1990s SCIENCE FICTION BOOKS TBR
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
- Steve discusses his memory and feelings of SF in the 1990s and his desire to catch up with books he's meant to read for ages. Was it the beginning of the end for original, literary SF, or was it a mini golden age of quality?
#sciencefiction #sciencefictionbooks
#bookcollecting
#bookcollecting
#bookrecommendations
#booktube
#fantasy
#fantasybooks
#literaryfiction
Just to say I'll be replying to comments in a day or two, as I've just been diagnosed with pre-hypertension blood pressure and am trying to take it easy currently. Thanks to everyone, will get back to you soon.
Sorry to hear that Stephen. Keep well. Wishing you all the best.
Steve, wishing you a very positive result with the lifestyle changes and medical advice that will lead you to a less worrisome place regarding your health. It's "always something", right? Crikey. Cheers.
Take it as easy as you can, reply’s are nice, but not required, your health is…
really enjoyed the historical context and personal anecdotes preceding each book. apologies if you've already previously mentioned him on the channel, but one of my favorite current SF writers is sean mcmullen from australia. his short story collection COLOURS OF THE SOUL is fantastic, and his story "the precedent" is one of my favorite SF stories of all time. in my opinion, he does stellar work combining hard SF with great writing; a rare thing, as you've mentioned. anyway, great video!
I'm aware of him but not read him - another name goes on my list!
Are you familiar with Richard Calder, author of the Dead Girls trilogy? As far as I can tell, he's pretty obscure here in the states. I always felt he didn't get the attention he deserves. He's a very interesting writer, but maybe too stylish for most readers.
I've read short stories and been meaning to get to this novel (and sequels) for years. I'm just waiting to find a cheap mint first edition, really.
My understanding from a British writer friend is that the publishers put so much pressure on new writers to cough up a new volume every 2-3 years that they have nervous breakdowns. They've had years to work on their first titles, and then if they are successful in the market, the publishers drive them too hard rather than developing them.
There is no doubt that this must happen sometimes, especially with writers who -foolishly in my view - who commit to writing a series as a debut. Although this is commercially attractive to a publisher, it's also a huge risk- many experience a sales crash with a second volume (even if a first has sold well, not everyone will like it of course) which means a third is subsequently doomed. I think most truly great writers manage a book every 2-3 years.
What book or websites is the equivalent of the science fiction the 101 best novels book. As someone just diving into the genre there is so much and difficult to decipher the cream of the crop.
No website can be trusted. Books written and edited by professionals remain the thing. It's impossible to develop a proper understanding of SF without history and context. My book '100 Must Read Science Fiction Novels' is compact and includes history, context and an overview of the genre in 100 books. David Pringle's 'Science Fiction: The 100 Best Novels' is indispensible and covers the postwar to 1984 period. Di Fillipo & Broderick's book is the sequel to Pringle's.
Most important is the second edition (circa 1993) of 'The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction' by Clute and Nicholls. There is a website equivalent now, but newer entries are less convincing on value judgements and criticism.
Love this video, so thanks for that.
I use that reading guide from Broderick & Di Filippo - or rather, I picked novels from it regularly, right after I picked it up, and that was nearer to when it was first published. So, I read a lot of books from it in a flurry, and have been a bit lax in going to it for suggestions lately, though I still have Red Mars lying around unread. I also remember that when I acquired that reading guide, I did a quick count, and discovered that I had already read 13 books from it before it was published. I was encouraged by the fact that on that list were many books I had loved: Neverness, Under The Skin, Grass, A Fire Upon the Deep, Altered Carbon, The Sea and Summer, and a few more.
Now the brutal news…I will now list all the books I read because they are mentioned in Science Fiction, The 101 Best Novels: 1985-2010 that I either dislike, or actively despise: Glimmering, Cyteen, Light, Counting Heads, Boneshaker, Synners, In War Times, Zero History, The Fortunate Fall, and Distant Haze. Oh, and The White Queen.
