• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

sci-fi recommendation?

orpheus

Thinker
orpheus
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
234
Hello, all.

I've entered one of my least favorite periods - that awful time between novels when I try to decide what to read next. (Funny thing - when I was a child, I never had this problem; I just devoured the next available thing. But now I can spend more time trying to find the "right" book to read next than it might take to read several long chapters! Grrrrr.)

So here's my question: can anyone nudge me in the direction of a good sci-fi read? Sci-fi is particularly problematic for me, since so much of it is not very well-written. (Philip K. Dick is a good example, though others may disagree. I'm fascinated by the ideas he explores, and that makes it worthwhile. But, as Stanislaw Lem said once, I have an urge to read Dick at top speed, since the quality of the writing is often not good; one doesn't want to linger.) So it's frustrating to look at a book, judge it by its cover, get excited about what it seems to promise, want to like it, salivate over starting it, dig in, and then find that my idea of what it should have been is much better than what it actually is.

Sci-fi I've enjoyed: Many of Dick's novels, some of Aldiss's short stories, a lot of Lem, some of Neal Stephenson (though I bogged down 2/3 of the way through Quicksilver), some A.C. Clarke.

Other writers I've enjoyed: Calvino, Borges, Robbe-Grillet, Perec, Beckett, and Russell Hoban.

Sci-fi writers I want to like but wonder if they'll disappoint: Gregory Benford, Greg Bear, David Brin, Stephen Baxter, Gene Wolfe, Olaf Stapledon, Samuel Delany.

Any thoughts? (other than that I should get over my neuroses...)
 
A whole depends on your own taste, of course. There's a pretty long thread, here..... http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59571

Ignore the thread title - although there are good recommendations for start-up, you're obviously not a newbie if you've delved into P.K. Dick, and the others you mention. I hate to admit it, but I sort of suspend literary tastes when reading murder mysteries or sci fi. Ripping through them is de rigeur.

With that in mind, the original Dune (not so much the sequels) is fun. I like the Foundation books, and Robot stories. If you dabble in fantasy, try The War of the Flowers by Tad Williams.
 
Two words : Isaac Asimov

Try the Foundation series. It made me the person I am today.
 
Thanks, Foolmewunz and Ryokan. I'll check out that thread. And it's interesting about Asimov: I've always loved his non-fiction, but never got into his sci-fi. Perhaps it's time to start. I've heard that The Gods Themselves is also good. What do you think?
 
I recommend you try Stephen Baxter. I find him a far better writer than Asimov or Clarke.

This is a fansite for him, but it will give you an idea of the kind of author he is:

http://www.themanifold.co.uk/news.php

Or if you like older stuff try The Forever War by Joe Haldeman.

Have you read any of John Wyndham's cosy catastrophes?

What about Heinlein's Future History stories or The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress?
 
orpheus said:
Sci-fi I've enjoyed: Many of Dick's novels, some of Aldiss's short stories, a lot of Lem, some of Neal Stephenson (though I bogged down 2/3 of the way through Quicksilver), some A.C. Clarke.

Other writers I've enjoyed: Calvino, Borges, Robbe-Grillet, Perec, Beckett, and Russell Hoban.

Sci-fi writers I want to like but wonder if they'll disappoint: Gregory Benford, Greg Bear, David Brin, Stephen Baxter, Gene Wolfe, Olaf Stapledon, Samuel Delany.
Click to expand...
I can recommend Baxter, Bear, Benford (although I found one of his recent ones slightly disappointing) and Delaney. I haven't read much by the others.

You could also try Greg Egan, Paul J McAuley, Christopher Priest, Kim Stanley Robinson, Adam Roberts, John Sladek...

If you're interested in some of the sub-genres, there's the whole cyberpunk thing: William Gibson, Bruce Sterling, Jack Womack, Pat Cadigan, Jon Courtenay Grimwood...

There's some quite good space opera around at the moment too: Ken MacLeod, Iain M Banks (note the "M" ;) ), Alastair Reynolds, Neal Asher...
 
orpheus said:
Hello, all.

Sci-fi writers I want to like but wonder if they'll disappoint: Gregory Benford, Greg Bear, David Brin, Stephen Baxter, Gene Wolfe, Olaf Stapledon, Samuel Delany.

Any thoughts? (other than that I should get over my neuroses...)
Click to expand...

