Ask Slashdot: How Could You Statistically Identify The Best Sci-Fi Books?

jimharris writes: Over at SF Signal I wrote a piece "How Well-Read Are You in Science Fiction?" There are three databases that collect lists of popular science fiction books that try to statistically identify the best books of the genre, [offering] combined list that shows which books were cited the most. They use different sets of best-of lists, but their results are often similar. The final lists are, Classics of Science Fiction, Worlds Without End Top Listed, and Premiosylista Comparativas: Comparativas: Ciencia ficcion (Spain).
Interestingly, each list has a different book in its #1 position (though both "Dune" and "Frankenstein" make the top four on at least two of the three lists). But is this really a good methodology for determining the classic canon? What would be the best way to statistically identify the greatest sci-fi books? (And have you read any good science fiction novels lately?)

Comments

You can't

[110010001000]

Art/literature/music is subjective. You can't rank them, except personally. Next question.

Re:define your terms first

[Anonymous Coward]

And not in the least decide what the definition of the term science fiction is (it's not as easy as it sounds).

Re:Not Dune

[__aaclcg7560]

Dune has faded badly.

What do expect from a novel written over 50 years ago? Go buy yourself a new paperback from Amazon. I usually replace my copy every ten years or so.

Measure the subjective responses

[Bruce66423]

If a lot of people are wowed by product A and bored silly by product B, it is irrational to argue that the two can't be ranked as to which is the one most worth investing time in to read, given that we have a finite amount of time to spend doing so. Therefore to get people to vote for their 'favourite' seems a rational way forward, despite its subjective foundation.

Otherwise I know a wall with some paint drying that you can watch this evening...