What can I tell ya, this has been a spotty, bumpy list of books, at least as far as my tastes go. Further, Bloom and Transmigration of Souls were only average reads for me, but I really hope they click with you. You are focusing on books from that list that, unfortunately, don’t excite me…except for one; I thoroughly enjoyed Cave of Stars! Needless to say, I perked up right at the end of your roll call of TBR choices (Growing Up Weightless is not an “SF Masterwork, IMO, but was okay as non-challenging 1990s YA that did not manage to involve me emotionally).
The supremely good news (from my selfish perspective): Broderick & Di Filippo got me to read Blindsight. It was not on my radar, until that reading guide. And now it’s my second favourite SF novel (or maybe tied with Orbitsville).
And there have been other winners, for me, from that reading guide: The Time Traveler’s Wife is a huge favourite; The Shore of Women; Steal Across the Sky still haunts me; Holy Fire (I finally found something by Sterling I enjoyed! Did not think that would happen, after Schismatrix Plus and The Difference Engine); Ventus; Parable of the Sower; Shadow of the Scorpion. These are the ones I’m glad the list made me read.
So, Cave of Stars…yeah, good, I hope that goes well!
Orbitsville was a good one.
Well, I've been reading the Barton this week and I'll be covering it quite soon, I think, but will keep you in suspense for now.
When I bought and read a smaller pile of titles from the 101 just after it came out, the 5-6 books I selected generally didn't blow me away- the one that stuck in my head, though it is just leGuin lite, but not bad, is Slonczewski's 'A Door Into Ocean'. Obviously I'd read quite a few of the books in the selection prior to buying it, but it will be interesting to see if my 1990s prejudices are further confirmed...
Well, 'Orbitsville' is from 1975, so it's outside the scope of this video and the 101 book by DiFillipo and Broderick, but it's a fave of many - I love Shaw, but never been that fussed on BDA (Big Dumb Object) books much myself. Have you read 'Other Days, Other Eyes' or 'A Wreath of Stars'?
looking forward to the 90's vids, thanks as always.
Well, there have been a couple since this one, but mostly in round-ups where I've talked about my struggles with DNFing 90s SF.
I LOVED the quick aside on Steampunk and Cyberpunk, that side glance, golden.
It had to be done...
I enjoyed Queen City Jazz and I started Bloom once but couldn't get into it, still looking forward to reading it eventually. It definitely reminds me of Blood Music as well. I also enjoyed the Omega Point trilogy by George Zebrowski when I read it but in hindsight its probably not that great lol. I've always been on the lookout for more of his stuff though, I just never see it or even see anyone talk about him.
Hi Matt, good to hear from you! I'm reading Zebrowski's 'Caves of Space' at the moment - the third from my 1990s TBR video I'm tackling and am enjoying it. I'm thinking now I'll do the first video of my '1990s SF I've Read Recently' in November. There will be a Vernor Vinge Video coming from me too, but this may be in December. As ever, my friend, our SF book adventures on YT continue apace. Hope you are well!
I think her books are criminally overlooked. Much better than Blood Music in my opinion.
I'm not familiar with many of those books, but some do look interesting. I do love Gwyneth Jones' books and the White Queen trilogy are some of her best work. I find that I have to reread her books a few times because she puts so much information into them at sentence level. It is easy to miss essential facts. Her aliens are some of the best that anyone has created, and, with no spoilers, the gap in understanding leaves both sides completely bewildered. There are many short stories and a later novel (Spirit) set in the same universe. Have you read her Bold as Love series about rock stars taking over the government and turning all of Britain into a giant rock festival? It is much better than it sounds, full of Arthurian references and heavy rock!
Another favorite is Elizabeth Hand. The Glimmering is perhaps not one of her best, but later fantasy/horror stories like Black Light and Waking the Moon are great. Also her later crime stories about an aging Punk photographer with a drug problem are much in the M John Harrison style. She also wrote a short novel called Wylding Hall about an English folk/rock group (think Fairport) encountering the supernatural while recording in a nicely spooky old house.
