[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by iansales

I'm going to commit heresy here. You've been given a *lot* of books as suggested reading and, quite frankly, I'm not entirely sure why you need to read any of them.

I don't think it's heresy (get the stake ready boys!). But the reason I suggested so many is I got the feeling from the original post that this was someone interested in finding out about "classic" sf in the usual sense; yet at the same time wanted something of a broader spectrum to get a better idea of what the scope of the field may be.

If you're 11 or under, then Doc Smith can be fun. But they really are quite badly written when compared with today's science fiction, and the attitudes and sensibilities implicit in the prose are close to offensive.

I'm not sure I'd agree with the latter part of this; if taken in historical perspective (the development of any branch of literature), it's not likely to stand out in context. But, yes, though Doc Smith was a lovely man, his literary abilities were a bit limited. However, he holds an important place in the development of sf, and influenced nearly all the major writers of the next 40 years.

As for the rest... There are a handful I'd agree are classics, and some I'd recommend reading if you like that type of SF. Dhalgren, for example, is a novel I love, but post-modern literary SF is not everyone's cup of tea. Van Vogt... well, his prose was pretty poor; and Slan dates from the 1940s, and very much reads like a 60-year-old novel. Harlan Ellison and Ray Bradbury, I've never understood the appeal...

Again, with such a broad range given, there's likely to be a fair amount that proves not of interest -- then again, this particular person may like it all (as do I -- even some of JWC's -- though for differing reasons). And, again, to understand the field, these are all writers who have had a tremendous impact in its development, and still continue to influence writers today. Even Van, whose prose is rather wonky, has some magnificent ideas and The Weapon Shops, in particular, has one of the best final lines I've ever read (though it must be read at the end of the novel; it gains its impact from all that's gone before). Slan, while flawed, still is one of the best examples of that particular kind of story not for the writing, for the exploration of ideas. And as for Ellison and Bradbury: Ray because he's one of the major figures in sf/f from the 1950s to at least the 1980s, and maintains a presence even today. His prose is nostalgic and even poetic at times; his darker work is some of the best of its kind, as well. And for someone who simply could convey a sense of wonder about the universe, it's hard to beat Bradbury. Ellison, while he tends to polarize, has again had tremendous impact on the field, and has won more awards than any other writer in the field as well; he's also extremely versatile; his early work has serious flaws, but by the latter part of the 1960s he had developed a truly unique, vibrant prose style that ended up (by the time of the Shatterday collection) combining an almost unbearable intensity with a cultural erudition and polish that's hard to beat. And his stories have often have great poignancy as well. Ellison by no means appeals to everyone, but his importance in the field is inarguable.

If, on the other hand, PoeticExplosion's only looking for the "gosh-wow" of the 1940s/50s period, then it's a different set of suggestions; and I'd suggest some of the anthologies of Groff Conklin, Anthony Boucher, et al. As for the post-modernists (and I'm not sure I'd include most of the "New Wave" in that bunch, postmodernism in sf coming later), they, too, have had their impact on "classic" sf. The newer writers I'm not that familiar with, and was being led by the term "classic" as well; for the newer writers, I bow to those more up-to-date on the field; I know there are no few really great writers out there -- it's just one of those things I know few specifics about.

And those are my reasons for these particular choices.....