Singularity Sky

Indomitus writes "I used to read tons of science fiction, nothing but for long stretches. Then I grew up and realized that most science fiction sucked. I look back on the time spent reading anything by Piers Anthony and know I'm going to be wishing I had those hours back when I'm older. Writers like Charlie Stross are the reason I know most SF sucks, because he does it so well. He fills this somewhat slim book with more ideas than any 10 other books from the section his work inhabits at the bookstore." Read on for the rest. Singularity Sky author Charles Stross pages 313 publisher Berkley Pub Group rating 9.9 reviewer Matt Grommes ISBN 0441010725 summary A semi-sentient space travelling information gatherer called The Festival comes to a backward planet and instigates 1000 years of technological change in a month. The rulers of the world are not too happy and will use any means they have to stop the Festival, even if it means incurring the wrath of the super-AI that watches over the universe.

The main idea of the story, that a semi-sentient information-gathering alien system called the Festival comes to a backward farming planet and begins granting wishes -- in the form of advanced technology -- in exchange for stories and information, is only the seedbed for the larger exploration of the societally backward planetary system and what happens when the revolution you hoped to lead finally comes and it doesn't need you.

As a lifelong reader of science fiction, I hate that most SF is just as backward-looking as most Fantasy. Part of the problem with recent SF work is that we've come to a point in science where a lot of what made science fiction new has been done and what's coming is almost impossible to imagine, which I'll get to in a second. Space exploration can still be exciting but most new space stuff has been infected with the Star Trek Syndrome, as I call it, where everyone is boring and has no flaws, and the status quo rules. People just don't look to space exploration as exciting in real life so that translates to the SF work that people do. Real life science is changing so fast that it leaves even science fiction people in the dust. The result is the rise of 'Fantasy with robots and aliens' and 'Space Opera,' two facets of SF that seem to be dominating the landscape. Even Neal Stephenson, who was at the forefront of real technological future SF with The Diamond Age and Snow Crash has gone backward with Quicksilver and to a lesser extent Cryptonomicon.

The issue is The Singularity. This is Vernor Vinge's idea that technological progress proceeds at an exponential rate until there is a complete break with what came before. The End Of History, as people call it. This comes with the creation of a human-level AI that quickly proceeds past human-level, the invention of Upload technology that will allow us to live in computer systems and artificial bodies, something of that nature that we can't imagine. The problem with writing futuristic work in the time before a Singularity is that you can't see beyond it. Everything is different, so much so that all we can hope for is the fire up our imaginations to the point where we can begin to think in new ways.

One of the main goals of science fiction as I see it is to prepare us for the future. You can't hope to cope with the future if you've never been innoculated with new ideas. Singularity Sky is one of the first post-Singularity novels I've read that takes the idea seriously and examines it, allowing us to open our minds to the vast possibilities. Stross doesn't shy away from it like so many others. He uses the Festival's coming to show the speed of the change that comes with a technological Singularity and what happens to people in the aftermath. He also shows a culture trying desperately to hang on to old ways and the futility of doing that in the face of such rapid change.

There are problems with the book, mostly in the perennial bugbear of science-fiction, character development, but the rush of ideas glossed over that for me. This is only Mr. Stross's second book, I believe, the first being a collection of short stories called Toast: And Other Rusted Futures, that is high on my Must Read list. Charles Stross is a name that you will hopefully hear a lot more from in the coming years. His imagination is up there with the best and brightest and with his work as an accelerant my mind can't help but burn with new ideas. I hope more science fiction writers see this book and decide to move forward to meet him.

You can purchase Singularity Sky from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

Comments

Does it so well?

[CanSpice]

Writers like Charlie Stross are the reason I know most SF sucks, because he does it so well.

So you're saying he's good at writing SF that sucks?

Re:Does it so well?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no, no. He's saying that he sucks Charlie Stross so good b/c he reads SF all day.

Re:Does it so well?

[shut_up_man]

I think he means it like Jackie Chan movies... when you examine the plot, acting, dialogue, pacing, makeup and costumes, they are terrible. It's just that the stunts/kung-fu aspect is so cool, that you really enjoy the movie.

Not surprisingly, this works for porn as well.

Re:Does it so well?

[pilgrim23]

Sturgeon's Law as in Theodore Sturgeon, author and editor of Sci Fi of "The Golden Age" and the period just after that, said it best when staring at the Slush pile (the unsolisited manuscripts) on his desk: "90% of everything is Crud!"

Re:Does it so well?

[saden1]

I want to know if he is Charlie Stross with all the Amazon.com self-reviewing that has been going.

Re:Does it so well?

[Anonymous Coward]

I look back on the time spent reading anything by Piers Anthony and know I'm going to be wishing I had those hours back when I'm older.

Don't live in the past. If you enjoyed the books at the time you were reading them, they fulfilled their purpose. What else exactly would you have done if someone had convinced you that you'd dislike them later? Probably nothing nearly as much fun as the reading you actually did.

Re:Does it so well?

[GCP]

So you're saying he's good at writing SF that sucks?

The whole industry is.

What we need is today's equivalent of a "2001" (though we can do without the incomprehensible plot).

By that I mean SF that makes a serious attempt at creating a plausible future about a generation ahead that puts so much effort into the details that the more you know about the subject matter, the more impressed you are. An intriguing, thought-provoking and informative preview of a world that well-informed people consider so well thought out as to be worth studying and pondering for its implications.

Re:Does it so well?

[T3kno]

Kind of like LOTR in space? That question is slightly tounge in cheek, but that is also exactly what I have been craving. An imersive, embracing, extremely detailed SCI-FI "sub-genre", for lack of a better term.

Re:Does it so well?

[llefler]

I think you missed the whole FICTION part. Personally, I thought 2001 was incredibly boring. (The movie, couldn't get motivated to read it after sleeping through the movie. Try his Rama series instead) Good Science Fiction is about character interactions that happen to be in a SF environment. I'd much rather be reading something by Larry Niven.

I don't look to SF to tell me the future. I'm looking for entertainment, and if some of it inspires future discoveries, that's great.

If you want factually based forward thinking literature, go read NASA manuals.

Re:Does it so well?

[GCP]

Well, sort of. ;-) But forget about the "in space". SF doesn't have to be in space, and there's plenty of interest to speculate about based on what is already underway right here on Earth.

If it's a movie, keep the LOTR production values, though.

Re:Does it so well?

[Ben Hutchings]

No, he wasn't looking at the slush pile. He was giving a talk and responding to the common belief that 90% of science fiction is crud.

Re:Does it so well?

[theefer]

Dan Simmon's Hyperion (+Endymion, though I've only read Hyperion yet) series is quite deep and interesting. Check it out !

Re:Does it so well?

[GCP]

I think you missed the whole FICTION part.

I think you missed the whole IMAGINATION part.

Fiction doesn't require the environment to be cartoonish or absurd, nor does a detailed and realistic environment rule out detailed and realistic characters.

Tom Clancy's Hunt for Red October has plenty of character interaction, and it's all played out in the amazing environment of real 1980s submarine technology and real 1980s international politics. When I was at the Naval Academy, midshipmen (the students) were required to read it for the many interacting issues of technology, politics, leadership styles, organizational structure, etc.

Now imagine something similar to Hunt for Red October but stretching to predict the technological, political, social, economic etc. circumstances of a generation or so from now. (And all of those aspects drive each other and provide real motivations for the characters.)

Assume a Clancy-like author who will put as much effort into his predicted details as the real Clancy does into his fiction. Despite the inevitable forecasting errors, a good, well-informed, careful Clancyish author who did a lot of interviews and a lot of study could create a story that would be far more interesting than just character interactions in the semi-void of a poorly developed environment.

Personally, I thought 2001 was incredibly boring.

I don't admire the plot, just the creation of realistic vignettes (based on what was known at that time) of a possible future. As soon as it got beyond Jupiter, it was just random noise as far as I was concerned, but those aspects aren't what I'm referring to.

If you want factually based forward thinking literature, go read NASA manuals.

I have, which is why I'm no longer satisfied with today's SF comic books. I think real life is far more interesting, and that goes double for realistic speculations on our future lives.

I was fortunate enough to be surrounded by NASA people when I was a kid, back when 2001 (movie) came out. I assure you that the NASA folks were entranced by the scenes from 2001 of the space station docking maneuvers, of the interactions of the human crew with the onboard computer (HAL) and other aspects of the movie. It spurred a lot of discussions.

Imagine such a movie or novel created today. Forget about aliens and hokey telepathic beings and other nonsense. If space is involved, it should just be a reasonable near-Earth industrial and scientific environment. The real thing is more amazing than any alien stories or other hokum. Or, just keep it on Earth.

Extrapolate today's infant technologies, social movements, economic changes, political changes, etc. with imagination and Clancy-like attention to detail, then (unlike 2001, but like Clancy) have a real plot with real characters against a background that seems even more plausible to the well-informed than to the general public.... ...and THAT is what I'd love to see.

Re:Does it so well?

[SpinningAround]

You are so right...Rendezvous With Rama is one of the seminal works of SF.

Rama is perhaps the first SF book I read where alien technology is just incomprehensible to humans. Rama comes, Rama goes and we are not much the wiser at the end of the book about what it is. Far more likely than the Star Trek ubiquitous humanoid scenario.

Sadly the 4 follow-up books (which I seem to recall are co-written with someone) are a waste of paper.

Re:Does it so well?

[blincoln]

What we need is today's equivalent of a "2001" (though we can do without the incomprehensible plot).

2001 had a totally straightforward plot, if you read the book.

Some people find a beacon on the Moon, and follow its signal to Jupiter/Saturn (depending on whether you're reading the book or watching the film). Their computer goes crazy because its instructions to keep the nature of their journey a secret conflict with its basic programming to provide truthful and complete information. It kills off four of them, and the fifth one shuts the computer down. When he gets to the destination, he finds a giant black rectangle that turns out to be an entrypoint to an intergalactic transit system. It takes him to another world, where an advanced race assimilates him.

I know the film is deliberately lacking in certain details, but I've never understood the need people have to read anything more into it.

As for modern sci-fi, I started reading Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space a week ago, and it's excellent. I'm really irritated that the third book in the series (Absolution Gap) won't be out in the US until June, despite it having been released in Britain last year.

Vernor Vinge and William Gibson are also excellent authors. Eric Nylund's Signal books were fun too, although he does have some of his geological and astronomical information wrong.

Re:Does it so well?

[mortal_enema]

Two words:

John Brunner

Re:Does it so well?

[dandelion_wine]

It just feels that way with sci-fi, because the bad stinks oh so bad.

Sci-fi is like red wine, compared to, say, mainstream "literary" fiction as white. A bad white wine still isn't all that bad. I'd rather skip straight to vomiting than drink a really bad red.

How bad can a bad literary novel be? You say the main character slept with both sisters? Oh how unoriginal. Sci-fi? (and god, fantasy, too) You say the main character became his own father, and then went further back in time and killed his mother because looking back, having sex with her was pretty icky though kinda fun at the time?

Re:Does it so well?

[GCP]

2001 had a totally straightforward plot, if you read the book.

Yes, and it's pretty well known that the book was written *after* the movie, in part to explain the plot of the movie. A good movie (or book) shouldn't have to rely on a third party to provide comprehensibility. I still love the movie, but it's a pretty extreme example of a movie being great in some ways and terrible in others.

And thanks for the recommended reading list. I'll check out Revelation Space.

Vinge is good for a couple of good ideas in each book, but then he only makes a mediocre effort to create a world around those ideas. (Compare a Vinge story world to the level of detail in a Clancy story world, to get the sense in which I mean this.) The ideas are enough to keep me reading his books, though.

Vinge is a lot better than Gibson, IMO. Gibson's ideas are no deeper than they have to be to provide a framework for a black leather and sunglasses-at-night fashion show. Even when I was a pimply adolescent, his presumed audience for kewwl black leather-clad assasin chicks and burnout rebel heroes, I didn't find much to ponder there, but YMMV.

And I haven't tried Eric Nylund.

Re:Does it so well?

[1u3hr]

Kind of like LOTR in space? That question is slightly tongue in cheek, but that is also exactly what I have been craving. An imersive, embracing, extremely detailed SCI-FI "sub-genre", for lack of a better term.

A couple of series come to mind: Gene Wolfe's "Book of the New Sun", Robert Silverberg's Majipoor books. These both have a flavour of epic fantasy, but are real SF. Maybe some Robert Zelazny too -- though a lot of his stuff is magical fantasy, he also did some very interesting far future stories, like Creatures of Light and Darkness, Lord of Light. I'll leave you to Google for more info; I suspect your local library will have many of these.

While I'm posting, I find the reviewer's attitude a bit distateful. He spends half of the review stating how much most SF sucks, before talking about the actual book in question. Does a restaurant reviewer spend half his column on how bad fast food is and how he regrets eating cheeseburgers when he was young before mentioning the place he's reviewing? It seems rather defensive to me. The reason we read reviews is to point us to the good stuff -- whether it's food, movies, books or music. That a popular genre has a lot of dross does not really need to be dwelled on.

Re:Does it so well?

[1u3hr]

Good Science Fiction is about character interactions that happen to be in a SF environment. I'd much rather be reading something by Larry Niven. I don't look to SF to tell me the future. I'm looking for entertainment

I take the opposite view. If I just want character interactions thee is a huge number of conventional novels to choose from. I read SF primarily for the "environment": the created world that the story is in. It's very hard to get that credible and also have credible characters; those that do are prized. But if it's just a conventional story dressed up with spaceships and rayguns there's no point for me.

I've branched out into historical fiction. That gives you perspective if you read well-researched stories set in different eras. You realise that the world and human society has changed enormously. It's quite depressing the lack of imagination that stories in the Star Trek mould have that assume 20th C American society unchanged centuries ahead. Random examples: Mary Renault's ancient Greek novels; Robert van Gulik's Judge Dee (7th C Chinese) stories; Lindsey Davis' Roman detective novels; Rosemary Sutcliff's many British historical novels; Robert Graves' and Anthony Burgess' Roman novels; ...

And perhaps the best SF is that exploring how different human nature could be -- past the "singularity" as this review mentions, for instance, or see John Varley's "Eight Worlds" stories about the effects of cloning, overnight sex changes and other technology.

Re:Does it so well?

[SirTalon42]

read house on mango street, that will get u to the puking REAL fast

(I have what the author, and publisher, of that book didn't have, a 'spell check')

Re:Does it so well?

[SirTalon42]

if you haven't read Hyperion and Endymion, read it!

Re:Does it so well?

[critter_hunter]

I believe both book and screenplay were written in parallel, and IMDB seem to confirm that.

The screenplay was written primarily by Kubrick and the novel primarily by Clarke, each working simultaneously and also providing feedback to the other. As the story went through many revisions, changes in the novel were taken over into the screenplay and vice versa. It was also unclear whether film or novel would be released first; in the end it was the film. Kubrick was to have been credited as second author of the novel, but in the end was not. It is believed that Kubrick deliberately withheld his approval of the novel as to not hurt the release of the film

IMDB trivia for 2001: A Space Odyssey

Re:Does it so well?

[Master of Transhuman]

Second that.

"Stand on Zanzibar", "The Jagged Orbit", "Shockwave Rider" - excellent. Cyberpunk years before Gibson had a clue.

Re:Does it so well?

[GCP]

Thanks. Interesting virtual mod point to you. ;-)

Re:Does it so well?

[SuperSnooper]

Somehow I feel that the Sci-Fi that came closest to an "LOTR in space" was the Dune series by Frank Herbert (and later carried on brilliantly by Brian Herbert, a marked difference from Christopher Tolkien in his story-telling abilities)...the number of different entities involved and the excellent characterisation of each of them, the gripping storyline....Dune is definitely up there as one of the greatest Science-fiction novels ever.

Re:Does it so well?

[oregonnerd]

Try reading Brian Stableford's Daedalus or Hooded Swan series...Ursula K. Le Guin's writings...Cherryh (who must write in her sleep to produce the volume of works she has)... The main problem with 'SF' is that it isn't and never has been one brand of fiction--the reason for the (much-reborn) F&SF magazine--and that originally Science Fiction avidly avoided most of the details of human existence, from sex to the more mundane. To make a blanket statement about any element of this (rather vast) field of fiction is somewhere between absurdity and ignorance, no insult intended. Bear in mind too that much mainstream fiction (carefully avoiding being 'nooked' into SF) is as speculative as books that were once solidly classified AS Science Fiction...

Re:Does it so well?

[CaptainAvatar]

Try his Rama series instead

Puh-LEASE, Rendezvous with Rama was brilliant, Rama II was quite good, the other two sucked greatly and made one wonder why they had been written.

Good Science Fiction is about character interactions that happen to be in a SF environment.

I only half agree with you here. It doesn't just happen to be in an SF environment; if the SF is merely window-dressing, why bother with it at all? Why not just read something in a more conventional setting? If it doesn't open your mind to possible futures, etc. then to me it's not good SF. OTOH, it definitely does need good characterisation and so forth - otherwise known as "good writing". I stopped reading Robert Forward for precisely this reason - great ideas, terrible writing.

Re:Does it so well?

[CaptainAvatar]

I know the film is deliberately lacking in certain details, but I've never understood the need people have to read anything more into it.

Yeah, what's up with that? Maybe it's because I read the book (*and* The Lost Worlds of 2001) before I saw the movie, but I never understood why even reasonably SF-literate people seemed to think the plot was bizarrely hard to understand. Is the stargate sequence, or the surreal bit at the end, or what? Otherwise, in sfnal terms it's pretty straightforward.

Heh. Gottalove it.

[dragondm]

I thought it was good.

You got to love a book that starts with it raining telephones.

Re:Heh. Gottalove it.

[Soruk]

Where are the telephone sanitizers? Or have they all been carted off elsewhere already? If so, it's only a matter of time before they're all wiped out by a virulent disease contracted from an unexpectedly dirty telephone.

Re:Heh. Gottalove it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I would prefer it to rain men, thank you

Re:Heh. Gottalove it.

[Pig Hogger]

You got to love a book that starts with it raining telephones.

Well, it could be worse; like raining telephone sanitizers...

Re:Heh. Gottalove it.

[normal_guy]

You know, the second and third books just aren't that funny. The telephone sanitizer sequence in particular was one of the worst. Throw a bunch of shit together and it's funny? Here's my Douglas Adams tribute, I gotta get this out: Quite improbably, he was one-quarter-eaten by a snark from Mingbar after hitting 'Preview'. Perhaps just as improbably, the electrons misfired, causing the catastrophic destruction of a small race of beings that lived inside fiber optic strands. These deaths created a sequence of bits that was, in fact, a computer virus that destroyed the entire network of that planet. Har har! That's why I don't hit Preview anymore!

Play nice with Piers Anthony

[YukioMishima]

Play nice with Piers Anthony. While Anthony's sci-fi books are definitely space opera, without his work, I would never have become the sci-fi reader I am today. His "Bio of a Space Tyrant" series was my first glimpse into some of the ideas that would germinate into a lifelong love of science fiction. He's an enthusiastic writer, and really does interact well with his fans, as evidenced by the fan correspondence he includes at the end of his books. Finally, at least it's reading and it's fun - I think the tradeoff for my hours is well worth it.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[Mukaikubo]

I don't have any use for most of Anthony's work, but his Incarnations of Immortality series was generally high-quality.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[Anonymous Coward]

Anthony is great for Junior and perhaps Senior high students who are into scifi. But, for a more mature audience he's just not there.

Out of the Anthony books I've read I'd reread the Incarnations of Immorality and only the first 6 books. The last one bit.

