Slashdot Mirror
Writers Who Will Stand the Test of Time?
Embedded Geek asks: "Every year, the online version of Locus (a trade magazine of Science Fiction & Fantasy) asks the question: "Name the 5 deceased 20th century SF & fantasy writers you think will still be read 50 years from now." The results favored some of the bigger names (Heinlein, Asimov, Tolkein) as well as a few lesser known figures (Simak, Bester). I would like to ask a broader question: What authors (in any genre, fiction or nonfiction) alive today will still be read (hard copy or online) in 2051?" If I had to answer off of the top of my head, I know William Gibson, Charles Sheffield, and Orson Scott Card would be in my list, but that's not all of them. A few authors who I thought would be classics have since vanished (whatever did happen to Daniel Keys Moran, anyways?) aand of course there are a few iffy ones which I could be convinced on (C.J. Cherryh, anyone). What authors do you feel will stand the test of time? Yeah, these are sci-fi authors, but that's about what I read these days.
Before you all say it...yeah, yeah, he's not *real* fantasy, whatever.
But the Discworld books are actually quite sharp, and ideas based: Small Gods and Jingo, for example.
And, more importantly, they are very very funny. The sort of books you keep to read to your children one day, in the hope they'll want to read on their own. I guess like Douglas Adams did for me when I was 11.
Roger Zelazny. Probably the best modern mythic author next to Tolkien and the only such author to try and talk about magic and technology as if they were the same thing and under the control of similar mythical forces.
Also H.P. Lovecraft. I predict people will recognize him for the genius he was sooner or later, although he was dismissed as a pulp author by most of the literati in this century.
One word - Shanara - enough said. Personally, I think what he has produced is every bit as good as LOTR (please don't flame me) and is actually in some ways better - A, there's more of it, and B, it's written in a way that is easier to read. No, I didn't have any trouble with LOTR, but I have known people who have, and most of them have found Brooks very accessable.
But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
Yes, not his *real* name, but I forget it right now. I've been enjoying his Wheel of Time series more than LotR, and - like most fantasy - the appeal is timeless.
Last post!
I also find it interesting that, of all the names listed in the body of this article, I had only heard of Heinlein, Asimov, and Tolkien...
Although he wrote lots of different subject matter, I think his sci-fi themed works were his best. Fahrenheit 451 & The Illustrated Man were both written in 1951, and they are some of the best and most forward-thinking sci-fi I have read.
He was *way* ahead of his time and I think Fahrenheit 451 will be read some time in to the future and hopefully some of his other works as well.
On the other hand, historical accounts will survive, I'm sure of that. So, for example, The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes will still be read, much like William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is still a must-read. The Atomic Bomb is a fantastic book, a towering and comprehensive work - I recommend it most strongly.
Then, for example, there are biographies: I doubt that James Gleick's Chaos will still be read - there will be other, better expositions of the Feigenbaum Constant - but his biography of Feynman, Genius, will still be read by anyone interested in the mystique of Feynman. (And trust me, with nanotech's rise, his mystique will only grow!)
And of course, I agree with everyone who nominated Dr. Seuss. That, and Alice, and Tolkien, will survive and still be relevant. Harry Potter - it's too early to say, though they are great fun to read...
Anyway, that's my $0.02.
"I will take the Ring," he said, "though I do not know the way."
While not at the grandmaster level of Asimov, Heinlen or Herbert, he will probably reach that level. I would like to see more books by him, but only at their contined level of excellence.
Stephenson is obviously destined for greatness. His current works already guarentee his place among the SF pantheon. He is also infinitely more readable than others in the cyberpunk genre.
When I want your opinion I will beat it out of you.
Very definitely one of the best! The FIRST author to win the Hugo and Nebula in the same year.
;-)
I see criticism of his style, but I think you could make the some of the same criticism of Asimov and Heinlein. Only because they were foundational to the genera, along with others (Lewis, Dick, Orwell, Zelazny, Sturgeon, Pohl, Ellison), and more modern writers largely follow in their footsteps.
For my money, Niven has some of the very best and most memorable characterizations in the business, and some of the best stories (by-passing dogs like Integral Trees).
Some modern authors focus more on tech or gore or action. But for REAL stories and REAL characters that can provike thought, I'll take Niven.
