New Wave SF

[clovis-man]

(My first reply got lost in the ozone. Trying again.)

Re: Reading Dragon in the Sea:

Originally Posted by Taltos

I have ... so what ?

In the original 1963 "Analog" serialization of Dune under the title Dune World, the editors stated in the obligatory blurb: "Herbert's last great novel was a tale of men under pressure and deep water. This is a story of men under pressure of politics and the dehydration of a waterless world."

Despite the somewhat insipid comparison, it's still clear that the stories have nothing to do with one another. But I liked Dune so much that I sought out other Herbert works, including DITS (which had more in common with "SeaQuest" than anything else). My point was that I read them because I liked them, not because of some perceived association with a science fiction sub-genre.

[clovis-man]

Originally Posted by Connavar

I mean atleast in the first book you cant get a story more focused on the people approach and not the outer space thing. Thats what i liked most in Dune. The social part of Arrakis and its people.


I mean if you havent read the book you expect a more epic space opera thing and not whats in the actual story.

Which is why the David Lynch film was so bad. He didn't get it.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by clovis-man

Which is why the David Lynch film was so bad. He didn't get it.

Not so sure about that one. From what I understand, Lynch's original was a loooot longer, and much, much better -- at least, this was the reaction from those who saw the longer version in its first screening. But studio execs found it hard to follow, and far too long... so cut it down by more than 2/3. I can't think of very many films that can take that kind of editing and still maintain any sort of integrity; and if they can... then there was an awful lot of extraneous stuff to begin with.....

As for Dune's relationship to the New Wave: I can see it to some degree. After all, it dealt with a lot of the concerns that New Wave sf (at least, the American branch) dealt with, including conservation issues, the rise of the "third world" cultures into dominance, the heavy use of drugs to aid in perception of varying layers of reality, the strong use of mysticism and religious themes in a (more or less) scientific fashion, etc. Stylistically, though, it was closer to the Campbellian sf than that of the '60s... though by no means all of the New Wave was so extremely experimental in form...

[clovis-man]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

Not so sure about that one. From what I understand, Lynch's original was a loooot longer, and much, much better -- at least, this was the reaction from those who saw the longer version in its first screening.

Then they must have tossed all the good stuff. Don't get me wrong. David Lynch is a great, if often quirky, filmmaker. But the goofy voice amplifiers for the Fremen; the penny arcade game terminals for the Emperor's generals; the lame audibalization of Paul's and Jessica's thoughts all had me wincing. And the warm, fuzzy smiles exchanged by Paul and Stilgar as the Baron goes flying into a worm's mouth just didn't fit into a serious effort at story telling. As Connavar indicates, the characters got short shrift when the story could have been properly told by making good use of them.

Sort of like when Dustin Hoffman and Lawrence Olivier worked together in the filming of The Marathon Man: Hoffman stayed up all night drinking boiler-makers before his dental torture scene so he could look convincingly wasted. Olivier's response: "Why not try acting?"

Sorry for the digression. I guess my original (and now much belabored) point was that the film could have represented what we might have considered to be a real "new wave" epic if it hadn't been so overproduced.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Connavar

Im gonna order Dangerous Visions, one of the two collections to see if Ellison is as interesting as he sounds.

Dangerous Visions is an anthology, Connavar, not a collection; so you'll only get a single taste of Ellison himself there ("The Prowler in the City at the Edge of the World"), aside from the introductory material he provides. You will, however, get a rich assortment of other writers in each of these anthologies -- none repeated, by the way; each writer only got one shot at this set, so you get a very wide variety of voices here.

For a good, solid taste of Ellison himself, I'd suggest either The Essential Ellison, which is a huge selection of the man's writing, or perhaps Deathbird Stories, Strange Wine, or Angry Candy (just to name a few).

Wasnt Samuel Delaney part of the so called Wave ?

As noted in the wiki article, indeed he was. In fact, my first encounter with Delaney was in Dangerous Visions, with "Aye, and Gomorrah"...

CM: I can see your objections to some of these, but in this case I'd say that some, at least, were a compromise between the written page, read at the time largely by sf afficionadoes, and the big screen, where it had to be more visually gripping (not to mention more graspable) for a wider audience not used to such concepts. On the other hand, even at its best, the film did have some serious flaws...

[Connavar]

What i thought Ellison's stories was in that anthology heh.

Im gonna try one of the collections you mentioned. The one that is best for a newbie of Ellison. See which one has the most of his famous stories.

I want to try him and not his editing skills.

[D_Davis]

The new wave is probably my favorite movement.

Beginning with Bester, the bridge from the pulp to the new wave, authors started shifting their stories towards innerspace, and I usually find these to be far more interesting.

I've also heard this movement be described as the "jazz era" of science fiction, if I am not mistaken.

I really enjoy authors like J.G. Ballard and Philip K. Dick.

I've often thought that Sturgeon had more in common with the new wave movement than he did with his own era.

Ballards short stories from this era are some of the most interesting I've ever read.

[GOLLUM]

I purchased a reissue of Elison's Dangerous Visions last year in Sydney although I had no idea it was that important in the eyes of my texan friend. Whilst I have the book I'm yet to read it and not being a big SF fan can't contribute much until I have. It sounds as if it's going to be a worthwhile read then..?

I can say though if Bester, Ballard and Dick are in this group then they are some of my favourite authors represented.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Connavar

What i thought Ellison's stories was in that anthology heh.

Im gonna try one of the collections you mentioned. The one that is best for a newbie of Ellison. See which one has the most of his famous stories.

I want to try him and not his editing skills.