I too have gone off much modern hard sf but may pick up some of these to give them a try.
Jones is very rich, I agree. Hand I'll get back to you about...
Thank you for the list looks great
I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on cyberpunk and on steam punk. I accidentaly came across a steam punk meet up in a pub recently. I said to to my mate. I think, THEY think it's about goggles on hats. Great minds. 😀
I was in Frome one day about 7-8 years ago and there was a 'Steampunk Fair' at a venue there. I went around every stall (there must have been twenty of them) and asked every stall-holder if they knew the origin of the word, who coined it etc. NONE of them did. I think that says it all - the only real Steampunk is stuff from the 70s, Jeter/Blaylock/Powers and Gibson/Sterling's book. The rest is ...well, let's not go there! Cyberpunk is a different matter, but again I think there's a few originals and that's it. Video will come on this.
Hi - interesting talk & look forward to any follow-up. Having been away from the SF scene for so long, none of these names were familiar (don't burn me as a heretic). I do agree that I would rather read a short good book than an average long one.I think that is why I enjoyed short stories when young plus if you didn't like one then there was always the next.
Is that shelf behind you sagging under the weight or is it an illusion by the camera?
It's weight....
Another great video... I look forward as these to wrap up long days before I read myself to sleep (both because they're relaxing and that they're so long I can't watch them during a normal day). I've only been reading adult fiction for four or five years and have only read somewhere around 300 SF novels/collections, but I've grown to view the 90s as... the decade where decades could no longer be largely classified by big movements in the genre (such as the Golden Age, or 70s Hard SF, or 80s cyberpunk). The decade where a little bit of everything was produced and retailed all at once, where the subgroups started by mix more freely. Is that just my conjecture, or is that a backable noticing? (Also, PS, I'm happy to say it's not just older people who have caught the A Format fetish!)
I'd say you're broadly correct. The history of genre SF prior to the nineties was studded with (r)evolutionary moments and although none of them were airtight (unlike the terminology applied to superhero comics, which is more tightly historically based), the 90s showed (arguably) development of existing tropes and approaches...or did it? We'll see in future videos on SF in the 90s, hope to get my first look at these books up later in November.
I'm sad to say Stephen,I know none of those Authors,so I will be looking forward to your reviews.The 90's and 00's are somethimg of a blnd spot for me,and I can't say I would go out of my way to track any books from this period down,not due to any particular dislike of the period,But simply because my own TBR is frighteningly large and there are only so many books one can read in a lifetime(especially at my age),so unless I hear a rave review,that will remain the case,for me
My TBR is immense too. Anything special will be singled out and analysed in clips to come!
Stephen could you please tell me the name of the book at your right shoulder on the stand. The one with the lady in white and the castle in the distance. I had the same one as a teen in the 80ies and I just can’t think what it was.
'The Hormone Jungle' by Robert Reed, which I think is very early 90s, but I may be wrong there...
Ah - that's it. Thanks!
I'm over a certain age, but I don't have an A format fetish, does that mean I'm a failure as science fiction book collector?
You're right about authors not being valued by publishers these days. Publisher such as Faber and Gollancz used ro invest in their authors and allow them years to develop. In the UK familiar names, Aldiss and Ballard for example, were allowed that time to develop and went on to became substantial writers; they also made money, both leaving estates worth millions.
Absolutely James.
Hi Stephen have you read The Gormenghast trilogy by Mervyn Peake?
Of course, many years ago, with a re-read of the first two within the last decade. As a Moorcock and Harrison fan, they were essential - plus, back in the late 70s/early 80s, they sold really well, this was as the Fantasy boom that started in '77 was still gathering pace and only dominated by a handful of new writers until around 85/86 when it got silly...
Who else nearly zoned out by just staring at that virtual zen cover?
I think a lot of them are still in that zone...I know I am...
