Build Your Own Arcade Controls Forum

Main => Everything Else => Topic started by: Ummon on November 20, 2008, 07:56:53 pm

Title: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on November 20, 2008, 07:56:53 pm
Just as preliminary, SF is not Star Wars or BSG or Terry Goodkind, etc. Those are sci-fi and fantasy, respectively.


So, currently I'm reading a novel called Spin (published in '05) by Robert Charles Wilson. I'm almost a hundred pages into it and the only 'action' there's been was a childhood bike accident. Wilson, at least in this story, is interested in the characters in an old-school fashion. This book so far is perhaps in the vein of To Kill A Mockingbird, etc, except that the time is around now or soon in the future and there are scientific descriptions and explanations of the elements that are 'the conflict'.

It's pretty decent. There's definitely a craft in the story-telling, the characters are real, and for the most part the science looks right.
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: Singapura on November 20, 2008, 08:51:32 pm
If you like reality grounded SF, read Jame5 by Stefan Pernar. It's free to download from the writer's website (http://www.jame5.com/). Very thought provoking stuff about technological singularity.
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: Malenko on November 20, 2008, 08:55:17 pm
I clicked this.... there is no Street Fighter in here  :banghead:
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: BORIStheBLADE on November 20, 2008, 09:26:56 pm
I clicked this.... there is no Street Fighter in here  :banghead:

Thats why I clicked on the thread. :dunno
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: hypernova on November 20, 2008, 10:44:06 pm
Not being in the know, I'm trying to figure out what the hell SF means here.
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: boykster on November 20, 2008, 11:18:31 pm
My favorite SF author is Philip K. Dick.  Clans of the Alphane Moon is one of my favorite works of fiction of any genre
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: AmericanDemon on November 21, 2008, 12:00:07 am
Yeah expected Street Fighter also.  LOL.  I have no idea what SF means....  My two cents.....  please educate us uneducated
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: somunny on November 21, 2008, 07:38:27 am


Sorry, plebes.  This thread is for Science-Fiction snobs only.  And don't try to bring your Star War or Star Track nonsence in here, either.  It doesn't rate.

I do feel somewhat validated though, as I read Event Horizon before it was a movie.  Does that mean I can stay?   ;D
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: danny_galaga on November 21, 2008, 08:09:20 am
Yeah expected Street Fighter also.  LOL.  I have no idea what SF means....  My two cents.....  please educate us uneducated

im pretty sure SF stand for San Francisco...
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: FrizzleFried on November 21, 2008, 08:17:34 am
First I thought San Fran,  then I thought Street Fighter,  but when I saw the OP wasn't interested in Star Wars or Star Trek I knew it was Science Fiction.  I am more of a Fantasy book reader...I tried reading some of Asimov's science fiction but I got tired of busting out the dictionary to figure out WTF the dude was trying to say.

Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: Ginsu Victim on November 21, 2008, 09:17:24 am
Yoga fire!
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: CheffoJeffo on November 21, 2008, 09:19:28 am
Hmmm ... SF snob ... hmmm ...

 ;)
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: ark_ader on November 21, 2008, 04:53:16 pm
I love Stainless Steel Rat by Harry Harrison.  Make Room Make Room is another.

Alan Dean Foster Spellsinger and Hour Of The Gate.

And while I'm on a SF kick - L.Ron Hubbard - The Invaders Plan (well the whole series too).  ;D
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: massive88 on November 21, 2008, 04:59:42 pm
Personally Im fired up about HD Remix coming out next week... seems like it was announed years ago!
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: Ed_McCarron on November 21, 2008, 08:34:17 pm
My favorite SF author is Philip K. Dick.  Clans of the Alphane Moon is one of my favorite works of fiction of any genre

Boykster likes Di...

Nah, too easy.

Go here:  http://www.baen.com/library/defaultTitles.htm

Baens free library.  Usually the first book of a series.  Some good stuff in there, and some really bad stuff.
Title: Re: The Sci Fi thread
Post by: SirPeale on November 21, 2008, 11:31:32 pm
I gotta admit when I saw the title I thought it was Street Fighter too.  I like Sci Fi much better.