Coorespondence at the end of books I read were awful. I remember the Incarnations letters basically turning into how Anthony feels he's the greatest scifi writer of all time. Maybe it was tongue in cheek but if so it didn't come off as tongue in cheek.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[Nom du Keyboard]

I especially like his Apprentice Adept series.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[Anonymous Coward]

Piers Anthony -- SF's most prolific typist.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[kfg]

On a Pale Horse is a wonder. If this is the sort of thing that Mr. Anthony is capable of I certainly wish he'd produce more of it.

With each further volume however he "progressed" more and more toward his standard goofey fantasy style, which is fine for a book or two of light reading, but that's about it. It gets old, in a hurry.

So, while in essence I agree with you, I nonetheless found the series as a whole dissapointing.

KFG

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[Mukaikubo]

Hmm. I do agree that On a Pale Horse is best, but I don't think there's a clear downward trend later. It's more bumpy than a simple slide.

The one about Time is forgettable but inoffensive; however, Fate is quite good. War is slightly bad, Nature's a bit above mediocre. "For Love of Evil", in my book, is almost as good as "On a Pale Horse" though.

There was no seventh novel in the series. I refuse to acknowledge its existence.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[kfg]

On the other hand, I must say that Anthony is one of my favorite authors in the genre when he writes with his own voice. Harlen Ellison is another of these.

Sometimes you you get your money's worth just from the introductory materials.

KFG

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[rufo]

Yes, On a Pale Horse was nice. I remember liking that quite a bit. I think I petered out on that whole series around book 5 or 6, and I guess I don't really want to finish them.

I was on a big Piers Anthony kick back around 4-6 years ago (I'm 19 now, to give you a clue), which I now sincerly regret.

I do recall the first three books of that one series with the dual fantasy/sci-fi world being moderately interesting in a fun way (although I'm not entirely certain I'd agree with that viewpoint now). The rest of that series completely and totally sucked though. And the Mode books were complete and utter trash.

The Xanth books were kind of a fun starter, but I wouldn't want to read any more now - I've got plenty of other things I'd rather read now.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[steveg]

Piers Anthony has great concepts. It's a pity he can't (or won't) write. If he could work with a co-author who could actually write (or an editor willing to rein in a Big Name Author), I could see some potential for some decent books.

What he does is over-write. This is as true on the paragraph level as it is on the book level. He'll turn a sentence into a paragraph or two by beating the reader over the head over and over with different restatings of what should be just the topic sentence.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[duanedv]

Speaking as someone who has read SF for more than 50 years, i believe that SF today is vastly improved in quality. Much of what I read today is for pure entertainment. When I want to stretch my mind, I read things by Stephen Hawking and others...that's a real mind blowing experience! As for Piers Anthony, I have read his 'Cluster' series several times. He comes up with some interesting observations from the view point of other life forms. The 'Xanth' series I read for fun.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[Anonymous Coward]

>His "Bio of a Space Tyrant" series was my first
>glimpse into some of the ideas that would germinate
>into a lifelong love of science fiction.

"Bio" was my last Anthony. He was just filling pages by the end. Hell, Phillip K Dick made a career of that, but his stuff is at least interesting. "Bio" had an intrigueing first book, then a general downward trend until the last book where he contradicted major plot points of books 1-4 and in general had the hero get continually involved with crippled children. But they were Meaningful Relationships, so it wasn't pedophilia. Don't I remember one of the major characters coming back from the dead to make everything OK as well? Or am I projecting some other miserable book onto these memories?

Anyway, a few neat ideas, mostly adolescent drivel. So no more Anthony for me. There are too many writers that don't suck to spend time on him.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[TopShelf]

I think the series could have been summed up as "On a Pale Horse" followed by "Beating a Dead Horse..." Like many authors, Anthony couldn't just let a good book stand on its own, he had to follow up with sequel after sequel after sequel...

Personally, I liked his Tarot books as well, though.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[MurphyZero]

On a Pale Horse is a fantastic novel. Time leaves you a little confused, you need to reread it to understand it completely. War was OK. Fates and Green Mother were substandard at best. But Anthony wove a good tale with For Love of Evil.

If nothing else, that series takes on a storyline and a world that few would have, and overall he does a good job. I agree that some of the books did not measure up, I think mostly cause of the subject matter--he forced himself in a corner by one book for each incarnation.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[fermion]

The thing is, one has to judge a book by what it meant to do. Anthony has fun with the language. This playfulness makes the books very enjoyable. And, as you say, this means people will read. Reading any book that uses proper grammar and even modestly advanced literary structures will put you light years ahead of the alliterate masses. Most people are lucky if they read a fishing or automobile or fashion magazine.

That said, I am supposing that reviewer is just post-adolescent. It is very common to have a sense of embarrassment over one childish pursuits when one begins to feel 'grow-up'. This embarrassment turns to nostalgia in about 10 years. In any case, a good reader can waste only so much time with Anthony, as any of his novels can be polished off in an evening.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[dandelion_wine]

If by the time I make it to the last book in a series, there has been more than one added to that number, I give up unless they're really worth it.

Incarnations.
Shannara.

Come on, guys. Come up with something else.
It's like Back To The Future Part XIII with you guys.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[olevy]

You are absolutely right. Just recognize that there are much, much better writers out there.

The biggest problem I have with Piers is that his characters are almost always two-dimensional. That is to say, there is no real emotional connection or development.

When I was younger I also read a *lot* of Piers (mainly his Xanth fantasy series), and I don't regret it, but when I try to read it now I don't find issues that interest me as an adult.

Re:Play nice with Piers Anthony

[CaptainAvatar]

Don't feel too bad, kid - we've all been there :) The only cure seems to be to keep reading Anthony until you get sickened by the sameness and the, well, creepiness, throw up, and move on, and you seem to have done that, so congratulations!

Some of his books I still remember with fondness, but I still can't get over how long I kept reading him after I realised how trashy most of his stuff was. I mean, I eventually got sick of Terry Pratchett's repetitiveness in the Discworld series, but it's still several orders of magnitude better than that Xanth crap. I mean, The Color of Her Panties, fer crying out loud ...

Oh for christ's sake

[Mukaikubo]

Reviewer needs to get off his high horse. It's fine that you experienced a loss of faith or whatever the smeg changed for you, but don't insult the rest of us who still like the sci-fi you sneer at (ooohhh, space operas, how amusingly plebeian- give me a break).

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[rjelks]

Shhhhhhhh, I liked the Zahn Starwars books.

-

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[bad enema]

Well, on the one hand you can immediately take offense to his opinion. On the other, you can take it as setting up emphasis for his praise on this particular book. But yeah, unbiased reviewers becoming scarce indeed.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[tjic]

Hey, this isn't a politically correct undergraduate liberal arts school love-fest, where diversity is the first and only good, where all opinions are wonderful, except those opinions that make other people feel bad.

The fact of the matter is that different artists are better or worse at what they do, and bending over backwards to molly coddle folks who still like creampuff science fiction does a disservice to them, and to anyone else who might read a review.

I'm not exactly sorry to say that Gene Wolfe and Michael Swanwick's work is radically different (and, yes, *better*) than _Xanth 49: More Puns about Panties and Ogres_.

I, for one, thank the original reviewer for a spot-on accurate review, which not only explains what's so right about _Singularity Sky_, but attempts to educate the reading public about what's wrong with most of the pulp that's published.

If you don't want to have your tastes developed to appreciate something a bit more sophisticated, fine: but don't call down the wrath of /. on someone who's trying to help you better yourself.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[(trb001)]

Agreed. While I would never give out an award for the writing in the Xanth series, it was creative and entertaining. Not every movie will receive an Oscar, but that doesn't mean that they aren't great in their own respect. Let me guess, you think heavy metal is 'lots of noise and stuff' too?

--trb

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[Mukaikubo]

Help me better myself... where have I heard that before?

Anyway, if you look at the Ringworld cycle as juvenile, I have nothing but pity for you. If you disdain Manifold: Time and The Light of Other Days, I scorn you. And if you buy into the reviewer's hypothesis that a higher percentage of scifi sucks than ANY OTHER POP CULTURE FORMAT, I laugh at you.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[RedWizzard]

Yep, definitely the most pretentious slashdot review I've ever seen.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[secolactico]

_Xanth 49: More Puns about Panties and Ogres_.

Ah, Xanth. Never had the stomach for this series. Puns are fine (in a groaner kind of way) but chapter after chapter of puns grow really old, really fast. Most of them aren't even that funny ("Compewter", anyone?)

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[kfg]

The question is, why do you choose to take the reviewer's expression of his own tastes and opinions as a personal insult?

And for that matter, if you find such to be wrong, why do you respond by insulting his taste?

KFG

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[trelanexiph]

Telling Science Fiction writers they suck is potentially deeply damaging. Proper Sci Fi comes from deep within the human experience. Capturing it and putting it on paper is difficult and demanding of an author. At times looking into the future and seeing any future for a race which seems at times bent on doing nothing but harm to it's members, and seeing anything but destruction and hatred is a difficult task for all of us.

You cry about "Space Operas", could we hope for anything less than the "Star Trek World". Perfection is not an un-noble goal. Even with realism and effort the negative sides of the human existance can be overcome.

Some us have forgotten that that world is not here yet, or believe that good in this world cannot now be done before things get better. The true point of science fiction is to look at what's wrong, and prove that it can get better.

The social concepts in the original Star Trek seem almost laughable. A race which is black on the left and white on the right, battling to the death with a race which is white on the left and black on the right? And yet we still burn crosses, we still commit hate crimes. And many of those who don't condone them saying "We can't do anything to stop this".

After the attack on the Two Towers an Indian Sheik was gunned down in the street, solely because "he looked like one of them". Be them "Japs", "Gooks", "Krauts", "Rag Heads", we haven't gotten far. We continually make peace with one race, African Americans, the Japanese, the Germans, only to wage war and destruction on another, Muslims, the Chinese, the Koreans. And let us not forget the continued oppression on the Jewish people, and the Palestinians.

Perhaps the problem with Science Fiction isn't that things have gotten so much better, but that reading it is a bitter reminder that in fact nothing has changed at all, we've come no closer to the exploration of strange new worlds, the seeking of new life, and forms of civilization, because we haven't gone where no man before has gone before, a unilateral acceptance of ourselves and humanity.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[GCP]

If by "reviewer needs to get off his high horse" you mean he shouldn't consider something you like to be schlock, I disagree. That's what reviewers do. They apply their standards to the topic of review and report on how they fare by those standards.

Apparently you're offended that he set his standards higher than yours in some respect. All I can say is that I wish the whole SF industry would follow his example.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[Buster Chan]

I'd laugh too, but I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, because literary preferences are personal.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[dandelion_wine]

argh. I have mod points but have already posted in this thread.

well said.

isn't it always those with wider tastes that "like trash" and those with narrower tastes that "are stuck up"? ditto morals, cleanliness, and just about everything else. as if where you are is *the* spot to be, in the world of subjective experiences.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[jridley]

Ditto. I really like stuff full of new ideas, but I also LOVE the fun romps, like Lensmen, Ringworld, Man-Kzin wars (the SF equivalent of the trashy romance novel), Heinlein juveniles, etc.

Reading is not only for mind expansion, it's also for taking your mind out on a virtual run in the park, reading stuff for no other reason than it's fun.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[Mukaikubo]

I'll grant you that most of the Man-Kzin stuff is forgettable. However, insult "The Survivor" (Go Eater-Of-Grass!) and I'll get very shirty.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[jridley]

Very true, that's a stand-out. And I have bought just about all of the Man-Kzin wars stuff, and re-read some of it; they're like candy.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[Mukaikubo]

Yeah. Honestly, there's only a few stories which actually stand out; "The Survivor" already mentioned, and "The Children's Hour" (closest, I think to actual Niven without being from the man himself).

But still, the Man-Kzin Wars series really put me onto Niven for the first time, for which I'm eternally grateful.

Re:Oh for christ's sake

[Anonymous Coward]

> While I would never give out an award for the writing in the Xanth series,

Heh. Ironically, Piers did win an award for the writing in the Xanth series. Specifically, the British World Fantasy Award for the first novel, _A Spell for Chameleon_. It wasn't lightly given either -- the book is well written. I stopped reading the Xanth series shortly after _Ogre, Ogre_ as I felt it was on a sharp downward path, and the plots started to seem rehashed. I don't begrudge him the series' longevity, we all have to make a buck somehow. If he's happy writing them and his fans are happy reading them, what right do I have to look down my nose at them?

But I enjoyed it...

[Anonymous Coward]

Piers Anthony may seem juvenile looking back; but you enjoyed it when you read it, didn't you? ....I know I did.

Don't knock Piers Anthony

[AtariAmarok]

It is easy to knock the guy if you think he is 100% Xanth. However, this is the same guy responsible for "Macroscope" (Nebula award nomination). The Cluster/Tarot series is also a worthy effort, with imaginative aliens that beat Niven's creations. There is also "OX", a decent attempt to make a novel around John Conway's "Game of Life".

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

In addition to some of the best short stories ever written, compiled into his "Anthanology"

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[moving_comfort]

Yes, Macroscope - one of my all-time favorite SF novels. P.A.'s existance is justified by this work.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[hoggoth]

> It is easy to knock the guy if you think he is 100% Xanth

Funny you should say that. I read and loved 'OX' and rushed out to read 'Orn' and 'Omnivore'. I couldn't believe so many amazing ideas packed into one story.

Then, looking for more from this amazing writer, I read a Xanth novel. Oh well, anyone can make a mistake. Then I read another Xanth novel. I haven't touched Piers Anthony since. Stupid stories and characters who's sole reason for being in the book is to make a bad pun. What a waste of my time.
Since I didn't know if the next Piers Anthony novel I pick up will be crap or excellent I gave up on him.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[Nom du Keyboard]

I read a Xanth novel. Oh well, anyone can make a mistake.

If you say that, then you don't realize that PA was parodying the entire Wizard of OZ/Land of OZ series of books, with an adult twist.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[hoggoth]

> If you say that, then you don't realize that PA was parodying the entire Wizard of OZ/Land of OZ series of books, with an adult twist.

No, I "get it". It still sucked.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[Anonymous Coward]

Piers Anthony is a child pornographer. Nothing more.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[grasshoppa]

Piers Anthony's characters are shallow, sexist and ultimately unbelievable. Regardless of how he is using them, it still doesn't excuse that kind of writing.

At least, in my mind at any rate.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[Anonymous Coward]

Piers Anthony is a child pornographer. Nothing more.

That's not just a troll. A number of his books have sex scenes with a child and an adult.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[wantobe]

That doesn't make Piers a child pornographer anymore than it makes the author of a book that has one character killing another a murderer. Piers writes about stuff that happens in real life, and often even his "villians" are people for whom one can feel sympathy.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[wantobe]

Sexist and ultimately unbelievable I'll not argue (though I don't agree), but shallow? Maybe (maybe) in the Xanth books, but few of his other characters could reasonably be considered shallow.

Unless you have a different definition of shallow than what is usually meant by the term.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[mbourgon]

Unfortunately, Cluster, Orn/Omnivore/Ox, Macroscope, etc, are all ancient books of his. Cluster, the latest of the bunch, was 1977 - Macroscope was 1969! If nothing else, it shows how an author can go downhill...and stay there.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[rossifer]

I found that Piers Anthony didn't let me think about any of the neat things that he was so excited about. Instead, he was so keen on drilling through all of the details and applications that he forgot about an effective plot and putting some effort into character development.

In his books, it is inevitable that the work is centered on the toys and the asides into how the toys work. When Neal Stephenson did this with Cryptonomicon, he lost me as a loyal reader. I'm not mentally reverting to 14 just so I can go "gee-whiz!" like I used to.

There's a place for contextual details and there's a place for exposition. You shouldn't do exposition about the details. The details are just that, details. Limit your exposition to what matters to the story, mention the contextual details as if they're completely normal and the story will be stronger for it. Asimov was the master of this in the Foundation Trilogy, but by the time of Foundation and Earth, he'd lost the talent.

IMHO, of course.

Regards,
Ross

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[euxneks]

You also forgot quite a few short stories that _always_ stick with me after I read them.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[damiam]

That might be a valid argument, except he's churned out thirty of the fucking things.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[Nom du Keyboard]

That might be a valid argument, except he's churned out thirty of the fucking things.

That's about one for each of the OZ books.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[damiam]

It doesn't matter. You don't write thirty shitty books as a parody. One or two maybe. When you get to thirty shitty books, it ceases to be a parody and just becomes a cesspool of bad puns.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[Nom du Keyboard]

When you get to thirty shitty books, it ceases to be a parody and just becomes a cesspool of bad puns.

You sound like you've read all thirty.

Re:Don't knock Piers Anthony

[damiam]

In my younger days, I read the first fifteen or so, before I realized they all sucked. It would actually be better if he just published lists of puns, without attempting to create a cookie-cutter story out of them.

Don't read Piers Anthony

[Anonymous Coward]

campy fantasy at that

I found his obsession on depicting homosexual sex also disgusting.

That made me throw away all his books after I found Jesus.

Re:Well, now I'm depressed

[A Naughty Moose]

Only if you want to know why science fiction isn't living up to the reviewers expectation.

Cool!

[Gr8Apes]

I'm always on the lookout for something different in the SF world. This review appears well done enough by not being all rosy, and instead focuses both on the pluses and minuses of the work. It has convinced me to at least look at the work for myself.
Thanks!

Ecology of Slashdot comments

[PanamaCongress]

Not off topic, but meta topic. Rarely do I get to see an interesting slashdot posting as it first appears. A moment of spare comments that allow me to post and comment. Unfortunately I have no interest to comment on this particular article -- but instead comment upon the peculiar way in which Slashdot articles resonate. Comments are a pyramid on slashdot. The earliest posters receive guaranteed exposure to meta-moderation. As the life of the posting grows, new comers, no matter how relevant their comments may be, are relegated to the end. New commenters should appear at the top rather than the bottom and be given a better opportunity for exposure and moderation. Thus people will see recent posts and posts that score highly. Hoorah

Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhhhh, check yourself there homie. You have the option of sorting comments in either oldest or newest order. Nice try though...

Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments

[PanamaCongress]

Thanks! But which is the default? =) Nicer try!

Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments

[rjelks]

While I agree with you in theory, you do realize that just because you haven't modified the default settings at the top of this page, others do set the page to "newest" on top. I like to customize it. I think people use most of their mod points on the newest story, so the old comments aren't read as much. You could stop wasting your time actually working and just visit the site more often. :)

-

Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments

[PanamaCongress]

Whether user control over comment sorting has any relevence would require a poll determining how many slashdotter actually utilize the feature.

Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments

[blindpoetx]

I just did some moderating and I noticed that most of the posts that caught my attention (aka visible, not collapsed) were already pegged out at 5. Such filtering helps when viewing the site, but it discourages moderators from culling through the dregs to find diamonds.

Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments

[RetroGeek]

But which is the default?

Click on Save, and then that is YOUR default.

Re:Ecology of Slashdot comments

[dandelion_wine]

That's simply not the way I mod. Recently I jumped into a thread that was eleven pages long. I started on page 5 and worked my way down, looking for quality, overlooked comments.

I mean really, something has to be absolutely fall on the floor funny for me to spend a point to make that +4 funny into +5. Plus, someone else is probably going to do it.

Not to mention, this is suggested methodology in the tips for moderators spiel (yep, some people read em).

Piers Anthony?

[LordoftheFrings]

While agree much of his latest work is hogwash, in particular I really enoyedc the Battle Circle series. The characterization was weak, but the narration was quite good, IMO. Just saying, if you've never read any Piers Anthony, don't get the wrong impression from this. Some is good stuff.