Haven't read Baxter - but the others have not disappointed in the past. Stapledon is the odd one in your list since he died or halted late 40's, early 50's. Very philosophical bent. read and enjoyed in late teen's (Odd-John) and early 20's Star-Maker and Last and First Men (titles may be slightly off, I am 60 so that would be 30 + years ago). Also, enjoy much Poul Anderson, Gordon Dickson (Dragon and the George, Dorsai and related series), Heinlein (Starship Troopers-dummies left jump suits and 30-second bombs out of movie. wish we had 30-sec. bombs, real fun) (many others). Good luck on your quest!!
 
Last edited:
Stephen Baxter bothers me with all his errors.

In normal scifi i don't care if there is stuff that goes contrary to science. But when you try to make hard scifi, and work with all the real theories and stuff like that. Then it really bothers me when your science is wrong.

Which it, unfortunatly, is with Stephen Baxter.
 
Just like any other branch of literature, there are many sub-genres, and some folks get all hung up on that. I remember being in a bookstore and talking with a couple of other scifi fans. I mentioned that I liked Harlan Ellison, and one fellow elevated his nose and said, "I don't read SOFT science fiction!"
His loss...

You might try picking up a copy or two of the always excellent Asimov's Science Fiction magazine. Short stories and novellas have always been a strong part of the genre, and Asimov's publishes the best.
 
I also recommend Asimov. And Lois McMaster Bujold (the Vorkosigan novels, not the Chalion ones), Connie Willis (Doomsday Book, To Say Nothing of the Dog) and C.J. Cherryh, especially Cyteen and Chanur's Pride. Recently I've discovered Robert J. Sawyer (I've just translated one of his books) and he's not half bad. Daring and "hard" SF. There's lots of stuff out there.
 
TobiasTheCommie said:
Stephen Baxter bothers me with all his errors.

In normal scifi i don't care if there is stuff that goes contrary to science. But when you try to make hard scifi, and work with all the real theories and stuff like that. Then it really bothers me when your science is wrong.

Which it, unfortunatly, is with Stephen Baxter.
Click to expand...

Which books are you referring to here? I find his stuff fairly compelling and I always thought he had a pretty solid science background(astronaut training etc)

Of course I'm no scientist, but I haven't read anything in Baxter's books which is any more outrageous than most other SF.
Maybe my standards of what constitutes Hard SF varies from yours.
Have you read Voyage? Titan? Evolution?
Most of his other books I suppose fall somewhere in between Hard and Soft SF
 
Asimov (Foundation, Robots etc.)
Iain M. Banks (Player of Games et. al.)
Frank Herbert (Dune)
Robert Heinlein

Asmiov is my great first love, but I quickly got turned on to many others.
 
orpheus said:
I've heard that The Gods Themselves is also good. What do you think?
Click to expand...

It's a very different Asimov book, but it's still pretty good. It's his only science fiction that includes aliens.

(If you disregard Gaia in the later Foundation books)
 
Brainache said:
Which books are you referring to here? I find his stuff fairly compelling and I always thought he had a pretty solid science background(astronaut training etc)

Of course I'm no scientist, but I haven't read anything in Baxter's books which is any more outrageous than most other SF.
Maybe my standards of what constitutes Hard SF varies from yours.
Have you read Voyage? Titan? Evolution?
Most of his other books I suppose fall somewhere in between Hard and Soft SF
Click to expand...

All his three manifold stories had huge gaping errors in them. For one.

I also remember some stuff in the Xeelee Sequence, but not as much as in the manifold series.

And i've only read those two series by him.


From the Xeelee Sequence he does the woo thing and explain how everything must be observed(from quantum mechanics), the woo thing being that it has to be a human that does the observation. Basicly, untill a human has gone around(At the end of time) and watched everything, all artifacts, etc, the history is still in flux as to what has happened. I guess it doesn't have to be a human, might have been a Qax or a Xeelee as well, but, it was some sentient being that had to do it.

From the manifold series the "Carter Catastrophe" is used as being something real.

Imagine that two big urns are put in front of you, and you know that one of them contains ten balls and the other a million, but you are ignorant as to which is which. You know the balls in each urn are numbered 1, 2, 3, 4 ... etc. Now you take a ball at random from the left urn, and it is number 7. Clearly, this is a strong indication that that urn contains only ten balls. [...]

But now consider the case where instead of the urns you have two possible human races, and instead of balls you have individuals, ranked according to birth order. As a matter of fact, you happen to find that your rank is about sixty billion. Now, say Carter and Leslie, we should reason in the same way as we did with the urns. That you should have a rank of sixty billion or so is much more likely if only 100 billion persons will ever have lived than if there will be many trillion persons. Therefore, by Bayes' theorem, you should update your beliefs about humankind’s prospects and realize that an impending doomsday is much more probable than you have hitherto thought.
Click to expand...
http://www.anthropic-principle.com/

As in, because you and me are both alive right now(which is statisticaly inprobable if the human race will go on for some 60 billion years more) it means that the human race will end soon.

