|
Post by papamihel on Feb 6, 2022 8:15:21 GMT
I like the girls. Elizabeth Moon, Anne McCaffrey, Ursula LeGuin. LeGuin would have got a Nobel literature prize if the snotty literati didn't think sci fi too lowbrow. I have my own favorite girls: Your countrywoman K. J. Bishop is sublime. I like early Kameron Hurley and there is this new brilliant author Tamsyn Muir.
|
|
|
Post by Hairynosedwombat on Feb 6, 2022 13:13:02 GMT
I like the girls. Elizabeth Moon, Anne McCaffrey, Ursula LeGuin. LeGuin would have got a Nobel literature prize if the snotty literati didn't think sci fi too lowbrow. I have my own favorite girls: Your countrywoman K. J. Bishop is sublime. I like early Kameron Hurley and there is this new brilliant author Tamsyn Muir. Thanks. I'll look them up.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Jul 1, 2022 11:49:46 GMT
I like the girls. Elizabeth Moon, Anne McCaffrey, Ursula LeGuin. LeGuin would have got a Nobel literature prize if the snotty literati didn't think sci fi too lowbrow. I have my own favorite girls: Your countrywoman K. J. Bishop is sublime. I like early Kameron Hurley and there is this new brilliant author Tamsyn Muir. I've read a couple C. J. Cherryh books that were pretty good too.
|
|
|
Post by papamihel on Jul 15, 2022 13:52:06 GMT
Oh, I have read two books of the trilogy in which that Natalie Portman movie is based on, Annihilation Vandermeer's earlier work is a lot more interesting and strange.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2022 10:22:47 GMT
Oh, I have read two books of the trilogy in which that Natalie Portman movie is based on, Annihilation Vandermeer's earlier work is a lot more interesting and strange. Thanks for the recommendation
|
|
|
Post by pathfinder on Aug 4, 2022 2:46:48 GMT
Creatures of Light and Darkness is a 1969 science fiction novel by American writer Roger Zelazny. It's written in a beatnik style poise. "Black daddy night. Fat dad." It focus on the ancient Egyptian gods and give them a new twist vintage 1969 style.
I'm surprised it hasn't been made into a movie. It's very colorful.
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Aug 12, 2022 8:50:54 GMT
Anyone into "hard sci fi" would enjoy the two Stephen Baxter books "flood" and "Ark". which would also make great movies. Also uses the "warp bubble" idea for faster than light travel which is a fascinating concept.
|
|
|
Post by PaulsLaugh (God/Almighty) on Aug 20, 2022 10:36:58 GMT
I don't read much sci-fi nowadays, but that's about all I read while in high school. I liked Samuel R. Delany, Ursula Le Guin, Kurt Vonnegut, Arthur C Clarke, Harlan Ellison, Philip K Dick, Michael Creighton, those guys.
|
|
|
Post by Flying Monkeys on Aug 20, 2022 14:22:46 GMT
Pat Mills and John Wagner.
|
|
|
Post by pathfinder on Sept 4, 2022 5:58:33 GMT
I'm gonna flipped your question: Who is the worst Science Fiction author. Number 1 is far and away is Arthur C. Clarke. 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the worst novels I've ever read. The end is so completely convoluted and confusing. It made absolutely no sense. And I did read it as an English class assignment. One time was more than enough. You had to pick a book, read it and do a report on it. And I thought that one would be interesting because of all the hype. Number 2. Is Isaac Asimov's Foundation. That's another one that is totally overrated. Asimov ended it without realizing he had ended it. Spoiler Alert: When the Mule established his empire. That was the end of the story. The Foundation was created to reestablished the empire. When the Mule came in and did it. The reason for the existence of the Foundation is now moot.
|
|
|
Post by mowlick on Sept 4, 2022 23:08:48 GMT
I'm gonna flipped your question: Who is the worst Science Fiction author. Number 1 is far and away is Arthur C. Clarke. 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the worst novels I've ever read. The end is so completely convoluted and confusing. It made absolutely no sense. And I did read it as an English class assignment. One time was more than enough. You had to pick a book, read it and do a report on it. And I thought that one would be interesting because of all the hype. Number 2. Is Isaac Asimov's Foundation. That's another one that is totally overrated. Asimov ended it without realizing he had ended it. Spoiler Alert: When the Mule established his empire. That was the end of the story. The Foundation was created to reestablished the empire. When the Mule came in and did it. The reason for the existence of the Foundation is now moot. Each to his own.
I loved Asimov's Foundation and have spent much of the year on various forums happily slagging off the TV series for being nothing like the book.
|
|
|
Post by stammer/head on Sept 5, 2022 0:36:54 GMT
I tend to listen to audiobooks nowadays and found going back to John Wyndham‘s disasters and weird happenings oddly soothing. Brian Aldis (who I also like) mocked him for his middle class, middlebrow style but I think that makes stuff like Day of the Triffids and The Kraken Wakes even more disturbing (in a soothing old fashioned BBC Radio 4 way).
More recent authors: Kim Stanley Robinson impressed me with his Mars Trilogy and The Gold Coast and Andy Weir’s The Martian and Artemis were an entertaining break from my usual diet of podcasts.
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Sept 5, 2022 9:55:03 GMT
I'm gonna flipped your question: Who is the worst Science Fiction author. Number 1 is far and away is Arthur C. Clarke. 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the worst novels I've ever read. The end is so completely convoluted and confusing. It made absolutely no sense. And I did read it as an English class assignment. One time was more than enough. You had to pick a book, read it and do a report on it. And I thought that one would be interesting because of all the hype. Number 2. Is Isaac Asimov's Foundation. That's another one that is totally overrated. Asimov ended it without realizing he had ended it. Spoiler Alert: When the Mule established his empire. That was the end of the story. The Foundation was created to reestablished the empire. When the Mule came in and did it. The reason for the existence of the Foundation is now moot. Unlike it's 2 sequels, "2001" was not a real book as such, it was written in association with and as an adaptation of the film and the film was largely a visual affair that was never intended to "make sense", it was supposed to be open to interpretation as many other forms of art are, you were supposed to decide for yourself rather than be spoon fed a narrative. As an author Clarke has written some of the cornerstones of sci fi helped by his solid scientific background, can't write of a canon of work based on a difficult ending to one book. and Asimov? Come on.
|
|
|
Post by klandersen on Apr 5, 2023 1:33:11 GMT
Douglas Adams, Fred Saberhagen, Greg Cox
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 5, 2023 4:55:49 GMT
The Ion War, by Colin Kapp
Rendezvous with Rama, by Arthur C. Clarke
2001: A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke
The Door into Summer, by Robert A. Heinlein
Have Space Suit - Will Travel, by Robert A. Heinlein
Medusa's Children, by Bob Shaw
The Moon Maid, by Edgar Rice Burroughs
A Princess of Mars, by Edgar Rice Burroughs
The Chessmen of Mars, by Edgar Rice Burroughs
|
|