Best-Selling SF book of all time?
BackTo1913
as HG Wells), or books which have more horror or fantasmagoric contents
than SF.
Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by George
Lucas. (Yes, it was based on a movie, but it probably outsold all other
SF books.) Best-selling author, probably Heinlien.
--
Traditional Values instead of Progressivism.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jordan S. Bassior
> By a SF book, I don't mean those proto-SF books in 19th century (such
>as HG Wells)
I'd call Wells' work "science fiction" ... between them Wells and Verne
virtually defined the genre.
>Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by George
>Lucas. (Yes, it was based on a movie, but it probably outsold all other
>SF books.)
It sold only because of the movie ... it wasn't actually that well-written.
Sincerely Yours,
Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and
a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
Peter Meilinger
: By a SF book, I don't mean those proto-SF books in 19th century (such
: as HG Wells), or books which have more horror or fantasmagoric contents
: than SF.
I'm sorry, and I know I'm dealing with an idiot here, but this is
just amazing. I'd really, REALLY like to see a decent definition of
Science-Fiction that excludes The Time Machine or The War of the Worlds.
: Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by George
: Lucas. (Yes, it was based on a movie, but it probably outsold all other
: SF books.) Best-selling author, probably Heinlien.
I doubt that very much, on both counts. Did Star Wars even make the
bestseller lists? At least Heinlein has had years to accrue sales,
but I'd still be surprised if any of his books were the top sellers.
I don't know what would be though. Some of the Star Trek books seem
to sell remarkably well, ditto the Star Wars tie-ins. How many
copies have those Harry Potter books sold so far?
Pete
Aaron M. Renn
>: By a SF book, I don't mean those proto-SF books in 19th century (such
>: as HG Wells), or books which have more horror or fantasmagoric contents
>: than SF.
>
>I'm sorry, and I know I'm dealing with an idiot here, but this is
>just amazing. I'd really, REALLY like to see a decent definition of
>Science-Fiction that excludes The Time Machine or The War of the Worlds.
It's certainly legitimate to draw a distinction between pre-1930's or
so books that are science fiction like, and modern genre SF.
--
Aaron M. Renn (ar...@urbanophile.com) http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/
Aaron M. Renn
> By a SF book, I don't mean those proto-SF books in 19th century (such
>as HG Wells), or books which have more horror or fantasmagoric contents
>than SF.
>
>Lucas. (Yes, it was based on a movie, but it probably outsold all other
>SF books.) Best-selling author, probably Heinlien.
I'd guess the best selling SF book of all time is Dune. My paperback
from some years ago claims it's sold over 10 million copies.
Peter Meilinger
: On 30 Oct 1999 17:36:31 GMT, Peter Meilinger <mell...@bu.edu> wrote:
: >: By a SF book, I don't mean those proto-SF books in 19th century (such
: >: as HG Wells), or books which have more horror or fantasmagoric contents
: >: than SF.
: >I'm sorry, and I know I'm dealing with an idiot here, but this is
: >just amazing. I'd really, REALLY like to see a decent definition of
: >Science-Fiction that excludes The Time Machine or The War of the Worlds.
: It's certainly legitimate to draw a distinction between pre-1930's or
: so books that are science fiction like, and modern genre SF.
That I can see, but it's all SF, whether SF means Science Fiction or
Speculative Fiction or something else I haven't come across. It would
be Pre-30's SF vs. Post-30's SF or something like that. Useful for
discussions and to define exactly what you're talking about, but
not excluding some of the greatest SF ever written from the club
because it's too old or whatever.
Pete
ROU Evolution in Action
Aaron M. Renn <ar...@urbanophile.com> asserted
>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:10:31 GMT, BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> By a SF book, I don't mean those proto-SF books in 19th century (such
>>as HG Wells), or books which have more horror or fantasmagoric contents
>>than SF.
>>
>>Lucas. (Yes, it was based on a movie, but it probably outsold all other
>>SF books.) Best-selling author, probably Heinlien.
>
>I'd guess the best selling SF book of all time is Dune. My paperback
>from some years ago claims it's sold over 10 million copies.
That's pretty good, but if 'SF' includes Fantasy, then _LOTR_ should win
by a country mile. Shoot, I've bought 3 copies in various forms.