Then again, maybe in just means I'm getting old and out-of-touch
Stephen King will be known as the Charles Dickens of our time. His works will be read for at least two generations. King will live on because he isn't obsessed with the technicalities of the genres he writes in unlike many of the SF writers whose works are starting to look rather dated. King puts his efforts into crafting characters that appeal psychologically to his audience as having truth beyond the genre. King isn't a horror writer who stoops to write about people--he's a writer who analyzes the human condition who just happens to have used horror as his handle to establish an audience. I believe that King will grow stronger in reputation as time goes by because his being mainstream will allow further acceptance of his insights. In fifty years once the controversy over some of King's themes subsides, King will become the United States orthodox white male to assign to students to read. He will be acceptable to the interest groups because his opinions are politically correct, he will be acceptable to the parents because of familiarity, and he will be acceptable to the students because his characters reflect empathy to many of their struggles.
I'd personally have to go for
Pratchett, Spider Robinson, Douglas Adams, C.S. Lewis, Tolkien, William Gibson. Also I hope no one forgets the absolutely wonderful J.K. Rowling and anyone who hasn't read the Potter books is missing out on something truly special.
Iain Banks Culture stories are fantastic!
I'd recommend Consider Phlebas to someone starting out.
Use of Weapons, Excession, and Player of Games are excellant as well.
nuclear iraq bioweapon encryption cocaine korea terrorist
If the literary range of slashdot readers is accurately represented by the postings to this story so far, most of you really need to break out of the SF rut once in a while. I'm not suggesting that SF books are inferior; just that there is a whole lot of great writing out there that is not in that category.
My nominations:
-Joseph Heller. After Catch 22 he didn't have much inspiration left, but Catch 22 is clearly one of the best American novels ever.
-Michael Chabon. I'm not nearly as confident about Chabon as I am about Heller, but some of his books are great reads and he's still in his 20's (I think).
Benjamin
1. Greg Egan
2. Gene Wolfe
3. Bruce Sterling
4. Greg Bear
5. William Gibson
6. Vernor Vinge
7. Dan Simmons
8. Octavia Butler
9. Neal Stephenson
10.Howard Waldrop
Honorable mention: Stephen Baxter, Pat Cadigan, Ian McDonald, Rober Reed, Brian Stableford, Walter Jon Williams. Note: This list really only deals with writers who acheived prominance in the last 20 years or so. There's really little point in listing living legends like Fred Pohl, Arthur C. Clarke, or Harlan Ellison, who pretty much everyone agrees will still be remembered then. (For one thing, they've all won Hugos, and Hugo-winners tend to be reprinted.)
I've stuck to science fiction writers, so Stephen King, Clive Barker, Neil Gaiman, Sean Stewart and Joe R. Lansdale are all missing from this list, though I expect some of their work to still be read 50 years from now as well.
Another interesting question is which even newer writers do you expect to see make the cut. Some of my predictions: Patrick O'Leary, Mary Doria Russell, Linda Nagata, Ted Chiang.
Remember, science fiction is a genre with a good institutional memory. It's quite possible that one or two works from all the above will still be read, they way that people like Eric Frank Russell, C. M. Kornbluth and Frederic Brown have all had large reprint collections of their short fiction published in the last five years.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
August 1914, A Distant Mirror, The March of Folly. Great works of History. Read August 1914, you know a lot about World War I, the mentality especially that lead to it. WW I will keep interesting people, so will this book.
Although SF now seems like a narrow genre, time tends to wipe out such notions. Jules Verne comes to mind. His books are read by all sorts of people, not just the lame star trek crowd. The best work of any genre will eventually become part of the classic litterature.
Asimov's books on robots will always be relevant. The authors who use SF to illuminate the human character will be relevant. Orwell will be relevant. All the Star Wars/Star Trek offspring will sonn be forgotten. Most of the dragon and knight sort of fantasy will soon be gone. Too much of the SF/Fantasy litterature is like Barabara Cartland for people who don't care for bodice rippers. Just replace bodice for space suit, and horse-cart with space ship.
Another factor I would include in this, is how much read the author is today.
An old favorite of mine is Dickens. He was wildly popular in his time, but not considered very fine litterature. However, his penny novels have stood the test of time much better than his contemporary's, who wrote flat, boring pieces about the dilemmas of the upper classes. So when trying to pick out the classics of the future, one might want to look for similarities with Dickens.
Agatha Christie is another one. There are better mystery writers out there, but her name might be the only one remembered 300 years from now.