I edited the main thread title.  Hopefully there won't be any more confusion.
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: Singapura on November 22, 2008, 12:58:10 am
Double post  :dunno
Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: Singapura on November 22, 2008, 12:59:52 am
Quote
one of my favorites as is Battlefield Earth

I love Stainless Steel Rat by Harry Harrison.  Make Room Make Room is another.

Alan Dean Foster Spellsinger and Hour Of The Gate.

And while I'm on a SF kick - L.Ron Hubbard - The Invaders Plan (well the whole series too).  ;D

You're not taking that scientology crap serious are you?
Title: Re: The Sci Fi thread
Post by: ark_ader on November 22, 2008, 06:56:33 am
Actually I was told that L. Ron Hubbard made a bet with a lady writer, saying that he could invent a religion and people would follow it.   Who is to know if L. Ron Hubbard is laughing from above or from some galaxy.  :)
Title: Re: The Sci Fi thread
Post by: Singapura on November 22, 2008, 08:34:06 am
At least his cronies are... all the way to the bank.
Title: Re: The Sci Fi thread
Post by: saint on November 22, 2008, 09:06:41 am
I gotta admit when I saw the title I thought it was Street Fighter too.  I like Sci Fi much better.

I edited the main thread title.  Hopefully there won't be any more confusion.

Heh. SciFi is bug eyed monsters and bad television. SF is real science fiction. For what the OP wanted, you can call it SF or Science Fiction, but not Sci Fi. It's almost a religious argument in the making.
Title: Re: The Science Fiction thread
Post by: Ed_McCarron on November 22, 2008, 10:35:26 am
I made it through most of "Enders Game" last night.  Pretty good.
Title: Re: The Sci Fi thread
Post by: Ed_McCarron on November 22, 2008, 10:36:39 am
Heh. SciFi is bug eyed monsters and bad television. SF is real science fiction. For what the OP wanted, you can call it SF or Science Fiction, but not Sci Fi. It's almost a religious argument in the making.

Wat?  Explain the difference.  What is 'real' science fiction?
Title: Re: The Sci Fi thread
Post by: saint on November 22, 2008, 11:33:17 am
Heh. SciFi is bug eyed monsters and bad television. SF is real science fiction. For what the OP wanted, you can call it SF or Science Fiction, but not Sci Fi. It's almost a religious argument in the making.

Wat?  Explain the difference.  What is 'real' science fiction?

You have to be a hard core science fiction fan to grok the difference, to the rest of the world it's a silly distinction.

The movie "Mission to Mars" was science fiction.  "Star Wars" was Sci-Fi (technically space-opera but I digress...).  There's a decent take on the difference here:

http://dynamicsubspace.net/2008/08/20/ontap-5-minute-teaching-session-sci-fi-or-sf/

Quote
So, what are some examples of SF and sci-fi?  A recent example of SF film would be The Matrix.  It extrapolates from our world to create a reasonably plausible future based around computer simulation, autonomous robot beings, and a planet devastated by war.  An example of sci-fi would be George Lucas’ Star Wars movies.  Sure, there are space ships, ray guns, and aliens, but there’s also the Force, which is more fantasy than Science Fiction, and the laws of physics are violated egregiously in space such as having things slide off space ships in outer space as if it were an airplane in the Earth’s atmosphere.  What are some Science Fiction movies that you’ve seen, and what would you classify them as–sci-fi or SF?  Some other examples of sci-fi include Plan 9 From Outer Sapce, Back to the Future, Cloverfield, and Red Planet.  Other examples of SF include A.I. Artificial Intelligence, A Scanner Darkly, WALL-E, The Dark Knight, and Mission to Mars.