Heinlein Doesn't Suck!

[waif69]

I know that you were writing a review of a book, not written by Heinlein, but the comment that most SciFi sucks, IMHO is going overboard. OK, perhaps 30% is lousy, and that might go even higher if you compare everyone to the standards that Heinlein and Clark and Asimov had set.

Obviously I have a lot of respect for the authors stated above, since they all have stong scientific backgrounds and truly understand the human condition. I just had to respond, don't hate me for message.

Re:Heinlein Doesn't Suck!

[bbsguru]

Not all SF is classic literature?

Pshaw! next you'll try to tell us that not all reality television is real, or that pro Wrestling isn't a sport.

Most of everything is not the Best of anything. Get a clue. It's reading the rest that makes the best such a treasure.

And lay off Piers Anthony. He ain't Heinlein or Asimov, but neither is William Gibson. Nobody is. That's why Heinlein and Asimov are important.

Re:Heinlein Doesn't Suck!

[nomadic]

But Heinlein does suck. Alright, fine, fine, LATE Heinlein sucks. But late Heinlein encompasses like several decades of his writing.

Re:Heinlein Doesn't Suck!

[lavaface]

Don't forget about Philip K. Dick and Vonnegut!

Review that says nothing?

[MrBlue VT]

I'm sorry, but this was less of a book review and more of a rant by the author on his view of the SF world. Sheesh, next time try to devote more than a sentence fragment to the book itself.

..the time spent reading anything by Piers Anthony

[burgburgburg]

I look back on the time spent reading anything by Piers Anthony and know I'm going to be wishing I had those hours back when I'm older.

Groan.[embarrassed shudder]
Proust and Joyce? No, don't have the time. I'm reading another Xanth book, thank you.

I'll be skulking over there, for now.

1000 years of technological change in a month.

[ch-chuck]

and you thought the patent office was busy and overwhelmed now

Speaking of bad...

[Euphonious Coward]

I just finished the worst book I have read in years -- "Chindi" by Jack McDermitt. It's awful from the very first line: "The Benjamin ... was at the extreme limit of its survey territory ..." Each chapter is worse than the last, each deft touch reveals it as the more tawdry. Chapters start with quotes from great but somehow sophomoric works of the 23rd century. The ship's captain is gorgeous but unfulfilled. Every character is bored with his or her life and life's work, desperate to relieve the tedium. Reading it was like watching a train wreck. Recommended, sort of.

Re:Speaking of bad...

[AKAImBatman]

Have you read his other books? He seemed to do best when he was writing Sci-Fi mystery, but pretty much all of his books are very dry reads. I'd almost go as far as to say they're painful to read. I think the only reason I keep reading them is because he throws out enough intrigue to keep you interested after reflection.

I've sort of developed a "take it in small quantities" approach to his writing.

Re:Speaking of bad...

[Charles Dart]

I agree, I have read several of his preious works that were slightly entertaining but "Chindi" is a real low. I found myself thinking 'is this supposed to be a joke?' I don't think I'll buy any thing by him again.

this sounds familiar!

[U.I.D 754625]

This Festival alien sounds like Linux, it gives us technological gifts in exchange for stealing IP!

Re:this sounds familiar!

[mdfst13]

How does Linux "steal IP?"

If the message had said, "When the Festival arrives, SCO will sue it saying, 'It's just like Linux; it gives us technological gifts in exchange for stealing IP,'" then it would have been satire, humor, social commentary, and geek humor.

Without SCO, it's trolling flamebait.

Re:this sounds familiar!

[U.I.D 754625]

You put two and two together and realized it was a SCO joke. I didn't think I had to write SCO all over the fucking thing. Why are you zealots so up tight about this stuff? Just laugh for once at a joke that might have just once, made you think for yourself.

Re:this sounds familiar!

[mdfst13]

No, I put two and two and two together and realized that it could be made *into* a SCO joke. Without saying SCO (or making any reference to an outside entity that might be SCO), it is not at all obvious that it refers to SCO.

The way the original post reads, *you* believe that Linux steals IP and think it is the same thing as Festival (regardless of what you actually believe, this is how it reads). That's not funny to people who don't agree with the position that Linux steals IP (the majority of the /. readership).

I'm not claiming that you were trolling by posting flamebait. What I am saying is that that post speaks in a way that is flamebait (by assuming that Linux steals IP). There is *nothing* in the post to indicate that we should have been looking for someone other than you who would hold that position. As posted, it looks like something that would be posted by Darl McBride (or whatever his name is).

It's like the following exchange:

Knock, Knock.
Who's there?
Orange.
Orange who?
Orange you glad it's not banana?

It makes no sense unless you already know the joke. Why? It's missing the whole prep of the repeated Banana sequence and skips straight to the punch line. Punch lines are not funny without the prep.

try again

[lambent]

The whole "magic is indistinguishable ..." bit, as well as 'uploading' yourself into a computer, as well as 'let's see what happens when old fashioned cultures collide with new cultures' is all old hat. Already been done many times before.

This is nothing new. The man you extol as being a fresh creative force for the beleagured sci-fi genre is doing the same thing every author has done for the bast 80 years.

Re:try again

[Elwood P Dowd]

Thank you. (Score:5, Amen)

Also, it would have been helpful if the reviewer named another author or novel that he felt stood the test of time. That would give us a data point so that we could have some idea if we could trust his judgment of fresh creative force.

I'M A TATTLETAIL HAHAHA LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

review copied from amazon

Try branching out..

[bravehamster]

If you think that the majority of scifi sucks these days, you aren't looking very hard. Try Iain M. Banks, anything of his, and then look me in the eye and tell me scifi sucks. Ditto for Stephen Baxter, or David Brin, or Greg Bear or Gregory Benford. Hmm...that's a lot of B's....

Re:Try branching out..

[Mukaikubo]

The joke in the fandom community is that they're the "Killer Bees".

Baxter earned my unending adulation for whatever part of "The Light of Other Days" he contributed with Clarke, and "Manifold: Time" sealed the deal. Favorite writer of the 1990s for me.

Re:Try branching out..

[Elwood P Dowd]

Try Iain M. Banks, anything of his, and then look me in the eye and tell me scifi sucks. Ditto for Stephen Baxter, or David Brin, or Greg Bear or Gregory Benford. Hmm...that's a lot of B's....

That's also a lot of men. Try Octavia Butler.

Re:Try branching out..

[QuijiboIsAWord]

And if you really want to hammer yourself in the head with those authors, you can read the Second Foundation Trilogy (based on Asimov's Foundation stories) as all of the latter 3 wrote a book in that set. They did a slightly better job than the unauthorized "A Psychohistorical Crisis" novel..but not much.

Re:Try branching out..

[AKAImBatman]

Ditto for Stephen Baxter

Ugh. Mainfold: Time was so damned depressing that I've vowed never to read another book by him. It started off so good too. "Man will get to space, even if he has to do it illegally." Then it degraded into franken-squids, everyone dies, and the Universe ends. Exactly how is this an entertaining read?

Re:Try branching out..

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

Joan Vinge.

Her vision of the future was dominated by amoral corrupt corporations, hypocritical religion, by a class/caste system and by drug syndicates.

Then again, maybe that was just observation.

Re:Try branching out..

[rjelks]

Baxter really reminds me of Clarke. I've read most of his books and really enjoyed him. In fact, if you like Baxter and Clarke, they wrote "The Light of Other Days" together and was an awesome read. For my favorite time travel book, Orson Scott Card's "Pastwatch" is dang good.

-

Re:Try branching out..

[Mukaikubo]

Wow, you took the exact opposite away from that book that I did. What I got out of it was that humanity would always fight, never giving up, but that it was a losing battle to begin with; thus, the Blue kids' actions were entirely proper.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

ODB's gonna fucking kill you!

Re:Try branching out..

[Damek]

or Ken MacLeod or Alastair Reynolds or Kim Stanley Robinson or Octavia Butler or... there are so many (and they don't all have last names starting with B :)

Re:Try branching out..

[AKAImBatman]

But man never accomplished anything. We're supposed to overcome the odds, not paint an ever bleaker and bleaker future. His final result is that our Universe is dead, the squid are trying to outrun the wave, his wife who he just saved from death is dead again, and the last of mankind are trapped inside a net zero-energy computer with no hope for having an interesting life. All for the forlorn hope that "other universes will support life".

Oh, and I thought the way he wrote the treatment of kids at these schools was atrocious and inexcusable. I don't care what he thinks of the world, I just can't see our modern culture allowing things to get *that* bad.

Authors are supposed to inspire us and encourage us to improve the human condition. Instead, his entire book was unrealistic and depressing.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

{looks parent in eye}

Gregory Benford sucks.

Re:Try branching out..

[Indomitus]

I love Banks's work. In fact I'm reading 'Look To Windward' right now. Can't say I care for Baxter based on Manifold: Time and I read the others so long ago I honestly can't remember them.

Have you read Banks's non-SF work? I liked The Bridge but haven't read his other stuff like The Wasp Factory.

Re:Try branching out..

[CrosseyedPainless]

Word. Just *seeing* the book depresses me, now.

Re:Try branching out..

[AKAImBatman]

I liked The Bridge but haven't read his other stuff like The Wasp Factory.

*AKAImBatman is suddenly reminded of the book Einstein's Bridge.

Re:Try branching out..

[steveg]

Lois McMaster Bujold.

Another 'B'.

Re:Try branching out..

[RickHunter]

Fine, I'll look you in the eye and tell you that I can't stand reading David Brin. His characters are flat and lifeless, altered however necessary to get across whatever "insightful" political or philosophical point he wants to emphasize this paragraph. Sundiver was okay, but Startide Rising and the Uplift War were absolutely hideously dry. Not only can he not do characters, he can't do plots or interesting situations either. I had to struggle to finish both of the above.

I'll look you in the eye and tell you that 90% of Greg Bear's stuff is written to capitalize on "market trends". How? You can tell when he's writing something because he WANTS to - then you get masterpieces like "Moving Mars" or "Songs of Earth and Power", and not tripe like Eon, or Anvil of Stars, or Slant.

I'll look yo in the eye and tell you Gregory Benford is a hack. His Galactic Center series was muddled and poorly-written.

All of the above are why sci-fi sucks. They're excellent examples of the "Plot? Characterization? Who needs those! We've got SCIENCE!" school of thought. They're so wrapped up in how scientifically accurate they are that they totally forget that scientific accuracy is not and has never been an element of an engaging story. Especially since their "accurate" predictions usually get disproven or debunked by scientists within six months of publication anyway.

And don't try telling me that they're pondering about the human condition, or how things might turn out, because that's crap. To do that, you need characterization and plot, and they don't give a damn about that. They just want to coerce little geeks like you into thinking you're so smart and so sophisticated, reading a book that's so scientifically accurate and nodding your head and going "yeah, that's so true".

Re:Try branching out..

[TheClam]

Wasp Factory is a tough one - tough to read, that is, but worth it if you push on to the end.

Re:Try branching out..

[ruhk]

A guy I used to work for called that collection "The Killer B's". I have to agree with him. I haven't read many books from those authors that sucked. There were some misses, but a hell of a lot more hits.

Re:Try branching out..

[mbourgon]

Octavia Butler - Dawn.

Worst. Book. Ever.
When the highlight is the rape of a woman by an alien, you have to go WTF?!?!?!!

And as for Iain Banks - I can easily look you in the eye and say he sucks - check out prior postings by me. I love Modesitt, Green, MacLeod, James Alan Gardner, Simon Green, Heinlein, Bunch, as well as the classics, but Banks just plain sucked. Even reread one of them twice to make sure it wasn't something I'd missed. Nope. Lent it to a friend. Friend hated it as well.

Re:Try branching out..

[Flamerule]

Fine, I'll look you in the eye and tell you that I can't stand reading David Brin. His characters are flat and lifeless, altered however necessary to get across whatever "insightful" political or philosophical point he wants to emphasize this paragraph. Sundiver was okay, but Startide Rising and the Uplift War were absolutely hideously dry. Not only can he not do characters, he can't do plots or interesting situations either. I had to struggle to finish both of the above.

*stares* You think they were dry? Of all words, dry? Startide Rising and The Uplift War were full of... emotion, description, action... they were fucking organic. Sundiver was far plainer and drier than those 2. I thought the characters and plots were thoroughly engrossing.

All of the above are why sci-fi sucks. They're excellent examples of the "Plot? Characterization? Who needs those! We've got SCIENCE!" school of thought. They're so wrapped up in how scientifically accurate they are that they totally forget that scientific accuracy is not and has never been an element of an engaging story. Especially since their "accurate" predictions usually get disproven or debunked by scientists within six months of publication anyway.

At this point I have to question whether you actually intended the above to include Brin, since it doesn't describe his novels at all. So you've read Startide Rising and The Uplift War, right? Where were there any scientific predictions of any sort? The novels are far more character- and story-driven. The only thing that's even vaguely scientific is the entire process of uplifting dolphins and chimps; none of the technology used, for example, is gone into at all. It's just there: superluminal drives, probability drives, weapons, etc. All of those are "far-future magic" sort of technologies. Maybe Sundiver has some of what you're describing, but I'm familiar with Bear and Benford, and Brin's Uplift Trilogy, at least, is quite distant from their work.

And just as an aside, Benford's Timescape was superb.

Re:Try branching out..

[Jeremy Erwin]

I'll look yo in the eye and tell you Gregory Benford is a hack. His Galactic Center series was muddled and poorly-written.

There's more to Benford than the "Galactic Center" novels. I rather like his modern day stuff--where unfulfilled physicists are the real heroes. I found his characterization of Alicia in Cosm to be somewhat stilted . Still, the "science" was interesting, and that's the important part.

Anvil of Stars was slicking awesome! I can't understand why you think a novel about a bunch of adolescents committing genocide with the help of alien weaponry falls flat. BTW, there's a film treatment of the Forge of God/Anvil of Stars flitting about Hollywood.

For characterization, I find John Varley to be interesting. His Work reads a bit like Heinlein at his randiest.

Re:Try branching out..

[k8to]

For Octavia Butler: try her collection of short stories Bloodchild, or perhaps Kindred.

I haven't read Dawn and cannot comment.

I feel her celebrated Parable of the Sower is a mixed bag.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

i totally agree. i couldnt believe what i was reading by this guy. the preamble of 'majority of sci fi sucks' is pure troll

Re:Try branching out..

[AsbestosRush]

For time travel fic, I actually liked Baxter's take on the old novel "The Time Machine", that he entitled "TimeShips". Pretty cool causality loops that he described and such.

Re:Try branching out..

[Elwood P Dowd]

Based on the dude's stated preferences, I wasn't about to recommend Thomas Pynchon. The only SF author I'd recommend to a reader of fine literature</sarcasm> is William Gibson, and I'm well aware I'd get a bit of argument about that, too.

I read Parable of the Sower, and I think it makes an excellent novel for young adults. That is 10x more than I could say for any of the few books I've read by the authors he mentions. She is a cut above space opera.

Re:Try branching out..

[rjelks]

That was actually the first one I read of his, and it was pretty good.

Re:Try branching out..

[bkhl]

I would say that the fact that a majority of everything sucks is key here.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

Iain M. Banks sucks. All that 'culture' thing sucks.

Deeply.

And, btw, the submitter if so wrong it isn't even funny. Science Fiction is /not/ about predicting the future (well, bad SF is, but good SF is not). SF is about the present. The fact it is located in a fantasy world that may or may not be in the future is of no importance.

Re:Try branching out..

[morn]

Kim Stanley Robinson's another great modern SF author.

His Mars trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars and Blue Mars) is one of the most well thought-out, well researched views of the near future I've read. As you continue reading and the story becomes more far fetched, you may disagree with the way he sees humanity turning out, but his world is consistent, the characters are believable and well fleshed out, and the story, while it sometimes gets bogged down in politics, certainly contains its fair share of mystery and action too.

Also, for those more into aesthetics, his descriptions of the (changing) Martian landscape seen through human eyes are at times breathtaking - it's probably the nearest I'll ever get to stepping onto another world.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

Authors are supposed to inspire us and encourage us to improve the human condition.

Really... says who (apart from you, obviously)?

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

Coalescent by Baxter was reviewed on slashdot not long ago.

Re:Try branching out..

[dandelion_wine]

David Brin??

David frigging Brin? of "Earth" fame?

Can I look you in the eye and tell you his science fiction sucks? Huh? Can I?

Re:Try branching out..

[tc]

Iain Banks I'll grant you, but Stephen Baxter sucks as a writer. Seriously.

Now, to be fair, Mr. Baxter has really great imaginative ideas, and reading his books is sure to turn up some thoughts you'd never had before, but frankly, they're a bit of a chore. The characters are one dimensional at best, the prose is plodding, and there is no sense of pacing or tension in the plot development. The text appears to merely be a vehicle to transport you from one of his 'big ideas' to the next. The ideas are good, it's just a shame you have to wade through such turgid prose to get to the next one.

I like to read Baxter for the cool ideas, but I generally find myself speed-reading and skimming along to the next good bit because I just don't care about the characters or what happens to them. I certainly don't find his books satisfying as literature, or worthy of a second reading.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

Really... says who (apart from you, obviously)?

Literary arts 101. Actually it says that the point of writing is, "to examine the human condition". Then it goes off to say how much readers appreciate it when the protagonist triumphs over the antagonist.

I suppose you fell asleep in that class, huh?

Re:Try branching out..

[lkcl]

David Brin, _that's_ the name of that boring 9-book series.

i bought them all, i read them all. yes, as an _introduction_ to the concept of space opera and alternate sci-fi technology, they "do the job".

however, there are much better stories around that, rather than go along the lines of "oh, let's mention some great technology", actually _take it for granted_ and just get on with telling an incredible story.

peter f. hamilton is very good at telling interesting and moving stories where the technology isn't the be-all and end-all. so is greg bear, so is iain m. banks.

neal stephenson actually does a very good job of explaining technology in _interesting_ ways, for example the diamond age explains turing machines and nano technology, yet it is also a beautiful and touching story of a young girl who only meets the person who was always there for her, effectively as her mother, when she becomes a teenager.

the uplift series could have been condensed into two books and it would have been better for it, basically.

Re:Try branching out..

[RickHunter]

*stares* You think they were dry? Of all words, dry? Startide Rising and The Uplift War were full of... emotion, description, action... they were fucking organic. Sundiver was far plainer and drier than those 2. I thought the characters and plots were thoroughly engrossing.

Yeah, I did. Sundiver at least had an interesting mystery and some nifty characters behind it. SR and TUW basically had the same re-hashed "sci-fi" stereotype characters. I also got tired of all the hinting about all this massive stuff that was going to change the universe and never actually SEEING any of it. Those two books were basically Brin treading water and trying to play out the story a little before his next trilogy started.

I will concur that Brin lacks the "oh, look at how scentific I am" self-importance of authors like Egan or Bear's more blatantly commercial stuff. Unfortunately, this isn't quite enough to save him. He's got interesting technology, sure, and the setting for SR was interesting... But I found that the plots and characters of both books just felt flat.

Plus, this puts him in the same category of "science fiction" as Hamilton and McCarthy. (Specifically, borderline space opera) And while Hamilton's "Neutronium Alchemist", etc. books did tend to drag on (thanks to "Robert Jordan syndrome" - he has too many separate groups of characters running around, most of which are unrelated to the main plot about Joshua until the very end), Fallen Dragon was incredible. McCarthy's Bloom and The Wellstone were so-so, but The Collapsium was awesome.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

Literary arts 101.

