10 ENTERTAINING SF Books People Should Read

[Shawn Wilson]

Why not?

The Mote in God's Eye

Protector

Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen

The Cosmic Computer

Galactic Patrol

1632

...To Say Nothing of the Dog

The Honor of the Queen

The Stainless Steel Rat

Starship Troopers

[Lynn McGuire]

I think that I have read all of these. I am not sure about "Lord
Kalvan" or "The Cosmic Computer".

This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it. These are
all comfort SF.

Lynn

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
>> Why not?

Well, here's my take.

>>
>> The Mote in God's Eye

Read, disliked.

>> Protector
Never read, having lost all interest in Niven by then.

>> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen
I think I did, but can't remember much about it.
Alternate-timeline by Piper, mostly in other-Pennsylvania.

>> The Cosmic Computer
Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
be so GOOD ...

>> Galactic Patrol
Well, of course.

>> 1632
Nope.

>> ...To Say Nothing of the Dog

A favorite of mine. It does help if you have read _Three Men in
a Boat_ and all the Lord Peter Wimseys.

>> The Honor of the Queen

I have probably read this, and several other Harringtons, but
they're all a blur by now, and I finally decided that what my son
terms "spaceship porn" is not my thing.

>> The Stainless Steel Rat
Read it long ago; liked it at the time, but would not reread now.

>> Starship Troopers
Read once; mil-sf (even if not porn) isn't my thing either.
EXCEPT that Graydon Saunders's _The March North is a long, grim
battle, and it's one of the two best books I've read in a couple
years. (And the other is his _A Succession of Bad Days._)

>
>This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.

Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
all a blur.

These are
>all comfort SF.

Comfort is one of the most YMMV things in human experience.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.

[David Goldfarb]

In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>,

Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>>On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
>>> The Cosmic Computer
>Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
>be so GOOD ...

I'm not even sure what book you're confusing this with; _The Cosmic
Computer_ is by H. Beam Piper.

For myself, I've read all but the Flint and the Weber, and am not
planning to read those two.

--
David Goldfarb |"The number of times I have been declared
goldf...@gmail.com |dead is statistically insignificant,
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu |although admittedly non-zero." -- James Nicoll

[Greg Goss]

I don't think I've read Mutineer's Moon, which is surprising since it
was out there in the used book stores when I went through my
"omnivorous" stage of reading anything remotely SF.

I don't recognize "To Say Nothing of the Dog."

I've read most of the rest more than once. I didn't much like SSR,
but read the whole trilogy because, well, "omnivorous".

(quick google).

To Say Nothing of the Dog came out in 1997. BBS and Usenet pretty
much pulled me out of reading anything other than next-in-series books
of seriesesI already liked. So I did almost no reading 1992 to 2007
other than Grisham, Clavell, and maybe a few others.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[Greg Goss]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

>In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>>On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
>
>Well, here's my take.
>>>
>>> The Mote in God's Eye
>Read, disliked.

I liked all of the Niven/Pournelle collaborations of the eighties.
This is probably my currently "favourite book of all time".

>>> Protector
>Never read, having lost all interest in Niven by then.

That was, I think, his second book. I love Niven, but I don't think
we want to double up multiple books by an author here, and we've
already got half a Niven above.

>>> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen
>I think I did, but can't remember much about it.
>Alternate-timeline by Piper, mostly in other-Pennsylvania.

>>> The Cosmic Computer
>Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
>be so GOOD ...

Bester? I read it as a Piper. I have the vague impression that there
are two versions out there, one where the computer does exist and one
where it doesn't. There are two TITLES for this work, but I don't
know if they have the same ending.

>>> Starship Troopers
>Read once; mil-sf (even if not porn) isn't my thing either.

Some mil I like, some I don't. I liked ST and the Harrington books.

>>This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>
>Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
>all a blur.

It came at the beginning of my "reading drought" so I never heard of
it. I was confusing the title with a fifties book
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_Moon which I never read.


Wikipedia often has "plot synopses" if you want to pretend to have
read a book.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutineers%27_Moon

[Greg Goss]

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:

>>This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it. These are
>>all comfort SF.
>
>I don't think I've read Mutineer's Moon, which is surprising since it
>was out there in the used book stores when I went through my
>"omnivorous" stage of reading anything remotely SF.

I was confusing titles between "Rogue Moon" and "Mutineer's Moon".

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <nsG4p...@kithrup.com>,

David Goldfarb <goldf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>,
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>>>On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
>>>> The Cosmic Computer
>>Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
>>be so GOOD ...
>
>I'm not even sure what book you're confusing this with; _The Cosmic
>Computer_ is by H. Beam Piper.

Having quickly checked ISFDB, I beg Mr. Piper's pardon. I was
thinking of Bester's _The Computer Connection._

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <d2650q...@mid.individual.net>,

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>
>Wikipedia often has "plot synopses" if you want to pretend to have
>read a book.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutineers%27_Moon

Yes, I know they do, and I freuently check them to get a brief
idea of wotthehell somebody is talking about. I don't pretend to
have read them though; I ring the various changes on "I'm
seventy-three" and "life is too short to stuff a mushroom."

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <d264am...@mid.individual.net>,

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>
>I don't recognize "To Say Nothing of the Dog."

Mid-period Willis, in the same universe as her other time-travel
stories, many internal references to Jerome K. Jerome and Dorothy
L. Sayers (as I said upthread, one really needs to have read
those in order to appreciate the in-jokes). It's my favorite of
all her books.

>
>(quick google).
>
>To Say Nothing of the Dog came out in 1997. BBS and Usenet pretty
>much pulled me out of reading anything other than next-in-series books
>of seriesesI already liked. So I did almost no reading 1992 to 2007
>other than Grisham, Clavell, and maybe a few others.

Well, everybody to his own tastes; if you find at some point you
find yourself temporarily out of series, you might hunt up _Dog_
and see if you like it.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Saturday, 1 August 2015 23:12:02 UTC+1, Shawn Wilson wrote:
> Why not?

Why not indeed! Or is that the first title, in which case, I missed that.

I also haven't read _Who?_

> The Mote in God's Eye

Yes.

> Protector

Good Niven. And "Mote" is good Niven-Pournelle.

> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen

My copy has title _Gunpowder God_.

> The Cosmic Computer

Or _Junkyard Planet_: I don't remember.

> Galactic Patrol

Good Smith.

> 1632

As to why not... following the series appears to be
a possible full time career, and I have one already.

> ...To Say Nothing of the Dog

I have read _Three Men in a Boat_, but not this.

> The Honor of the Queen

"To Wikipedia with you!"

> The Stainless Steel Rat

Of course! Well... on first reading, narration carried me
through without realising that the protagonist is somewhat
a jerk. And a prominent female character is rather
misogynistically drawn, although since this is quite old,
/having/ a prominent female character was creditable.

If we're looking for reasons not to.

> Starship Troopers

No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)

[J. Clarke]

In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...

>
> In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
> >On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
> >> Why not?
>
> Well, here's my take.
> >>
> >> The Mote in God's Eye
> Read, disliked.
>
> >> Protector
> Never read, having lost all interest in Niven by then.

The first half of it was published much earlier in Analog as "The
Adults". First Niven I recall reading and it's what hooked me. Of
course I wasn't much beyond the Golden Age then.

Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
"interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.

[Michael R N Dolbear]

"Dorothy J Heydt" wrote

>> The Cosmic Computer
Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
be so GOOD ...

I and the ISDB only know of the H Beam Piper novel The Cosmic Computer: aka
Junkyard Planet
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?186701

The Computer Connection aka Extro ?
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2204

>This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.

Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
all a blur.

David Weber, not Harrington

Introducing Dahak, a spaceship the size of the Moon (and currently
spoiler...)


--
Mike D

[Titus G]

On 2/08/2015 9:07 p.m., Greg Goss wrote:
> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

>> In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:

>> Well, here's my take.

>>>> The Mote in God's Eye
>> Read, disliked.

> I liked all of the Niven/Pournelle collaborations of the eighties.
> This is probably my currently "favourite book of all time".

One of my favourites as well.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,

J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
>>
>> >

>> >This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>>
>> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
>> all a blur.
>
>Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
>"interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
>your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.

But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.

[J. Clarke]

In article <nsGK3...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...

>
> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
> >>
> >> >
> >> >This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
> >>
> >> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
> >> all a blur.
> >
> >Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
> >"interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
> >your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.
>
> But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
> So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
> unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.

I need to reread it to judge how different it is from Manticore--it's
not Manticore at war though--in Mutineer's Moon the war was over long,
long ago, for certain values, and things start on near-future Earth.
Dahak is one of his best characters.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 8/2/15 9:57 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>>>
>>> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
>>> all a blur.
>>
>> Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
>> "interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
>> your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.
>
> But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
> So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
> unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.
>

I would agree it's very Smithian. And to a great extent the main
character Colin ends up a rather Smithian hero.

OTOH, it *is* by David Weber, and so will have much of his style.
There's a fair concentration on the military and weaponry involved, so
if that's what turned you off, no, it's not sufficiently unlike Honor
Harrington.


--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

[art...@yahoo.com]

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 5:15:04 AM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

> Mid-period Willis, in the same universe as her other time-travel
> stories, many internal references to Jerome K. Jerome and Dorothy
> L. Sayers (as I said upthread, one really needs to have read
> those in order to appreciate the in-jokes). It's my favorite of
> all her books.

I liked "To Say Nothing Of the Dog" even without having read Jerome etc. Which reminds me. Is it worth reading "The Wasteland" to really understand "Last Call" by Tim Powers?

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <mplb7e$aue$1...@dont-email.me>,

If the term "spaceship porn" can describe it, then, no, probably
not.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 15:11:54 -0700 (PDT), Shawn Wilson
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:26841f8e-9650-4384...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:

> Why not?

> The Mote in God's Eye

Enh.

> Protector

Liked it quite a bit at the time.

> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen

Fun.

> The Cosmic Computer

Might have read it; can’t decide even after glancing at the
copy at Gutenberg.

> Galactic Patrol

Not my favorite of the series, but fun.

> 1632

Enjoyable enough, but I long ago lost interest in the
series.

> ...To Say Nothing of the Dog

I liked _Water Witch_ (with Cynthia Felice), but otherwise
Willis doesn’t really do much for me, and I no longer
bother even to check.

> The Honor of the Queen

One of the better ones.

> The Stainless Steel Rat

Fun.

> Starship Troopers

Okay, but definitely not one of my favorite Heinleins.

I’m not at all sure that any of these would go on my list
of SF books that people should read, if I were so foolish
as to try to make one.

Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <049402c3-42c7-4ca6...@googlegroups.com>,

I have not read the Powers, but certainly "The Wasteland" is
worth reading. Note that it was written in 1922, and like many
works of that period is full of postwar angst.

http://www.bartleby.com/201/1.html

I'll translate the Latin/Greek at the beginning: it's from
Petronius's _Satyricon._

"For I myself have seen with my own eyes the former Cumaean Sybil
hanging in a bottle, and whenever the boys asked her, 'Sybil,
what do you want?' she would answer, 'I want to die.'"

(I used that passage to introduce a story myself; it wasn't as
good as Eliot, but it sold.)

[J. Clarke]

In article <nsGqG...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...

>
> In article <mplb7e$aue$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> >On 8/2/15 9:57 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >> J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
> >>>> all a blur.
> >>>
> >>> Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
> >>> "interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
> >>> your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.
> >>
> >> But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
> >> So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
> >> unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I would agree it's very Smithian. And to a great extent the main
> >character Colin ends up a rather Smithian hero.
> >
> > OTOH, it *is* by David Weber, and so will have much of his style.
> >There's a fair concentration on the military and weaponry involved, so
> >if that's what turned you off, no, it's not sufficiently unlike Honor
> >Harrington.
> >
> If the term "spaceship porn" can describe it, then, no, probably
> not.

IIRC there's only one spaceship of any significance, but it's such a
Doozy that it deserves a little bit of porn.

[Adamastor Glace Mortimer]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

In article <26841f8e-9650-4384...@googlegroups.com>
Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why not?
> ....

I have definitely read the following, not sure about one that I'm
not listing.

The Mote in God's Eye

Galactic Patrol
Starship Troopers

I read "Starship Troopers" when I was a kid. I tried to write part
of it all over again to my own liking after the first reading,
didn't go well. I read it again in my late 20s.

I SO wish that I had gotten ahold of "Galactic Patrol" when I was a
kid. I guess I was in my 20s when I first read it. Space opera like
that would have been so great to have spent time with during some
grammar school Summer. I would have liked the entire series. I did
read "The Vortex Blasters" back then. Liked it.

I was in my late 20s when I read "The Mote in God's Eye." I liked
it and I suppose it had enough space opera in it to scratch that
itch. I haven't scratched my space opera itch for a long time, I'm
realizing. Maybe I should read this one a second time in my old age.


Adamastor Glace Mortimer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iEYEAREKAAYFAlW+HXAACgkQ1vVH2r/FDv1Q1gCbB8eLo58NgHrihRPa/Cp8L5Sx
aDgAn3isDq9yRp/YtveAR5EbmWyaDkmZ
=0ByR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Magewolf]

On 8/2/2015 12:14 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <mplb7e$aue$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 8/2/15 9:57 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
>>>>> all a blur.
>>>>
>>>> Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
>>>> "interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
>>>> your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.
>>>
>>> But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
>>> So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
>>> unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I would agree it's very Smithian. And to a great extent the main
>> character Colin ends up a rather Smithian hero.
>>
>> OTOH, it *is* by David Weber, and so will have much of his style.
>> There's a fair concentration on the military and weaponry involved, so
>> if that's what turned you off, no, it's not sufficiently unlike Honor
>> Harrington.
>>
> If the term "spaceship porn" can describe it, then, no, probably
> not.
>

"Mutineer's Moon" does not have all that many spaceships in it. It is
mostly ground and air combat. But the sequel "The Armageddon
Inheritance" has quite a lot.

I am still upset that the deal to make an anime of the series fell
apart. If they could have gotten a decent budget the defense of Earth in
"The Armageddon Inheritance" would have been a wonder to see. It would
have made a good companion piece with Macross.

[Robert A. Woodward]

In article <d2650q...@mid.individual.net>,

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:

> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>
> >In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
> >wrote:
> >>On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:

<SNIP>

>
> >>> The Cosmic Computer
> >Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
> >be so GOOD ...
>
> Bester? I read it as a Piper. I have the vague impression that there
> are two versions out there, one where the computer does exist and one
> where it doesn't. There are two TITLES for this work, but I don't
> know if they have the same ending.

Dorothy might had been thinking of Bester's _The Computer
Connection_ (aka _Extro_, aka "The Indian Giver").

_Junkyard Planet_ (aka _The Cosmic Computer_) was an extension (and
with some revision) of "Graveyard of Dreams" (which was the basis
for chapters 1-4 of _Junkyard Planet_). Which means that it ends
long before the protagonist discovers that there actually WAS a
giant main computer.

--
Robert Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com>
<http://robertaw.drizzlehosting.com>

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <robertaw-10D21C...@news.individual.net>,

Robert A. Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com> wrote:
>In article <d2650q...@mid.individual.net>,
> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>
>> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >>On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
><SNIP>
>>
>> >>> The Cosmic Computer
>> >Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
>> >be so GOOD ...
>>
>> Bester? I read it as a Piper. I have the vague impression that there
>> are two versions out there, one where the computer does exist and one
>> where it doesn't. There are two TITLES for this work, but I don't
>> know if they have the same ending.
>
>Dorothy might had been thinking of Bester's _The Computer
>Connection_ (aka _Extro_, aka "The Indian Giver").

That's right, and I said so (after a quick google) somewhere
upthread.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 10:17:09 AM UTC-7, Robert A. Woodward wrote:


> _Junkyard Planet_ (aka _The Cosmic Computer_) was an extension (and
> with some revision) of "Graveyard of Dreams" (which was the basis
> for chapters 1-4 of _Junkyard Planet_). Which means that it ends
> long before the protagonist discovers that there actually WAS a
> giant main computer.

Or, rather, IS...

My favorite part is after having spent the entire book deliberately building up the lie that Merlin exists, he starts finding evidence that... Merlin really does exist.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 9:17:43 PM UTC-7, Lynn McGuire wrote:


> > The Mote in God's Eye
> >

> > Protector
> >
> > Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen
> >
> > The Cosmic Computer
> >
> > Galactic Patrol
> >
> > 1632
> >

> > ...To Say Nothing of the Dog
> >

> > The Honor of the Queen
> >

> > The Stainless Steel Rat
> >
> > Starship Troopers
>
> I think that I have read all of these. I am not sure about "Lord
> Kalvan" or "The Cosmic Computer".
>

> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it. These are
> all comfort SF.

Indeed I considered putting Mutineer's Moon on it. I was deliberately avoiding the whole 'one book per author' thing, as you may have noticed. But then I decided that the second one was better, but couldn't remember it's name offhand...

I was even going to put more than ten and include a 'base-n' joke, but I ran out of ideas and didn't want to spend that much time on it. I also deliberately left out Star Wars/Trek books, figuring they were better known via TV/movies.

I didn't include fantasy, including space fantasy like 'A Princess of Mars'.


So... yeah, add

The Armageddon Inheritance

Cobra

Have Space Suit, Will Travel

perhaps others, as and if they occur to me.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 1:56:57 AM UTC-7, Greg Goss wrote:


> I don't recognize "To Say Nothing of the Dog."

Dear Lord... Read it immediately. Very entertaining. Hero is a time traveller for a university. He has been working very hard and has 'time lag' and is generally messed up and needs rest. So he is given a very simple assignment in the past- go here, meet this person, perform this simple act.

Only... because of the time lag he didn't quite get where he was supposed to go, who he was supposed to meet, or what he was supposed to do and might have accidently changed history before things got sorted out. Now he has to fix it. That is, he has to get a contemp girl unengaged from the wrong guy and engaged to the right one, only no one knows who the right one is...

Oh, and he has to determine exactly where an object called 'The Bishop's Bird Stump' was on the night Coventry Cathedral was destroyed in WWII.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:


> > Starship Troopers
>
> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)

PHILISTINE!!!

Read the book. It is a classic for a reason.

[Ahasuerus]

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 12:15:05 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <mplb7e$aue$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> >On 8/2/15 9:57 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >> J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said,
> >>>> it's all a blur.
> >>>
> >>> Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is
> >>> far more "interesting" than anyone expected. From what you
> >>> say, probably not your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.
> >>
> >> But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
> >> So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
> >> unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.
> >
> > I would agree it's very Smithian. And to a great extent the
> > main character Colin ends up a rather Smithian hero.
> >
> > OTOH, it *is* by David Weber, and so will have much of his style.
> >There's a fair concentration on the military and weaponry involved, so
> >if that's what turned you off, no, it's not sufficiently unlike Honor
> >Harrington.
> >
> If the term "spaceship porn" can describe it, then, no, probably
> not.

The first book is milSF with an emphasis on weapons (imagine that!),
human enhancements, secret history and a nifty sentient computer.
The computer is by far the most interesting character in the book,
but then it *is* milSF...

The second book is much more Lensmanesque: huge fleets, titanic
battles, alien races and so on. Doc Smith would have approved.

The third book deals with the next generation and is ... different.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 8/2/15 12:14 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <mplb7e$aue$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 8/2/15 9:57 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
>>>>> all a blur.
>>>>
>>>> Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
>>>> "interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
>>>> your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.
>>>
>>> But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
>>> So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
>>> unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I would agree it's very Smithian. And to a great extent the main
>> character Colin ends up a rather Smithian hero.
>>
>> OTOH, it *is* by David Weber, and so will have much of his style.
>> There's a fair concentration on the military and weaponry involved, so
>> if that's what turned you off, no, it's not sufficiently unlike Honor
>> Harrington.
>>
> If the term "spaceship porn" can describe it, then, no, probably
> not.
>

That I wouldn't know. It's not got Harrington's multiple fleets of
ships slowly closing on each other. There's a lot more personal combat
and action.

[Greg Goss]

Adamastor Glace Mortimer <nos...@no.invalid> wrote:

>I was in my late 20s when I read "The Mote in God's Eye." I liked
>it and I suppose it had enough space opera in it to scratch that
>itch. I haven't scratched my space opera itch for a long time, I'm
>realizing. Maybe I should read this one a second time in my old age.

Heinlein convinced them to slice out huge swaths of the story to
tighten it up and make it saleable. I also appreciate Heinlein's
comment that MoteLight would be parsed as Motel Light - you know those
things that say [NO]VACANCY? Heinlein's letter is available somewhere
on the web.

Anyhow, some of the chopped parts are available in other parts. I
read the "lost preface" in Galaxy, in the same issue where Pournelle
discusses the physics behind the story.

In the past year when I was doing a comprehensive Niven reread, I
found the scene where Rod burnt his arm in one place and the Staley's
Bomb scene in another, and I think another one that was supposed to be
developing Rod's character before the novel as we know it started.
When you're big enough, the bits you chop out HERE can sometimes be
sold somewhere else.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[Raymond Daley]

Authors names would have been a good idea too, did you not think?

> The Mote in God's Eye - By Larry Niven, I think I've got it but I've never
> read it. Must correct that.
> Protector - Never heard of it.
> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen - ditto
> The Cosmic Computer - by CM Kornbluth, decent book as I recall.
> Galactic Patrol - EE Smith? Not sure if I read this or not.
> 1632 - Eric Flint, I believe. Not a fan of his.
> ...To Say Nothing of the Dog - Heard of this, not sure who it's by. I've
> read 3 men in a boat so I'd probably read this.
> The Honor of the Queen - Never heard of this.
> The Stainless Steel Rat - By Harry Harrison. Excellent book.
> Starship Troopers - Better than the movie, actually!>

[Raymond Daley]

"Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a74007f8-1c00-4445...@googlegroups.com...

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 1:56:57 AM UTC-7, Greg Goss wrote:


> I don't recognize "To Say Nothing of the Dog."

Dear Lord... Read it immediately. Oh, and he has to determine exactly

where an object called 'The Bishop's Bird Stump' was on the night Coventry
Cathedral was destroyed in WWII.

And now I absolutely HAVE to read it as a loyal Coventrian who loves his
city history and the cathedral.

[Raymond Daley]

"Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:5085b0f5-5495-41b6-8df8-

The book is a SHIT LOAD better than the movie.

[J. Clarke]

In article <AdJvx.127235$JH3.1...@fx37.am4>,
raymon...@ntlworld.com says...

A load of shit is a SHIT LOAD better than the movie.

[James Nicoll]

In article <AdJvx.127235$JH3.1...@fx37.am4>,

Brightman had a better version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wwilCs4Jqg
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Livejournal at http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)

[Don Bruder]

In article <MPG.3029458c7...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Bah! Quit getting all analytic and watch the movie for what it is: A
good fun rompin', stompin', kick-some-ass-and-take-some-names,
action-and-FX-fest.

The book is philosopical as all get-out. The movie has nothing
whatsoever to say about anything beyond "Ain't it great fun to beat the
stuffin' out of the bad guys?"

--
Security provided by Mssrs Smith and/or Wesson. Brought to you by the letter Q

[J. Clarke]

In article <mpo2p5$6k5$1...@reader1.panix.com>, jdni...@panix.com says...

>
> In article <AdJvx.127235$JH3.1...@fx37.am4>,
> Raymond Daley <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:5085b0f5-5495-41b6-8df8-
> >> On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> >>> > Starship Troopers
> >>> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)
> >> PHILISTINE!!!
> >> Read the book. It is a classic for a reason.
> >
> >The book is a SHIT LOAD better than the movie.
> >
> >
>
> Brightman had a better version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wwilCs4Jqg

I think Jane Fonda did the definitive version of that one.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Monday, August 3, 2015 at 5:34:01 AM UTC-7, Raymond Daley wrote:


> > I don't recognize "To Say Nothing of the Dog."
>
> Dear Lord... Read it immediately. Oh, and he has to determine exactly
> where an object called 'The Bishop's Bird Stump' was on the night Coventry
> Cathedral was destroyed in WWII.
>
> And now I absolutely HAVE to read it as a loyal Coventrian who loves his
> city history and the cathedral.

OOOHHH... Then you MUST read Connie Willis, Coventry Cathedral is ALL OVER her time travel stories. Especially this and Firewatch.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <AdJvx.127235$JH3.1...@fx37.am4>,
Raymond Daley <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>

The book has nothing in common with the movie but the title.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XcJvx.192214$ad5....@fx06.am4>,

Go, you!

I have a book with pictures of the ruins, and the cross built
from charred timbers, and the inscription, "Father Forgive."

Maybe I should dig up the review I wrote of it for _The Other
Change of Hobbit_ when it came out. Hold that thought....

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/1/2015 11:47 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>> On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:

>>> Why not?
>
> Well, here's my take.

>>>
>>> The Mote in God's Eye

> Read, disliked.
>
>>> Protector
> Never read, having lost all interest in Niven by then.
>
>>> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen
> I think I did, but can't remember much about it.
> Alternate-timeline by Piper, mostly in other-Pennsylvania.

>
>>> The Cosmic Computer
> Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
> be so GOOD ...
>

>>> Galactic Patrol
> Well, of course.
>
>>> 1632
> Nope.

>
>>> ...To Say Nothing of the Dog

> A favorite of mine. It does help if you have read _Three Men in
> a Boat_ and all the Lord Peter Wimseys.

>
>>> The Honor of the Queen

> I have probably read this, and several other Harringtons, but
> they're all a blur by now, and I finally decided that what my son
> terms "spaceship porn" is not my thing.
>
>>> The Stainless Steel Rat
> Read it long ago; liked it at the time, but would not reread now.
>
>>> Starship Troopers
> Read once; mil-sf (even if not porn) isn't my thing either.
> EXCEPT that Graydon Saunders's _The March North is a long, grim
> battle, and it's one of the two best books I've read in a couple
> years. (And the other is his _A Succession of Bad Days._)

>>
>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>
> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
> all a blur.
>

> These are
>> all comfort SF.
>

> Comfort is one of the most YMMV things in human experience.

_Mutineer's Moon_ is David Weber's ripoff XXXXXX homage to the Perry Rhodan series. My favorite SF book of all time. Space Opera rules!
http://www.amazon.com/Mutineers-Moon-Dahak-David-Weber/dp/0671720856/

Lynn

[Lynn McGuire]

And there is even a trade paperback of the _Mutineers Moon_ book:
http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Ashes-David-Weber/dp/141650933X/

We all like a little comfort now and then.

Lynn

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/2/2015 5:27 AM, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
>
>
> "Dorothy J Heydt" wrote

>
>>> The Cosmic Computer
> Read. O, what a noble mind is thus o'erthrown? Bester used to
> be so GOOD ...
>

> I and the ISDB only know of the H Beam Piper novel The Cosmic Computer: aka Junkyard Planet
> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?186701
>
> The Computer Connection aka Extro ?
> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2204

>
>
>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>
> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
> all a blur.
>

> David Weber, not Harrington
>
> Introducing Dahak, a spaceship the size of the Moon (and currently spoiler...)

Dorothy is thinking of David Weber's long running Honor Harrington series.

Lynn

[Lynn McGuire]

I would call _1632_ and _...To Say Nothing of the Dog_ time travel fantasy.

Lynn

[lal_truckee]

On 8/3/15 9:08 AM, Don Bruder wrote:
> Bah! Quit getting all analytic and watch the movie for what it is: A
> good fun rompin', stompin', kick-some-ass-and-take-some-names,
> action-and-FX-fest.

With boobs.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Monday, August 3, 2015 at 5:19:52 AM UTC-7, Raymond Daley wrote:

> Authors names would have been a good idea too, did you not think?

I considered, but decided that everyone reading it would already know, so I didn't. I seem to have been wrong.

> > The Mote in God's Eye - By Larry Niven, I think I've got it but I've never
> > read it. Must correct that.

Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. Their collaborations are better than the stuff they do solo.

> > Protector - Never heard of it.

Niven solo.

> > Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen - ditto

H. Beam Piper.

> > The Cosmic Computer - by CM Kornbluth, decent book as I recall.

Nope, H. Beam Piper again. It's available on Gutenberg.

> > Galactic Patrol - EE Smith? Not sure if I read this or not.

Doc Smith indeed.

> > 1632 - Eric Flint, I believe. Not a fan of his.

Eric Flint, I like the series.

> > ...To Say Nothing of the Dog - Heard of this, not sure who it's by. I've
> > read 3 men in a boat so I'd probably read this.

Connie Willis.

> > The Honor of the Queen - Never heard of this.

David Weber, Honor Harrington series.

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 16:05:16 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
wrote:

>In article <AdJvx.127235$JH3.1...@fx37.am4>,
>Raymond Daley <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:5085b0f5-5495-41b6-8df8-
>>> On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>>> > Starship Troopers
>>>> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)
>>> PHILISTINE!!!
>>> Read the book. It is a classic for a reason.
>>
>>The book is a SHIT LOAD better than the movie.
>
>The book has nothing in common with the movie but the title.

Oh, there are a few bits that bear some similarity, and I seem to
recall one line of dialogue. Might be as much as 2% of the movie
comes from the book.





--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Robert Carnegie]

I know what I did. I'm not sorry.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <nsIKo...@kithrup.com>,

Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>
>Maybe I should dig up the review I wrote of it for _The Other
>Change of Hobbit_ when it came out. Hold that thought....

Dug up: this was several computer-deaths ago, but I tucked the
printout into my copy of the book. If you're not interested, hit
'n' now.

TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG
or, HOW WE FOUND THE BISHOP'S BIRD STUMP AT LAST
by Connie Willis

Time lag is a wretched thing. You make a dozen or thirteen time
drops within a week or so, and your brain goes wonky and you
can't think straight, and you can't see straight, and you can't
hear straight, and you think your friend said, "We've let the hat
out of the bag," when in fact he said something different
altogether.

And then you come down with spells of maudlin sentimentality that
make you talk, as Ned Henry puts it, "like an Irishman in his
cups or a Victorian poet cold-sober."

So when poor overworked, time-lagged Ned is sent back to 1888 for
a badly needed rest, not only does it start the story rolling,
but it gives Connie willis an excuse to write her novel in the
style of Jerome K. Jerome's _Three Men in a Boat (To Say Nothing
of the Dog)._

Now, there are grim somber Connie Willis books (_Lincoln's
Dreams,_ e.g.), and there are funny convoluted zany Connie Wills
books. This is one of the latter, even though it takes place in
the same universe as _Doomsday Book._ As you'll remember, it's
impossible to send anything back in time that might cause a
paradox, or anything forward at all. When something is brought
forward anyway, chaos threatens, and though they hastily send it
back again, something seems to have shaken loose. Things fall
apart, the center cannot hold, and poor Ned arrives days and
miles from his proper destination, too lagged to realize what
he's got in his possession and what he was supposed to do.

There are people in this world who don't like spoilers. Tell
them the plot of a story, even part of the plot, and they get all
huffy and say you've ruined it for them. For their sake (and
because when I tried to describe this one to my husband it took
me twenty minutes and I'd left several important points unmade),
I won't attempt to go into the plot of _To Say Nothing of the
Dog._ It would be deceptive if I did so, anyway. Willis (clever
minx) would have you believe that the integrity of the space-time
continuum is at stake, that the fate of the universe hangs in the
balance. Not a bit of it. It's about important things like love
and marriage and dogs and cats. Especially cats.

There are people in this world (they may be the same as the first
lot) who like solving puzzles. I'm not one of them, which may
explain why I liked this one better on the second reading than
the first, and still better on the third, all within forty-eight
hours of buying it. Once you've had a look at the middle and the
end, you can go back to the beginning and appreciate how Willis
inserts little clues and foreshadowings and hints under the guise
of minor decorative details. It's like tracing a page from the
Book of Kells, or following the threads of a cat's cradle.

Then, either after or before you've read it, I advise you to go
back and read _Three Men in a Boat,_ to say nothing of some P. G.
Wodehouse, Agatha Christie, and Dorothy L. Sayers. If you
haven't read Sayers, for example, how can you properly appreciate
the moment when the hero, with his wire wrist-hooks tucked into
his sleeves and the heroine, with her metal box tucked into her
garter, infiltrate the seance and deliver the essential message,

... I beg your pardon. I quite forgot.

If you really want a spoiler, I can tell you that the bishop's
bird stump is an ornate, cast-iron Victorian vase that claims to
be the McGuffin in the story, but it isn't really. The McGuffin
is the fan in the covered basket.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

But it has to be one's own comfort, not someone else's. (e.g.,
football, porn, beer....)

[Don Bruder]

In article <mpo59r$usk$2...@dont-email.me>,
lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> <mpo3j2$j29$1...@dont-email.me>

Well, yeah, but only a little of that action, unless I'm hopelessly
mis-remembering. (The shower scene, specifically)

[Anonymous Remailer (austria)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>
"J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...

> >
> > In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
> > >On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
> > >> Why not?
> >
> > Well, here's my take.
> > >>
> > >> The Mote in God's Eye
> > Read, disliked.
> >
> > >> Protector
> > Never read, having lost all interest in Niven by then.
>

> The first half of it was published much earlier in Analog as "The
> Adults". First Niven I recall reading and it's what hooked me. Of
> course I wasn't much beyond the Golden Age then. ....

What year, or issue if you can recall, of "Analog" was that in? I
was a subscriber for years and years. I'd be interested in whether
or not I'd read another half book on the list without knowing it.



Adamastor Glace Mortimer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iEYEAREKAAYFAlW/ilwACgkQ1vVH2r/FDv3lpwCguczzn//keC+VC31EWYPiy9EC
yEQAoO6nL6ejTq1+DZceoYoWiox0M6bV
=4WWz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Greg Goss]

Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:


>> David Weber, not Harrington

>
>Dorothy is thinking of David Weber's long running Honor Harrington series.

The series is shrinking in length but growing in width.

I find it disconcerting to read a story that's now THREE serieses
running in parallel, where events in one series affect the flow ot the
other two. It's never clear what order to read stuff in, because the
narrative flow of books in each series overlap -- an event in A will
cause stuff in B which in turn affects something later in the same A
book.

I find the side-serieses to be badly named.

"Honor"

"Torch" The series is named after the title of the first book, but
the planet (re)name is used in at least one of the successive books.

"Shadows" The series is named after a hero of several centuries back
and a naval school named after him. The first book in the series was
"Shadow of Saganami". The author refers to them as "Saganami" but
that name is irrelevant after the first book. Subsequent books focus
on "shadow" or "shadows" in titles.

Wikipedia also lists two series of back-stories, but since they're
back stories, I don't get as frustrated by reading order there. But
by extending the story BACK several centuries, I guess the series is
even longer than it was originally plotted out, violating my theme of
"shorter but wider".

From Wikipedia" "This "rethink" and redesign caused Weber to move the
series' internal chronology up by about 20 years and begat the Crown
of Slaves novel, first in the "Crown of Slaves" sub-series based on a
number of the short stories of the first four collections."

[Greg Goss]

Robert was trolling. I'm not sure whether Shawn was offended or just
playing along.

[Lynn McGuire]

All those and baseball too! The Astros have been awesome lately.

Lynn

[Greg Goss]

"Raymond Daley" <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>Authors names would have been a good idea too, did you not think?
>
>> The Mote in God's Eye - By Larry Niven, I think I've got it but I've never
>> read it. Must correct that.

The first of the Niven/Pournelle collaborations. They've been working
together ever since (Pournelle mentions story conferences with Niven
and someone else Barnes? frequently in his blog.)

It uses Niven's style of alien design and Pournelle's future history.

>> Protector - Never heard of it.

Niven's second novel, if I recall correctly. Two of the "Fleet of
Worlds" stories depend on its backstory.

>> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen - ditto

Alternate universe story. A modern urban cop falls into another
history line and changes it utterly.

>> The Cosmic Computer - by CM Kornbluth, decent book as I recall.

You've got a Kornbluth and someone else had a Bester. The mention
here was for another Piper. I'm not sure which Kornbluth you're
thinking of.

>> The Honor of the Queen - Never heard of this.

The second Honor Harrington story by Weber. This is where the series
really takes form as a series rather than a self-contained single
story. The mainline Honor series alternates titles with and without
"Honor" in the title.

>> Starship Troopers - Better than the movie, actually!>

Do we disallow multiple people running the same troll?

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/2/2015 11:14 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <mplb7e$aue$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 8/2/15 9:57 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>,

>>> J. Clarke <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>>>

>>>>>> This is the type of list that needs "Mutineer's Moon" in it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that more Harrington? May have read, may not; as I said, it's
>>>>> all a blur.
>>>>

>>>> Weber but not Harrington. Seems that the Moon (our Moon) is far more
>>>> "interesting" than anyone expected. From what you say, probably not
>>>> your thing--space opera on a Smithean scale.
>>>
>>> But I like the Lensman series. (Could never get into Skylark.)
>>> So you never know. But unless _Mutineer's Moon_ is a whole LOT
>>> unlike Harrington, I probably wouldn't care for it.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I would agree it's very Smithian. And to a great extent the main
>> character Colin ends up a rather Smithian hero.
>>
>> OTOH, it *is* by David Weber, and so will have much of his style.
>> There's a fair concentration on the military and weaponry involved, so
>> if that's what turned you off, no, it's not sufficiently unlike Honor
>> Harrington.
>>
> If the term "spaceship porn" can describe it, then, no, probably
> not.

Depends. How do you feel about Mike in _The Moon is A Harsh Mistress_?

Lynn

[Adamastor Glace Mortimer]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

In article <a7f23e0d-0048-41e3...@googlegroups.com>
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, 1 August 2015 23:12:02 UTC+1, Shawn Wilson wrote:
> ....

> > Starship Troopers
>
> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)

If you want to get the bizarre notion drilled into your head that
interstellar war is being waged according to the Geneva Convention,
by the Earth side, the movie is good enough. Meanwhile the bugs do
whatever they want. Yeah, load your rifles with FMJ ammo so you
don't violate the convention, and don't just drop chemicals on the
bugs, go get close up and shoot them when you know that your Geneva
Convention allowed ammo doesn't do much to them. Hell, those
troopers didn't even have 40 mm grenade launchers to use against
the bugs.

I've read the book twice, it's much better than that stupid movie,
which was probably made by people who've never considered why
certain ordinance is used for certain purposes.

Adamastor Glace Mortimer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iEYEAREKAAYFAlW/jbQACgkQ1vVH2r/FDv2ANwCg2Du3UgoUDOq13GvMZp7EfwmP
ldUAoPdZjv0Q8rKv2ydf6ZYwmgx547sL
=8lkZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Jack Ryan]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

In article <049402c3-42c7-4ca6...@googlegroups.com>
"art...@yahoo.com" <art...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 5:15:04 AM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
> > Mid-period Willis, in the same universe as her other time-travel
> > stories, many internal references to Jerome K. Jerome and Dorothy
> > L. Sayers (as I said upthread, one really needs to have read
> > those in order to appreciate the in-jokes). It's my favorite of
> > all her books.
>
>
> I liked "To Say Nothing Of the Dog" even without having read Jerome etc. Which reminds me. Is it worth reading "The Wasteland" to really understand "Last Call" by Tim Powers?

Oh, it is SO worth reading "The Wasteland" by T.S. Eliot
independently of any other reason; it is Great Literature (note
capitalization)!

Now available for free!

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1321/1321-h/1321-h.htm

But I'm glad that I got mine even when I had to pay for it long ago.

Adamastor Glace Mortimer

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iEYEAREKAAYFAlW/i4YACgkQ1vVH2r/FDv0IuQCfcavQyAbbLmTTrEHHZFcIqugi
z6QAn1+ScLcRie51lAm6BZq4DLWdIuT3
=K3BQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 13:31:48 +0100, Raymond Daley
<raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote
in<news:XcJvx.192214$ad5....@fx06.am4> in
rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> And now I absolutely HAVE to read it as a loyal
> Coventrian who loves his city history and the cathedral.

I do hope that you mean the old one, not the regrettable
post-war replacement.

Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.

[Raymond Daley]

"Dorothy J Heydt" <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in message
news:nsIKo...@kithrup.com...

> In article <XcJvx.192214$ad5....@fx06.am4>,
> Raymond Daley <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:a74007f8-1c00-4445...@googlegroups.com...
>>On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 1:56:57 AM UTC-7, Greg Goss wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I don't recognize "To Say Nothing of the Dog."
>>
>>Dear Lord... Read it immediately. Oh, and he has to determine exactly
>>where an object called 'The Bishop's Bird Stump' was on the night Coventry
>>Cathedral was destroyed in WWII.
>>
>>And now I absolutely HAVE to read it as a loyal Coventrian who loves his
>>city history and the cathedral.
>
> Go, you!
>
> I have a book with pictures of the ruins, and the cross built
> from charred timbers, and the inscription, "Father Forgive."

The one thing I always make sure I look at when I visit is the wooden chair
with a mouse carved into on of its legs, as the signature of its creator.
That and the tomb of the bishop holding the model of the old cathedral in
his hands. I used to run tours for ppl (as a native, "Take a tour, with a
local!") and show them that model, pointing out where on the model the bombs
actually dropped. Used to make some nice money with anyone who wasn't
German.
"Welcome to Coventry, air-conditioned by the Germans in the '40's!" or
"Welcome to Coventry, twinned with Dresden!" (which we ACTUALLY are!).
Americans always gave nice tips at the end of tours.

[Kevrob]

On Monday, August 3, 2015 at 3:12:08 PM UTC-4, Adamastor Glace Mortimer wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> In article <a7f23e0d-0048-41e3...@googlegroups.com>
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Saturday, 1 August 2015 23:12:02 UTC+1, Shawn Wilson wrote:
> > ....
> > > Starship Troopers
> >
> > No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)
>
> If you want to get the bizarre notion drilled into your head that
> interstellar war is being waged according to the Geneva Convention,
> by the Earth side, the movie is good enough. Meanwhile the bugs do
> whatever they want. Yeah, load your rifles with FMJ ammo so you
> don't violate the convention, and don't just drop chemicals on the
> bugs, go get close up and shoot them when you know that your Geneva
> Convention allowed ammo doesn't do much to them. Hell, those
> troopers didn't even have 40 mm grenade launchers to use against
> the bugs.
>
> I've read the book twice, it's much better than that stupid movie,
> which was probably made by people who've never considered why
> certain ordinance is used for certain purposes.

After 3 IRON MAN and 2 AVENGERS movies, an ST remake - and I've
read rumblings and mumblings of a reboot for cable TV - could
finally have the Mobile Infantry in powered armor, given how
CGI has advanced since the film debuted.

Still needs more faithful scripts, though.

Kevin R

[Raymond Daley]

"Lynn McGuire" <l...@winsim.com> wrote in message
news:mpo4po$qrg$5...@dont-email.me...

Have Spacesuit. AWESOME book. 1st read it aged 9. Loved it ever since. That
and The Forever War.
Have Spacesuit should totally be made into a movie. And Orphans Of The Sky.
And Tunnel In The Sky.

[Raymond Daley]

"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in message
news:1tdl1cn6tr0vw.1...@40tude.net...
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 13:31:48 +0100, Raymond Daley wrote

>> And now I absolutely HAVE to read it as a loyal
>> Coventrian who loves his city history and the cathedral.
>
> I do hope that you mean the old one, not the regrettable
> post-war replacement.

Actually, I love all 3 of our cathedrals. Including the one Time Team
discovered. I'm an equal opportunity cathedralist.

One of our football terrace songs even mentions it.

"In me Coventry 'ome,
In me Coventry 'ome,
We speak with an accent exceedingly rare,
You want a cathedral we've got one to spare,
In me Coventry 'ome."

Must find out if they sing we've got 3 now at the football.

[J. Clarke]

In article <v86vrato3cc9ahje8...@reader80.eternal-
september.org>, l...@sff.net says...

>
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 16:05:16 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
> wrote:
>
> >In article <AdJvx.127235$JH3.1...@fx37.am4>,
> >Raymond Daley <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>"Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:5085b0f5-5495-41b6-8df8-
> >>> On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> >>>> > Starship Troopers
> >>>> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)
> >>> PHILISTINE!!!
> >>> Read the book. It is a classic for a reason.
> >>
> >>The book is a SHIT LOAD better than the movie.
> >
> >The book has nothing in common with the movie but the title.
>
> Oh, there are a few bits that bear some similarity, and I seem to
> recall one line of dialogue. Might be as much as 2% of the movie
> comes from the book.

Some character and place names were borrowed.

[J. Clarke]

In article <aed29452439cee52...@remailer.privacy.at>,
mixm...@remailer.privacy.at says...

>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> In article <MPG.3027b7c96...@news.eternal-september.org>
> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > In article <nsFuM...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...
> > >
> > > In article <mpk5i6$ooi$1...@dont-email.me>, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
> > > >On 8/1/2015 5:11 PM, Shawn Wilson wrote:
> > > >> Why not?
> > >
> > > Well, here's my take.
> > > >>
> > > >> The Mote in God's Eye
> > > Read, disliked.
> > >
> > > >> Protector
> > > Never read, having lost all interest in Niven by then.
> >
> > The first half of it was published much earlier in Analog as "The
> > Adults". First Niven I recall reading and it's what hooked me. Of
> > course I wasn't much beyond the Golden Age then. ....
>
> What year, or issue if you can recall, of "Analog" was that in? I
> was a subscriber for years and years. I'd be interested in whether
> or not I'd read another half book on the list without knowing it.

My apologies, it wasn't Analog, it was Galaxy, June '67.

[David Johnston]

On 8/3/2015 12:42 PM, Greg Goss wrote:
> Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> David Weber, not Harrington
>>
>> Dorothy is thinking of David Weber's long running Honor Harrington series.
>
> The series is shrinking in length but growing in width.
>
> I find it disconcerting to read a story that's now THREE serieses
> running in parallel, where events in one series affect the flow ot the
> other two.

Given how much infodumping that universe has, I think it hardly matters
whether you've read the book that actually had the events being referred
to.

[David Johnston]

On 8/3/2015 1:20 PM, Jack Ryan wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> In article <049402c3-42c7-4ca6...@googlegroups.com>
> "art...@yahoo.com" <art...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 5:15:04 AM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>
>>> Mid-period Willis, in the same universe as her other time-travel
>>> stories, many internal references to Jerome K. Jerome and Dorothy
>>> L. Sayers (as I said upthread, one really needs to have read
>>> those in order to appreciate the in-jokes). It's my favorite of
>>> all her books.
>>
>>
>> I liked "To Say Nothing Of the Dog" even without having read Jerome etc. Which reminds me. Is it worth reading "The Wasteland" to really understand "Last Call" by Tim Powers?
>
> Oh, it is SO worth reading "The Wasteland" by T.S. Eliot
> independently of any other reason; it is Great Literature (note
> capitalization)!
>

...ordinarily that's a good reason to run the other way.

[pete...@gmail.com]

As great as The Wasteland is, reading it to understand Tim Powers may be
opening a can worms, since Elliot in turn references:

<wikipedia>
Homer, Sophocles, Petronius, Virgil, Ovid, Saint Augustine of Hippo, Dante
Alighieri, William Shakespeare, Edmund Spenser, Gérard de Nerval, Thomas Kyd,
Geoffrey Chaucer, Thomas Middleton, John Webster, Joseph Conrad, John Milton,
Andrew Marvell, Charles Baudelaire, Richard Wagner, Oliver Goldsmith, Hermann
Hesse, Aldous Huxley, Paul Verlaine, Walt Whitman and Bram Stoker.

Eliot also makes extensive use of Scriptural writings including the Bible,
the Book of Common Prayer, the Hindu Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, and the Buddha's
Fire Sermon, and of cultural and anthropological studies such as Sir James
Frazer's The Golden Bough and Jessie Weston's From Ritual to Romance
(particularly its study of the Wasteland motif in Celtic mythology).
</wikipedia>

pt

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

The flogging scene bears a mild resemblance to a scene in the book.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 15:10:00 -0600, David Johnston
<Da...@block.net> wrote in<news:mpol88$3pr$1...@dont-email.me>
in rec.arts.sf.written:

> On 8/3/2015 12:42 PM, Greg Goss wrote:

>> Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:

[...]

>>> Dorothy is thinking of David Weber's long running Honor
>>> Harrington series.

>> The series is shrinking in length but growing in width.

>> I find it disconcerting to read a story that's now THREE
>> serieses running in parallel, where events in one
>> series affect the flow ot the other two.

> Given how much infodumping that universe has, I think it
> hardly matters whether you've read the book that
> actually had the events being referred to.

It does make a significant difference if you focus more on
characters than on plot.

[Lynn McGuire]

So who should play Joe-Jim, the two headed mutant in _Orphans of the Sky"? I vote for Arnold. That could be awesome.

Lynn

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <mpol9n$3pr$2...@dont-email.me>,

Well, maybe I didn't run the other way because nobody TOLD me to
read it.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <7b49f611-cd53-4bb8...@googlegroups.com>,

And to somebody's journal of the Shackleton expedition. But he
does tell you that in the footnotes.

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/2015 2:42 am, Greg Goss wrote:

> I find it disconcerting to read a story that's now THREE serieses
> running in parallel, where events in one series affect the flow ot the
> other two. It's never clear what order to read stuff in, because the
> narrative flow of books in each series overlap -- an event in A will
> cause stuff in B which in turn affects something later in the same A
> book.

That was the problem I had with the 1632 series, which I eventually gave
up on, although I think I own 15 or 16 novels in the series.
--
Robert Bannister
Perth, Western Australia

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/2015 12:45 am, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

> TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG
> or, HOW WE FOUND THE BISHOP'S BIRD STUMP AT LAST
> by Connie Willis

OK, you've talked me into it. I've ordered it from Abe Books as it seems
to be out of print.

[David DeLaney]

On 2015-08-03, Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:

> On Monday, 3 August 2015 13:34:43 UTC+1, Raymond Daley wrote:
>> "Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:5085b0f5-5495-41b6-8df8-
>> > On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>> >> > Starship Troopers
>> >> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)
>> > PHILISTINE!!!
>> > Read the book. It is a classic for a reason.
>>
>> The book is a SHIT LOAD better than the movie.
>

> I know what I did. I'm not sorry.

And you did it fairly well, too!

Dave, it's nice to see examples of the now-Ancient Art again

ps: now envisioning Ted Frank talking with Terry Austin
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://gatekeeper.vic.com/~dbd/ -net.legends/Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[William December Starr]

In article <nsIMK...@kithrup.com>,

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:

> TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG
> or, HOW WE FOUND THE BISHOP'S BIRD STUMP AT LAST
> by Connie Willis
>

> Time lag is a wretched thing. You make a dozen or thirteen time
> drops within a week or so, and your brain goes wonky and you
> can't think straight, and you can't see straight, and you can't
> hear straight, and you think your friend said, "We've let the hat
> out of the bag," when in fact he said something different
> altogether.
>
> And then you come down with spells of maudlin sentimentality that
> make you talk, as Ned Henry puts it, "like an Irishman in his
> cups or a Victorian poet cold-sober."
>
> So when poor overworked, time-lagged Ned is sent back to 1888 for
> a badly needed rest,

Why does someone need to be sent a few centuries into the past in
order to get some rest?

-- wds

[William December Starr]

In article <w6Qvx.71822$Dx3....@fx39.am4>,

"Raymond Daley" <raymon...@ntlworld.com> said:

> Have Spacesuit. AWESOME book. 1st read it aged 9. Loved it ever
> since. That and The Forever War. Have Spacesuit should totally be
> made into a movie. And Orphans Of The Sky. And Tunnel In The Sky.

Because it worked so well for STARSHIP TROOPERS...

-- wds

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <d2afsc...@mid.individual.net>,

Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>On 4/08/2015 12:45 am, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>> TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG
>> or, HOW WE FOUND THE BISHOP'S BIRD STUMP AT LAST
>> by Connie Willis
>
>OK, you've talked me into it. I've ordered it from Abe Books as it seems
>to be out of print.

Oh, goodie. I think you will not regret it.

[William December Starr]

In article <d29rhg...@mid.individual.net>,

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> said:

>>> Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen - ditto
>
> Alternate universe story. A modern urban cop

A Pennsylvania state trooper, I believe. (Checks
wikipedia... yup, my memory was right.)

> falls into another history line and changes it utterly.

-- wds

[Gary R. Schmidt]

On 4/08/2015 5:10 AM, Adamastor Glace Mortimer wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> In article <a7f23e0d-0048-41e3...@googlegroups.com>
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Saturday, 1 August 2015 23:12:02 UTC+1, Shawn Wilson wrote:
>> ....
>>> Starship Troopers
>>
>> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)
>
> If you want to get the bizarre notion drilled into your head that
> interstellar war is being waged according to the Geneva Convention,
> by the Earth side, the movie is good enough. Meanwhile the bugs do
> whatever they want. Yeah, load your rifles with FMJ ammo so you
> don't violate the convention, and don't just drop chemicals on the
> bugs, go get close up and shoot them when you know that your Geneva
> Convention allowed ammo doesn't do much to them. Hell, those
> troopers didn't even have 40 mm grenade launchers to use against
> the bugs.
>
> I've read the book twice, it's much better than that stupid movie,
> which was probably made by people who've never considered why
> certain ordinance is used for certain purposes.
>

The so-called "director" of the movie is reported to have stated that he
did not read the book before making the film, so follow-on errors are to
be expected.

Cheers,
Gary B-)

--
When men talk to their friends, they insult each other.
They don't really mean it.
When women talk to their friends, they compliment each other.
They don't mean it either.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <mppctu$7sk$1...@panix2.panix.com>,

Because as long as he remains in the present (mid-21st century),
the person funding endless time drops to find the Bishop's Bird
Stump will get on his case to make another drop and FIND IT.

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 8/3/2015 5:32 AM, Raymond Daley wrote:
> "Shawn Wilson" <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5085b0f5-5495-41b6-8df8-
>> On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:

>>>> Starship Troopers
>>> No, but I could just watch the movie, right? :-)

>> PHILISTINE!!!
>> Read the book. It is a classic for a reason.
>
> The book is a SHIT LOAD better than the movie.
>

Mostly because the movie is just plain shit.

--
Veni, vidi, snarki.

[William December Starr]

In article <nsJHt...@kithrup.com>,

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:

> William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:
>>
>>> So when poor overworked, time-lagged Ned is sent back to 1888
>>> for a badly needed rest,
>>
>> Why does someone need to be sent a few centuries into the past in
>> order to get some rest?
>
> Because as long as he remains in the present (mid-21st century),
> the person funding endless time drops to find the Bishop's Bird
> Stump will get on his case to make another drop and FIND IT.

So his organization is essentially hiding him from the guy that's
paying their bills?

-- wds

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <mpqgr3$7ca$1...@panix2.panix.com>,

William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <nsJHt...@kithrup.com>,
>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:
>
>> William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>>> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:
>>>
>>>> So when poor overworked, time-lagged Ned is sent back to 1888
>>>> for a badly needed rest,
>>>
>>> Why does someone need to be sent a few centuries into the past in
>>> order to get some rest?
>>
>> Because as long as he remains in the present (mid-21st century),
>> the person funding endless time drops to find the Bishop's Bird
>> Stump will get on his case to make another drop and FIND IT.
>
>So his organization is essentially hiding him from the guy that's
>paying their bills?

Elderly woman, actually, but otherwise, yes. We're talking about
saving his sanity, perhaps his life, here.

[Kevrob]

That's one head? Who's the other?

The easy choice is Danny DeVito. Maybe it would be more fun to use
JeanClaudeVanDamme?

Kevin R

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <49fa14b3-34ac-441e...@googlegroups.com>,

Actually, assuming the two-headed person is a conjoined twin --
which is the only way you can get that kind of configuration --
the heads would be identical. Get whomever you cast to play both
heads, through the miracles of modern CGI.

Zaphod Beeblebrox's other head was a dummy (at least in the old
version; I haven't seen the new one).

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in
news:d2afsc...@mid.individual.net:

> On 4/08/2015 12:45 am, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>> TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG
>> or, HOW WE FOUND THE BISHOP'S BIRD STUMP AT LAST
>> by Connie Willis
>
> OK, you've talked me into it. I've ordered it from Abe Books as
> it seems to be out of print.

Have you read "Three Men in a Boat"? You don't really need to, but To
Say Nothing of the Dog is more amusing if you have.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote in news:mpqgr3$7ca$1
@panix2.panix.com:

Said organization is Oxford's history department (because who better
to travel in to history than historians?).

You really have to read it for it to make sense. (And it still
probably wont', but odds are good that you won't mind so much.)
Willis is a first rate writer.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA4EC567093...@69.16.179.43>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in
>news:d2afsc...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 4/08/2015 12:45 am, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>
>>> TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG
>>> or, HOW WE FOUND THE BISHOP'S BIRD STUMP AT LAST
>>> by Connie Willis
>>
>> OK, you've talked me into it. I've ordered it from Abe Books as
>> it seems to be out of print.
>
>Have you read "Three Men in a Boat"? You don't really need to, but To
>Say Nothing of the Dog is more amusing if you have.
>

Yes, and as I said upthread, the more you know about Sayers's
Peter Wimsey stories, the more in-jokes you will catch.

[Greg Goss]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

>Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>On Monday, August 3, 2015 at 5:51:53 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:

>>> So who should play Joe-Jim, the two headed mutant in _Orphans of the
>>Sky"? I vote for Arnold. That could be awesome.
>>
>>That's one head? Who's the other?
>>
>>The easy choice is Danny DeVito. Maybe it would be more fun to use
>>JeanClaudeVanDamme?
>
>Actually, assuming the two-headed person is a conjoined twin --
>which is the only way you can get that kind of configuration --
>the heads would be identical. Get whomever you cast to play both
>heads, through the miracles of modern CGI.

Can't blastocysts join? You seem to hear about cats having different
genes in one zone than another, and I seem to recall a Law & Order
episode featuring a guy with different DNA from a cheek swab than in
his blood.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[David Johnston]

I checked and whether or not it's theoretically possible to have
fraternal conjoined twins, apparently they've never found an actual
example.

[Don Bruder]

In article <nsKDw...@kithrup.com>,

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

> In article <XnsA4EC567093...@69.16.179.43>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in
> >news:d2afsc...@mid.individual.net:
> >
> >> On 4/08/2015 12:45 am, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >>
> >>> TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG
> >>> or, HOW WE FOUND THE BISHOP'S BIRD STUMP AT LAST
> >>> by Connie Willis
> >>
> >> OK, you've talked me into it. I've ordered it from Abe Books as
> >> it seems to be out of print.
> >
> >Have you read "Three Men in a Boat"? You don't really need to, but To
> >Say Nothing of the Dog is more amusing if you have.
> >
> Yes, and as I said upthread, the more you know about Sayers's
> Peter Wimsey stories, the more in-jokes you will catch.

And the more "homework" an author assigns, particularly when the "class"
(As in, the book I'm trying to decide to read) is Biology, and the
homework (the other book(s) I "ought to" read so I get the in-jokes in
the one I'm considering) is "Intro to metal shop", the less likely I am
to even pick up the book in question.

Or put more plainly, if, in order to enjoy reading a given book, I need
to read, not only "something else", but something in a genre (such as
Sayers/Wimsey) that I not only don't care about, but actually dislike,
I'll almost certainly be taking a pass on that book.

For some, Sayers' Wimsey may be the height of great literature. That's
fine. Personally, I've found that I'm likely to get more
enjoyment/entertainment out of watching paint dry than reading another
of the P.W. tales.

--
Security provided by Mssrs Smith and/or Wesson. Brought to you by the letter Q

[Kevrob]

One of the Jo-Jim heads, preferably one played by Arnold,
has to say "I am not a tumor!"

Kevin R

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

You shouldn't read these books.

Don Bruder <dak...@sonic.net> wrote in
news:mpqo53$mrs$2...@dont-email.me:

[Don Bruder]

In article <d2c5jo...@mid.individual.net>,

Exceedingly rare, but yes. We see it sometimes in horses - A few years
ago (like 7-8, give or take) A so-called "brindle" horse (which is
*EXTREMELY* unusual) was black-flagged at an event 'cause genetic
testing said it couldn't be the horse that it was claimed to be. The
owner, who, if I'm recalling rightly, owned both stallion and mare, bred
the mare, foaled out the resulting baby, raised it, and entered it in
the competition - pretty much ruling out any possibility of a mixup -
went digging, and after a while, ended up getting a full genetic workup
on the critter. At which point, they discovered that "which horse is it"
was variable based on whether the sample was taken from blood, hair,
skin, hoof, and in the case of hair, WHERE the hair was sampled - Mane
hair showed one, body hair another.

The theory that developed was that he was a chimera - the survivor of a
pair of fraternal twins, one of which absorbed the other very early in
the pregnancy, and somehow, the two "cooperated" enough that he came out
viable, but genetically, he was two different horses.

There was some speculation as to whether he might have been able to sire
foals that were genetically unrelated to each other, due to the
possibility that his testicles might have produced sperm from either set
of genes - That idea never got much traction, though, as the testicles
in question had been... Shall we say "escorted off the premises" several
years before it was discovered he was a chimera.