In the book it is some 150-200 years away. Or maybe it was less.

The problem with the argument above is, of course. That for it to make sence you and me have to somehow be "special". In reality all the balls in the urn would just be red, and have nothing to distinguish them. So after you have taken 5 balls you still have no idea if there was 10 to begin with, or 1000.

And yes, it really bothered me a LOT while reading those books.

Good enough for you? :D
 
Ryokan said:
It's a very different Asimov book, but it's still pretty good. It's his only science fiction that includes aliens.

(If you disregard Gaia in the later Foundation books)
Click to expand...

Wrong, there is a short that happens during Empire where there are aliens. Yes, in the robot -> empire -> foundation series.

If you really care i guess i could find the name. I liked the story. :)
 
TobiasTheCommie said:
Wrong, there is a short that happens during Empire where there are aliens. Yes, in the robot -> empire -> foundation series.

If you really care i guess i could find the name. I liked the story. :)
Click to expand...

And now that you mention it, there's a robot short story with aliens on Jupiter as well. Pretty good story, actually.

But I was thinking about his novels.
 
Ryokan said:
And now that you mention it, there's a robot short story with aliens on Jupiter as well. Pretty good story, actually.

But I was thinking about his novels.
Click to expand...

Ah, oki, well, as it says in my title i have autism, and you didn't say book, you said "It's his only science fiction that includes aliens.", so :D hehe


No, i honestly did wonder if you meant book or not. You might have meant both, but there was nothing to lose by me posting what i did. Not like i could offend or anything :)

And i had totally spaced the robot and jupiter thing.. That is.. till now. I was thinking about it all the time i was writting this. Was just about to ask what story when i remembered.
 
TobiasTheCommie said:
All his three manifold stories had huge gaping errors in them. For one.

I also remember some stuff in the Xeelee Sequence, but not as much as in the manifold series.

And i've only read those two series by him.


From the Xeelee Sequence he does the woo thing and explain how everything must be observed(from quantum mechanics), the woo thing being that it has to be a human that does the observation. Basicly, untill a human has gone around(At the end of time) and watched everything, all artifacts, etc, the history is still in flux as to what has happened. I guess it doesn't have to be a human, might have been a Qax or a Xeelee as well, but, it was some sentient being that had to do it.

From the manifold series the "Carter Catastrophe" is used as being something real.


http://www.anthropic-principle.com/

As in, because you and me are both alive right now(which is statisticaly inprobable if the human race will go on for some 60 billion years more) it means that the human race will end soon.

In the book it is some 150-200 years away. Or maybe it was less.

The problem with the argument above is, of course. That for it to make sence you and me have to somehow be "special". In reality all the balls in the urn would just be red, and have nothing to distinguish them. So after you have taken 5 balls you still have no idea if there was 10 to begin with, or 1000.

And yes, it really bothered me a LOT while reading those books.

Good enough for you? :D
Click to expand...

Umm I think that statistics thing is a plot device. If you are going to get all huffy about SF books with unrealistic plot devices, maybe you should stick to reading text books.

Don't get me started on "psychohistory", FTL, positronic brains, force fields, transporter beams, time travel, anti-gravity, galactic empires, or any one of a thousand other concepts in so-called "Hard SF". None of them work as real science in our current understanding.

Expecting an SF author to stick to the laws of physics as currently understood is just silly.

It is fiction, not science. It should be enjoyed as a story, not held to some standard of scientific rigour. If it fails to entertain, then it fails as fiction. It can't fail as scientific fact, because it isn't supposed to be scientific fact.


Oh and did anyone mention Brian Aldiss? I like his early stuff and his anthologies. His "Billion Year Spree" is a pretty good reference book for finding highlights from the pulps.
 
Go wacky with Rudy Rucker. Software, Wetware, Freeware and Realware.
 
Oooh, Lem! Did someone mention Stanislaw Lem? Either you hate him or love him, but he's certaintly interesting.
 
Brainache said:
Umm I think that statistics thing is a plot device. If you are going to get all huffy about SF books with unrealistic plot devices, maybe you should stick to reading text books.

