IMHO, what dates some "classic" sf is not the "advanced technology" (I always get a kick out of seeing how close they come or how wide of the mark they go) but the rigid, unchanging gender roles. I remember being very disheartened by a Philip K. Dick book (UBIQ?) where, in the midst of this wonderfully-built futuristic world, the only thing he could find for women to do was to be secretaries. On the other hand, if a story grabs me, I accept that the gender roles reflect the time in which the book was written and read on.
Also, I think something Roger Ebert said about movies might be applicable to books: he said only when a movie is old enough to stop being dated and start being history, can we see if it is truly timeless.
5 comments:
Dated science fiction novels people should still read...
Philip Jose Farmer's Riverworld (the sequels sort of fell flat)
Arthur C. Clarke, Rendevous With Rama
Larry Niven, Ringworld (it's now available in an edition for schools, with discussion questions) (the sequels were also not as good)
Isaac Asimov, The Gods Themselves and The Caves of Steel (and...and...and..)
Robert Heinlein, the "future history" books; I'm particularly fond of Revolt in 2100
Murray Leinster, Sidewise in Time
John Brunner, Stand on Zanzibar
Frank Herbert, Dune
Ray Bradbury, Something Wicked This Way Comes, Fahrenheit 451, and The Martian Chronicles
Kurt Vonnegut, Mother Night (not really SF), Cat's Cradle, and Slaughterhouse 5
I liked Ann McCafferty's Dragonriders books, but haven't read them since the 1960s, so I don't know how they hold up.
Ursula LeGuin, The Left Hand of Darkness and The Lathe of Heaven
Roger Zelazny, Lord of Light; also the entire Princes of Amber series (not the ones written by other people after he died)
Samuel R Delany, The Einstein Intersection, Babel-17, Stars in My Pocket Like Grains of Sand
That seems sufficient without looking anything up...
Not bad. I could add a few dozen, too, but I'm lazy.
IMHO, what dates some "classic" sf is not the "advanced technology" (I always get a kick out of seeing how close they come or how wide of the mark they go) but the rigid, unchanging gender roles. I remember being very disheartened by a Philip K. Dick book (UBIQ?) where, in the midst of this wonderfully-built futuristic world, the only thing he could find for women to do was to be secretaries. On the other hand, if a story grabs me, I accept that the gender roles reflect the time in which the book was written and read on.
Also, I think something Roger Ebert said about movies might be applicable to books: he said only when a movie is old enough to stop being dated and start being history, can we see if it is truly timeless.
I miss Ebert.
Post a Comment