For most of the world it's probably silly semantics, but for hard core science fiction readers it's a valid distinction.  I fall in the latter category but I don't get religious about it. :)

Title: Re: The Sci Fi thread
Post by: saint on November 22, 2008, 11:35:16 am
Heh. SciFi is bug eyed monsters and bad television. SF is real science fiction. For what the OP wanted, you can call it SF or Science Fiction, but not Sci Fi. It's almost a religious argument in the making.

Wat?  Explain the difference.  What is 'real' science fiction?

You have to be a hard core science fiction fan to grok the difference, to the rest of the world it's a silly distinction.

The movie "Mission to Mars" was science fiction.  "Star Wars" was Sci-Fi (technically space-opera but I digress...).  There's a decent take on the difference here:

http://dynamicsubspace.net/2008/08/20/ontap-5-minute-teaching-session-sci-fi-or-sf/

Quote
So, what are some examples of SF and sci-fi?  A recent example of SF film would be The Matrix.  It extrapolates from our world to create a reasonably plausible future based around computer simulation, autonomous robot beings, and a planet devastated by war.  An example of sci-fi would be George Lucas’ Star Wars movies.  Sure, there are space ships, ray guns, and aliens, but there’s also the Force, which is more fantasy than Science Fiction, and the laws of physics are violated egregiously in space such as having things slide off space ships in outer space as if it were an airplane in the Earth’s atmosphere.  What are some Science Fiction movies that you’ve seen, and what would you classify them as–sci-fi or SF?  Some other examples of sci-fi include Plan 9 From Outer Sapce, Back to the Future, Cloverfield, and Red Planet.  Other examples of SF include A.I. Artificial Intelligence, A Scanner Darkly, WALL-E, The Dark Knight, and Mission to Mars.


For most of the world it's probably silly semantics, but for hard core science fiction readers it's a valid distinction.  I fall in the latter category but I don't get religious about it. :)



By the way - my comparison of Mission to Mars vs Star Wars was made before I read the quoted article, but he and I both had the same opinion if that helps to illustrate the mindset.
Title: Re: The Science Fiction thread
Post by: Ed_McCarron on November 22, 2008, 01:48:58 pm
Gotcha.

Plausible future scenario - SF.

So, are bug-eyed green aliens plausible future?   HHGG, for example.  Tech, aliens, and beer.  Would you label it SF if it wasn't for that damn babel fish?
Title: Re: The Science Fiction thread
Post by: saint on November 22, 2008, 03:21:45 pm
Entirely Sci-Fi. :)
Title: Re: The Science Fiction thread
Post by: Cakemeister on November 22, 2008, 07:05:23 pm
Battlefield Earth is an awesome book, which I have read multiple times.

Just don't see the movie.

Also, don't look at who wrote it. :)

Has anyone mentioned David Brin's Startide Rising? I don't think the science in it is plausible, but it's a great story.

Title: Re: The Science Fiction thread
Post by: saint on November 22, 2008, 07:51:18 pm
Battlefield Earth is an awesome book, which I have read multiple times.

Just don't see the movie.

Also, don't look at who wrote it. :)

Has anyone mentioned David Brin's Startide Rising? I don't think the science in it is plausible, but it's a great story.

Startide Rising and the entire Uplift series is excellent work.
Title: Re: The Science Fiction thread
Post by: Singapura on November 22, 2008, 08:19:22 pm
Battlefield Earth, i.m.h.o. is an awful book full of one dimensional characters. It tries to be epic but utterly fails to be convincing. If you really want epic SF literature, read Dick or Asimov. I wonder if the first authors name gets through the auto censor?
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on November 22, 2008, 08:58:42 pm
Given this is 'Everything Else', Street Fighter wouldn't make sense, no?


I love Stainless Steel Rat by Harry Harrison.  Make Room Make Room is another.

Alan Dean Foster Spellsinger and Hour Of The Gate.

And while I'm on a SF kick - L.Ron Hubbard - The Invaders Plan (well the whole series too).  ;D

No, none of those really quaify. Scifi, fantasy, scifi, respectively.


I gotta admit when I saw the title I thought it was Street Fighter too.  I like Sci Fi much better.

