You do realize that your second paragraph is wild speculation based entirely on overly simplified, semi-scientific and mostly completely unsubstantiated guesswork?
I might be able to shed some light - To say that the Minoan (yes you are correct) civilization was destroyed by a volcanic eruption is an oversimplification, that was certainly part of it, but mostly they were destroyed by the Mycenean (the first Indo-European wave into what is now Greece) civilization.
I am not familiar with direct references to something resembling a meteorite hit in Greco-Roman or Middle Eastern mythology, apart from a brief mention that the entire earth (Gaia) was "charred and burned" after either the Titanomachy or the Gigantomachy; but I would say that's really stretching things. Btw, this is very early Greek myth, so the time of it's actual conception would be sometime 2000BC-1500BC, maybe earlier.
Respectuflly, that is a load of... not really scientific speculation.
Meteor or not, mammals are far better adopted to the earths evolving climate than dinosaurs - survival of the fittest. And yes, believe it or not, small furry creatures are "fitter" than large hulking dinosaurs.
... most people here agree that what we are giving the readers of tomorrow is:
1 - Some scifi
2 - Glorified children's books (Rowlings? You gotta be kidding me!)
3 - Fantasy (your basic Medieval Space-Castle genre)
and it goes downhill from there
I certainly hope this won't be the case, because then the "Land of Tomorrow" will be a poor place indeed.
Classics is a bit of a misnomer - it doesn't actually mean that these books are better than everything else, it means they are important, and if you want to consider yourself and educated person you have to at least have read these. Whether you like them or not, you have to know them. In other words, they are important.
Pratchett may be a barrell of monkeys to read (may - I don't actually know), but is it an important body of literature? Hardly.
Think of Classics as your starting off point - once you master those you know what you like and what you don't, and have some to compare new - as yet unjudged by others - literature to.
uh no, I believe that under the Clarke-Asimov Treaty Clarke is not "just as good" as Asimov, but was the "world's second best science fiction writer" (after Asimov of course), while Asimov would be the "second best science writer" after Calrke... but that of course is their own opinion.
I personnaly am not a fan of either, and think there are far better writers in both of those categories. But they will most likely be remembered for some time. They will become dated though, maybe not in 50 years, but they won't enter the realm of "timeless" literature. Who will want to read made-up laws of cybernetics when the real laws are already known?
I left many out (somehow even didn't mention Franz Kafka - talking of influential writers)
but apparently we are on some sort of inappropriate tangent since most of these people are long dead.
True - so far I've just been going on the basis of "who are the good authors of today/last century" not on the influence they've had (which just might be more relevant to their future readership, I hope not though).
In any case, I'd consider "Father of Modern Fantasy" to be a pretty dubious honour - but that's just me, of couse:)
If we are to go by influence and/or widespread readership today, then I'd have to agree with the person who said that Stephen King would be the one to endure. Not because he will be read, but because he will be watched.
Can't believe he wasn't mentioned yet!
As far as authors still living, he is definitely one of the best. Though I am not a big fan of "Immortality" (I am pretty much alone on this, though); "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" is one of the best books I've ever read.
Very true, which is precisely why Stanislaw Lem (who's been mentioned a few times already) will be one of the few SciFi authors to be read 50 years from now.
Putting Marquez on the same level as Tolkien is just silly - Marquez is one of the most brilliant writers of this century, Tolkien's are children's books. Nice children's books - but nonetheless.
Oh, and Solaris will definitely be among Lem's remembered works.
For some reason you seem to think that only English (language at least) authors will be read.
Since we are going 20th cerntury (and not necessarily 'still alive'), what about Herman Hesse, Marcel Proust, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Mikhail Bulgakov or Stanislaw Lem (if you want real science fiction).
Hemingway's stuff is kid's play compared to some of these. The won't be widely read, but they will be read many, many years from now.
what some people seem to miss, is that things like sharing Babylon 5 tapes are also, technically, illegal. So no Replay doesn't differ from it in any way.