You learned it in class, so that makes it true. That confirms everything I remember about humanities/arts students.

Then it goes off to say how much readers appreciate it when the protagonist triumphs over the antagonist.

And they also like boy-meets-girl and movies with lots of explosions.

I suppose you fell asleep in that class, huh?

Didn't everyone... well, apart from those furiously taking down notes to memorise later and spew out as dogma.

Re:Try branching out..

[Anonymous Coward]

Brin intended these books to be space opera. The science is meant to be "over the top". I think he did a good job in this and is a lot better in this than most of the older SF-writers Antony included.

For some other SF read Earth or even Ditto. I think Brin has a little Gaia tick.

By the way, do you think that talking all the time is a good character trait?

Is this a book review?

[Mr2cents]

Or is it general SF bashing? Most SF sucks, I hate this, I hate that, that is boring, ...
The fact is: most x suck, where x can be anything you like (TV programs, /. stories, people, hookers, ...). Get over it and stay on topic next time.

Re:Is this a book review?

[Flyboy Connor]

most x suck, where x can be anything you like (TV programs, /. stories, people, hookers, ...)

Hookers only suck when you pay extra.

Re:Is this a book review?

[jdcook]

"most X suck" Best summarized as Sturgeon's Law: "90% of everything is crud." And hey, an SF author said it!

Re:Is this a book review?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Q:How many libertarians does it take to stop a Panzer division? A:None,
> obviously market forces will take care of it.

Uh..I think you meant to type "economists" or something...

Re:Is this a book review?

[jdcook]

Your grunt helps me verify that you are indeed a moron.

Re:Is this a book review?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dipshit.

Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[Culture]

Piers Anthony is a pedophile (or at best a fantasy author), not a science fiction author.

The Eschaton

[Anonymous Coward]

We all know that the singularity, the end of time as we know it, comes at Dec. 21st 2012. At least according to the Mayans and Terence McKenna.

There's far too little of McKenna on slashdot. If you all did what he did (eat 5grams of dried psilocybe cubensis mushrooms) you'd all see the singularity, and beyond, for yourselves.

And when you're older still...

[Call Me Black Cloud]

...you'll look back on your Slashdot submission and realize what a pretentious uptight snob you were, and you'll wish you had the time back you spend shunning things that were actually entertaining.

Based on your review, I'll take Anthony over Stross:

There are problems with the book, mostly in the perennial bugbear of science-fiction, character development, but the rush of ideas glossed over that for me.

I'm sorry, I prefer a few good ideas and good characters versus poor characters and many ideas.

Piers Anthony and science fiction?

[AtariAmarok]

by the way, since when does Piers Anthony write science fiction?

Here are just some of his "pure science fiction" titles. I weeded out the "half-fantasy" ones like Apprentice Adept:

Macroscope
Prostho Plus
Race Against Time
Rings of Ice
Triple Detente DAW pb 74; Tor pb 88
Steppe
But What of Earth?
Total Recall
Chthon
Phthor
Battle Circle (Sos the Rope, Var the Stick, Neq Omnivore
Orn
OX
Cluster
Chaining the Lady
Kirlian Quest
Thousandstar
Viscous Circle
Refugee
Mercenary
Politician
Exectutive
Statesman
The Iron Maiden

Re:Piers Anthony and science fiction?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Tarot series is also great.

Re:Piers Anthony and science fiction?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would remove Total Recall from that because it is not really his, being a novelisation of a screenplay of a movie barely based on a story by Philip K. Dick.

However, apart from that I'd say the first two or three Cluster books left a favorable impression, Bio of a Space Tyrant was very interesting from a political point of view, and Prostho Plus was fun, entertaining, and interesting, if a lot unbelievable.

(Race Against Time was almost interesting, but it was so heavily message-laden that it hurt, and Steppe never really did anything for me. I didn't like Phthor either, but maybe that was because I couldn't find a copy of Chthon to read first.)

That all?

[Stumbles]

I think timothy as age wears on will wish more than those hours spent reading sucky SF could be recouped.

With apologies to Emacs...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a excellent rant, now if someone would just write a decent book review for it.

Parent is an Amazon Repost

[Entropy Unleashed]

The parent link just reposted the spotlight review from Amazon, which is available here.

A Colder War

[HeghmoH]

If anybody is interested in seeing a glimpse of what this author can produce, his short story "A Colder War" is available online for free at http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/colderwar.ht m.

This story is one of the best I've ever read, and it's the only work of fiction I have ever encountered, on paper or on the screen, that actually managed to give me nightmares. Go read it if you haven't!

Re:A Colder War

[dustmote]

Well now that was just creepy as all hell. I sure am glad I read that during the daylight hours.

Re:A Colder War

[aliens]

That was a cool story. But damnit he could've written so much more!

That's the problem with short stories sometimes, they could've been even better had they been longer.

Re:A Colder War

[charlie]

"A Colder War" was a dry run for a novel.

That novel, "The Atrocity Archives", is due out in hardcover in the US this April/May.

You can pre-order it from Amazon.com here.

Re:A Colder War

[DragoonAK]

I am glad to inform you that he has, in a way. Look up "The Atrocity Archives". Haven't read it yet, but I'm told it covers similar ground, although in a slightly more humorous manner.

Re:A Colder War

[JLSigman]

SWEET! Thanks for the heads up, I'll look for it.

Re:A Colder War

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not really sure it's right to describe them that way; it was a dry run for a novel in a completely different subgenre. So the 'feel' is quite different.

(But, hell, you know that. :) )

Re:A Colder War

[mofolotopo]

To be honest, I wasn't that impressed. It was all right, but I thought the writing was awfully melodramatic and the story a little less than stellar. There were a bunch of cheesy little narrative tricks (such as writing in the style of stage directions and whatnot) that did more to interrupt the flow of the story than to advance it, and overall I just felt like the author was a little pretentious and impressed with his own narrative voice.

The general idea of the story was very good, but it really didn't unfold very well as a story per se. It seemed more like a concatenation of "wouldn't it be cool if" ideas than a single narrative thread. All in all, I thought it was too annoying stylistically to be scary, although it certainly tried.

Re:A Colder War

[HeghmoH]

To each his own, of course. For me, I wasn't bothered at all by any pretentiousness on the author's part regarding his narrative voice, because I was damned impressed with his narrative voice.

The "wouldn't it be cool if" tone is probably because that's exactly how the story got started. There was a thread on soc.history.what-if which sort of covered the basic ideas in the story, and Stross saw it and ran with it. (The discussion was split into a couple of different threads, but you can get to the biggest one on Google Groups here.

I've run into far too many people who think my favorite books are crap to be annoyed or even surprised by it. People just like different things. Personally, I read this story (for the second time, what was I thinking?) right before bed one night, and woke up at something like 3AM sweating and with my heart pounding. If it didn't do it for you, them's the breaks.

Re:A Colder War

[Anonymous Coward]

What's not to like? We've got a sympathetic alternate history featuring Poindexter, North & Fawn Hall plotting to toast the planet with alien technology that makes nuclear weapons look impotent - and they're the good guys.

The Russkies have captured Cthulu and have him locked in a bunker so they can bring him out, Peter Sellers doomsday machine style, if they feel that all hope is lost.

The American government has discovered ancient portals to distant planets, but they're only using them for smuggling heroin to fund right wing revolutionaries in Central America.

All it needs is some great show tunes and Robert Rankine to do the adaptation and we'd have a Broadway hit.

Oh, wait! It's not funny.

In that case, my first impression must have been correct: It's an egregious piece of crap. I hope his for-pay stuff is better, because I would fling this garbage back through the bookstore window if I had shelled out cash for it.

If you were disturbed by this trite piece of fluff then Cthulu has already eaten your brain and you're living out the "What if Gilligan's Island were real" scenario right now.

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[AtariAmarok]

not a science fiction author.

He's written more than 25 science-fiction novels (yes, that is excluding all the fantasy novels), some getting important genre awards or nominations.

Piers Anthony

[nicophonica]

I do have one good thing to say about Pierce Anthony. I was reading him one day and suddenly a little thought balloon formed over my head which read: "This is crap." I threw the book down in disgust and learned a valuable lesson: it's not a moral failing to give up on a bad book. Quite the opposite, it a sin to reward a horrible writer by plowing threw dreck just to finish it.

Re:Piers Anthony

[X-Nc]

The problem with Anthony can best be described by his statement that he has never, ever had writers block. This is why he can turn out the occational gem along with the flood of crap.

Back in the ol' FidoNet days there was an echo F&SF for fiction and science fiction. The people on this echo had come up with a scale to rate authors and books. It was a rating between 1 and 10 with Anthony representing the 1 and Azimov the 10.

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

Where do you get pedophile from?
And what do you call his "Bio of a Space Tyrant" series, or his "Adept" series?
Methinks you're a troll, therefore, begone, dipshit.

Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

Sci-Fi has always been a bit difficult for me. I love the ideas of building new technology, visiting new worlds, and finding out new things about the Universe. Above all though, it still should be entertaining.

Unfortunately, most Sci-Fi writers fall into two categories:

1. Taking the "human condition" to the extreme. Futures where sex is the only thing driving humanity. Of course, they're so much more advanced than us because everyone has sex with everyone.

I hate to break it to the authors, but this sort of society would quickly degrade due to a lack of scientific focus. Not to mention that human feelings on the subject are actually pretty immutable. (No matter what anyone says.)

One way or another, these books are no more entertaining than a porno flick.

2. Fantasy dressed up as Sci-Fi. I personally don't like Fantasy books all that much. But these books make it that much worse. Most of them have space travel as a background to get to a fantasy-like world. After that, forget about the Sci-Fi.

Once on the fantasy world, the laws of physics no longer apply. There aren't even social-political issues to work out. There's just some big quest for something. Or a, "look at how much better they are than humans." Blech.

Personally, I thought Heinlen's juveniles were the best examples of Sci-Fi. Rocket Ship Galileo, The Rolling Stones, and Time for the Stars inspired those of us who wanted to some day reach the stars. Which is amusing since so many of his adult books fell into the categories above.

Here's what I'd like to see: Someone should write a series of books on what space would be like if we developed nuclear engines. (Orion, NERVA, GCNR, M2P2, NSWR, etc.) Build a grand story around the concepts and push the public to make it happen. We always see space as far in the future. It doesn't have to be!

An even better bit of Sci-Fi would be a television movie showing the conflicts of developing the first nuclear launch methods. The struggle between the pro and anti nuclear groups. Showing how far people are willing to go for their beliefs. And the results of finally reaching the stars.

Re:Double edged sword

[Mukaikubo]

Although it doesn't involve nuclear engines, I'd recommend the Firestar series by... um... Flynn. (I can't get to a search engine or Amazon, so working off memory- if Flynn fails, search for Firestar).

It's about, in extremely broad terms, how mankind goes from more or less current state to one where space travel is accepted as routine, unremarkable, and cheap, there's several large space stations in orbit, et cetera et cetera... basically, every space geek's dream of what could happen in the next 50 years.

For the love of God, though, stop after Rogue Star, the second book. The last two are a dramatic dropoff in quality.

Re:Double edged sword

[Nom du Keyboard]

Someone should write a series of books on what space would be like if we developed nuclear engines.

Day 1: Set out on trip to nearest star (not counting Sun).

Year 1: Still on course.

Decade 1: Still on course.

Century 1: Dead, but ship still on course.

Re:Double edged sword

[infochuck]

Personally, I thought Heinlen's juveniles were the best examples of Sci-Fi. Rocket Ship Galileo, The Rolling Stones, and Time for the Stars inspired those of us who wanted to some day reach the stars. Which is amusing since so many of his adult books fell into the categories above.

Amen, brother! Sing it! Oh yeah! I cut my scifi teeth on "The Rolling Stones", moved on to "Citizen of the Galaxy" from there, and havn't looked back since! "Farnham's Freehold" (PORN!), JOB, and even (god forgive me) "Stranger" - blech.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

Century 1: Dead, but ship still on course.

*chuckle*

Not quite. I was referring to interplanetary missions, frontier spirit, new technologies changing the shape of our Solar System (like locomotives, cars, and factories did for the old west), and eventually looking at real opportunities to head to Alpha Centari. Once you have a Solar System Infrastructure in space, building a craft that can make it to a serious fraction of c doesn't look so hard.

Current proposals for an Alpha Centari mission include a Nuclear Salt Water Rocket that's all fuel, and a M2P2 "Railway" Orion that would ride nukes that are launched from some external source (i.e. Planet or asteroid) to rendezvous with the craft at the exact moment the craft needs acceleration. If you keep a constant stream of these nukes going, you'd eventually build a "railway" for the Orion to follow.

A 40 year mission (20 there, 20 back) is possible. We just need to take it one step at a time.

Re:Double edged sword

[Noren]

Century 2: Arrive at destination, Great-great-great grandchildren colonize planet.

Re:Double edged sword

[Perl_Monk]

How do Heinlein's later adult works equate into "Futures where sex is the only thing driving humanity. Of course, they're so much more advanced than us because everyone has sex with everyone."?

The ONLY Heinlein adult novel that I could think of that might fit that category is Time Enough for Love. But, if you actually read the book, you see that the author is talking about the difference between sex and love! He is also showing by example that not all societies fall into the "1950's America" ideals of morality, by showing us that a society as a whole DEFINE what is moral. But that society did NOT become "more advanced than us because everyone has sex with everyone". He shows different human cultures in vignettes throughout the book with DIFFERING laws and tacit morality, from the totally monogamous to polygamies and every other conceivable thing in between!

These are all HISTORICAL examples of human customs, and the author did not just invent them, but used these to illustrate a point. And sure, his characters do engage in sex. Who doesn't?

-
Vidi Vici Veni!

Re:Double edged sword

[ultramk]

1. Taking the "human condition" to the extreme. Futures where sex is the only thing driving humanity. Of course, they're so much more advanced than us because everyone has sex with everyone.

There are lots of books about Europe.

m-

Re:Double edged sword

[Sloppy]

Futures where sex is the only thing driving humanity. Of course, they're so much more advanced than us because everyone has sex with everyone.
..
human feelings on the subject are actually pretty immutable.

Human feelings are mutable, because humans are mutable. I mean, if we're talking about Science Fiction, is altering humanity (e.g. genetic manipulation, cybernetic surgery, psychological brainwashing, etc) really that hard to swallow?

No, when it comes to human feelings in Science Fiction, I think just about anything is workable. Perhaps even for the purpose of exploring exactly just how much can be changed and still have a character that is identifiably human, vs what is "going too far."

Re:Double edged sword

[Flamerule]

Not quite. I was referring to interplanetary missions, frontier spirit, new technologies changing the shape of our Solar System (like locomotives, cars, and factories did for the old west), and eventually looking at real opportunities to head to Alpha Centari. Once you have a Solar System Infrastructure in space, building a craft that can make it to a serious fraction of c doesn't look so hard.

You seem to be looking for some sort of comprehensive examination of the exploration and settling of the solar system and beyond. I'm not sure I can give you exactly that, but Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy gives you a lot of what you're asking for. It focuses on Mars and its relationship with Earth, of course, but especially in the last book, Blue Mars, there's discussion of the settlements, cultures, etc., on Mercury, the Jovian moons, and even one of Uranus' moons. And there are interstellar spacecraft launched as well, though that's not such a big part of the story.

The series is superb, and pretty highly thought of on /., too, if past discussions are any indication. Highly recommended.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

The ONLY Heinlein adult novel that I could think of that might fit that category is Time Enough for Love.

Hello? Friday? Love "groups"?

I made the mistake of picking that book up thinking it would be as good as his juveniles. I didn't get very far.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

You mean "Red Mars"? That was another book I put down after it became weird freaks/terrorists/Martian Gia lovers having sex on Mars.

Sex is a very normal part of human existence. However, it is not the be all to end all of that existence. Most of this #### is akin to stories of western frontier's men heading west just so they could get women to have sex with them! It's pathetic!

I'm sure many people don't agree with me, but that's my feelings on the issue.

Re:Double edged sword

[ChaosDiscord]

Unfortunately, most Sci-Fi writers fall into two categories:

Two categories that I suspect you would define as crap. Always remember, 90% of everything is crap.

Taking the "human condition" to the extreme.

It's a common technique in fiction to try and distill down something "pure" about humanity, to reveal things hidden by day-to-day life. Typically this is done by creating an unusual setting to eliminate reader's preconceived notions. You might do this by trapping children on an island, sending someone to fictional lands, or having animals play the parts of humans. That you might set people into a future distopia or future utopia doesn't change the basic technique.

Futures where sex is the only thing driving humanity.

Geez, as a kid I sought out the slightly racier sci-fi and I never saw anything that bad. Sure, I saw books that had alot of sex in them (looks to Heinlein), but where it's the only driving force? Perhaps you're confusing erotica set in a sci-fi setting with the wide variety of sci-fi options.

I hate to break it to the authors, but this sort of society would quickly degrade due to a lack of scientific focus. Not to mention that human feelings on the subject are actually pretty immutable. (No matter what anyone says.)

I hate to break it to you, but many people would argue that lots of human advancement is the indirect result of a desire for nookie. Even ignoring the iffy assumption that human feelings are immutable, if they are immutable they are immutable in that people want sex; not real complicated.

Most of them have space travel as a background to get to a fantasy-like world.

Heaven above, was your reading limited to erotica and Stasheff? Yes, there is alot of great sci-fi that doesn't fit into these two categories. Did Heinlein, Clarke, Orwell, and Asimov never exist? What in the world are you looking for?

Personally, I thought Heinlen's juveniles were the best examples of Sci-Fi.

Oh, that's what you're looking for. Boy's adventure stories and pulp adventure. Great stuff, I enjoy them myself, but it's an amazingly small subset of sci-fi. Sci-fi includes a wide variety of writing, just like historical fiction, fantasy, or modern stories.

Re:Double edged sword

[Flamerule]

You mean "Red Mars"? That was another book I put down after it became weird freaks/terrorists/Martian Gia lovers having sex on Mars.

Dude, you're weirding me out here. It never "became" about sex on Mars. That's not part of the story at all. The people on Mars did have sex, of course. It wasn't a big issue. Earlier you mentioned that you were looking for "interplanetary missions, frontier spirit, new technologies changing the shape of our Solar System (like locomotives, cars, and factories did for the old west)". Well, the Mars Trilogy deals with all of that. That's what it's about.

Sex is a very normal part of human existence. However, it is not the be all to end all of that existence. Most of this #### is akin to stories of western frontier's men heading west just so they could get women to have sex with them! It's pathetic!

Again, people having sex is not a major element KSR's story. The only story you've mentioned specifically is Heinlein's Friday, and there's an element of truth to that -- but that's one of Heinlein's well-known "issues".

I'm sure many people don't agree with me, but that's my feelings on the issue.

*shrugs* It sounds like you want a story without the word "sex" in it. Good luck.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

I'll check it out. :-)

The primary reason I tend to gravitate toward nuclear engines, is that it's the only technology with a high enough energy output. I've done some research, and the chemical with the highest (viable) energy density is Cryogenic H2 with a density of 2.5E7 J/Kg. Fission of U235 Oxide makes H2 look tame. It has an energy density of 1.5E12 J/Kg! That's five orders of magnitude higher than our best chemicals!

A lot of people keep waiting for methods like Fusion and Antimatter. My response is simply: "It ain't gonna happen." Nearly all Fusion reactors self-destruct during operation, and not one has produced so much as 1 joule of net power. Antimatter is even worse, costing trillions of dollars per gram! I hate to say it, but these are technologies we'll need to develop in space. Out there, you can create a tiny star for a reactor (fusion) and no one will care. Once you have that cheap power, you can use it to create antimatter as fuel.