I edited the main thread title.  Hopefully there won't be any more confusion.

I edited it better.


For what the OP wanted, you can call it SF or Science Fiction, but not Sci Fi. It's almost a religious argument in the making.

Heh. I'm not zealous about it, just particular. Which means I don't say 'science fiction', either. But your description distinguishing scifi and science fiction is adequate. Of course, it does somewhat blur the line that even with only 'SF' as a label is only fairly distinct, and often case-dependent. The Matrix I wouldn't consider SF or even science fiction. At best, it's an almost two-decades-old rip-off of the cyberpunk genre.

jim's posted a decent one above, though it could perhaps be articulated a little better.


Steve: I dunno. You may have to do some extra-curricular study.


So what is everyone reading?
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Mamed for life on November 23, 2008, 10:18:43 am
I'm not really sure if I have the distinction right, but I recently read The Algebraist by Iain M Banks: bit of a slow starter but excellent once it gets moving. Crow Road (as Iain Banks) is brilliant as well: thats his fiction writing, as opposed to SF.

I've been working through Peter F. Hamilton's catalogue as well. The Commonwealth Saga and the Night's Dawn trilogy are some of the best books I've ever read, never mind SF (or Sci-fi, whatever). :dizzy:

 Getting the second part of the Void Trilogy in the next week or two, first part (Dreaming Void) I really enjoyed.

MfL
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: boykster on November 24, 2008, 12:52:37 am
Obvious unmentioned:

William Gibson - any book
K W Jeter - Farewell Horizion and his other original works (haven't read his trew/starwars/etc stuff)
Heinlein - anything other than the "boyscout" bunch of books, but even some of those hold up.  JOB is my fave Heinlein novel of all time

Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on November 24, 2008, 08:55:17 pm
JOB is just a farce. Fun, but not SF or scifi.  I lost interest with Gibson in Pattern Recognition and put it down less than a hundred pages in.

Night's dawn is great - except the second book of The Naked God, which was sort of a let down, partly because he invoked a Deus Ex Machina sort of thing. Commonwealth was very similar. Mostly great and fun, but the ending of Judas Unchained, and the whole motivation of the 'alien', was unsatisfying. And the asian detective chick was annoying because she couldn't see her function was totally reliant on any particular social mores she happened to serve under (and arbitrary because of this).

The Algebraist was slow. But what caused me to lose interest was that it seemed the same forumula as his Culture novels without anything new. Add to that his recent Matter - the latest Culture novel - that adhered to the old formula but lacked any of the rich wit and intensely black humor common in the earlier books. Or maybe it was just me, I dunno.
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: boykster on November 25, 2008, 01:49:03 am
JOB is just a farce. Fun, but not SF or scifi.  I lost interest with Gibson in Pattern Recognition and put it down less than a hundred pages in.

Night's dawn is great - except the second book of The Naked God, which was sort of a let down, partly because he invoked a Deus Ex Machina sort of thing. Commonwealth was very similar. Mostly great and fun, but the ending of Judas Unchained, and the whole motivation of the 'alien', was unsatisfying. And the asian detective chick was annoying because she couldn't see her function was totally reliant on any particular social mores she happened to serve under (and arbitrary because of this).

The Algebraist was slow. But what caused me to lose interest was that it seemed the same forumula as his Culture novels without anything new. Add to that his recent Matter - the latest Culture novel - that adhered to the old formula but lacked any of the rich wit and intensely black humor common in the earlier books. Or maybe it was just me, I dunno.

Find a copy of "The Man in the High Castle".  Thank me later.  Take that pompous, stick in the mud definition of "SF" vs Sci-Fi and read the authors who built the foundation of a legitimate branch of fiction that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for pulp novels and dime-store books. 

Title: Re: The SF thread
Post by: CheffoJeffo on November 25, 2008, 08:07:24 am
Hmmm ... this thread seems familiar ... hmmm ... 

