The Nebulas (1967)

[James Nicoll]

You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."

The Nebulas: 1967

Some years are easier to do than others.

I am not going to use the organization I did for the previous one
because the number of items nominated was much, much smaller than for
the '66 Nebulas. Also, I am still hilariously underinformed (a real time
saver).

Novels
Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress

Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
Nebula. Take that, Bob.

I think the original form of Flowers for Algernon is superior to the novel.
And I'm not super-keen on the Delany. At the same time, Moon has lots of
issues too. Kind of tempted to pull a John W. Campbell Memorial Award for
Best Science Fiction Novel, announce no novel was worthy of the award that
year and give it to a novel from a different year.

If we use the "Is it it in print" test, they all pass with flying colours.
All are in print, all have had multiple editions. As far as I know, Flowers
for Algernon is the only one to have a movie.


Novellas

Jack Vance* "The Last Castle"
Avram Davidson "Clash of Star-Kings"
Charles L. Harness "The Alchemist"

I've read the winner, "The Last Castle". It's kind of hard to second-guess
SFWA without reading the other two but despite the fact I own a copy of the
Harness I am not going to go read it. The Vance has appeared in multiple
locations, as recently as 2007, but the Davidson seems to have gone out of
print by the 1980s and the Harness last saw print in 1999 and it didn't see
a lot of appearances before that.

If staying in print is any indication of quality, SFWA made the right
call.


Novelettes

Gordon R. Dickson* "Call Him Lord"
Robert M. Green, Jr. "Apology to Inky"
Charles L. Harness "An Ornament to His Profession"
Hayden Howard "The Eskimo Invasion"
Roger Zelazny "This Moment of the Storm"

The only one I've read is the winner, a tale of a space feudalism and how
they handle the problem of an heir who is not up to the job. Odd detail about
this story; the sequels were by Ben Bova. I don't know how that happened.

The Dickson was avidly collected until about 1990, when suddenly it
wasn't. The Green fell out of print pretty quickly but did make it into
a few anthologies (more than more short works can say). The Harness got
collected in a number of places in the 1960s and 1970s and once in the
1980s and then nothing until 1999 and nothing since. The Howard seems to
have been reprinted once, in Italian. The Zelazny has been collected many,
many times.

My suspicion is the Zelazny may have stood the test of time better than
the others but this is one of the cases where I am absolutely sure I have
not read it.


Short Stories

Richard McKenna* "The Secret Place"
Brian Aldiss "Man In His Time"
Bob Shaw "Light of Other Days"

I've read two of these, McKenna's winning story and Bob Shaw's nominee.
Looking at my notes for Casey Agonistes and Other Science Fiction and Fantasy
Stories I see I didn't care for the McKenna (among other things, apparently
his female characters are awful, although at least in this one he didn't
write them out of evolution). A lot of people disagree with me on this one,
because despite McKenna dying young (and being unable to encourage publishers
to keep his stuff in print) this story was collected many times, although not
in the last decade that I can see.

The Aldiss was also avidly collected. Don't know anything about it.

Crap, I totally forgot the Shaw in my original version of this. It was praised
by Campbell as one of the genuinely original ideas he'd seen in years and a lot
of people agreed because it has been collected often and continually over the
years. It was also adopted to radio at least twice.

I'm inclined to go with the Shaw here.
--
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)

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On 2013-03-29 00:46:18 -0400, James Nicoll said:

> You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
> of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."

They were tinkering with the rules, trying to find what worked. I
could go into details, but nobody cares.

Originally, all it took to get a story on the ballot was for one active
member of SFWA to nominate it; that had changed as of 1967.

> The Nebulas: 1967

>
> Novels
> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
>
> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
> Nebula. Take that, Bob.

The novel of "Flowers" was greatly inferior to the original story.
Between the other two, I honestly don't know which I'd choose.

> Novellas
>
> Jack Vance* "The Last Castle"
> Avram Davidson "Clash of Star-Kings"
> Charles L. Harness "The Alchemist"

I've only read the Vance.

> If staying in print is any indication of quality, SFWA made the right
> call.

There's a question here of which is cause and which is effect.

> Novelettes
>
> Gordon R. Dickson* "Call Him Lord"
> Robert M. Green, Jr. "Apology to Inky"
> Charles L. Harness "An Ornament to His Profession"
> Hayden Howard "The Eskimo Invasion"
> Roger Zelazny "This Moment of the Storm"

Haven't read the Harness or the Zelazny -- which is odd, as I've read a
LOT of Zelazny.