Our existence depends on progress. The most progress can be made by going to space. Space infrastructure requires power. The only method we currently have to supply that power is Nuclear Fission.

Re:Double edged sword

[ageoffri]

Someone has written a series of books on what space would be like with likely technologies. Look for just about anything by Robert L Forward. Not always that greatest story teller because the technology is the focus, but very well grounded in reality overall.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

Dude, you're weirding me out here. It never "became" about sex on Mars. That's not part of the story at all.

So I'm just imagining the part where half the settlers started weirding everyone out by having secret meetings in the nude? How many of the early Western settlers did crazy stuff like that? The closest I can imagine is the Mormon settlers. (e.g. The Sherlock Holmes story of "A Study in Scarlet") Some of them may have been less than civil in the stories (disclaimer: most of the Mormons I've met are actually nice people), but things never turned into free-for-alls, or secret meetings that bar clothes.

*shrugs* It sounds like you want a story without the word "sex" in it. Good luck.

Not quite. I really enjoyed Carver's "Eternity's End". Sex, normal sex inside a relationship BTW, was touched upon, but was by no means a central focus. Pioneers to new worlds would be too busy trying to survive to worry about creating cabals of nudist terrorists. History has shown this out. It's ridiculous to assume that people who are trying to survive would have so much time on their hands to do anything else.

About the worst any story should have is prostitutes. Those are always around, even in the old west. Otherwise, keep it real, will you?

Re:Double edged sword

[Mukaikubo]

Oh, trust me, I know- Part of my research is working on a smaller NERVA-type nuke thermal rocket motor for use on a deep space probe.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

Are you serious? Got a link or something? I'd love to hear about it!

Re:Double edged sword

[Mukaikubo]

Unfortunately not- It's part of a national design competition that's still ongoing.

Re:Double edged sword

[Mistshadow2k4]

I actually like fantasy quite a bit myself, but I agree with the rest of your post. Here's my list of the biggest flaws with almost all SF (and especially Star Trek), as I see it:

1. They seem to think that the point of life developing at all is for a species to develop our kind of intelligence.

2. They seem to think that the point of intelligent life developing must be to develop technology.

3. Most SF authors show a terrible ignorance about other cultures and anthropology when they attempt to show how alien some non-terrestial society is, or else adapt human cultures to aliens and then pretend that it' still alien ("today is a good day to die" is a millenium-old cliche).

4. They also have an unfortunate tendency to simply take our future to extremes; we're all goody two-shoes with an "evolved sensibility", or either the future is really, really bad, man. Yet the people are somehow pretty much the same. What about simple change in beliefs and customs?

5. Characterization; I'm so tired of cookie-cutter humans who are deliberately bland to make the aliens look more alien. It has the opposite effect - the aliens wind up looking more human, and the humans wind up looking like a species of school pincipals, nannies and lawyers. (The cool thing about some fantasy stories, and some SF too, is when the author shows us what a truly different and new human culture might be like.)

6. Big animals, whether from a different planet or from our own prehistory, don't exist just to eat us. Predators do not pursue prey contiually for hours or days at a time. That's in the realm of the so-called "intelligent" creatures, such as humans.

7. Many SF stories revolve around things going very wrong with computers, and thus the author reveals his or her ignorance about the computers we have now. Come on, writers, read a little about Unix and then you'll realize why half of the computer freakout stories should be infeasible if they have a decent OS with any security built-in.

8. Technobabble. New ideas are great, but it's just nonsense when you use a bunch of tech-sounding doubletalk to solve the big problem.

9. Technobabble that's utter nonsense. Antimatter radiation; if you're nerdy enough to know which series and episode I mean, then I'm sure you get the point. If you're going to use technobabble at all, don't make up stuff that we know isn't true *now*.

10. Psionic powers that are like magic. Psionics, yes, but a little research into the subject quickly reveals that no one has ever been known to be so incredibly powerful as in a lot of the SF about it.

Unfortunately most SF has one or more of the above themes in the story, so there's not that much SF out there I like anymore. The time is long past to break away from these cliched plot conventions and imagine something new. Once upon a time, all the cliches and conventions were new, so it can be done.

Re:Double edged sword

[JeanPaulBob]

That's not part of the story at all.

So I'm just imagining the part where half the settlers started weirding everyone out by having secret meetings in the nude?

I'm reading the series for the first time now--I'm about half way through Blue Mars. No, you didn't imagine that scene. Yeah, the other poster was exaggerating when he said "That's not part of the story at all." It did happen, and it was weird freaky group sex. It also took up a grand total of 4 out of 572 pages in Red Mars. So far, nothing remotely similar has happened in Blue Mars. In fact, the only mention of sex so far has been two or three passing references to couples "making love".

The series didn't "become" weird group sex--it happened, once, in a brief scene. Otherwise, it's a fascinating, complex, realistic (though somewhat to the left of Marx) picture of human exploration/expansion.

Re:Double edged sword

[wash23]

Good hard science fiction: Greg Bear David Brin Good humanist science fiction: Theodore Sturgeon God: Philip K. Dick If I could find anybody else as good as those four authors.. I'd... I dunno. Suggestions?

Re:Double edged sword

[dandelion_wine]

I'm not commenting on KSR in particular, but I don't see the point in extrapolating science, especially to the point where it will reshape human experience, without extrapolating culture or society, too. I'll be the first to admit that sometimes the "what will 'human relations' be like" question sometimes gets a little out there, but judging from what used to be unacceptable human behaviour a hundred years ago, a hundred years from now is going to be a little out there, too.

If I want to read only about rockets, I'll pick up a text, not a novel.

Re:Double edged sword

[ahunter]

Iain M. Banks seems to think like you do; quite a lot of his books seem to take a poke at the 'sex is all that's left' style of SF. He's got a good sense of humour and a keen sense of human nature - it probably helps that most of what he writes is 'serious' literature, published under a slightly different name so he doesn't get lumped as a 'Sci-Fi' author. (Against a Dark Background being my personal favourite of his)

There are quite a few 'near future' type books; Stephen Baxter's Voyage is a superb book about a manned mission to Mars, replete with technical detail. Titan suffers from a poor ending (Baxter seems to have trouble with them), but the start is worryingly prophetic (hmm, it may feature NERVA later on, too. Been a while since I read it). Footfall (can't remember the author) is noted for featuring Orion. Ken McLeod has written several near future books about space travel, and Peter F. Hamilton portrays a future where money is based on fusion fuel rather than gold. Neal Asher's polity series has brilliant portrayals of really alien ecosystems. If you look for it, you'll probably find someone who's written about it.

Of course, books are more about entertainment than predicting the future. I know I wouldn't buy a book that turned out to be 100% right while being 100% boring.

Re:Double edged sword

[Nom du Keyboard]

you'd eventually build a "railway" for the Orion to follow.

A 40 year mission (20 there, 20 back) is possible. We just need to take it one step at a time.

Given that all the hard science is in place for the outbound trip, I'm still dubious about getting back in the same length of time (unless you hook around that sun with no time to stop and see anything) without the same infrastructure in place on the other end.

Re:Double edged sword

[Anonymous Coward]

Start Trek is to Science Fiction as See Spot Run is to the rest of literature.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

but judging from what used to be unacceptable human behaviour a hundred years ago, a hundred years from now is going to be a little out there, too.

For all that people would have you believe, sex hasn't changed in thousands of years. Prostitutes, orgies, polygamy, etc. are all written down in history. Despite the moral dilemmas in our society today, we're nowhere near as bad as early Britain. Treatment of fellow humans was so poor, that it lead to the development of a set of manners and etiquette. Many of these manners (e.g. Open a door for a lady, curtsy when introduced to a gentleman, etc.) have survived to this day.

Taking the stance that the future will lead to extreme sexual relationships as the norm is silly. Especially when you're dealing with closed communities where the emotions attached to sex can make people feel uncomfortable. Most of the bizarre sexual behavior has and will developed in heavily populated areas where people are not afraid of rebuke from the community whole.

Re:Double edged sword

[AKAImBatman]

You'd probably send probes and various pieces of infrastructure there before you attempted a manned mission. Otherwise, it would be kind of silly to waste 40 years on human life for a simple slingshot around a star.

Re:Double edged sword

[CaptainAvatar]

For all that people would have you believe, sex hasn't changed in thousands of years. Prostitutes, orgies, polygamy, etc. are all written down in history.

And yet you seem to have a big hang-up about sex in SF. No, sex hasn't changed that much, but you cannot deny that attitudes towards sex have changed a lot over the course of time, and they will change - one way or the other - in the future. So if people do want to have weird nude love-fests, they can feel happy about doing so ... One thing I do have a slight concern with, though, is that most of the changes posited in SF do seem to be towards greater permissiveness; there's no inherent reason why the future might not become less permissive, and this might be interesting to explore.

Oh, and I reiterate what others have said, the Mars series are really not about sex ... I don't even remember that scene (though I'm not doubting it was there). I do remember all the great technical stuff about colonising and terraforming Mars, and the politics of colonisation. It's well worth revisiting.

Re:Well, now I'm depressed

[smack_attack]

... or you want to join the elite .0726% of /. that actually reads the articles.

Anthonology

[AtariAmarok]

I was going to include "Anthonology", but wasn't sure it was 100% fantasy-free. I was listing only the science-fiction stuff.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Author is a Slashdot Reader?

[Entropy Unleashed]

In one of the Amazon reviews it was mentioned that the author apparently is a Slashdot reader. If so, it would be quite interesting to hear about his experiences in writing and publishing a science fiction novel today. Do any other /.ers have questions that he would be able to shed light on?

What?!

[Orien]

New commenters should appear at the top rather than the bottom and be given a better opportunity for exposure and moderation.

I really hope you know that you can change that, right? Right under the article and before the comments start there is this handly little section where you choose the sort order of the comments, and what moderation threshold you want to read at. And for even more control, if you don't like the defaults then you can CHANGE THEM IN YOUR PREFERENCES! Please tell me you knew that?!

richard morgan

[jeff munkyfaces]

well, his first one anyway..

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

If You're Unhappy with SF...

[Nom du Keyboard]

If you're unhappy with the state of SF, perhaps you've just been reading the wrong SF. I am not yet nearly so ready to consign away the entire field (with the exception of a few remaining choice nuggets) as you sound to be. This may well be an excellent book, however there remain more worthwhile books and authors out there to read that I've already discovered (and don't yet have time for) for me to believe SF is a dying field.

And as another person who has also read a great deal of Mr. Piers Anthony Jacob's works, he entertains well, and often slips in useful observations on life. (A certain RAH was also known for that once upon a time.) He entertained you well once, or you wouldn't have kept reading him.

To want those hours back now (or someday) is to say that time spent reading is not time well spent. I respectfully disagree, although time spent writing is even better time spent. What else would you have done during that time really that would have been better for you now? Split your time between reading the Encyclopedia Britannica and running cross-country to improve your health? I think not!

And if P.A. Jacob no longer meets your reading needs, it is not because he has changed, but rather you have. This is not a bad thing for either you -- or him.

Regardless, you have succeeded in interesting me in this book, and I'll add it to my list as well. However your reasoning behind it seems less than universal.

And consider reading some authors who only publish on the Internet. Some ideas are too leading edge to sell to editors and publishers. That's how I found this sig line.

Peace!

why knock down others in a "Review"?

[emptybody]

Sorry sir, you lost me.

Your introduction slams other authors for no aparent good reason. If you are reviewing a book you can easily say it is better or worse, in your opinion, than some other works.

It is not necessary to drag in some other persons works and knock them down.

Re:why knock down others in a "Review"?

[ultramk]

Your introduction slams other authors for no aparent good reason. If you are reviewing a book you can easily say it is better or worse, in your opinion, than some other works.

I completely disagree. Having a reviewer state up front who they think rocks or sucks, let's you "calibrate" the review to your own tastes.

I totally agree with the reviewer about Piers Anthony, and so that makes me think that I will probably agree with him about the rest of his review. (of course, there are those who who will consider PA high literature, but as the saying goes, YMMV. Some people watch American Idol, too.) I personally outgrew PA when I was about 12, so I have strong opinions about him.

Of course, it works conversely: one reviewer called a book "The worst thing since David Weber!". I enjoy DW, so I gave it a shot. (mind you, I don't consider his work mindbending or provocative, just an entertaining read. Like Laurel K. Hamilton, for e.g.)

Like I said, YMMV. Which is kind of the whole point.

m-

Re:why knock down others in a "Review"?

[RickHunter]

That seems to be obligatory for any "sci-fi" book review here on Slashdot. Every one I can think of that I spared more than a cursory look at in the past six months has been nothing more than picking a space opera author and bitching about them.

total recall

[Anonymous Coward]

"this book is a novelization of the script and the original novel" mm, sounds great _and_ original!

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

"Pedophile" is the new boogeyman term. It's similar to the cold war "communist" label. You can always identify the posers who don't have anything substantive to say by their use of that term.

Tarot series

[AtariAmarok]

"Tarot" is actually part of a larger series that includes "But What of Earth", the Cluster Trilogy, Thousandstar, and Viscous Circle.

However, I excluded "Tarot" from my long list that proved he was a science-fiction writer, because Tarot to me contains too much of a mystical/fantasy aspect to make it count as strictly science-fiction.

Re:Tarot series

[Anonymous Coward]

mystical/fantasy aspect

The only Piers Anthony I've liked is actually the Tarot-series - just because of that.

I liked how Sci-Fi suddenly blended into Satan shitting the main character out of "his" rectum.

And regarding the so-called singularity

[Transient0]

Try Permutation City by Greg Egan, Everyone in Silico by Jim Munroe or Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect by Roger Williams.

MOPI is even available as a free text at the website. And these are just the three excellent examples that spring to mind, I know I've read at least a dozen other decent explorations of this unimaginable future.

Re:And regarding the so-called singularity

[dsplat]

I don't get the impression from what I've read of Vinge that he views the singularity as a discontinuity. The problem is that we understand progress and innovation based on models of their first and second derivatives that simply won't apply beyond the singularity.

An interesting point to consider is that singularities have happened to humanity before, but on a greater time scale. Speech made it possible to convey information from one individual to another abstractly. Writing made it possible to convey information across distances and time. Each of these advances changed the nature of what is required for humans to acquire skills and knowledge and push beyond the boundaries of what is already known.

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[namidim]

There was a slashdot interview that raised a few eyebrows on that front

Same with Arthur C Clarke

[AtariAmarok]

"this book is a novelization of the script and the original novel" mm, sounds great _and_ original!

Yes, this applies to Total Recall. It also applies to Arthur C Clarke's "2001" novel. Guess you'd better take that one off Clarke's science-fiction bibliography, ok?

Re:Same with Arthur C Clarke

[Anonymous Coward]

From http://www.elstree.co.uk/2001.html

The original concept came from the Arthur C. Clarke short story "The Sentinel". Stanley Kubrick and Arthur.C.Clarke wrote the original screenplay for 2001:A Space Odyssey. Arthur C. Clarke went away to turn the screenplay into the 2001 novel, and when Stanley Kubrick began filming changed the shooting script, and in addition removed many entire scenes from the film in the editing.

So, is rewriting your own story make it not original?

Re:Same with Arthur C Clarke

[CaptainAvatar]

(1) The novel of 2001 was not written after the movie; it was written while the movie was being scripted and shot - and Clarke co-authored the screenplay with Kubrick anyway.

(2) The original source for 2001 was written by - wait for it - Clarke himself.

It's a bit rich to claim that Clarke is as lacking in originality in the 2001 creative process as Anthony was with the Total Recall, given that Clarke was involved in every single step of 2001 and Anthony was only called in to write a film tie-in of Philip K. Dick's short story.

We seem a little tender today, don't we?

[krilli]

Come now, there's no need to let your feelings be hurt ... by a book review.

But still I agree with you, partly: badmouthing is not needed to contrast praise.

Re:We seem a little tender today, don't we?

[Mukaikubo]

I am sick and tired of people telling me what I shouldn't like.

Re:We seem a little tender today, don't we?

[Scott Francis[Mecham]

You may want to stop reading the Internet, then.

Re:We seem a little tender today, don't we?

[nomadic]

I'd suggest avoiding "reviews" then.

Re:We seem a little tender today, don't we?

[aardvarkjoe]

This wasn't much of a review. It seemed like it was just an excuse to rant about how much science fiction sucks these days, with some shallow references to a book so that it would be posted on slashdot. A good review should get you to either want to read the book, or give you some reasons why you wouldn't want to read it. After reading this review ... I still don't particularly care about Singularity Sky.

Re:We seem a little tender today, don't we?

[dandelion_wine]

One of the grandparent posters hit it -- this is constrasting praise with disdain so as to make the praise brighter.

You hear it in commercials all the time, so as to "demonstrate" that the person was a convert to the product: "I normally don't use Irish Spring. In fact, I never used to shower at all. But now..."

Re:We seem a little tender today, don't we?

[Anonymous Coward]

Should I go read a library instead?

More to try

[AtariAmarok]

Since I didn't know if the next Piers Anthony novel I pick up will be crap or excellent I gave up on him

Anthony writes on three levels: at the bottom, there is Xanth. At the middle, there is Incarnations of Immortality. At the top, there is Macroscope and Chthon. He's been doing through all his career.

If you enjoy OX/Orn/Omnivore, you might like "Kirlian Quest". Yes, it is the 3rd book of a trilogy, but I read it first myself and had no problem from that.

Suckage

[zaxus]

I think the real question is, does a greater percentage of Sci-Fi suck then the general percentage of suckage in everything else. And I think the answer is probably no. The general rule is that 80% of everything is crap, seek the 20%. If this book is truly part of that 20%, I'd be interested in reading it.

Re:this sounds familiar! NOT FLAMEBAIT

[Nom du Keyboard]

Unfair to have moderated this parent as Flamebait.

Satire or humor, absolutely!

Social commentary? I see it.

Geek humor? You bet!!

Piers Anthony

[truffle]

While much of what Piers Anthony has written is crap, he has written several books which I would personally consider good science fiction:

* Macroscope
* The Apprentice Adept (books 1-3 only)
* Incarnations of Imortality (books 1-4 only)

I'm omiting from this list books that were entertaining but not really good, and books that are clearly fantasy and not sci fi. Of this list only Macroscope is what I'd call pure sci fi, containing no fantasy elements, but it was really quite good, one of his first.

Most of his sci fi is really quite tollerable and an enjoyable read. When in doubt skim the first chapter, and if the word panties is mentioned skip the book.

I did of course also quite like his lighter fluffier stuff, it was a staple of my reading from ages 12-17 when I bought anything he wrote.

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

Read it. Didn't see anything amiss. Dude spoke a lot of truths. Conclusion: he's not a pedophile.

My biggest complaint about McDevitt (and others)

[edremy]

He can't write endings. He's got the idea thing down pat, and many of his characters are interesting. (A Talent For War and The Hercules Text are good examples, and much better books than Chindi)

But he can't write an ending to save his life. His books just sort of peter out, or end so abruptly you're left going WTF? Destiny Road is a great example of the latter: major plot points are still being resolved on the 3rd to last page. Stephenson, for all that's he's loved here, is another like that. I love Snow Crash, but the ending- sheesh. It's obvious in The Diamond Age that he just got bored and stopped writing.

Could be worse- he could be Peter Hamilton. Now there's a godawful writer.