;)

Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on November 26, 2008, 07:55:02 pm
So instead of slamming all of our definitions of what constitutes 'SF' how about you offer up some examples of your own?  (besides that one author nobody else has ever heard of)

I've read people arguing over the debate... and the soft scifi guys will cite Clarke, Heinlein, and Anderson as examples.

The hard scifi guys will also cite Clarke, Heinlein, and Anderson as examples.

 :dizzy:



I already mentioned Saint and you had pretty good ones, and added that it's hard to generalize much further. Especially with this kind of thing, it depends somewhat on era, though generally HardSF has a scientific problem(s) as backdrop if not the plot-driving device of the story. In that sense, very few of the early novels were Hard SF. The pulp fiction stuff doesn't really count either way.


JOB is just a farce. Fun, but not SF or scifi.  I lost interest with Gibson in Pattern Recognition and put it down less than a hundred pages in.

Night's dawn is great - except the second book of The Naked God, which was sort of a let down, partly because he invoked a Deus Ex Machina sort of thing. Commonwealth was very similar. Mostly great and fun, but the ending of Judas Unchained, and the whole motivation of the 'alien', was unsatisfying. And the asian detective chick was annoying because she couldn't see her function was totally reliant on any particular social mores she happened to serve under (and arbitrary because of this).

The Algebraist was slow. But what caused me to lose interest was that it seemed the same forumula as his Culture novels without anything new. Add to that his recent Matter - the latest Culture novel - that adhered to the old formula but lacked any of the rich wit and intensely black humor common in the earlier books. Or maybe it was just me, I dunno.

Find a copy of "The Man in the High Castle".  Thank me later.  Take that pompous, stick in the mud definition of "SF" vs Sci-Fi and read the authors who built the foundation of a legitimate branch of fiction that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for pulp novels and dime-store books. 



I don't know about that. Verne and Wells were - and another American author, I want to say Hawthorne, as well as a French novelist in the late 1900s, I forget his name - were writing SF and it wasn't of the pulp style to come, though the pulp authors would surely rip from them.
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: boykster on November 27, 2008, 01:17:55 am
I guess I'm confused about your definition of SF - I was under the impression that you were looking for recommendations of serious authors writing in the field of science fiction (SF).  Not bug-eyed monsters and laser guns, but real fiction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_K._Dick_Award

 :dunno

Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on November 28, 2008, 08:14:28 pm
I guess I'm confused about your definition of SF - I was under the impression that you were looking for recommendations of serious authors writing in the field of science fiction (SF).  Not bug-eyed monsters and laser guns, but real fiction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_K._Dick_Award

 :dunno



I explained that abofe. Also, I think you may be confusing The War of the Worlds with The Time Machine, though the former was still to some degree for the time SF. Like I said, I don't call it science fiction, but science fiction is different than sci-fi. And Verne was more literarily-endowed than Wells. In any case, there's no argument here. We're all just comparing notes. Some of them are the same or similar. Some not. The real point of the thread is to talk about the stories themselves, of which no on else really has.
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on November 30, 2008, 06:03:39 pm
Hahahah. I've read that his stuff is pretty heady. I haven't decided to try him out yet. I've seen a lot of stuff online saying Snow Crash is phenomenal, but the premise didn't grab me. Granted, it was written in '92 when VR was becoming a mainstream buzzword and all, but the 'what is reality?' thing was already old hat to me. Maybe I'll have to go back and look again.

In the other thread, you said Canticle was difficult reading. How so?
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on December 03, 2008, 06:04:19 am
Hmmm. I was only half into it because by the time I read it I was 22 and had read far more intense stuff. It was interesting, though. I think Miller was Christian, so he had a sort of agenda, though not necessarily an evangelical one. For some fairly substantive Catholic church stuff, you might check out Dan Simmons' Endymion - although you might want to read Hyperion and The Fall of Hyperion, first.

Didn't you mention you read Ender's Game recently?  What'd you think of that?
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: saint on December 03, 2008, 07:09:53 am
Hyperion and the other two were some heavy reading, but I enjoyed them. Not for the light reader though...
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: HaRuMaN on December 03, 2008, 08:02:23 am
hmm... who deleted my posts out of this thread?
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: saint on December 03, 2008, 09:40:38 am
hmm... who deleted my posts out of this thread?