I think I'd go with "Apology to Inky" as the best of them, though the
other two are good in very, VERY different ways.

> Short Stories
>
> Richard McKenna* "The Secret Place"
> Brian Aldiss "Man In His Time"
> Bob Shaw "Light of Other Days"

I've only read the Shaw.




--
Now available on Amazon or B&N: One-Eyed Jack.
Greg Kraft could see ghosts. That didn't mean he could stop them...

[Brian M. Scott]

On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 04:46:18 +0000 (UTC), James Nicoll
<jdni...@panix.com> wrote in
<news:kj36aq$gvs$1...@reader1.panix.com> in
rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> The Nebulas: 1967

[...]

> Novels
> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress

> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two,
> shared the Nebula. Take that, Bob.

> I think the original form of Flowers for Algernon is
> superior to the novel. And I'm not super-keen on the
> Delany. At the same time, Moon has lots of issues too.
> Kind of tempted to pull a John W. Campbell Memorial Award
> for Best Science Fiction Novel, announce no novel was
> worthy of the award that year and give it to a novel from
> a different year.

On the contrary, this is one of the few years when *all* of
the nominees were worthy. I'd probably go with FfA, but it
would be a hard decision. The Whorfianism in _Babel-17_ is
*way* over the top, but he made it work for the story, and
Rydra alone is worth the price of admission.

[...]

> Novelettes

> Gordon R. Dickson* "Call Him Lord"
> Robert M. Green, Jr. "Apology to Inky"
> Charles L. Harness "An Ornament to His Profession"
> Hayden Howard "The Eskimo Invasion"
> Roger Zelazny "This Moment of the Storm"

> The only one I've read is the winner, a tale of a space
> feudalism and how they handle the problem of an heir who
> is not up to the job.

'Feudalism' is inaccurate, even ignoring the modern view
that the term is well-nigh meaningless without a great deal
of qualification.

I've read at least four; I'm not sure about the Howard. The
Dickson and the Zelazny are the ones that have stuck, and
either would be a legitimate winner.

[...]

> Short Stories

> Richard McKenna* "The Secret Place"
> Brian Aldiss "Man In His Time"
> Bob Shaw "Light of Other Days"

[...]

> I'm inclined to go with the Shaw here.

The Shaw is an easy choice if I have to stick with the
nominees, but my real choice is Zelazny, 'The Man Who Loved
the Faioli'.

Brian

[James Nicoll]

In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,

Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>On 2013-03-29 00:46:18 -0400, James Nicoll said:
>
>> You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>> of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>
>They were tinkering with the rules, trying to find what worked. I
>could go into details, but nobody cares.
>

>I've only read the Shaw.

With McKenna, I'd recommend his novel THE SAND PEBBLES over his short
stories but if a copy of CASEY AGONISTES fell into your hands, it's
worth a look.

Trivia: There are a lot of parallels between the lives lived by McKenna
and mystery writer Charles Willeford. Willeford managed a longer and much
happier life, though.

[James Nicoll]

In article <kj490d$hrr$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>On 2013-03-29 00:46:18 -0400, James Nicoll said:
>>
>>> You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>>> of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."

I am!

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On 2013-03-29 10:38:05 -0400, James Nicoll said:

> In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>> On 2013-03-29 00:46:18 -0400, James Nicoll said:
>>
>>> You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>>> of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>>
>> They were tinkering with the rules, trying to find what worked. I
>> could go into details, but nobody cares.

Abbreviated version, without dates I'd need to look up: Originally,
any member could nominate anything, and that would put it on the
ballot. This got unwieldy very quickly, so it was changed to THREE
nominations, from different members, put it on the ballot. After a
year or two, when that still yielded an unmanageably-long ballot, they
added the preliminary ballot -- anything with three or more nominations
went on that, and there was a round of voting, and the top five then
went on a final ballot, which was what was released to the public and
voted on to choose the winners.

That's roughly the current system, except that the number of
nominations (now called "recommendations" so that people couldn't call
themselves "Nebula nominees" when they got three friends to cite them)
required to go on the preliminary ballot has varied from as low as
three to as high as ten.

There's also the Nebula jury -- now "juries." Someone felt some works
were being missed by the membership at large, so a five-member jury was
chosen to read ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING PUBLISHED IN THE FIELD (which
meant not doing much of anything else for a year), with the option (not
requirement) of then adding a sixth nominee to any category where they
felt something brilliant had been missed by the membership at large.
This eventually got split into two juries, one for novels and one for
everything else.

