal.
Reply
You haven't read Earthsea or Covenant? Tsk tsk. *G* Although, admittedly, Donaldson is always an unpleasant mindfuck, so I'm not going to harp on that one.
Reply
Earthsea is definitely very high up my to-read list though; I don't know how I never got around to reading LeGuin. Bad me.
Reply
Leave a comment