I certainly don't mean to discourage you from getting Dangerous Visions (or Again, Dangerous Visions, for that matter), as both are excellent anthologies; your time would certainly not be wasted.

The most of his "famous" stories....? Well, then, go for The Essential Ellison (the 50-year retrospective edition, as it has some added material). It has the largest number of his more famous works for one volume, plus it gives a good overview of Ellison's career.

As for Dangerous Visions... this isn't an ordinary anthology, by any means; there's never been anything quite like those two volumes, and I doubt there ever will be (though some have tried). I just didn't want you to think you were getting a collection of Ellison's own work, when what you have is an anthology with a lot of different writers represented -- albeit Ellison's personality does permeate the books in many ways.

And GOLLUM: The New Wave is definitely not your "typical" science fiction. Though emerging from the field, it tended to turn much of said field on its head, for one thing -- one of the many reasons it caused such controversy. Another major one was its abandonment of the pulp tradition for a more literary approach (sometimes successful, sometimes not). I'd go so far as to say Dangerous Visions is one of the ten or so most influential anthologies ever published in the field, so I'd definitely call it a worthwhile read. (It's also an extremely lively volume; full of energy and a lot of the idealism of the period -- despite the fact that a lot of the stories in there are rather dark in tone.)

Another anthology I should have mentioned is Langdon Jones' The New SF, which was (in many ways) a lot like a larger issue of New Worlds; a very good sampling of what was going on in the wave at that time... and I only today managed to find a replacement copy and order it....

[iansales]

As I've no doubt said before, I'm not a fan of Ellison, the man or his writing. Delany, OTOH, I like a great deal and still count Dhalgren as a favourite novel. From what I remember of the last time I read Dangerous Visions, it hasn't aged well. It seemed to me that half of the authors in it were more concerned solely with breaking taboos than actually buying into the whole New Wave philosophy. And those taboos aren't, well, taboos any more.

[Connavar]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

I certainly don't mean to discourage you from getting Dangerous Visions (or Again, Dangerous Visions, for that matter), as both are excellent anthologies; your time would certainly not be wasted.

The most of his "famous" stories....? Well, then, go for The Essential Ellison (the 50-year retrospective edition, as it has some added material). It has the largest number of his more famous works for one volume, plus it gives a good overview of Ellison's career.

As for Dangerous Visions... this isn't an ordinary anthology, by any means; there's never been anything quite like those two volumes, and I doubt there ever will be (though some have tried). I just didn't want you to think you were getting a collection of Ellison's own work, when what you have is an anthology with a lot of different writers represented -- albeit Ellison's personality does permeate the books in many ways.

And GOLLUM: The New Wave is definitely not your "typical" science fiction. Though emerging from the field, it tended to turn much of said field on its head, for one thing -- one of the many reasons it caused such controversy. Another major one was its abandonment of the pulp tradition for a more literary approach (sometimes successful, sometimes not). I'd go so far as to say Dangerous Visions is one of the ten or so most influential anthologies ever published in the field, so I'd definitely call it a worthwhile read. (It's also an extremely lively volume; full of energy and a lot of the idealism of the period -- despite the fact that a lot of the stories in there are rather dark in tone.)

Another anthology I should have mentioned is Langdon Jones' The New SF, which was (in many ways) a lot like a larger issue of New Worlds; a very good sampling of what was going on in the wave at that time... and I only today managed to find a replacement copy and order it....

Im not overlooking Dangerous Visions, just interested more right now in a collection by Ellison.

I will get DV later on to try several authors at once. Delany and co.

[Nesacat]

Have never been terribly good at keeping track of the many different kinds of science fiction. I only recently found out what steam punk was for instance. However I am very fond of Ellison and Moorcock as well as Ballard and Dick.

I'll heartily second JD's suggestions regarding Ellison as well.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by iansales

As I've no doubt said before, I'm not a fan of Ellison, the man or his writing. Delany, OTOH, I like a great deal and still count Dhalgren as a favourite novel. From what I remember of the last time I read Dangerous Visions, it hasn't aged well. It seemed to me that half of the authors in it were more concerned solely with breaking taboos than actually buying into the whole New Wave philosophy. And those taboos aren't, well, taboos any more.

Obviously I disagree with you here to a certain degree. I will agree that the taboo aspects are (by and large) no longer applicable, but on a fairly recent rereading (about 5-6 years ago), I was pleasantly surprised to find how well the stories still held up as stories, though they may not be as startling as they were 41 years ago. In any event, like the book or not, it retains its place as one of the most influential anthologies published in the field, whether one considers that to be for better or for worse....

I would also say that there was more of a tendency with some writers to mistake form for substance at times, and this is when the New Wave was at its worst; but a remarkable amount of good material came out of the movement, that can still not only hold the attention, but challenge the reader in their perceptions and preconceptions, while remaining entertaining... if more often on an intellectual level rather than in the same way as an adventure story would.

And on the subject of favorites (and I'd agree that Dhalgren is a superb book and well deserves its reputation; ditto for the "ecological dystopia" novels Stand on Zanzibar, The Jagged Orbit, and The Sheep Look Up), one of my personal favorites is Ballard's The Atrocity Exhibition, which has since been republished in an expanded, annotated edition (Ballard himself providing the annotations) -- in fact, aside from "The Recognition" in DV, selections from this were among my first encounters with Ballard's writing, and I found it both very intriguing and, frankly, mind-blowing. I'd say it still retains these qualities to this day.

Anyone else here a fan of that particular book?

[D_Davis]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

Anyone else here a fan of that particular book?

Yes, I am.

I am, frankly, an admirer of everything I've read from Ballard.

[GOLLUM]

OH, never heard of that one. I'l have to track it down.