Don't get me started on "psychohistory", FTL, positronic brains, force fields, transporter beams, time travel, anti-gravity, galactic empires, or any one of a thousand other concepts in so-called "Hard SF". None of them work as real science in our current understanding.

Expecting an SF author to stick to the laws of physics as currently understood is just silly.

It is fiction, not science. It should be enjoyed as a story, not held to some standard of scientific rigour. If it fails to entertain, then it fails as fiction. It can't fail as scientific fact, because it isn't supposed to be scientific fact.


Oh and did anyone mention Brian Aldiss? I like his early stuff and his anthologies. His "Billion Year Spree" is a pretty good reference book for finding highlights from the pulps.
Click to expand...

Ehm, did you totally disregard my first post on this subject?

I specificaly stated, and i quote.

TobiasTheCommie said:
Stephen Baxter bothers me with all his errors.

In normal scifi i don't care if there is stuff that goes contrary to science. But when you try to make hard scifi, and work with all the real theories and stuff like that. Then it really bothers me when your science is wrong.

Which it, unfortunatly, is with Stephen Baxter.
Click to expand...

In some books i don't care at all. For instance in Dune. In some books i do care. Like Rama. Depends on what one is trying to accomplish. Either one justs want to tell a story, and that is fine with me (and the science is so so) or one is trying to make a story based on science, in which case it shouldn't have big gaping holes.
 
TobiasTheCommie said:
Ehm, did you totally disregard my first post on this subject?

I specificaly stated, and i quote.



In some books i don't care at all. For instance in Dune. In some books i do care. Like Rama. Depends on what one is trying to accomplish. Either one justs want to tell a story, and that is fine with me (and the science is so so) or one is trying to make a story based on science, in which case it shouldn't have big gaping holes.
Click to expand...

But I don't assume that Baxter is writing such hard SF with the Manifold series. I think he is telling great SF stories. Why do you assume he is writing a science text?
I like the talking squid idea.
I like the successive extinction waves idea.
I even kind of like Reid Malenfant as a character.
I wouldn't call Manifold really hard SF and so I don't understand your complaint about holes in the science.

I have nothing personal against commies either.
 
Brainache said:
But I don't assume that Baxter is writing such hard SF with the Manifold series. I think he is telling great SF stories. Why do you assume he is writing a science text?
I like the talking squid idea.
I like the successive extinction waves idea.
I even kind of like Reid Malenfant as a character.
I wouldn't call Manifold really hard SF and so I don't understand your complaint about holes in the science.

I have nothing personal against commies either.
Click to expand...
I agree with the squid and succesive extinction things.. Malenfant, i'm kinda indifferent towards him.

I guess i just expected hard SF, maybe i shouldn't have. :D


I have nothing personal against non-commies either. :)
 
If you like psychological SF, try A canticle for Leibowitz or Elizabeth Moon's The Speed of Dark

Tobias, if you've read the latter I'd be very interesting in hearing your views. It tries to describe autism "from the inside", but I'm not sure how good a job it does.
 
How about Larry Niven's "Known Space" stories? Or any of his books with Jerry Pournelle? Once a friend told me I simply had to read Stephen King's The Stand. After I read it, I handed it back and told him if he wanted an end-of-the-world story, he should read Lucifer's Hammer.

Also anything by Robert F. Forward.

Also also Encounter With Tiber, by Buzz Aldrin & John Barnes.
 
Anything by Orson Scott Card - his Ender's Game books or my own favourite "Wyrms" which isn't the book you think it is at the start
 
ArmillarySphere said:
If you like psychological SF, try A canticle for Leibowitz or Elizabeth Moon's The Speed of Dark

Tobias, if you've read the latter I'd be very interesting in hearing your views. It tries to describe autism "from the inside", but I'm not sure how good a job it does.
Click to expand...

Never heard of it, i am currently in the middle of some rather big novels so it will have to wait a bit. I will put it on my list though, and you can pop me a message and ask.. i'll get to it in due time. :)

If, however, you want to make a short summery/review i could post it on my site and ask people for their thoughts. :)
 
Rather fond of the works of John Wyndham myself, memorable works include: The Day Of The Triffids,The Midwich Cuckoos, and my all-time favourite Chocky.
 
I will leave it to others to recommend specific authors or series. One thing to consider is The Year's Best Science Fiction Stories series, edited by Gardener Dozois. There are plenty of known and unknown sci fi writers. And you will get a real spread of themes and styles. It may lead you in directions you never expected. You can sometimes pick up the hardbacks at good prices at Half Price Books or similar stores.