Also things like '1984' (Orwell) probably sold well, not least because
several zillion got bought for schools where they were occasionally part
of the syllabus.
ROU Evolution in Action
Aaron M. Renn
>>I'd guess the best selling SF book of all time is Dune. My paperback
>>from some years ago claims it's sold over 10 million copies.
>
>That's pretty good, but if 'SF' includes Fantasy, then _LOTR_ should win
>by a country mile. Shoot, I've bought 3 copies in various forms.
>
>Also things like '1984' (Orwell) probably sold well, not least because
>several zillion got bought for schools where they were occasionally part
>of the syllabus.
I'm not sure how many copies 1984 sold, but it might well be more than
10 million. The front cover of my old Ballantine editions of LotR
(which aren't too much older that my copy of Dune), claim that series
only sold eight million.
Mark Hanson
BackTo1913 wrote:
> By a SF book, I don't mean those proto-SF books in 19th century (such
> as HG Wells), or books which have more horror or fantasmagoric contents
> than SF.
>
> Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by George
> Lucas.
I think you mean, "...by Alan Dean Foster," who actually wrote the
novelization.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>Mark Hanson said:
>
>>I think you mean, "...by Alan Dean Foster," who actually wrote the
>>novelization.
>
>Oh, he ghost-wrote the first one?
Yup.
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 10/1/99
DRAGON WEATHER is now available -- ISBN 0-312-86978-9
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<ama...@abs.net> wrote:
>Mark Hanson <mpha...@erols.com> wrote in message
>news:381CB798...@erols.com...
>>
>> BackTo1913 wrote:
>> >
>> > Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by
>George
>> > Lucas.
>>
>> I think you mean, "...by Alan Dean Foster," who actually wrote the
>> novelization.
>
>The rumor I heard was that Donald Glut wrote the novelization. But I
>wouldn't be surprised if it was Alan Dean Foster instead. He wrote
>"Splinter in the Mind's Eye" (*) before Glut wrote the novelization of
>"The Empire Strikes Back."
The way I heard it, from reliable sources but not Foster or Lucas, was
that Foster ghosted the first novelization for a flat fee, and was
then allowed to write _Splinter of the Mind's Eye_ to make up for
being shafted on the royalties on the novelization when the movie
turned into a phenomenon.
Anne M. Marble
news:381CB798...@erols.com...
>
> BackTo1913 wrote:
> >
> > Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by
George
> > Lucas.
>
> I think you mean, "...by Alan Dean Foster," who actually wrote the
> novelization.
The rumor I heard was that Donald Glut wrote the novelization. But I
wouldn't be surprised if it was Alan Dean Foster instead. He wrote
"Splinter in the Mind's Eye" (*) before Glut wrote the novelization of
"The Empire Strikes Back."
* Sexual tension between Luke and Princess Leia?! Ewww! (Good thing
they didn't give the series to V.C. Andrews...)
BackTo1913
1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but different.
And the SF element is not that strong.
Fantasy books are not SFs, although similar.
> Aaron M. Renn (ar...@urbanophile.com)
http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/
>
--
Not Libertie, Egalitie, and Fraternitie.
Not Peace, Bread, and Land.
Not Faith, Hope and Charity.
Only Authority, Obedience and Efficiency.
Jordan S. Bassior
>I think you mean, "...by Alan Dean Foster," who actually wrote the
>novelization.
Oh, he ghost-wrote the first one?
Sincerely Yours,
Johnny Pez
>Mark Hanson said:
>
>>I think you mean, "...by Alan Dean Foster," who actually wrote the
>>novelization.
>
>Oh, he ghost-wrote the first one?
Lucas comes out and says so in his intro to the latest edition.
--
Johnny Pez
You think you're funny, but you're not. -- Wally
Vlatko Juric-Kokic
wrote:
> The front cover of my old Ballantine editions of LotR
>(which aren't too much older that my copy of Dune), claim that series
>only sold eight million.
According to a book about Tolkien I've recently read, LOTR sold more
than 50 million copies. In various editions. That makes it the biggest
seller in history. After LOTR is The Hobbit, with about 34 millions.