Sorta agree with both points of view

[OmniGeek]

Yes, much SF is junk (like much of Zelazny and Farmer, and I *thoroughly enjoy* their work); that shouldn't surprise anyone. (Harlequin romances, anyone? Junk is all over literature, and SF is no exception.) Of course, "junk" here has a wildly variable and subjective meaning.

As far as space opera, I just finished David Weber's "Path of the Fury", and while it doesn't stand up there with Lois McMaster Bujold or C.J. Cherryh, or Weber's other works (comes off somewhat as though put together out of spare parts to turn a buck), it was a great way to spend a 6-hour airplane ride. Best thing I could have done with the time.

I've spent many an otherwise-wasted hour reading good and bad SF, and I cannot honestly say I regret ANY of it, even *shudder* half of Battlefield Earth (as a research project in "Gods below, surely the book wasn't THAT bad, the filmmaker musta taken liberties... Gaah, he didn't, it was, it was!"). Consider the alternatives, like Harlequin romances, USA Today, and broadcast TV. Even bad written fiction is better than most TV, and it lets us exercise our imaginations instead of rotting our minds.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[Mukaikubo]

Blast you and your ability to make the points I'm trying to get to with your infernal tact.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[jandrese]

Funny you should mention David Weber because I'm reading Field of Dishonor now. Unfortunatly, although I rather liked the second book in the Honor series (I read it first off of the Baen free library), I think i'm going to stop after this one. I swear my hands start to feel sticky whenever Weber goes off on one of his "Honor is the bestest person in the world ever!!!" tangents. His admiration for his own main character borders on pornographic at times, and the villans are so one dimentional with absolutely no redeeming qualities or plausible motivations whatsoever. And he's spending page after page on Honor doing her desk job and other mundane tasks.

...and this book is taking far too long to get to the space battle. If he doesn't hurry up, I might actually make good on my promise not to buy the next book. The space battle in the last book was the only thing that made be buy this one.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[Flamerule]

Funny you should mention David Weber because I'm reading Field of Dishonor now. Unfortunatly, although I rather liked the second book in the Honor series (I read it first off of the Baen free library), I think i'm going to stop after this one. I swear my hands start to feel sticky whenever Weber goes off on one of his "Honor is the bestest person in the world ever!!!" tangents. His admiration for his own main character borders on pornographic at times [...]

Yeah, a lot of people have this issue. I personally don't have a problem with the Honor-worship, but if you do, you might as well bail out now, because it only gets more and more worshipful.

[...] and the villans are so one dimentional with absolutely no redeeming qualities or plausible motivations whatsoever.

This is a problem. Later on, he goes into the Havenites in more depth, and I think (some of the characters, at least) are quite deep.

...and this book is taking far too long to get to the space battle.

Uh oh... ah, let's see, how to put this? I'm afraid you've got some disappointment ahead in that area....

If he doesn't hurry up, I might actually make good on my promise not to buy the next book. The space battle in the last book was the only thing that made be buy this one.

There are many more kick-ass battles ahead... but you'll have to buy some more books.

Sorry about the vagueness, just trying not to spoil shit.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[pspinler]

The thing I find annoying about Weber's work is the constant litany of 'Rah rah Kings are good, Rah rah heroic military, booo hiss all of you bad, evil, liberal government folks."

The guy has apparently never heard of a system of checks and balances.

The space opera battle scenes are fairly enjoyable, and I own most of the Honor Harrington series for them. Just ignore the technobabble. :-) (Excuse me - fission reactors require less fuel mass per watt than a mature fusion technology? Say what?)

Unfortunately, his last couple of books in the series have been 3/4 politics and very little space opera.

-- Pat

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[IthnkImParanoid]

I agree with your points too (I've read a lot of SF).

A lot of SF is crap (but it's still fun to read (and there's nothing wrong with that.))

You give some great examples like CJ Cherryh (who I read one time when I lost power for a couple days (although I didn't think it was the best thing ever (although one can only think of one thing as the best thing ever right? (unless one changes his (or her) mind after thinking something is the best thing ever)), still good though).

Either you're a Lisp programmer, or a character in a really long David Lynch movie.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[esj at harvee]

on the never having heard of checks and balances, if you study your history, you will find that the honor Harrington series is derivative of the one of the many times when England and France were at war with each other. That military tactics then as in the book were based on "ships of the wall" and that you could travel faster than you could communicate.

Weber did a good job at translating the politics of the era to fictional future. Hence the pro royalty stance.

also see Horatio Hornblower for a similar genre

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[llefler]

I've spent many an otherwise-wasted hour reading good and bad SF, and I cannot honestly say I regret ANY of it, even *shudder* half of Battlefield Earth (as a research project in "Gods below, surely the book wasn't THAT bad, the filmmaker musta taken liberties... Gaah, he didn't, it was, it was!").

Seeing the Battlefield Earth movie before reading the book tainted you. BE was the first Hubbard book that I read, and I thought it was pretty good. I was one that anxiously awaited the movie, then cringed at the result. Of course, I read far too many of the Mission Earth series, and haven't touched a Hubbard book since.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy has apparently never heard of a system of checks and balances.

Oh fuck off you small-minded USian cuntwit... can't you imagine, for just one second, that democracy isn't the bestest system EVAR!!!!! Books are supposed to pick you up and take you into a world you've never seen, and a view point that you haven't considered. All you seem to be able to do is bitch about it ignoring a soundbite from your own system of government.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[WNight]

The bad guys get better towards the end of the (currently written) series.

They are quite pathetic early on, but they seem fairly realistic. Just pay attention of modern politics for examples of creeps who'd vote to kill their own mothers simply to spite the other party. The only unrealistic thing is that Honor's side seems honestly motivated by good, which is quite unlike modern politics where both sides are almost exactly the same.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[Anonymous Coward]

Field of Dishonor is probably one of his weaker books. However it is important in the series since Honor's relationship with Paul Tankersley, and the fallout guide her career and emotional state significantly for the next few books.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[Inspector Lopez]

You know, I'd be the first to enjoy a bit of Harlequin Romance bashing ... and my wife (who is smarter than I am) shyly enjoys HRs...and (amazingly) puts up with me sneering at them.

Because I read Real Man's Literature! Gaddis, Pynchon, DeLillo, Coover... Yes, avert your eyes in my presence!

But one day, my wife approached me gingerly with some HR, and said, "honey, I know you hate the idea of these things, but, um, humor me and take a look at this..."

And I did. And it was absolutely charming. So I don't beat up on Harlequin Romances anymore.

Re:Sorta agree with both points of view

[CaptainAvatar]

That military tactics then as in the book were based on "ships of the wall"

Do you perhaps mean "That naval tactics then as in the book were based on 'ships of the line'"?

and that you could travel faster than you could communicate.

To be even more needlessly pedantic, unless you are very much out of breath by the time you arrived, surely you can always communicate at at least the same speed at which you travel.

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's a cultural thing.

In most cultures (yes, even in Europe) 16 years is well above the age of consent.

Sturgeon's Revelation

[Tim Ward]

Grew up and realised that:

most science fiction sucked

Yes, of course.

May I refer you to Sturgeon's Revelation.

Toast, collection of short stories

[martyn s]

I was checking out his books on amazon and I came across, his collection of short stories called "Toast: And Other Rusted Features". Aside from a glowing review from Cory Doctorow, the author, Charles Stross also gave a review. But he gave it 4 stars! Heh, I guess he didn't like it *THAT* much. ....er, unless of course that's not really him. I can't decide..

SF for adults, please.

[rumblin'rabbit]

Yeah, you're right. Most science fiction sucks. I have about 1000 SF books in my basement from my youth, and I find that few of them are readable now.

My main problem is not the stories themselves, but the quality of the writing. That many of them are written for 14 year olds doesn't help (although this in itself doesn't make it poor writing).

We need SF book for adults, for people who have actually become somewhat literate in their dotage. I know they're out there, because I own a few.

Re:SF for adults, please.

[b00le]

Tell the publishers, the agents, or any of the other bean counters who control what gets printed. There is a wall of conservatism and cowardice surrounding the business that almost guarantees that anything that looks a bit difficult never sees the light of day. I'm not sure there's more crap in SF than any other genre but it does sometimes seem that way.
I'd like to break a lance for an old-timer who now seems completely forgotten; John Sladek - does anyone remember him? The Muller-Fokker Effect, The Steam-Driven Boy, Roderick at Random - SF, satire, and literature, dammit. Mind you, Sladek's great inspiration was mainstream genius William Gaddis, and nobody read him either. Still, at least they got into print.

Re:SF for adults, please.

[llefler]

Yeah, you're right. Most science fiction sucks. I have about 1000 SF books in my basement from my youth, and I find that few of them are readable now.

Tastes change. Rather than re-reading you should probably be looking at new authors. When I was much younger I read a lot of Jack London and Mark Twain. I enjoyed them when I read them, but couldn't tolerate either now. I recently tried to re-read some of the Tom Sawyer novels, and saw them in a completely different light. Connecticut Yankee seriously annoyed me. Surely that doesn't make them suck. I'm just no longer in the intended audience. For a SF example; Anne McCaffery and the Pern series.

Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[dmaxwell]

Piers Anthony will never see another dime from me. He wrote in one his newsletters last year that he can't see "why some people get so outraged about protections on digital works". He often claims to hate tyranny and love personal liberty but is completely unable to see the connection those things have to DRM.

I had an email back and forth with him and he brushed off as completely unimportant:

Forced format changes
Locking independents out of the market
Forced choice of platforms
Retroactive changes of licensing terms
Rewriting history
Every other thing about DRM that is problematic.

Oh and he completely doesn't get that what one clever human can do another clever human can undo which ultimately makes the so-called benefits of DRM moot.

He seems to think that DRM is his only hope of getting paid in the future. I got the distinct impression that to him Disney and the *IAA are completely reasonable aggrieved souls. For all of his professed love of liberty and justice, he comes off like Jack Valenti when it comes to his wallet. His works emphasize his dislike of censorship. He hasn't seen anything yet and he has no idea that he is now an advocate of censorship. If he likes DRM then he'll have to like everything that comes with it.

This is fine. I won't misappropriate his stuff online but I won't fund him anymore.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[farrellj]

Piers just doesn't understand the problem...and we have yahoos like Harlan Ellison blathering like he usually does...and unfortunately, he now has an audience outside of Fandom who actually thinks that HE knows what he is doing...yes, HE is a great writer, and speaker, but he is clueless about technoloyg...the fact that he still uses a typewriters says it all!

ttyl
Farrell ...former Harlan Ellison fan

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[FryGuy1013]

He does not still use a typewriter. According to the author's notes at the end of each Xanth book, he converted to using a PC 6-7 years ago.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[Flamerule]

He does not still use a typewriter. According to the author's notes at the end of each Xanth book, he converted to using a PC 6-7 years ago.

I believe the grandparent was referring to Harlan Ellison, not Anthony.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[cardshark2001]

Piers Anthony will never see another dime from me. He wrote in one his newsletters last year that he can't see "why some people get so outraged about protections on digital works". He often claims to hate tyranny and love personal liberty but is completely unable to see the connection those things have to DRM.

What's that got to do with whether you enjoy his fiction? It's like the Seinfeld where Elaine refuses to eat at Poppy's pizza place because he's against abortion.

Hell, I like some of L Ron Hubbard's stuff, and we all know what a psycho he was (he invented scientology, in case you didn't know).

The fact that he was even willing to discuss stuff with you is pretty impressive, even if you disagree. You may have no idea what other authors feel about your pet political issues, because they never interact with the public. Piers should be punished because he does interact with his fans?

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[dmaxwell]

It is because I find his position in context to be utterly offensive. Yes, he answers his own email. Yes he'll even discuss his own views. I'm not "punishing" him because he interacts with his fans. I'm "punishing" him for rank hypocrasy.

His favoring of DRM is completely counter to everything he claims to stand for. I also try to avoid funding DRM advocates on general principle. I'll grant that is difficult these days but I will boycott the more obvious ways of giving Disney money for instance.

I'll even still read his stuff but only if I can pick it legitimately without funding him. I'm thinking of things like libraries and used bookshops.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[cardshark2001]

I'm "punishing" him for rank hypocrasy.

It's your right of course, and I agree with you on Disney, for more than just their DRM stance. The ironic thing with Piers is just that you would never know what his position was unless he had taken the time out of his day to answer your missives. Your sort of attitude is probably one reason many authors don't go to the trouble. They're bound to offend some people with whatever views they hold.

As far as DRM goes, I think you're putting the cart in front of the horse. It's more important (to me) that the copyright terms be reasonable in the first place than whether they use some silly copy protection scheme or proprietary formatting scheme.

If there was a reasonable law that said all copyrighted material had to be published into the public domain after a reasonable time, say fifteen years, who cares about DRM? Good luck getting that out of the Disney Congress though.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[dmaxwell]

I would have had the same opinion even if he hadn't corresponded with me. He said in his newsletter that he agreed with Harlan Ellison about DRM. He has also said himself and in his fiction that he claims to oppose injustice and tyranny. With no correspondence with me whatsover, I would have formed the opinion. At best, his correspondence with me gave added weight and justification to my opinion of him but I would have had it nonetheless.

As for the cart in front of the horse, DRM isn't just about putting silly little locks on the latest Britney album. It has far reaching implications on our rights to use and develop technology. It will also enable new forms of censorship, consolidation of markets and control. For instance, all digital non-DVD releases from Disney will use Windows DRM. No skin off my ass for now but this sort of thing will continue. Its obvious that MS would love their OS to be a chokepoint for consuming any form of home entertainment. They won't suceed utterly at it. Nonetheless, just about every form of home entertainment going forward will have obnoxious strings attached. No thanks.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[dandelion_wine]

Harlan is the ultimate proof that you can be talented and a prick and be grudgingly liked, but the talent better be in proportion because we'll only put up with so much.

Asshole.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[Genda]

This is the problem with advances in technology that transcend the common man's ability to adapt. There are a few, a precious few who are ready and willing to advance themselves to the point of transhumanity. The rest of the race is not only unwilling, the entire conversation scares the holy bejesus out of them, and the last thing they want is a few folks receiving virtual godhood in their presense... ergo, ignorance, bgotry, and stupid fear (by the way one must also acknowlege not all that fear is stupid.)

Talking about freedom and liberty seems high minded and right headed until, you live in a society that can read minds, share experienc at the speed of light, and manipulate matter... in that world what does freedom even look like? Liberty? Should I have the right to obliterate entire worlds simply because I have the power to? What qualifies as a threat, and how do we respond to it? Looking at our own government (the current executive in specific), have we got the wisdom, and emotional maturity to wield that kind of power.

These are arguements and discussions that deserve serious appreciation, and the tech keeps exploding forward so the time to make these choices is now...

...And I can get dmaxwell's moral indignatin at the apparent hypocracy of a man that proports to love liberty and then stomps on it in the face of personal gain... that would be somebody who's self interest transcend huma interest... unfortunately that is a significant part of the human condition and it's programmed into us at the genetic level. It is in fact, one of the larger problems that we must transcend if we expect to survive our own technological adolescence.

Genda

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[jridley]

He seems to think that DRM is his only hope of getting paid in the future.

I guess myself and a bunch of other SF fans aren't really paying Baen Books for unprotected SF stories, and wishing that all the other publishers would release their stuff in unprotected formats, so we could give THEM money too.

I used to buy SF from Peanut Press, but I stopped because I didn't like the DRM. I now only buy books that I can get in an unprotected format.

For books that the publisher doesn't release in unprotected electronic format, I wait until I can find a pirated copy on usenet, download it to read, and go buy a copy of the book to satisfy legality. I don't really want the paper around and abhor the waste of trees, but that's the only way they give me to give them money. They'd get more of my money for less of their work if they'd release a free-format electronic version.

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[torokun]

unfortunately, for every person willing to pay for that free-format version, there are probably far more who would douwload it via p2p or share it...

It's very easy to be pro-free-everything until you have to make money from the thing. it's simple economics that most people will not pay for something that's free. i would be willing to bet that the vast majority of people on slashdot that advocate no DRM make their money (1) from their parents, (2) from contracting for one-off software, (3) from IT services, or (4) from software using some form of DRM, be it online activation, dongles, or other methods...

with books, the e-versions don't do all the same things for you that the paper versions do yet. what if you could download a paper version online and recreate it with a nano-assembler a la diamond age though? how many would buy a book if they could have the _exact_ same thing instantaneously for free...?

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd just like to say at this juncture that I fail to see why some people get so outraged about protections on digital works.

- Piers Anthony

Re:Piers Anthony advocates DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

"HE is a great writer, and speaker"

No, the guy is mostly known for having written a passable episode of star trek.

His books, unfortunately, are crap. Utterly.

Re:this sounds familiar! NOT FLAMEBAIT

[U.I.D 754625]

I'll probably be posting at 0/-1 from now on for that little comment as it bouces from funny back to troll. Can't please everyone I guess. Thanks for trying to point out the injustice. ;)

Re:Other books with same theme..

[Anonymous Coward]

How could you favor MOPI?
It was so deliberately unpleasant that it left nothing but a bad taste in my mouth.

The ended solved none of the issues of meaninglessness raised, rather making it seem like man was locked in some endless cycle of progress and regress.

The PI was such a boring and flavorless idiot god. I fail to see how it understands the deepest secrets of the universe yet is easily duped.

The whole thing has a decidedly anti-technological attitude which I despise.

Review?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's the review? All we got was a rant about how scifi sucks, and NOTHING other than the grey box text about the book.

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[Culture]

Read "Firefly" and tell me he isn't. Or at least a wanna-be. Unless the age of consent is 10.

As Theodore Sturgeon said...

[The Fun Guy]

"Ninety percent of science fiction is crap. Of course, ninety percent of *everything* is crap."

What sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to read tons of science fiction, nothing but for long stretches. Then I grew up and realized that most science fiction sucked.

And so does your grammar. I had to read that four times before I translated this sentence to, "I used to read tons of science fiction, and nothing but, for long stretches." You might want to work on that if you intend to write book reviews.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Try Brainwave, by Poul Anderson

[Anonymous Coward]

The reviewed story reminds me of this book. The plot line from Amazon.com:

For millions of years, the part of the galaxy containing our solar system has been moving through a vast force field whose effect has been to inhibit "certain electromagnetic and electrochemical processes" and thus certain neurotic functions. When Earth escapes the inhibiting field, synapse speed immediately increases, causing a rise in intelligence, which results in a transfigured humanity reaching for the stars, leaving behind our earth to the less intelligent humans and animal lifeforms. A transcendent look at the possible effects of enhanced intelligence on our planet.

I thought it "good enough" (read it as teenager), and *does* deal with catastropic change. Or would you prefer Childhood's End?

Re:Sturgeons Law

[pauls2272]

>but the comment that most SciFi sucks, IMHO is >going overboard. OK, perhaps 30% is lousy Don't forget. 90% of EVERYTHING is crap.

Unfortunately "Sucks" is a relative term

[MerlynEmrys67]

I don't know why you bothered listing Quicksilver as Science Fiction (was it just because N. Stevenson wrote it ?) because it is definately historical fiction.

As for Science Fiction "sucking" I guess it tends to depend on what you are looking for. I read several kinds of books - Short, cheap, light, "sucky", science fiction when I have to get on a plane - more complicated, deeper, longer science fiction at home.

So I guess I will be the first to admit given the right circumstances I LOVE sci-fi that you claim "sucks". Frankly - I'd just assume loose myself in a quick starwars/star trek novel for the 2-3 hours on a plane than work - so it is great for me

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

(Theodore) Sturgeon's Law

[Wun Hung Lo]

"90% of everything is crap."