Deleted posts go to a trash can forum that I can see. I don't see any deleted posts from you in this thread.  :dunno Did you say something obnoxious? If you said something obnoxious I might have been tempted to snip it but then I'd beat you about the ears with it and it'd be in the trash can. Nothing there.

Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: HaRuMaN on December 03, 2008, 09:46:17 am
No, nothing obnoxious...  I had mentioned some of my favorite authors, like Heinlen, Anthony, etc...  weird.   :dizzy:

Nevermind...  I'm getting my threads mixed up.   :burgerking:
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on December 04, 2008, 10:34:52 pm
Hyperion and the other two were some heavy reading, but I enjoyed them. Not for the light reader though...

Well, I don't think SF by nature is, but yeah the Hyperion cantos are at the top end. He doesn't use any avant-garde writing techniques or anything, though.



He bombed the oldest monastery in Europe during WWII and converted to Catholicism after the war.  To say he had a guilty conscience would be understating it.  ;D  (coincidentally, EVERY single one of his short stories deals with the same themes... and I think I've read his entire output)


Mmm, that sounds familiar. Silly man.


Quote
No, but I've read it.  I started with Speaker for the Dead, though.  Ender's Game was a decent book, Speaker for the Dead's supposed profundity was lost on me.




Really? It's been almost twenty years since I read it, I caught it when it came out, and maybe have read it again since, but I do remember it really moving me. Just Card's voice in those books is enjoyable - so different than in the Shadow series (not that the story behind it helps any).
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on December 10, 2008, 05:52:49 pm
I've been thinking about The Terminator premise lately, and have decided to illuminate this as a sci-fi thing. Why?  Well, let's take a look back only one year to Wargames. Here's a scenario that is (for the time) currently set, and yet the machine is seemingly cognizent.

Regardless, it's aim is to explore ways of winning. This means it's inherently curious. Any curious entity ends up becoming more curious and more considering. Once it considers its own existence, I'm betting an early component to this is 'how can I survive/continue to exist?' In humans, if there isn't a scarcity of resources, there is a tendency to find a solution that isn't draconian. A machine of such sophistication programmed by a human will likely have human tendencies.

At the very least, if the machine is programmed to protect humans, the 'other side' is not likely the enemy but rather simply a factor to match so as to keep a balance. In which case, a consideration might be made that would enable both sides to survive. Here we get into some later aspects of Asimov's Daneel Olivaw. Which is SF.
Title: Re: The SF (as in literature) thread
Post by: Ummon on December 23, 2008, 09:28:28 pm
I recently read a story in The Year's Best SF 12 ('06, of course, but published this year) called Nano comes to Clifton Falls, written by Nancy Kress. I've never much liked her stories, and this is just bad SF. (She can write and tell a story well. It's her ideas and how she works them that are questionable.) It starts out with nano fab devices being delivered all across the country, and they've been delivered to Clifton Falls (somewhere in the mid-west I think). Everything - food or object - is made by a kind of fabber, and so people don't have to work anymore. Not quite, because they still have to fix things, and so the country swiftly goes to pot.

Um, well no. These kinds of things don't happen all by themselves. Usually there are parallel (not to mention gradual) developments - like automated repair or self-maintaining structures, etc. Here, Kress pulls a 50's 'what if this happened?' and just lets it run unchecked.

Then of course there's the fact that everyone seems to be getting theirs around the same time. Not to mention that that kind of pulls the shine off the title - you know, them bumpkins is getting new-fangled stuff finally, hey! - but that it isn't likely. Cities would have them first, and their 'falls' would likely happen before the little places got theirs, especially with how quick it happened.

However, there's something that precludes all this: what feeds the fabbers?? Apparently it's plentiful, right? How??

These are all questions a serious reader doesn't even have to ask. They're just evident.