If I have to pick the Dickens of this century, it'll be Stephen King. His short stories are excellent. He writes pure fiction, and is not afraid to break some laws of nature. He is extremely productive, and a best-seller. Teh best-seller part is what surprises me a bit, since I usually try to stay away from the unwashed masses reading habits. I guess sometimes the unwashed masses are right. Or maybe they buy the books for the flashy ingredients, not realizing what gems they are. Some of his books dig deep into the human character. He does not try to please the literature critics and besser-wissers. He just wites and writes. Some of his books have a strange ending, but that was also the case for Dickens.
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
What will be considered literature in 50 years. Very few science fiction authors will manage that. Among those there are mostly older authors like Asimov, Heinlein, Tolkien, Dick, LeGuin, and Clarke. But some of these authors that people have been listing just don't have any real staying power. All of those authors backed up their great ideas with, at the very least, solid writing and good plots. To make an example of Robert Jordan, whatever his real name is, I've read the first 6 books. In the midst of that 6 book I realized he had nothing original to say. In his mind, everyone of his male characters thought the same way, and all of the female characters thought about the men as stubborn mules everyone other second. Now some people may still enjoy his writing for the plot, but plot doesn't last 50 years, particularly if it's so long that someone has to read 6,000 pages.
The fact is that any author or book that has lasted this long was trying to say something about humanity, not just convey a good story. Even though Tolkien denies any meaning in his trilogy, he clearly explores the nature of humankind. And the fact is, there isn't much of that in science fiction these days. Aside from a few notable exceptions, most authors are just telling tales.
That's why I think most of the authors that will still be read from this century are those that manage to both sell and be critically acclaimed. For example, Michael Chabon. Adventure's of Kavalier and Clay is a fantastic novel which sold well even before it was awarded the Pulitzer. Now it's a national bestseller. The man is in his 30s. There are a number of post modernist writers who absolutely should be remembered in 50 years, it's just a question of whether people will find post modernism appealing. By the way, as far as I've seen, nobody can really define modernism or post moderism very well. They more or less define an era. The other current writers who will still be read, and I think there are a lot: Gunter Grass, Don Delillo, John Updike, Cheever, Joyce Carol Oates, Toni Morrison, Gabriel Marquez, Jorge Borges, Vonnegut, Chinua Achebe, Margaret Atwood, and so many others. And some of the classics from the lost century and beyond will always be read: Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Salinger, Carver, Chekhov, Nabokov, and more that are slipping my mind at the moment.
These are just a few of my favorite things
This kind of question reminds of watching old science fiction movies. Entertainment that attempts to portray the "future" is always hamstrung by the fact that any vision is constrained by current knowledge and to connect to its audience in any meaningful way must include contemporary references, which necessarily dates the material immediately. Every "future" seems simply to be a forward looking time capsule of the period in which it is produced, and inevitably says more about its own time than the time it purports to portray.
The same with sci-fi. Who knows who will live on? I certainly wouldn't look at the best sellers to tell me. Look back and some old best-sellers lists from the 30's and 40's and see how many titles you recognize. You'll probably say, "who the hell was that?"
Some cases in point: Kafka was barely read at all during his time and directed that all his papers be burnt upon his death. It is only through the "faithlessness" of his executor that we are able to read him at all. Salieri(?) of 'Amadeus' fame. He was by all accounts one of the most popular composers of his day, but who knows of him now except through the play and movie in which he is portrayed as hopelessly mediocre. Bach led a very parochial life, never straying very far from his home town and church, yet wrote volumes of what is now considered to be some of the greatest works of all time. It is really only after his death and through other scholar's research that he has come to be so recognized.
Who will people be reading in 50 years? We probably aren't even reading them now.
Not because he was especially profound - although he certainly was at times - but because his humor is universal despite the sf setting. I've bugged a lot of people who positively loath science fiction into reading the Hitchiker's series, and do you know what? They love it, all of them. This was the best of British and sf humor all combined by the brilliant mind of Douglas Adams, and I really can't imagine a time when people will stop saying to each other "Hey, this guy Doug Adams wrote some really funny stuff. Read it!"
I would also argue that this degree of absurdist, uniquely british humor in science fiction was really a new innovation of Douglas Adams, although I do know I'm on thin ice there.
As is obligatory in any post about Adams, I would like to close by saying that Douglas Adams most definatly was a man who always knew where his towel was, and his literature reflects that.
I'm the stranger...posting to
Sentimental clerk who's a DNA fan. Nothing wrong with that, mind you - I would have done the same thing - , but it has no deeper meaning.