Early Works by Anthony

[supersmike]

Check out the Omnivor/Orn/Ox series he wrote back in the day. That was good writing. The first Xanth was fun too. But yes, most of his recent work is just so much verbal masturbation

Re:Early Works by Anthony

[farrellj]

I agree...but do remember one thing, he can only publish in book form what the publishers want...and all they want these days is Bubblegum Xanth. The last really intersting series he wrote was the Bio of a Space Tyrant...which is *so* applicable to today's circumstances with our "Friend" Bush & co in the White House.

ttyl
Farrell

Re:Early Works by Anthony

[1u3hr]

I agree...but do remember one thing, he can only publish in book form what the publishers want...and all they want these days is Bubblegum Xanth.

No -- his publisher will give him a big advance for another Xanth novel. But if he wants to write anything else, he could certainly find a publisher, just not one who would pay so well, because they'd rightly see it as a risk. But if that should sell more he'd make itup in royalties.

Personally I enjoyed some of his earlier works, a humorous series about a dentist kidnapped by aliens Prostho Plus for instance, before he gave up doing anything but puns.

Re:Early Works by Anthony

[Thing 1]

For a squirming good time, read "On the Uses of Torture", a short story which appears in Anthonology.

It's not very long, and your testicles will be crawling up into your body for weeks afterwards. Great stuff. ;-)

Re:Early Works by Anthony

[1u3hr]

For a squirming good time, read "On the Uses of Torture"

I haven't read that, and don't really feel a need to, but I do remember "In the Barn" in one of the Dangerous Visions anthologies, I think, which is about a world where people are raised as meat; sort of a PETA propaganda piece. Also not very nice.

Re:Early Works by Anthony

[Thing 1]

Yeah, that had a very odd sex scene in it (she was extremely the opposite of tight, and didn't care what he was doing). Not just people; only females (at least, at the barn he was at -- it's been a while since I read it).

"In the Barn" was also in "Anthonology" (but I don't doubt it was included in more than one anthology).

He's made his bread and butter from Xanth (and I lived in Florida for a while myself, and can see where he's coming from with a lot of it), but he has also written a lot of other, "different" stories like the two we're discussing. I really liked reading the Bio of a Space Tyrant series as a teenager, and the other 5-book series in which consciousness can be teleported into different hosts, I really liked the different points of views that aliens had. I remember the one where the host was like a frisbee donut, and its predator had a long tooth which it caught them on. The frisbees could commit suicide very easily, so when confronted with danger they generally just up and died. The human taught the frisbees to stack together, and then the long-toothed predator couldn't get them into its mouth. Sounds a little silly as I describe it but he did a great job getting into the aliens' heads.

I haven't read anything by Mr. Anthony in ... jeesh, almost two decades. Man I'm old. ;-) Currently reading lots of Niven (got moderated Troll for saying the Eskimo migration reminded me of Fallen Angels yesterday), Philip K. Dick, Dan Simmons (Hyperion series), and Cory Doctorow (great new author with a very cool business plan).

Author website

[charlie]

Hi there.

If you want to read more of my stuff, there are some (older) stories on my fiction pages.

If you want to know when the sequel, "Iron Sunrise", is due out (and the other books I've got coming), see my books FAQ.

And there is of course the obligatory weblog, but because it's CGI-mediated and my server's decidedly on the elderly side I'm not going to post the URL here. (If you want it badly enough and you're clueful you'll find it :)

Re:Author website

[The Bungi]

Look at your UIN! OK, so, given that you've obviously been reading /. for the past decade (or it just seems that way), we want teh skooop as the /. editors would say... do you use any personality traits exhibited by people who hang around here as basis for your characters? C'mon, you can tell us!

Re:Author website

[charlie]

I'm told I'm cited as the primary source for the verb "to slashdot" in the Oxford English Dictionary corpus. (They're after printed sources, not online ones, so this is rather unfair -- I didn't invent the verb-backformation, after all.)

I don't use /. reader personality traits in my fiction. But I do read /. daily -- as I have done for some years -- and use it as a fertile source of pointers to new ideas. (If I use any net personality types in my fiction it's from usenet -- which I've been reading since about 1989. All of human life is there, kinda-sorta, including both saints and the sorts who live under rocks.)

Added bonus factoid: Singularity Sky was written on Linux and MacOS/X boxen, using Vim. Formatting was done using POD macros, and the source was kept under RCS control (CVS is massive overkill for novels). The output files (in RTF and PDF) were finally generated using some command line tools and a makefile I knocked together ...

... Then I had to find a box running Microsoft Word in order to import the files and save them in the file format the publisher wanted. (And people wonder why I wash my hands compulsively?)

sucks does not suck

[Anonymous Coward]

The book reviewer worded his introduction in some weierd double-negative scheme and so it sucks (not because I like it, but because I don't).
Ya, I know ... Sci-Fi sucks (and so does the book) because he wastes too much time reading it ... because he really likes Sci-Fi and this particular book a lot.
But I don't think it came across as bright as was originally thought. Just give us the damn book review already - -we don't care that your personal meaning of suck is opposite to what it usually means. We have enough reading to do on Slashdot without having the slug through this kind of editorial crap ....
Man that felt good.

Wear Sunscreen, by Ellison

[Anonymous Coward]

"....when he writes with his own voice. Harlen Ellison is another of these."

Don't you just love Ellison's "Wear Sunscreen" speech?

Re:Wear Sunscreen, by Ellison

[kfg]

Are you by any chance thinking of the supposed commencment address by Kurt Vonnegut?

If so that was actually written by Mary
Schmich of the Chicago Tribune.

KFG

Re:this sounds familiar! NOT FLAMEBAIT

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was Microsoft that stole IP, also TCP

Silly humans...

[Anonymous Coward]

Want good SF, read Heinlein!!!

Is post-Singularity the next big thing in SF?

[nessus42]

He fills this somewhat slim book with more ideas than any 10 other books from the section his work inhabits at the bookstore.

Clearly you are referring to a bookstore that does not carry the works of Greg Egan, whose books are often dizzying in the density of ideas they contain.

But that's not what I wanted to talk about. Instead, your post reminded me that at the recent Arisia con, I was in a discussion group that was trying to decide what the next big thing in Science Fiction would be, now that all the previous big things seem to have died out or ossified. I suggested post-Singularity works.

Of course, on the other hand, writing about the unimaginable can, I imagine, be quite difficult at times, and also, since the nature of humanity may change radically, readers of today may not be able to identify very well with what we are likely to become.

|>oug

Piers Anthony writes crap now

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of Piers Anthony's early books were pretty good. Then he started pumping them out like an assembly line and the quality/content was crap. There's no way I'd waste my time with one of his books now.

The "Golden Age" of Sci-Fi. . .

[eutychus_awakes]

is 14. Okay, maybe pre-teen.

oooohhh Tech-nol-o-gy

[jdkane]

The Festival comes to a backward planet and instigates 1000 years of technological change in a month.

Kind of like that scene out of Battlefield Earth where the cavemen learned to fly jets in 7 days. (and the electricity to the flight simulators happened to be working in a destroyed city overgrown with the jungle). Awesome stuff that is.

Hey, just wait until that backward farming community has to learn to maintain the technology they've been given by The Festival.

Along parallel lines I envision: A linux expert sets up a MS-based business with everything Linux, ready for the users. And then after he is long gone, something needs to be changed .... good luck!

I didn't read the book ... I'm just relying on the words of the book reviewer to get a mental picture -- since those words seem somewhat negative it made for a good sarcastic vision on my part.

Re:Piers Annthony Science Fiction

[Rob Simpson]

Can't he be both? (Or all three?)

Seriously, steering clear of Firefly and Xanth, he has written some pretty good SF (as well as some crap), which several posters have mentioned above. I liked the Omnivore/Orn/OX series, and after hearing it mentioned several times, I might check out Macroscope.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

John W. Campbell

[ChrisMaple]

He wrote in a preface to "A Requiem for Astounding"

"'We don't have winters like we used to; why I remember snowdrifts clear up to my shoulders!' (And what Alva is not remembering is that, at that time, his shoulders were three feet from the ground, not five!"

You've changed. Science fiction has changed, mostly for the better, just as most popular fiction has improved.

Science fiction is for the "young, enthusiastic and open-minded." It's not a waste of time for those for whom it is appropriate, particularly if it encourages that enthusiasm.

Remember's STURGEON'S LAW

[farrellj]

'90% of Science Fiction, is Sh*t!'

The humble reviewer has only realized this...and doesn't understand the other ramification... the other 10% is worth reading...and some of it is pure gold!

ttyl
Farrell ....Science Fiction fan since 5 years of age!

Re:Remember's STURGEON'S LAW

[Anonymous Coward]

the other 10% is worth reading...

Sorry to say, but if 90% of anything is crap, then it stands to say that once you've thrown out the crappy 90%, and then assess the remaining 10%, you will find that 90% of that is crap too.

When you read only Sci-fi that sucks

[Mr. Piddle]

you just might think Sci-fi sucks. However, if you read the authors who are sci-fi, such as Asimov, A.C. Clark, and Orson Scott Card, you find that the sucky authors are just along for the sci-fi ride (i.e., they'd suck no matter the genre).

The reviewer sucks

[ed1park]

Reviewers like Matt Grommes are the reason I know most reviews suck, because he does it so well. (writing sucky reviews.)

His review reads like a high school dork literary snob wannabe looking for something profound in his utterly lacking life. i pity u. perhaps you'll grow out of it one day.

Setting doesn't dictate SCI-FI

[fernd1]

Just because Neal Stephenson's Quicksilver is set in the 17th and 18th centuries doesn't mean that it is not science fiction. To get to this we have to ask ourselves what exactly science fiction is. The truth is there are many Fantasy novels that are masquerading as science fiction. But these have elements that are not explained by scientific reasoning. True science fiction uses principles of Science to explain why certain things are happening in the novel. Science Fiction also deals with how science and technology affects the Human Race. In both the Cryptonomicon and Quicksilver everything is explained by scientific principles and the technology that is described affects the fate of the human race. Yes they may be historical, but NOT ALL SCI-FI HAS TO BE ABOUT THE FUTURE. In fact that doesn't even factor into the most practical definition of SCI-FI, which is "Fiction about Science". BOTH Cryptonimicon and Quicksilver are undisputedly Fiction about Science.

Science Fiction

[man_ls]

Science Fiction doesn't have to mean fictional technology. It can mean realistic technology, used in a very fictional way.

i.e.: "Brave New World" is arguably Science Fiction. Except, all the technology in it, we have now, and then some (For the most part.)

Equilibrium, has mostly standard technology, save Prozium, but it is still a science fiction movie.

Just because it's not set in the future, or not set in the future with wicked-cool space ships and gunfights, doesn't make it not science fiction.

Please . . . less rant, more review!

[StefanJ]

This review had barely a thing to say about the book.

Other than avoiding the Sci-Fi Comfort Food syndrome, how was it? Was it well based? Were the characters interesting and believable? Was the technology well worked out, or just wish-fulfillment stuff?

While I agree with much of the reviewers ranting, I was really disappointed in this piece as a review.

Stefan "More about the Singularity here!" Jones

Reviewer disclosure?

[bolix]

Can we trust no one in the light of Amazon barfing up reviewers glowing praise for their own work?
Scottish translation (in case Timothy is the author and reviewer):
"Kin we truss naebody aftherr th'Amazon beastie shat 'isself? Fook tha' cunt MacLeod onnyway."

Oh, yes he does!

[RatBastard]

I can't stand that man's work. Pretentious, mysoginistic and self absorbed drek! The only work of his I actually enjoyed was "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress". While he was good at thinking up intersting technoilogies, his actuall stories were painful to read.

Re:Oh, yes he does!

[Anonymous Coward]

First, it's "misogynistic". Don't use words that you can't spell, if makes you look foolish at best.

You missed a hyphen in "self-absorbed". It is "interesting", not "intersting". Also "technologies", not "technoilogies" and "actual", not "actuall".

You could improve the last sentence by removing the word actual, as it isn't really needed.

No regrets.

[ChaosDiscord]

I look back on the time spent reading anything by Piers Anthony and know I'm going to be wishing I had those hours back when I'm older.

Why in the hell would you regret that time? Presumably you were enjoying yourself, otherwise why did you keep reading them? Anthony isn't a particularly deep writer, but I have fond memories of reading his light, entertaining books. You made a perfectly reasonable decision at thet time, regretting it is just dumb.

Re:..the time spent reading anything by Piers Anth

[Anonymous Coward]

I -like- James Joyce. The Wake is paper-based hypertext, but I'll never try reading it again, even though I keep a copy around to impress myself. While I was in one of my college Lit courses, a professor whom I liked said "Finnegans Wake" would take 19 years to read, but that at the end of that time, "you would know everything. What could be better than that?" At the time, I bit my tongue, but the answer should have been "living those nineteen years and experiencing the world." In point of fact, I haven't done either. I work in a corporation and keep a copy of 'Finnegans Wake' and at my back I always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near.

What the fuck happened in the end?

[Anonymous Coward]

I did *not* get that ending. Did the analyst escape and the entire earth consumed by alien nanotechnology, or was the analyst living in some nanotech created simulation he entered previously?

Re:What the fuck happened in the end?

[HeghmoH]

My interpretation is to take everything literally. So, Roger and a good chunk of the upper crust of the US government escape to a secret facility on another planet. Everyone left behind is nuked (if they're lucky) or eaten by Cthulhu, where they live forever as he explores all the possible endings to their lives. Delightful.

Singularity fiction should be anonymous!

[Thinkit4]

Who "discovered" an idea won't be as important post-singularity, so it would be appropriate to have a novel about the singularity be from "Anonymous" (Primary Colors still made money this way).

Try reading

[Creepy Crawler]

"Permutation City" by Greg Egan.

The year is around 2054 and rudimentary AI's are here. People have been digitized, but only run at the maximum allowed then at 1/17 time ratio.

The book deals with spam filters (baneysian and adaptive ai - if the spam filter acts as you, is it really avoiding what you want?), AI, duplication of the mind, evolution, government.. There's some pretty heavy theory in this book.

What I can tell is it's mainly sold in Australia and UK as mine's pried only as such. I got my copy at a 1/2 priced book store here in Indiana.

Re:Try reading

[CaptainAvatar]

A thousand times yes - Egan is the most brilliant ideas man in current sf, IMHO. But it worries me that after churning out a great novel every year or two for most of the last decade, according to his website he doesn't have anything at all coming out. Unless he has stopped listing them in advance for some reason, but he always used to have a page about the book he was currently working on. I hope he hasn't stopped writing ...

SF

[IntergalacticWalrus]

Yeah, the more recent Street Fighter games suck. Good ol' Street Fighter II will always be the best for me.

My review from IBList.org

[Knowbuddy]

I reviewed this book on IBList.org last year. I figure I'll repost it here just to add another voice to the chorus.

-----

Economics, espionage, nanotechnology, black holes, social enginerring, and carnival phenomena. This book winds all these disparate subjects together into one (mostly) cohesive plot. This tends to lead to parts of the book reading more like college textbook excerpts than light sci-fi reading, but that may very well increase the appeal for the hard-core geek readers. The pacing occasionally suffers from the massive amounts of technobabbling exposition, but you still slog through it like a rubbernecker watching a car crash -- you just can't wait to see what it all means.

The character development is better than average, though there could have been more character-building scenes without significantly slowing the pace. Indeed, the technologies and concepts often get more ink than the characters do. (Because, really, there's only so often you can be hit over the head with the "socialism/marxism/communism/*-ism is bad!" bat before you're ready to start skimming instead of really reading.)

Overall, this was a good book. It could even make a good series, should Stross continue to write for it. College students pumped up on technobabble and economic/social theory will breeze through it, but the rest of us will still enjoy it.

Goal of science fiction

[takshaka]

One of the main goals of science fiction as I see it is to prepare us for the future.

Funny, I thought it was to prepare us for the present.

Okay, this was a cool book, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

...didn't anyone notice the ways in which it sucked? The plotting and pacing were inconsistent, the dialogue and characterization left a lot to be desired. Which is weird, given that he has shown in his Accelerando series of short stories that he can handle both those things.

90% of everything is crap

[krysith]

All the above discussion about what sci-fi sucks and doesn't suck reminds me of an old quote by Theodore Sturgeon (if you don't know who he is, read more sci-fi).

Someone asked him if it bothered him that 90% of science fiction was crap. He responded "No. 90% of ~everything~ is crap".

Re:90% of everything is crap

[wes33]

now what is that supposed to mean exactly?

90% of wine is crap ... maybe

90% of expensive wine is crap ... less likely

90% of the bottles of 2000 Terres Des Papes are crap ... hardly

I'm looking around my room: is 90% of everything crap? Maybe in your room but not mine!

What is the *precise* statement of Sturgeon's law?

Re:90% of everything is crap

[krysith]

I hardly think that when Sturgeon said what he said, he was trying to create a 'law'. I think he was trying to make the point that yes, there is a lot of crap in sci-fi, but there is a lot of crap in other fields of literature, and in other fields of human endeavour. To follow your example, someone might say "Lots of German Reislings are crap". But then, according to 'Sturgeon's Law', lots of wine from other places of other types might be crap too. That doesn't mean that the good wines are crappy, just that their origin or type doesn't determine their crappiness. The reason this is relevant to our current discussion is that Sturgeon was making a point about sci-fi not being crap just by being sci-fi (which was the perception back then, and in some quarters, still is).

Re:90% of everything is crap

[cqnn]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law

As I once heard it stated, there was an additional part of the quote where the effect was

"No two people can agree what that 90% signifies"

Re:90% of everything is crap

[Anonymous Coward]

you are a fucking piece of crap, crap head

Loss of your inner child

[alexjohns]

"Then I grew up and realized that most science fiction sucked."

You've lost contact with your inner child. You need to find it again. I re-read old Heinlein (Citizen of the Galaxy, Tunnel in the Sky, Starman Jones, Farnham's Freehold, etc.) and E.E. Doc Smith (Lensman and Skylark novels) frequently. The science is usually wrong, the characterizations are often shallow, the dialog frequently corny ("You're a blinding flash and a deafening report."), but if you truly don't like that stuff anymore you need to re-connect with a simpler version of yourself.

It's like if you suddenly stopped liking Legos and Video Games. It's OK to not play with them as much as you used to, but if you truly think of such things as childish and beneath you and uninteresting even for a few fleeting moments you've lost something vital. If you never liked such stuff to begin with, then you're OK. Otherwise, you're repressing something.

Of course, you could just be someone who's gotten to the point where they don't want to admit they like that stuff any more. That's OK. You'll grow out of that stage, too.

Re:Loss of your inner child

[cnf]

Haha, cool, I didn't knew there where other people who put E.E. Doc Smith up there !

I re-read the skylark of space series about once a year (still missing most of the lensman series, sadly), and I still love every line of it.

Especially that 4th dimention thing, still boggles me ^^

this reviewer sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

there is a ton of great scifi

Where exactly is he mentioned in that discussion?

[cgenman]

Before I mod you +1 insightful, where exactly is "Charlie Stross" mentioned in that discussion or article? A scan of the article and a search of the postings comes up with no mention of Stross...

Funny

[Mr2cents]

I looked it up.. The first page I found noted: Oddly, when Sturgeon's Law is cited, the final word is almost invariably changed to `crap'.

Destination Moon

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>An even better bit of Sci-Fi would be a television movie showing the conflicts of developing the first nuclear launch methods

Heinlein's "Destination Moon" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042393/) had this as a plot element. 1950.

ah, good ol lovecraft

[cliffmeece]

continuing to inspire long after death

Re:Where exactly is he mentioned in that discussio

[mithras]

Maybe you missed the fact that the book being reviewed is authored by "Charles Stross"?