And only after that is Gone With The Wind, about 28 millions.
vlatko
--
vlatko.ju...@zg.tel.hr
Evelyn C. Leeper
Johnny Pez <johnn...@aol.com> wrote:
> Jordan S. Bassior writes:
>
> >Mark Hanson said:
> >
> >>I think you mean, "...by Alan Dean Foster," who actually wrote the
> >>novelization.
> >
> >Oh, he ghost-wrote the first one?
>
> Lucas comes out and says so in his intro to the latest edition.
Just a little note here:
Mark wrote an article entitled "Who Wrote STARS WARS?" in which he
concluded it was Alan Dean Foster. It was published in "Lan's
Lantern"--in the fall of 1977, *years* before anyone else suggested or
admitted this. Foster's only response to the article (at the time)
was, "Interesting."
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over
public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman.
Eric D. Berge
Peter Meilinger wrote:
> : Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by George
> : Lucas. (Yes, it was based on a movie, but it probably outsold all other
> : SF books.) Best-selling author, probably Heinlien.
>
> I doubt that very much, on both counts. Did Star Wars even make the
> bestseller lists?
Yes.
> At least Heinlein has had years to accrue sales,
> but I'd still be surprised if any of his books were the top sellers.
I would guess that Ray Bradbury would be right up there; alot of his stuff
is seen as quasi-respectable by school librarians and such. Although Verne
and Wells have probably established pretty dominant leads by now, given the
amount of time their books have been on the market.
--
Eric Berge
---------------------------------------------------
Clay lies still, but blood's a rover
Breath's a ware that will not keep
Up, lad! When the journey's over
There'll be time enough to sleep.
- A.E.Housman, "Reveille"
---------------------------------------------------
Mark Hanson
Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
> The way I heard it, from reliable sources but not Foster or Lucas, was
> that Foster ghosted the first novelization for a flat fee, and was
> then allowed to write _Splinter of the Mind's Eye_ to make up for
> being shafted on the royalties on the novelization when the movie
> turned into a phenomenon.
That sounds familiar. "Splinter" was an excellent book, though it's been a
long time since I've read it.
Mark
Keith Stokes
>The rumor I heard was that Donald Glut wrote the novelization. But I
>wouldn't be surprised if it was Alan Dean Foster instead. He wrote
>"Splinter in the Mind's Eye" (*) before Glut wrote the novelization of
>"The Empire Strikes Back."
Foster signed my copy.
Keith
Keith Stokes
>Fantasy books are not SFs, although similar.
Point to the definative source that says this.
Keith
Scott Drellishak
Mark Hanson <mpha...@erols.com> wrote:
)Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
)
)> The way I heard it, from reliable sources but not Foster or Lucas, was
)> that Foster ghosted the first novelization for a flat fee, and was
)> then allowed to write _Splinter of the Mind's Eye_ to make up for
)> being shafted on the royalties on the novelization when the movie
)> turned into a phenomenon.
)
)That sounds familiar. "Splinter" was an excellent book, though it's been a
)long time since I've read it.
So good that Foster reused a medium-sized chunk of it years later in
_Flinx in Flux_ (the journey through the caves).
--
/ Scott Drellishak \
| "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced." |
\ "Perfect paranoia is perfect awareness." /
James Gassaway
--
"Why are you talking to me? She's the one with the gun."
P.D. TILLMAN
In a previous article, dtr...@linex.com (James Gassaway) says:
>The Bible.
>
No, that's a fantasy.
--
The history of the World, my sweet,
is who gets eaten and who gets to eat.
-Sweeney Todd
--
mstemper - psc . com
>On 31 Oct 1999 17:52:05 GMT, ar...@urbanophile.com (Aaron M. Renn)
>wrote:
>> The front cover of my old Ballantine editions of LotR
>>(which aren't too much older that my copy of Dune), claim that series
>>only sold eight million.
>
>According to a book about Tolkien I've recently read, LOTR sold more
>than 50 million copies. In various editions. That makes it the biggest
>seller in history.
<nitpick>
Is that "50 million copies of LotR", or is that "50 million copies of
any book that is part of LotR"? IOW, would 17E6 copies of TFotR, 17E6
copies of TTT, and 16E6 copies of TRotK be 50 million?