I'm the stranger...posting to
In that vein, look at some of the authors people cited as timeless on these posts:
- Dr. Seuss - All his stuff was written in the 40's-70's, yet his messages ring true, even the political ones. (If you've never seen his collection of anti-Nazi cartoons, run out and get it).
- Larry Niven - Some of his technology is dated (mainframe computing) but his stories are still fantastic. The fact that Known Space takes place in the far, far future helps.
On the other hand, Tom Clancy will not (IMHO) "stand the test of time," and not because of the quality of his writting (although some might criticize him for that). No, what I mean is that his stuff becomes dated so dang quickly. Look at his subject matter: politics and technological nuts & bolts details. You'd be hard pressed to find two subjects that have changed more radically in the last ten years. I mean, try to reread Red Storm Rising as anything other than "What may have been" and you bust a gut laughing (On the other hand, The Hunt for Red October works great as historical fiction).Of course, don't weep for poor old Tom: he's laughing all the way to the bank.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
Yes, wolfe,g.
many try and do something different,
Wolfe actually succeeded.
Reading the majority of the comments, no one is given the reasons that most "classics" share; that being universal themses.
These are those stories that span ages and most cultures; stuff that made Tolkien famous and has a bunch of people re-reading his work in anticipation of movies!
If you've ever read his trilogy, you'll notice that it's good - vs.- evil all over again in an interesting world. Robert Jordan has an amazing world, but I can't see him sticking around as a classic because he doesn't write to the heart and soul of people.
Consider Shakespear who may not be the most famed sci-fi writer, but in the Tempest touches on forgiveness and the depth of meaning of life and love between enemies and family. People don't read Shakespear today because of the hefty language barrier and they had it spoiled for them in some formal education, but I encourage you to pick it up and take a look! Shakespear's claimed "genius" should NEVER be put in his plots! They are trite and many clearly borrowed/stole. The reason you read Shakespear is that he writes so that we can see the depth of the characters, and in them we see reflections of our selves.
What do you think makes Star Trek (or did make Star Trek) so popular! We saw bits of our daily world in those shows with racism, hate, love, betrayal, forgiveness, grace, justice, and all the rest. The sci-fi wrapper was just a very tasty sugary hook, hehehe.
I'll say that many sci-fi series and books will linger on, but I think the ones with the "universal theme" as it's called, will remain. Read Frankenstein! It's sci-fi and is really a great book. Read The Time Machine. Read The Tempest and King Lear and Paradise Lost. (Paradise Lost does drag, though). Read the Christian Bible and you'll see universal themes applied to life here in our reality; In our Internet; In our world.
The bottom line to this rambling is that despitre genre or plot books that deal with certain issues stick around regardless of what people do. Farenheight 451 will be around for a loooong time. It deals with rights of the individual and breaking the mold. Oh well... you get the idea.
Sam
If the couple of centuries before the 20th were anything to go by, the most successful writers (and by that I mean sales and critical acclaim, whatever the genre) are not necessarily the ones still read 50 or 100 years after their death. Take the 19th century - one of the biggest selling novels in the 19th was East Lynn by Mrs Henry Woods (great name), sold millions of copies, and is now hardly in print (it's still worth reading - combination murder mystery/love story). Or one of the most prolific novelists of the 19thC, Mary Elizabeth Braddon, wrote 80 novels, almost all bestsellers, including a couple of huge sellers - Lady Audley's Secret being one. You'd be hard-pressed to find it in a bookshop these days. Some bestsellers do hang around, like Charles Dickens, but his contemporary Wilkie Collins was just as popular in his day, and doesn't have nearly as high profile as Dickens still has - the Woman in White and The Moonstone notwithstanding (both excellent).
Going further back (stop me if you're bored), The Mysteries of Udolpho (Mrs Radcliffe) was HUGE at the turn of the 19th century - so much so that Jane Austen wrote a parody of it (Northanger Abby). The parody's still in print, the original is very hard to find (and having read it, you don't want to find it, believe me).
And it's not just literature where this happens. GE Moore was one of the leading philosophers of the early 20th century, a colleague of Russell and Wittgenstein - and now barely rates a mention. Yet you can have someone like Nietzsche who was ignored during his lifetime, and yet is today probably more influential and widely-read than ever in academic circles.
The obvious point is that we just don't know who will be big in 50 to 100 years time (tho its fun to speculate), although it's almost worth betting that it *won't* be someone we've all heard of today. Other times look for other things from their art, and we can't guess what they'll be. As it says in The Go-Between: "The past is another country, they do things differently there." So's the future.