Sladek was great

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot Tik-Tok. I think I might need to check out this Gaddis person.

What about..

[The Authority]

Wil McCarthy? He's the author of Bloom, which covers the exodus of humanity to the outer system caused by a mycophage, and the exploration team that's sent back in. He also wrote Collapsium and Wellstone, which are the first two books in a trilogy. They're filled with quite a bit of technology that seems quite plausible, and the people in them, while being 'perfect' physically still have plenty of flaws.

Historical angle

[OmniGeek]

Mantricore is a clear England stand-in, and Haven an analog of France at the time of the Terror. (Rob. S. Pierre ... Robespierre)

That said, I don't really know just how far Weber takes the historical analogy, being summat rusty on that history meself.

Get used to it

[utahjazz]

Pretty much everyone outside the tiny world of geek activism thinks DRM is a great idea. So if your going to start boycotting, get a really big net.

Evidence: The DMCA passed the House and Senate unanimously, and was quickly and proudly signed by Bill Clinton.

It's scary to think just how thoughtless *all* of our representatives are.

Re:Where exactly is he mentioned in that discussio

[LazyBoy]

It's a joke.

He wants to know if the Slashdot review was written by Charlie Stross.

Re:CJ

[Anonymous Coward]

As a rabid CJ Cherryh fan I'm incensed ;)

Care to name the book that you "thought was quite good" ? There are after all a selection of over 40 that you could be referring to, and I'll accept that among them there are a few examples that fall to being only good.

IMNSHO simply the best, and still writing good stuff.

Shoka

science fiction: what to read and what to avoid

[lkcl]

i have seven shelves six feet long stacked with sci-fi books, mostly good and some bad. at one point i stopped buying sci-fi books because there weren't any that were, in my opinion, any good (around 2000) and i had to wait. piers anthony is childish: the books are great for children. my advice is that you not read any of his books after the time when he obtained a computer, i.e. after mars in the eternity series. so is anne mccaffrey but she has a specific purpose in her writing: to co-author books with someone who brings a particular topic and experience to the fore: for example acorna the unicorn book is actually about child slave labour, and the ship who fought is about rape. if you want _really_ good sci-fi books to read, then go for the "masterworks" series, for example "first and last men" by olaf stapledon is incredible: every other sci-fi book a la "space opera" genre just "fills in the gaps" left by first and last men. basically, the masterworks books are what sci-fi writers read. if you want _incredible_ stories, read orson scott card's books - all of them. pay particular attention to the alvin maker series, people from the US. you will find that "book 2" of the trilogy, which is actually the second half of book 1 outside of the US, is not available on the shelves. the reason is because the book covers the murder of 10,000 native red indians. if you want good space opera, i recommend ken macleod (although his politics are a little odd, i.e. he could be branded a commie 20 years ago, until you get to his more recent works where it actually starts to make sense in a universe perspective and things get messy). and also for space opera: greg bear, but greg bear takes getting used to. _really_ getting used to. i do NOT recommend "talking heads" as a first read. also for space opera, alasdair reynolds, peter f hamilton and iain m. banks. alasdair reynolds is very new on the scene, yet his books are extremely well written. peter f hamilton's books are fantastic: i love them, although "a quantum murder" i found disturbing. iain m banks' books are really good, although i would never have read them if i had read "the wasp factory" first. banks' books are very graphic in their violence (but not in a "horror" way) but they are also funny and sad as well as deep and illustrate futility of life. i thoroughly recommend "the player of games" if you want to be shell-shocked even right up to the end of the book. what else. for space opera, don't bother with those stupid nine books by that idiot author who did all those different species, damn i wasted my money on those. there is so much to choose from, you just have to be selective: to make a blanket statememt that time has been wasted is rather disappointing to hear.

Singularity - Rapture For Nerds

[meehawl]

It's an old truism, but one that always bears repeating.

Singularity Is Rapture For Nerds .

The Singularity for skiffy fans works like the Rapture for Xtians - you don't have to work hard worrying away at real ideas of what it means to be human and social during times of change, because all that is going to pass away anyway and you will be absolved of responsibility and cares in a new land of opportunity and adventure...

The interested reader is directed to Theodore Roszak's The Cult of Information: A Neo-Luddite Treatise on High Tech, Artificial Intelligence, and the True Art of Thinking for an idea of how long the info cultists have been preaching their schtick.

Phillip K Dick

[gr0kCalvin]

OK, agreed that most sci-fi sucks, in that a lot of it is in the vein of "replace 'Pirate' with 'Space Pirate'". There are a number of great sci-fi writers, though: Philip K Dick Orson Scott Card Greg Bear Stephen Baxter Cory Doctorow I'll have to check that book out...

A bad book is still better than an average sit-com

[x-caiver]

I am not one of those people that claim they do not watch TV, do not have cable, blah blah blah. I have a TV, I have cable, and I use my TiVo to record shows I like to watch, so that I do not end up sitting in front of the tube watching crap "because nothing else is on."

But, I do realize that a lot of "bad" books are still better than a lot of "average" sit-coms. Even with a bad book you have to use your imagination. You use your mind to develop pictures of the characters in your story, you use your mind to give life to the dialog, and you use your mind to read the words which is always helpful to keep your vocabulary sharp.

As Robert Crais once wrote...

[magusxxx]

"Stick with Twain, boy. He'll never steer you wrong."
- Emile Francis Bendictson (Played by Ralph Bellamy in the Twilight Zone (1986) story "Monsters!"

-----

Can't write an ending

[FlyingOrca]

That's my biggest gripe with Stephenson. Love his writing, love his characters, and he *sets up* a great plot... but his endings have gone downhill, IMHO, since Snow Crash.

Piers Anthony

[xchino]

is a fine sci fi writer, and the only reason I can see for you to put down his work like that without reason is so you can feel elitist in what you choose to read. As an early teen I was enthralled by the world of Xanth, and I was able to immerse myself in his books for hours and hours. I rarely get a chance to read a good sci fi book these days, as I'm too busy reading technical manuals and the like, but I will always fondly remember Piers works. Xanth, Apprentice Adept, and Incarnations were all excellent sci fi/fantasy series that I would all read again.

You take a cheap shot at a good writer, and act as if you're some sort of authority on what good sci fi is.. your review shows you have an inability to actually put anything into perspective.

"There are problems with the book, mostly in the perennial bugbear of science-fiction, character development, but the rush of ideas glossed over that for me."

So cramming as many ideas into as small a space makes up for a lack of personality in the characters? Sci Fi is not about who can fit the most neat ideas into the least number of pages.

I might have taken your review seriously, and possibly taken some time to check out this guy's work, but your unwarranted cheap shot at Piers Anthony just proved to me your opinion is far from trustworthy. Next time your write a review, try sticking reviewing the book you're supposed to revuew and not throwing in one liner summation reviews of other authors entire works, it just indicateds your ignorance and inability to stay on topic without trying to cram your opinions about the sci fi world down everyone's throat. This book can be a good book without "All others sucking".

btw Piers Anthony is personally kind of an asshole. I still like his work.

most is bad

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of SF is bad, indeed, but when it's good, then it's damn good. And rare, too, unfortunately. So far my favourite authors are only three; Carl Sagan, Eugen Semitjov and Arthur C Clarke.

Re:My biggest complaint about McDevitt (and others

[dandelion_wine]

Where are these people's editors??

Greg Egan does it better

[Anonymous Coward]

If you really want to stretch your mind you should be reading greg egan.

Re:CJ

[IthnkImParanoid]

I read the Faded Sun trilogy, or at least that's what I think it was called. It was about a nomadic race of ninja-like people dying out, and the last survivors traveling to their original planet. It was really good in some parts, but really draaaaaged in others.

Re:Other books with same theme..

[scribblej]

I found this post of yours this morning. I clicked on MOPI, your first link.

It's now several hours later, I've just finished the entire story. I even donated to the author's paypal site. It's not the most perfect sci-fi I've ever read but it's definately a good read.

Open source Piers?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have often wondered about open source literature. The Xanth series seems to approach this. ? I'm not sure. The last chapter of each of these books consists of acknowledgements of the story ideas and puns submitted by Piers' readers.

Is Piers to Xanth as Linus is to Linux?

most science fiction sucks?

[thomasgulch]

In order to accurately and truthfully make that statement, you would have had to have read at least 51% of all the science fiction that has been written since the genres inception. You are either a very avid reader, or someone who leaps to conclusions and assumes their microscopic sampling represents all of reality.

I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream

[meehawl]

On further reflection, I think my favourite "Singularity" story has to be I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream

Limp, the body of Gorrister hung from the pink palette; unsupported--hanging high above us in the computer chamber; and it did not shiver in the chill, oily breeze that blew eternally through the main cavern. The body hung head down, attached to the underside of the palette by the sole of its right foot. It had been drained of blood through a precise incision made from ear to ear under the lantern jaw. There was no blood on the reflective surface of the metal floor.

When Gorrister joined our group and looked up at himself, it was already too late for us to realize that, once again, AM had duped us, had had its fun; it had been a diversion on the part of the machine. Three of us had vomited, turning away from one another in a reflex as ancient as the nausea that had produced it.

Gorrister went white. It was almost as though he had seen a voodoo icon, and was afraid of the future. "Oh God," he mumbled, and walked away. The three of us followed him after a time, and found him sitting with his back to one of the smaller chittering banks, his head in his hands. Ellen knelt down beside him and stroked his hair. He didn't move, but his voice came out of his covered face quite clearly. "Why doesn't it just do us in and get it over with? Christ, I don't know how much longer I can go on like this."

It was our one hundred and ninth year in the computer.

It's easily Googled as an freetext, but I don't think I'll post it or Ellison will hunt me down and eat my eyeballs.

Free clue: the best SF was never really about tech

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, I've just got to say it: saying that someone is good in comparison to Anthony is a really, really bad, that is to say strong, example of damning with faint praise. Nothing better than low-mediocre can usefully be compared to Anthony's high-volume churn of... printed matter.

And, yeah, I too have swotted up a lot of words from that printed matter in years past. Hey, maybe one's intellectual intake needs a certain amount of roughage too...

But I didn't come here to talk about Anthony. I'd really rather not think about his... output... any more. I came to tell you that the best SF has always been about the human condition, just like all other good novels. It just gets to use cooler props and settings, at least if your tastes run that way. So if you think that it has to have wooden characters, let alone cardboard cutouts, in order to be on the SF shelf, then you haven't hit the good stuff yet.

BTW, the suckiness of most SF is not new news. I suppose you missed out on Sturgeon's Law, which has been telling us for probably longer than you've been breathing that 90% of everything - yes, including SF - is crap. As for why there's so much crap, well, here we are, two guys who once upon a time read Anthony's swill...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

This is an example of how to ruin a discussion

[DavidBrown]

It's quite fascinating. I saw the article on /., and decided to read it. But most of the comments that have been highly moderated (forgive me, but I cruise at filter +2) are comments either attacking or defending Piers Anthony instead of discussing Singularity Sky and the talents of Charlie Stross.

Why did this happen?

It happened because the submitter, timothy, decided to attack Piers Anthony in his post as a target of opportunity, and the /. staff decided to let it in (assuming timothy isn't on the /. staff himself - I wouldn't know).

Why was this attack posted? If timothy had submitted a post entitled "Piers Anthony Sucks" it wouldn't have been accepted by /. editors.

At this point it seems that nobody cares about Stross's novel, which is a shame.

For these reasons, I think that the /. staff should consider this story to be an example of a failure of editing, and should consider the idea that it's better to leave the personal attacks /. readers instead of posters and editors.

Re:This is an example of how to ruin a discussion

[Fantastic Lad]

People discuss what interests them. I don't know anything about Charlie Stross, and I'm almost certainly not going to read his work. (My own interest in SciFi books ran its natural course back in my early teen years.)

I don't care about Piers Anthony either, and indeed, I don't care to rate him good or bad, precisely because I don't care.

I DO however, care about the same issue you care about; I find social patterns completely fascinating. Hence my commenting on your comment.

People discuss that which fascinates them. Especially on a site like Slashdot, which is one part nerd-news, one part debating forum and two parts entertaining distraction for bored post-adolescents. (Me included.)

-FL

Re:This is an example of how to ruin a discussion

[benja]

The submitter is Indomitus (the post starts with, Indomitus writes...). timothy is the /. editor that perhaps should not have let it in without editing. :-)

Not really

[Anonymous Coward]

" Pretty much everyone outside the tiny world of geek activism thinks DRM is a great idea."

They do until they buy that new $4000 plasma TV, pay an extra $50 for the HDTV cable box, buy the new $1500 HDTV VCR, and press the record button and... it says "sorry, can't copy, flag set".

Then they'll hate.

Can't wait to see the reaction when that happens. Gonna be good.

Re:Not really

[utahjazz]

Actually what it'll say is:

"You have attempted to circumvent copyright protection, this is illegal and has been prevented".

They will acquire a look on their face, not unlike that of a dog that just urinated on the floor, and pray that no one finds out what they attempted to do, lest they be punished.

Indeed, our only hope is the 2nd amendment. (Sorry to the Australians, you're just plain screwed)

Re:Not really

[squiggleslash]

Indeed, our only hope is the 2nd amendment. (Sorry to the Australians, you're just plain screwed)

I hardly think the computer's going to unlock the file if we put a bullet through its motherboard...

The Dune...

[0x1337]

I recommend the Dune (and the subsequent books).

"The issue is The Singularity"

[Anonymous Coward]

Contrary to what many techno-fetishists would have us believe, the emergence of the "Singularity" is not a foregone conclusion. In my opinion no one has conclusively proved that increases in computing power have moved us any closer to creating an artificial intelligence. Consciousness may be beyond our powers to simulate. I think a more plausible reason for the sorry state of S.F. is that it, like most other parts of our creative culture, has been calcified in recent years. We live in a time where works of art that do not fit into carefully segregated categories are ignored. And anything that challenges our intellect is degraded for being too academic. Imagination is what is lacking.

Book that addresses this issue:
The Middle Mind : Why Americans Don't Think for Themselves, by Curtis White

Sorry I missed you in Toronto

[Anonymous Coward]

Had to pass on Torcon, but was going to treat you and the missus to a cold beverage.

Still think "A Colder War" is one of the scariest stories ever.

Good luck on the fantasy series as per your blog.

Your SF is state of the art.

Everything sucks eventually...

[SnakeStu]

...you just have to pay attention long enough. My fiction is no exception -- the only thing that doesn't suck about it, after paying attention long enough, is that it's not only free as in beer but free as in speech.

Charles Stross' Website

[Wes Janson]

www.antipope.org

Since no one else bothered to state his website, I figured I should. He has a half dozen or a dozen short stories of his on there, as well as some essays and miscellaneous things. Ever since A Colder War I've been a fan of Stross. His most recent published piece is either from this month, or from two months ago, in Asimov/Analog, and it's a post-Singularity human culture viewpoint. Wild, even by his standards, but still interesting.

Yes, but...

[The Gline]

...that doesn't mean it's going to be remotely palatable reading.

The gist of this discussion is not that people should not write about such things, but that most of the time, it's handled in such a way that it is a massive turn-off.

Ender's Game, Xenocide ROCKS!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wanted to get that out of the way...

Piers Anthony is great what the hell are you talking about mister reviewer?!?!?!

Sometimes I wanted to watch an epic (LoTR) and other times I want to watch SG-1... WTF! Point being you sometimes read books based on the mood you are in not because the are factually sound or whatever gacked criteria that you decide.

I say the reviewer can't talk smack unless he writes a book himself.

Try "First Contract" by Greg Costikyan. Good read.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312873964/ inktomi-bkasin-20/ref%3Dnosim/104-2546330-8060754

The review is at this link

Re:Double edged sword - Centruy 2

[Nom du Keyboard]

Century 2: Arrive at destination, Great-great-great grandchildren colonize planet.

Who haven't got a clue on why they're there.

Charles Stross weblog

[LazyGun]

Charles Stross's weblog is here

Piers Anthony

[HiVeloCT]

It sounds like you've only read his Xanth series. His earlier work, such as the Omnivore series, was much more science-based rather than fantasy. You might want to try them. HiVeloCT {{{((((

Re:Double edged sword - Centruy 2

[Noren]

Darn, those silly space travelers should have talked to their kids occasionally. Or, given the high-tech nature of the spacecraft, used some futuristic device to transfer knowledge from one generation to another... like books, or a computer nework message board.

Science fiction: what to read

[solprovider]

Orson Scott Card and Spider Robinson are the only living authors that I will buy as full-price hardcovers. I buy most of my hardcovers at Atlantic Books for $2-$6. Almost the only paperbacks I buy are Robert Asprin, since they are rarely released as hardcovers. I do have a few of the Myth series as hardcovers, but they were difficult to find.

I just got around to reading all of OSC's Alvin Maker series. I will be reading "Crystal City" tonight. I had read the first 2 books before the others were published. I did not realize that "Red Prophet" was hard to find. (I have 2 copies.) It is good story-telling, internally consistent, and I keep researching the real people from history to see how OSC modified them for the series. The series is alternate historical fantasy, but does meet the definition of science fiction. Just do not expect anything to do with space travel.
- The Ender series is required reading for every nerd, particularly "Ender's Game". "Ender's Shadow" and its sequels offer an expansion on the original story, and are better written, but you should read "Ender's Game" first. They do have some space travel.

Greg Bear's "Eon" and "Eternity" are original. He sometimes used 20 pages to cover what could have been one, and switched between characters without purpose, but his originality makes the books worth it. He is one of the hard-core science fiction writers, where the science must make sense, so that adds some of the long explanantions.

Gordon R. Dickson never seems to be mentioned on Slashdot. His Chantry Guild series is incredible, and his storytelling keeps improving. "Dorsai", "Soldier, Ask Not" and other early books contain great short stories. He switched to writing full novels. "Other" is one of the latest books, and one of the best. Many of his other books are insightful, original, and/or just fun. For fun, see "The Right to Arm Bears". Most of his books deal with social conditions on other planets.

I read Larry Niven's "Rainbow Mars" last week. This is a time-travel and weird technology book, not a typical "Mars" book. The title story is placed first, even though it happens after the other stories, so read it last. Most of Niven's other books are classics.

--- Off-topic
Please use Preview to remind yourself to add line breaks. Capitalizing "I" when it is used as a pronoun is common practice. Your post was informative, but very difficult to read.

Sounds like you might like Stephen Baxter

[Anonymous Coward]

Stephen Baxter has written a few books dealing with alternative histories for the US space program, including unearthing the NERVA stuff, etc. From memory, Voyage or Titan are the ones I'm thinking of... better read the blurbs before you buy, though :)

That said, Baxter's written some other great stuff, so you wouldn't do too badly picking up the wrong book.

Re:Sounds like you might like Stephen Baxter

[AKAImBatman]

That said, Baxter's written some other great stuff, so you wouldn't do too badly picking up the wrong book.

ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!

If I never hear about his fantasy space squids again, it will be too soon.

Quicksilver 'backwards'?

[Cougem]

"Even Neal Stephenson, who was at the forefront of real technological future SF with The Diamond Age and Snow Crash has gone backward with Quicksilver and to a lesser extent Cryptonomicon." I presume you mean he's gone backwards on a time style, rather than backwards in the less literal sense of that he's lost his talent. It's a pretty misleading statement; The implication that Quicksilver, a hefty yet thoroughly interesting and educational book about the evolvation of science in the 17th/18th century is backwards SF isn't fair.