</nitpick>
--
Michael F. Stemper
mstemper @ siemens - psc . com
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Science major: "Why does it work?"
Engineering major: "How does it work?"
Accounting major: "How much will it cost?"
Liberal Arts major: "Do you want fries with that?"
Vlatko Juric-Kokic
Stemper) wrote:
>In article <381d6e6d...@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>, vlatko.ju...@zg.tel.hr (Vlatko Juric-Kokic) writes:
>>According to a book about Tolkien I've recently read, LOTR sold more
>>than 50 million copies.
>any book that is part of LotR"? IOW, would 17E6 copies of TFotR, 17E6
>copies of TTT, and 16E6 copies of TRotK be 50 million?
Er ... you mean, somebody ... 17E6 somebodies bought the first part,
17E6 somebodies bought the second part, and only 16E6 somebodies
bought the third part? What, a million people got disgusted with the
first two parts? :-)
Just kidding. Actually, no, the author didn't say, but I think it was
LOTR as a whole. Otherwise it wouldn't make sense. Unless you are a
book promoter or something. :-)
vlatko
--
vlatko.ju...@zg.tel.hr
Lee Ann Rucker
vlatko.ju...@zg.tel.hr (Vlatko Juric-Kokic) writes:
>>
>>According to a book about Tolkien I've recently read, LOTR sold more
>>seller in history.
The Hubbardites claim X million copies sold of _Battlefield Earth_
(currently being filmed, pity the MST3K guys aren't at it anymore) but
most people figure the number of copies *printed* is significantly lower
than X.
--
Working at Apple for Javasoft
lru...@aruba.apple.com
Also at (but not very often) leeann...@eng.sun.com
Justin Bacon
writes:
>1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but different.
>And the SF element is not that strong.
Interesting. So it isn't SF, because it would interfere with your cock-eyed
theory.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Justin Bacon
writes:
>Probably the best-selling SF book of all time was Star Wars, by George
>Lucas. (Yes, it was based on a movie, but it probably outsold all other
>SF books.) Best-selling author, probably Heinlien.
Actually, novelizations of movies sell better than a lot things -- but they
aren't "best sellers" by any stretch of the imagination. I doubt that
novelization topped 1,000,000 copies sold -- and there are many, many, many SF
books which have beaten that relatively easy barrier.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Jordan S. Bassior
>In article <7vj1fa$7k9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com>
>writes:
>
>>1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but different.
>>And the SF element is not that strong.
>
>Interesting. So it isn't SF, because it would interfere with your cock-eyed
>theory.
Of course, _1984_ *is* science fiction, because it was written in 1948. It's
been overtaken by the passage of time, but of course it's science fiction ...
Orwell postulated massive worldwise social and political changes, resulting in
worldwide Stalinism. It's allegorical science fiction of the "If This Goes On"
subgenre.
Stefan Raets
wrote:
>Justin Bacon said:
>
>>In article <7vj1fa$7k9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com>
>>writes:
>>
>>>1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but different.
>>>And the SF element is not that strong.
>>
>>Interesting. So it isn't SF, because it would interfere with your cock-eyed
>>theory.
>
>Of course, _1984_ *is* science fiction, because it was written in 1948. It's
>been overtaken by the passage of time, but of course it's science fiction ...
>Orwell postulated massive worldwise social and political changes, resulting in
>worldwide Stalinism. It's allegorical science fiction of the "If This Goes On"
>subgenre.
Yes! I am so glad that someone finally corrected this statement by
Quonster. I've been biting my teeth for a week now - but I refuse to
get involved in his threads by responding to him directly. This was
the only Quonster thread I haven't killed yet, just to see if someone
would finally correct him.
Stefan Raets
--
********************************************** ***** **** *** ** *
* Currently reading: "Schismatrix Plus",
* by Bruce Sterling
********************************************** ***** **** *** ** *
Remove the spamblocker for personal replies.
Robert A. Woodward
tria...@aol.com (Justin Bacon) wrote:
I have this vague recollection that the novelization of "Star Wars" sold
about 5 million copies (by 1979) - I do have the issue of Locus that
mentioned the number somewhere. That doesn't include the recent reprint of
course.
ROU Evolution in Action
wonderful Justin Bacon <tria...@aol.com> asserted
>In article <7vj1fa$7k9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com>
>writes:
>
>>1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but different.
>>And the SF element is not that strong.
>
>Interesting. So it isn't SF, because it would interfere with your cock-eyed
>theory.
He's trolling again Justin, Ignore him. Of course 1984 =is= alternate
history =now=, but back when it was published it was definitely SF. I
doubt he's read it anyway.
ROU Evolution in Action
Rikardia
If he did read it, he was ready to sent his resume to the bad guys. (Where
do they put the ads for lackeys in the classified section?) Oh, wait a
minute, the government in 1984 is a left-wing dictatorship, so that means he
must think they're evil.
Anyway, he probably hasn't read it. (Sorry, reading the Cliff Notes version
doesn't count.)
This whole thread only proves that he knows as much about science fiction
(and other genres) -- and book sale results -- as he does about history,
politics, economy, and sociology.
sands
sands
Lee Ann Rucker wrote in message ...
>>In article <381d6e6d...@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
>vlatko.ju...@zg.tel.hr (Vlatko Juric-Kokic) writes:
>>>
>>>According to a book about Tolkien I've recently read, LOTR sold more
>>>than 50 million copies. In various editions. That makes it the biggest
>>>seller in history.
>
>The Hubbardites claim X million copies sold of _Battlefield Earth_
>(currently being filmed, pity the MST3K guys aren't at it anymore) but
>most people figure the number of copies *printed* is significantly lower
>than X.
Hm, bringing up Hubbard, I am brought to mind of the bible. Certainly *that*
book has sold the most copies of anything in history, and there are quite a
few who believe it fits into the sci-fi/fantasy category...
Just a thought,
Sands
Dorothy J Heydt
sands <sgr...@earthcafe.com> wrote:
>
>Hm, bringing up Hubbard, I am brought to mind of the bible. Certainly *that*
>book has sold the most copies of anything in history, and there are quite a
>few who believe it fits into the sci-fi/fantasy category...
And it's been suggested it could'e been published as an Ace
Double, suitably cut of course, with the titles MASTER OF CHAOS
and THE THING WITH THREE SOULS.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Andrew Maizels
> And it's been suggested it could'e been published as an Ace
> Double, suitably cut of course, with the titles MASTER OF CHAOS
> and THE THING WITH THREE SOULS.
I thought the Old Testament was retitled WAR GOD OF ANCIENT ISRAEL. I
seem to have misplaced my copy, unfortunately.
Andrew.
--
The sensitive soul who designs the One.Tel ads and the annual reports
has been let loose on the walls, armed with what seems like the nation's
entire supply of phosphorescent paint.
-- The Australia Financial Review, Tuesday, September 21, 1999
Nancy Lebovitz
Andrew Maizels <and...@one.net.au> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>> And it's been suggested it could'e been published as an Ace
>> Double, suitably cut of course, with the titles MASTER OF CHAOS
>> and THE THING WITH THREE SOULS.
>
>I thought the Old Testament was retitled WAR GOD OF ANCIENT ISRAEL. I
>seem to have misplaced my copy, unfortunately.
>
as good. Wasn't there also an Ace Double title for the Koran?
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com
October '99 calligraphic button catalogue available by email!
sands
Dorothy J Heydt wrote in message ...
>In article <s2cd4v...@corp.supernews.com>,
>sands <sgr...@earthcafe.com> wrote:
>>
>>Hm, bringing up Hubbard, I am brought to mind of the bible. Certainly
*that*
>>book has sold the most copies of anything in history, and there are quite
a
>>few who believe it fits into the sci-fi/fantasy category...
>
>Double, suitably cut of course, with the titles MASTER OF CHAOS
>and THE THING WITH THREE SOULS.
I like your thinking! It's all about the marketing, baby.
William December Starr
ROU Evolution in Action said:
>>> 1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but different.
>>> And the SF element is not that strong. [BackTo1913]
>>
>> Interesting. So it isn't SF, because it would interfere with your
>> cock-eyed theory. [Justin Bacon]
>
> He's trolling again Justin, Ignore him.
Are you sure the Feudalist is _capable_ of trolling? I mean, isn't
there an "intent" element of the crime that requires a realization
that one _is_ trolling?
-- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>
ROU Evolution in Action
Starr <wds...@crl.com> asserted
You mean he may have disconnected his brain =by accident= ???
ROU Evolution in Action
Justin Bacon
(Jordan S. Bassior) writes:
>Justin Bacon said:
>
>>In article <7vj1fa$7k9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com>
>>writes:
>>
>>>1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but different.
>>>And the SF element is not that strong.
>>
>>Interesting. So it isn't SF, because it would interfere with your cock-eyed
>>theory.
>
>Of course, _1984_ *is* science fiction, because it was written in 1948. It's
>been overtaken by the passage of time, but of course it's science fiction ...
>Orwell postulated massive worldwise social and political changes, resulting in
>worldwide Stalinism. It's allegorical science fiction of the "If This Goes
>On" subgenre.
Yes, of *course* it's science fiction. I've already realized that actually
arguing with the Quonster is like arguing with a a brain-damaged five year old,
so I try to derive some value from his presence by ridiculing him at every
opportunity.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
sands
Justin Bacon wrote in message
<19991110040121...@ngol08.aol.com>...
Hey, I *knew* a brain damaged 5 year old, and Quonster, you are *no* brain
damaged 5 year old.
Sands, the other white meat.
>
>Justin Bacon
>tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Anton Sherwood
MASTER OF CHAOS
WAR GOD OF ISRAEL
THE THING WITH THREE SOULS
--
Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685 *\\* http://www.jps.net/antons/
willre...@my-deja.com
tria...@aol.com (Justin Bacon) wrote:
> In article <19991106032426...@ng-fl1.aol.com>,
jsba...@aol.com
> (Jordan S. Bassior) writes:
>
> >
> >>In article <7vj1fa$7k9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, BackTo1913 <feudalist@my-
deja.com>
> >>writes:
> >>
> >>>1984 is more like an alternate-history novel, similar but
different.
> >>>And the SF element is not that strong.
> >>
> >>Interesting. So it isn't SF, because it would interfere with your
cock-eyed
> >>theory.
> >
> >Of course, _1984_ *is* science fiction, because it was written in
1948. It's
> >been overtaken by the passage of time, but of course it's science
fiction ...
> >Orwell postulated massive worldwise social and political changes,
resulting in
> >worldwide Stalinism. It's allegorical science fiction of the "If
This Goes
> >On" subgenre.
>
actually
> arguing with the Quonster is like arguing with a a brain-damaged five
year old,
> so I try to derive some value from his presence by ridiculing him at
every
> opportunity.
If you mean a brain-damaged five year old HAMSTER, I will agree. Of
course, I agree that 1984 is SF, although no bookstore will or SHOULD
put it on the SF shelves.
You got to put the hay where the goats 'kin git it.
--
Bill Reich
I expect your names to SHINE
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
willre...@my-deja.com
das...@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood) wrote:
> A trilogy?
> MASTER OF CHAOS
> WAR GOD OF ISRAEL
> THE THING WITH THREE SOULS
Wonderful. I was thinking that the people who promote that book are
always saying that it is the best selling book of all time and it IS SF
or Fantasy, anyway. BTW, it is easily the most STOLEN book of all time,
according to every bookseller I ever talked to.
--
Bill Reich
Quonster, Quonster burning bright
On the NewsGroup in the night.
What immortal hand or eye
Could match your bad ideas or try?
Quonster, in the mind of man
You are like a load of sand,
Tossed into the big machine
Keeping it from running clean.
Michael Caldwell
>A trilogy?
>MASTER OF CHAOS
>WAR GOD OF ISRAEL
>THE THING WITH THREE SOULS
I hear it's recently been released as an omnibus edition, although
the old copies with the pretty illustrations are much nicer IMHO.
--
MJ Stoddard
inspired more plots and characters than any others? And it is a solid member
of the SF category, unlike religious texts, sagas, and epic poems.
Sheer age and class-assignments make it popular, and best-selling.