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize that your second paragraph is wild speculation based entirely on overly simplified, semi-scientific and mostly completely unsubstantiated guesswork?
I might be able to shed some light - To say that the Minoan (yes you are correct) civilization was destroyed by a volcanic eruption is an oversimplification, that was certainly part of it, but mostly they were destroyed by the Mycenean (the first Indo-European wave into what is now Greece) civilization. I am not familiar with direct references to something resembling a meteorite hit in Greco-Roman or Middle Eastern mythology, apart from a brief mention that the entire earth (Gaia) was "charred and burned" after either the Titanomachy or the Gigantomachy; but I would say that's really stretching things. Btw, this is very early Greek myth, so the time of it's actual conception would be sometime 2000BC-1500BC, maybe earlier.
Respectuflly, that is a load of... not really scientific speculation.
Meteor or not, mammals are far better adopted to the earths evolving climate than dinosaurs - survival of the fittest. And yes, believe it or not, small furry creatures are "fitter" than large hulking dinosaurs.
... most people here agree that what we are giving the readers of tomorrow is:
1 - Some scifi
2 - Glorified children's books (Rowlings? You gotta be kidding me!)
3 - Fantasy (your basic Medieval Space-Castle genre)
and it goes downhill from there
I certainly hope this won't be the case, because then the "Land of Tomorrow" will be a poor place indeed.
Glad somebody brought up Bradbury. He dfinitely makes the top five as far as good scifi writers go.
Classics is a bit of a misnomer - it doesn't actually mean that these books are better than everything else, it means they are important, and if you want to consider yourself and educated person you have to at least have read these. Whether you like them or not, you have to know them. In other words, they are important. Pratchett may be a barrell of monkeys to read (may - I don't actually know), but is it an important body of literature? Hardly. Think of Classics as your starting off point - once you master those you know what you like and what you don't, and have some to compare new - as yet unjudged by others - literature to.
the former is true, while the latter is simply sad
uh no, I believe that under the Clarke-Asimov Treaty Clarke is not "just as good" as Asimov, but was the "world's second best science fiction writer" (after Asimov of course), while Asimov would be the "second best science writer" after Calrke... but that of course is their own opinion. I personnaly am not a fan of either, and think there are far better writers in both of those categories. But they will most likely be remembered for some time. They will become dated though, maybe not in 50 years, but they won't enter the realm of "timeless" literature. Who will want to read made-up laws of cybernetics when the real laws are already known?
I left many out (somehow even didn't mention Franz Kafka - talking of influential writers) but apparently we are on some sort of inappropriate tangent since most of these people are long dead.
True - so far I've just been going on the basis of "who are the good authors of today/last century" not on the influence they've had (which just might be more relevant to their future readership, I hope not though). In any case, I'd consider "Father of Modern Fantasy" to be a pretty dubious honour - but that's just me, of couse :)
If we are to go by influence and/or widespread readership today, then I'd have to agree with the person who said that Stephen King would be the one to endure. Not because he will be read, but because he will be watched.
Can't believe he wasn't mentioned yet! As far as authors still living, he is definitely one of the best. Though I am not a big fan of "Immortality" (I am pretty much alone on this, though); "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" is one of the best books I've ever read.
Very true, which is precisely why Stanislaw Lem (who's been mentioned a few times already) will be one of the few SciFi authors to be read 50 years from now.
Putting Marquez on the same level as Tolkien is just silly - Marquez is one of the most brilliant writers of this century, Tolkien's are children's books. Nice children's books - but nonetheless. Oh, and Solaris will definitely be among Lem's remembered works.
For some reason you seem to think that only English (language at least) authors will be read. Since we are going 20th cerntury (and not necessarily 'still alive'), what about Herman Hesse, Marcel Proust, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Mikhail Bulgakov or Stanislaw Lem (if you want real science fiction). Hemingway's stuff is kid's play compared to some of these. The won't be widely read, but they will be read many, many years from now.
what some people seem to miss, is that things like sharing Babylon 5 tapes are also, technically, illegal. So no Replay doesn't differ from it in any way.