That aside I can't see too many writers around today (living) who'll still be big (and I mean Dickens/Joyce/Proust big) in 50-100 years. Peter Carey, the Australian who's just won another big prize, might do it: you sci-fi fiends out there should try his novel Illywacker, it's crazy. JK Rowling's Harry Potter books probably will. Toni Morrison, maybe. So long as Martin Amis is forgotten as quickly as possible.
Gotta go, it's Clemens v Schilling... Clemens will probably still be pitching in 50 years time.
Look, I read Science Fiction (or better yet, as Harlan Ellison puts it 'Speculative Fiction') as much as the next guy, few of the people on the list are easily construed as classics, whatever your opinion.
These people are writing generic fiction, the equiviant of daytime television. The real people who should (though probably will not) be read in the future are those who chose to break ground with their writings. For me personally, I would give credit to Phillip K. Dick, Harlan Ellison, Robert Bloch, Theodore Sturgeon, Asimov, and maybe a few others. These are the types of author
who deserve to be remembered. ( I won't even begin to talk about whoever decided to list Tom Clancy on this list, that's not funny, even as a joke)
Though taste in literature is certainly subjective, I find it arrogant for people to give credit to those who produce tales no deeper than the surface words. Even worse than those, are the writers who rehash old plots with aliens and spaceships. Books like 'Stranger in a Strange Land' are what this kind of fiction can do, and more often should.
Now that I have babbled for a while, I would like to apoligize to those who feel differently than I and find these kind of bathroom reading hacks meaningful, but alas, I can't as this is a dispicable opinion, and not worthy of anyone!
Also, to the guy who bashed Wittgenstein for not being particularly deep, maybe the problem lies in the reader, and not in what is read...
I have to concur. The Sparrow and Children of God were two of the most moving books of any genre I have ever read.
And in the genre of the rare female sci-fi writer, I am horrified that nobody has mentioned Ursula LeGuin in any of the highly moderated comments. She has written many excellent novels. IMHO, one of the marks of a great fiction writer is one whose stories carry a ring of truth to them, even though they are fiction. LeGuin's stories fullfil this marvelously for me.
For those of you new to her writing, my personal recommendations for books to get you started are The Left Hand of Darkness, The Dispossessed, The Telling, and Rocannon's World. IIRC, she has won several Hugo & Nebula awards.
-Cheetah
Obligatory Author: Frank Herbet (Specifically Dune). I know he's dead, but it was premature and relatively (15 years) recently. He certainly is a writer of this era.
First of all, my thoughts here are strictly confined to authors who write in English of some form. As for the longevity of current authors I think almost none will be around in 50 years, other than those within the circles of the literati (eg Nobel and Booker prize winners). The problem will be that the volume of content will continue unabated and the new prose (particularly in SF) will drown out that written today.
The problem with SF is that there is little to recommend it as literature, the plots are often excellent (for example I love greg bear and a grandchild of mine would surely enjoy his work as much as I did, but I don't think they will read him) and the ideas great but of this masse, it is only those who famously tie themselves to a point in time in the future that end up being read at that time, particulalry since their lack of literary "quality" means that they will notbe taught in schools. I think we have moved into a phase where the near future offers barren ground for the current author (perhaps current events will alter that) and so few will stand the test of time.
I agree with a previous poster who mentioned Steinbeck (although he too is dead) and I think that Irving Welsh will be read in fifty years because he speaks to/of the chemical generation whose lives will be "interesting" at that time.
One of the great problems is the lack of social comment in "populist" literature. It is difficult to find the Dickens of the late 20th C (in fiction) whose well crafted books critique the wrongs of the society of the day, through metaphor and satire. For it is those authors who are sought out to try and understand a society for ehich we do not have a direct experience. The other problem is that literature is no longer the most accessible vehicle for that form of comment any more. Television and even music is the metaphoric record of today.
"The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."
There are many authors that have already stood the test of time and will continue to do so. Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, Ernest Hemmingway, Franz Kafka, just to name a few. There are some great writers in the Sci-fi genre (Asimov, Orwell) however I find it unlikely that ALL the names being mentioned here will truly be relevant 50 years from now. There's a giant literary world out there, consisting of much more than just sci-fi/fantasy authors and history has shown us that only a small number of the very best authors will be remembered as classics in 50 years.