Considering some of these authors as potential new-era (to me) reads has me nervous. Why? Because I've already found my comfort zone with their predecessors and also, as you stated, OB, it's all been written and anything newer is just rehashing long-established premises. I feel there is a rush by contemporary authors (and the bottom line driving the publishing industry to push push push new perspectives and strive to be noticed) into, well, silliness, they'll say anything to stand out from the din, and I don't relish spending money and time finding out I was right. I suppose I'm hardcore. Plus, intellectually, I'd rather hang out with my contemporaries than a bunch of newbs I suppose. All that aside, thanks much for sharing your insight and experience. It has really helped me rekindle my interest in sci fi and sci fantasy. Cheers.
I think it was Dozois who would go after mood in the short stories he selected. He never said it but I think he also thought most of the premises could be easily sectioned off into a handful of categories and the only difference in most stories was mood and characters.
@@apilgrim8715 I very much agree my friend.
Completely understand your POV on this and I'm largely the same, but now and again I like to challenge my comofort zone, usually proving to myself that I was right all along- being in the book trade so long has actually given me a kind of instinct which is pretty reliable on what I'll like and what to avoid. But now and then, in my position, you have to read things to ensure you can critique them. So we'll see.
Glad you're enjoying the channel!
I think most editors will have a methodology like this, or an agenda, or a mix of both. Overall, I'd go for quality of prose above all else, but it's interesting how editors have in the past tried to create or have created or natured a (r)evolutionary zeitgeist in SF. Or perhaps have tried to construct a 'scene' or 'moment' because it's good for the book business and to keep their income coming in. Writing and editing are jobs, after all.
One instance that fascinates me is Pringle's editorship of Interzone: now David and I are online friends and I've read a lot of his work since the 1980s and I consider him a very fine critic and writer indeed - and I'm honoured to have contributed to the Ballard memorial anthology series 'Deep Ends' alongside him and people like Di Filippo and Max Jakubowski.
Looking back at Interzone, although I loved early issues - I would, as it was all by writers I already revered - the new breed of those days (Baxter, McCauley, Brown) never did much for me, even though I've met a number of them later and they're good guys. They seemed way too enamoured as a group of a kind of revisionist hard SF that owed more to Clark than say Ballard, which I found problematic personally. Was David just fostering a new school of writers as many publishers have, to keep the business of SF going with a new generation? After all, US writers were popping up in quantity and of high quality oeuvres from the get-go - Gibson, Sterling, Shepherd, Leigh Kennedy, Swanwick.
The Interzone group- inasmuch as any writers can be said to be a group - seemed to support the new revisionist zeitgeist that came out of Banks' 'Consider Phlebas' (here we go, back to 1930s tropes). Even the very wonderful Colin Greenland produced a -admittedly very good- Space Opera.
I always think I'd be so tough as an editor that I'd struggle to publish anything if I had a 'zine or book imprint LOL.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal All great points OB! I hope I didn't sound snobbish. I'm just a very comfortable-in-my-own-skin sort and reticent to embrace new adventure. I wholeheartedly agree with your point about the current industry trying to encourage/sustain interest and I get that. LOL indeed, on the "if I were an editor" comment! Your conscientious approach to your YT channel is refreshing insofar as you "work it", the lack of doing so is a widespread malady in this YT world. Plus, your content is positive. I would estimate at least 90% of YT content/channels is/are negative, trite and exploitative. Thank God for your channel! Cheers.
Paul de Fillipo did the book reviews for Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine for a while so I'm sure he found plenty of material for his book there.
Yep, no doubt that helped!
Agree that the trend of long, padded novels is awful. I don’t get it. I remember reading The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo when it was the hot thing, and wondered why the author felt the need to include so many details about what the main character had for breakfast. The plot could have been contained in a 250-page book instead of nearly 700.
Well yes. That's the ONLY Scandinavian book I've read - and I've read quite a few- that didn't feel like it was from Scandinavia at all.
Ha ha. Then, of course, there is, want to read (Goodreads)
Goodreads -avoid like the plague, I say.