CT
 
Thank you, all, for the wonderful recommendations. I must get me to a bookshop, pronto.

Morwen said:
Oooh, Lem! Did someone mention Stanislaw Lem? Either you hate him or love him, but he's certaintly interesting.
Click to expand...

Actually, I mentioned him in my first post. I'm a big fan. For other fans out there, you might be interested in the several interviews with Lem that exist on the internet. (I don't have links handy, but I'll try to find them.) Really powerful mind and original thinker.
 
chance said:
Rather fond of the works of John Wyndham myself, memorable works include: The Day Of The Triffids,The Midwich Cuckoos, and my all-time favourite Chocky.
Click to expand...

Oh man, I haven't read any Wyndham in ages. I have a short story collection of his themed round time travel. It's very good.

To the wider topic:

I'd also recommend, if you can get a hold of it, the short story Collection Nova Scotia. Very good scottish short story collection. Worth it for 'Pisces Ya Bass' if nothing else.
 
No-one's mentioned LeGuin? She reminds me a bit of the little girl with the little curl right in the middle of her forehead, but it's well worth reading The Lathe of Heaven, The Left Hand of Darkness, The Dispossessed, The Wind's Twelve Quarters and The Compass Rose.

Fred Pohl's Gateway and Gladiators at Law (with Kornbluth). Keith Roberts' Pavane (OK, technically that's alternate history). For a recent book which ought to be a classic, try Souls in the Great Machine by Sean McMullen.

I'll second A Canticle for Leibowitz, and Ian M Banks (the best ones are The Player of Games, Inversions and Against a Dark Background).

As for the man Baxter, I read one of his thrillers lately in which in the first few pages he explains how Intelligent Design is proved by blood-clotting proteins, blah-de-blah. I flung the book across the room.
 
Dr Adequate said:
As for the man Baxter, I read one of his thrillers lately in which in the first few pages he explains how Intelligent Design is proved by blood-clotting proteins, blah-de-blah. I flung the book across the room.
Click to expand...

I somehow doubt you are referring to the same Baxter. The Baxter who wrote "Evolution" would not be talking ID. If he was I would join you in a book flinging party.
 
Brainache said:
But I don't assume that Baxter is writing such hard SF with the Manifold series. I think he is telling great SF stories. Why do you assume he is writing a science text?
I like the talking squid idea.
I like the successive extinction waves idea.
I even kind of like Reid Malenfant as a character.
I wouldn't call Manifold really hard SF and so I don't understand your complaint about holes in the science.

I have nothing personal against commies either.
Click to expand...


I thought Manifold: Time / Space / Origin were Great / Good / Crap, respectively. I just finished the latter last week, thanks to some serious skimming.

And I have to say, I treat Baxter like the original poster treats Dick. I read him fast and try to glean the ideas. As far as the writing goes: well, he tries, and he's improved, but I just don't think he's a good prosist.

But I keep coming back to him, because he thinks bigger than anyone, and occasionally manages to excite me about the conquest of space. And that counts for something. Check out his "The Light of Other Days" (written w/Arthur C. Clarke) for another worthy read.

And let me recommend a writer who a) gets the science right, b) can construct a sentence, and c) (in spite of a and b) writes clearly and understandably: Ted Chiang. He's actually only written short stories, and only about a dozen or so, but half of them are absolute gems.

Oh yeah: Greg Egan can write too, and is one of the rare writers who is actually improving as the years go on. His early stuff is good; his later stuff, even better. IMO.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to recommend C.S. Friedman's This Alien Shore. Well plotted with an interesting choice of characters including a girl with multiple-personality disorders and who is being pursued by dangerous corporate entities who want what's in her brain, as well as a computer expert with Aspergers and who is trying to solve the mystery of a deadly computer virus that's killing the outpilots.

I'll also second the recommendations for Iain M. Banks's Culture series. The Player of Games is definitely the easiest book to get into the world. I'm currently midway through Use of Weapons and I want to get myself a personal droid like Skaffen-Amtiskaw.
 
I just started Robert A. Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land. So far, so good, I would recommend it.

The Otherland series by Tad Williams is excellent sort-of cyberpunk (City of Golden Shadow is the first volume). Highly recommended.

Avoid anything by Orson Scott Card. Anyone who recommends Ender's Game to you needs to be hanged, drawn, and quartered. And not necessarily in that order.
 
I realize it's prosaic to say so, but William Gobson's Neuromancer is just about as good as any novel - sci-fi or otherwise - ever written. It also may be the most important sci-fi novel of the last 30 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom