posted
I'm pleased to see both Rothfuss and Sanderson on the list. Disappointed to not see Alastair Reynolds.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um, just it's regular literature. *shrug* Satire. If it were shelved in the fantasy/SF section of a bookstore or library, I'd either think the people working there were playing a practical joke or a tad dim.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Plenty of regular literature is fantasy or science fiction. Often it has just been around longer. Take a look at Gulliver's Travels for example - man discovers strange lands and meets odd creatures. Classic speculative fiction. You could say the same thing about the Odyssey. Frankenstein is often found on the lit. shelves, but it is science fiction.
I wouldn't use book store organization as a reliable guide. It is a convenience, not a real description.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am certainly not getting your point. I think there are better ways of describing fantasy or science fiction than where they are shelved in a bookstore.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't call the Amber books great, by any means, but I definitely find them fun. They're ones I reread every now and then.
Posts: 1087 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
It kinda bugs me to see unfinished series that are still in active development on the list. The way it ends can really make or break a series.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: It kinda bugs me to see unfinished series that are still in active development on the list. The way it ends can really make or break a series.
It bothers me that the entire LOTR trilogy is lumped in to one entry, but I can only assume the HHG "trilogy" is not.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
JRRT has said himself that LOTR is not a trilogy, it's a single story, written in six books, that out of convenience was published in three volumes.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I've read 65/100. Not bad.
It kinda bugs me to see unfinished series that are still in active development on the list. The way it ends can really make or break a series.
I'm at about half that, depending on how liberal I am with my counts (there are several series that I've read some, but not all, of). Were there entries on the list you hadn't heard of before? Did your opinion of any of the books included change as a result of their being on the list (i.e. wouldn't have read them before but now you will)? I'm wondering what the utility of the list is; most of the things I haven't read are on my "I'll get to it sometime" list. There were several though, particularly in the bottom 25 that I wasn't previously aware of.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are a few on the list that I've tried to read several times but couldn't get very far in. I'm sure they deserve their spot on the list but they're not to my liking.
I've read the majority on that list, though. I appreciated the link to all 237 books in the running, as it contained more books I haven't read yet.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've read 75 of those. There were two I hadn't heard of. There were three that I don't think deserve a place on the list.
Posts: 1087 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: It kinda bugs me to see unfinished series that are still in active development on the list. The way it ends can really make or break a series.
I agree. I'm ok with ASOIAF given both that it is more than half done (apparently) and the early books have been published more than a decade. For both Rothfuss' 'Kingkiller Chronicles' and Sanderson's 'The Way of Kings' it seems very premature. An example of a series seriously losing its way after a promising start is Greg Keyes' "The Kingdoms of Thorn and Bone."
Posts: 644 | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:I agree. I'm ok with ASOIAF given both that it is more than half done (apparently) and the early books have been published more than a decade. For both Rothfuss' 'Kingkiller Chronicles' and Sanderson's 'The Way of Kings' it seems very premature."
I put ASoIaF in the premature category -- I'm not confident at all that we know how much there is left, but we do know that it's an awful lot.
But Way of Kings is listed as a single book, not the Stormlight Archive series. The book is ready to be judged as a book. As much as I enjoy reading more of the series, and have hopes that it will deserve to be on such lists, I don't think that Way of Kings, on its own, really deserves to be there.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: I was really bored by Chronicles of Amber and The Moon is a harsh mistress.
I was disappointed that The Moon is a Harsh Mistress wasn't higher on the list. Then again, there are a number of things on the list I disagree with. I tried reading A Handmaid's Tale and, while it was well written and the story was interesting, it just didn't engage me. I felt the same about American Gods, and while Watchmen is great, it does not deserve to be so high.
As for the Moon again, I'm probably biased because I think that half the list should comprise of Heinlein books.
Posts: 2705 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
I don't mind seeing unfinished series on the list, and I also don't mind seeing series listed as one item on the list--it leaves more room for other authors, IMO. As far as the unfinished series, I figure this isn't the definitive list for all time. Hopefully this list will be repolled regularly as more good work is written.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Plenty of regular literature is fantasy or science fiction. Often it has just been around longer. Take a look at Gulliver's Travels for example - man discovers strange lands and meets odd creatures. Classic speculative fiction. You could say the same thing about the Odyssey. Frankenstein is often found on the lit. shelves, but it is science fiction.
I wouldn't use book store organization as a reliable guide. It is a convenience, not a real description.
I tend to agree with this. Frankenstein was science fiction before there was science fiction, so we see it as a classic, and thus regular literature, rather than science fiction. Published 100 years later it would have been science fiction and not gothic regular literature. Some of the stuff that was published before sci-fi and fantasy became big were pre-classified as regular lit before they got a chance to be called sci-fi, but looking back, I think we can clearly classify stuff like Animal Farm as sci-fi or fantasy, whatever you like.
At the end of the day, it's all just regular literature, but then, why do we even have genres?
In general, I feel like I'm woefully under read on sci-fi classics, but I don't know when I'll ever have the time to catch up. I read Dune and ASOIAF last year, and felt accomplished for that, but there's so much left still!
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Not surprisingly, many of my favorite sci-fi books aren't on this list because they are all pretty obscure. Still an interesting list.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
While I wouldn't put it on the list myself, I am surprised that a list from NPR listeners doesn't include it.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am REALLY REALLY sad that CS Lewis's space trilogy is number 100. That means it came in dead last, since we only voted out of a hundred. I can only assume it's because not many people have read it. It's the mind blowingly trippiest sci-fi I've ever read, and that's what makes things fantastic in my mind.
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: Not surprisingly, many of my favorite sci-fi books aren't on this list because they are all pretty obscure.
Such as?
Ship Of Fools by Richard Paul Russo - published as Unto Leviathan in Great Britain - and Doorways In The Sand by Rodger Zelazny are the two that first come to mind.
Obviously Zelazny is well known but most people haven't read anything beyond the Chronicles of Amber. This is even the case with some Zelazny fans I've talked to. Russo is less than a blip in the sci-fi universe and I believe SoF is his only foray into the genre. It received accolades but wasn't in the running for any of the more well known awards.
Another I should mention is Alan Dean Foster's novelization of Alien. In general I think novelizations suck but this one can add to the film in appreciable ways, even for big Alien fans like me. The only other novelization I've enjoyed - this time of a video game - is the continuing Halo series, which is probably more accurately classified under expanded-universe, not a novelization.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wheel of Time is garbage. Even diehard fans of the series can be seen repeatedly exasperated while reading. "This crap goes on forever. I just wish it would end so I could be done with it."
Anything you have to force yourself to read out of obligation, is garbage.
(see also my post about Episode 3) I kill me.
Posts: 2532 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really like Going Postal (unlike many). No way does it belong anywhere near this list. I don't think it's even in the top 20 Discworld novels (again speaking as someone who enjoys and re-reads it).
Much Zelazny greatness is missing and boy did they overrate Graphic Novels HUGELY. Verne and Wells (especially Verne) are underrated.
I'd like to have seen more (that is, ANY) of the children's fiction. I enjoyed A Wrinkle in Time, The Chronicles of Prydain, and even Harry Potter significantly more than some of their choices.
I was pleasantly surprised to see Lewis' Space Trilogy on there at all, but agree with Annie that they are neat books and deserve a place here.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: [qb] Not surprisingly, many of my favorite sci-fi books aren't on this list because they are all pretty obscure.
Such as?
Ship Of Fools by Richard Paul Russo - published as Unto Leviathan in Great Britain
Never heard of it. What do you like about it? What are a few of your other, more common favorites (just so that I can get a feel for how compatible our tastes are)?
quote:and Doorways In The Sand by Rodger Zelazny are the two that first come to mind.
I'd argue that Doorways in the Sand is better known than you think it is. It's something of a fan favorite, by my understanding. I thought it was fun, but it didn't blow me out of the water.
quote:The only other novelization I've enjoyed - this time of a video game - is the continuing Halo series, which is probably more accurately classified under expanded-universe, not a novelization.
Have you read Card's adaptation of The Abyss? It's pretty good.
Lyrhawn, I agree about His Dark Materials. The first book had a ton of promise that the second two failed to live up to.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am REALLY REALLY sad that CS Lewis's space trilogy is number 100. That means it came in dead last, since we only voted out of a hundred. I can only assume it's because not many people have read it. It's the mind blowingly trippiest sci-fi I've ever read, and that's what makes things fantastic in my mind.
I've read it. I liked it. But it does not belong on this list at all. They're interesting stories, but pretty terrible science fiction.
Regarding Zelazny, Lord of Light deserves to be on this list 10x more than the Amber books do.
quote:If you read the little side story that explains how they classify things, they'll tell you that His Dark Materials was declared YA fiction.
And YA fic is disqualified as being great science fiction or fantasy? Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's amusing that YA is disqualified but they have the Drizzt books. (they're great fun, but they're basically glorified fan fiction)
It is a popular choice, though, and so you'll always see that the books that have sold extremely well or are a part of our cultural memory being put selected regardless of quality.
Look at Fahrenheit 451 being put in the top 10 with The Dispossessed being back at 77, for example. The Dispossessed is possibly the deepest, most brilliant, most heartfelt book Le Guin has ever written, and Fahrenheit 451 I just found hollow and annoying, but because it's had such a large impact on our society and is read in just about every school in America, of course it'll be in the top 10.
I feel like something of a novice, I've only read 44 of the entries. (though a lot of them are multi-book entries) I know a lot about all but 10 of them, though, and a lot of them I read the first few pages and stopped for whatever reason.
Notably, The Colour of Magic is the only Pratchett Book I've ever read, and I only read 30 pages of it. (I also read an article he wrote for a small Young Writers type magazine I subscribed to as a kid) I know he has an insane number of people who absolutely love him and has dramatically influenced modern fantasy, I just can't seem to get into it.
OTOH, I've read just about every short story Roger Zelazny wrote, and think he's a far better short story writer than he ever was a novelist. I think there are a lot of incredible authors who simply don't have the temperament to write novels, and are forced into it by social/publisher/monetary pressure.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Notably, The Colour of Magic is the only Pratchett Book I've ever read, and I only read 30 pages of it. (I also read an article he wrote for a small Young Writers type magazine I subscribed to as a kid) I know he has an insane number of people who absolutely love him and has dramatically influenced modern fantasy, I just can't seem to get into it.
You could try something other than The Colour of Magic, which I think is generally regarded as one of his weakest works. Guards, Guards, maybe, or Wyrd Sisters, or Small Gods. Or Nation or Only You Can Save Mankind, if you want to ignore Discworld entirely.
Posts: 650 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I feel the problem with that is the same reason why I've never read The Wheel of Time. A lot of Jordan fans tell me the quality of his writing vastly improved as a grew older, and I believe them, but I can't get myself to start at a book in the middle of the series. I feel that I if I'm to start it I have to force myself to start with The Eye of the World and sludge through it. Otherwise I'll always feel like I'm missing part of the story. And I know for damn sure I'm not doing *that* until Sanderson finally completes the thing.
Likewise, I don't know if I'd ever be able to really get into Discworld if I don't start at the first book. It's just every time I try I get distracted. Reading really fascinating Sci-Fi and Fantasy novels has totally destroyed my concentration. For example, it took me over 10 years to read War and Peace even though I've read similar sized novels by George R.R. Martin in 8 hours, and read all of Ender's Game in a single sitting.
(Your use of italics has made me feel slightly inferior and crude, so I have done my best to compensate )
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Take a look at Gulliver's Travels for example - man discovers strange lands and meets odd creatures. Classic speculative fiction. You could say the same thing about the Odyssey. Frankenstein is often found on the lit. shelves, but it is science fiction.![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
*
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
I kill me.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