There was talk of abandoning the juries awhile back, on the grounds
that the jury's additions to the ballot never actually won because no
one but the jury had read them, but then one of them DID win -- it was
available online -- so the juries were still around last I heard.
(Remember I quit SFWA a few years back.)

>> I've only read the Shaw.
>
> With McKenna, I'd recommend his novel THE SAND PEBBLES over his short
> stories but if a copy of CASEY AGONISTES fell into your hands, it's
> worth a look.

Oh, I've read the story "Casey Agonistes." Several times. I cried a
couple of them. Didn't much like the other one or two short stories by
him that I've read (as in, I can't even remember the titles).

I may have THE SAND PEBBLES among my inherited books; haven't read it.

[James Nicoll]

In article <kj4ep9$n17$1...@dont-email.me>,

Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>On 2013-03-29 10:38:05 -0400, James Nicoll said:
>
>> In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
>> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>> On 2013-03-29 00:46:18 -0400, James Nicoll said:
>>>
>>>> You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>>>> of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>>>
>>> They were tinkering with the rules, trying to find what worked. I
>>> could go into details, but nobody cares.
>
>Abbreviated version, without dates I'd need to look up:

[snip]

May I quote this?

My enthusiasm for looking up the fate of every story nominated is dampened by
my foreknowledge of just how long the nominations lists get some years.

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On 2013-03-29 12:44:02 -0400, James Nicoll said:

> In article <kj4ep9$n17$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>> On 2013-03-29 10:38:05 -0400, James Nicoll said:
>>
>>> In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2013-03-29 00:46:18 -0400, James Nicoll said:
>>>>
>>>>> You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>>>>> of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>>>>
>>>> They were tinkering with the rules, trying to find what worked. I
>>>> could go into details, but nobody cares.
>>
>> Abbreviated version, without dates I'd need to look up:
>
> [snip]
>
> May I quote this?

Sure; it's accurate to the best of my knowledge and recollection, and
not secret.

> My enthusiasm for looking up the fate of every story nominated is dampened by
> my foreknowledge of just how long the nominations lists get some years.

I'll bet.

[William Hyde]

On Mar 29, 12:46 am, jdnic...@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote:
> You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
> of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>
> The Nebulas: 1967
>
>     Some years are easier to do than others.
>
>     I am not going to use the organization I did for the previous one
> because the number of items nominated was much, much smaller than for
> the '66 Nebulas. Also, I am still hilariously underinformed (a real time
> saver).
>
>     Novels
>     Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
>     Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
>     Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress

>     Novellas
>
>     Jack Vance* "The Last Castle"
>     Avram Davidson "Clash of Star-Kings"
>     Charles L. Harness "The Alchemist"
>

>

>     If staying in print is any indication of quality, SFWA made the right
> call.
>
>     Novelettes
>
>     Gordon R. Dickson* "Call Him Lord"
>     Robert M. Green, Jr. "Apology to Inky"
>     Charles L. Harness "An Ornament to His Profession"
>     Hayden Howard "The Eskimo Invasion"
>     Roger Zelazny "This Moment of the Storm"
>

>

>     Short Stories
>
>     Richard McKenna* "The Secret Place"
>     Brian Aldiss "Man In His Time"
>     Bob Shaw "Light of Other Days"

In the novel category I'd have voted for TMIAHM in a heartbeat at the
time, but I've come to like it a good deal less and would now vote for
Babel-17. I never read "Flowers", possibly beacause I felt the short
story had said it all.

As to novella, I'd definitely have voted for the Vance, and probably
still would. But I'd have to reread the Davidson and Harness first,
as my appreciation for both authors has grown over the years.

Among the novelettes, I thought the Dickson was slight but beautifully
done, and it's the only story I remember. Which is odd as I tend to
remember Zelazny's stories.

Among the short stories the Shaw is very fine and would have been a
good winner. I might prefer the Aldiss, but it is far less
approachable. I remember liking the McKenna, but not as much as the
other two. Damon Knight was very influential, and a big backer of
McKenna.

William Hyde

[Mark Zenier]

In article <kj36aq$gvs$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>
>The Nebulas: 1967
>

> Novels
> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
>
> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
>Nebula. Take that, Bob.

Remember, this was the crashing edge of The New Wave.


Mark Zenier mze...@eskimo.com
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)

[James Nicoll]

In article <kj73r...@enews1.newsguy.com>,

Mark Zenier <mze...@eskimo.com> wrote:
>In article <kj36aq$gvs$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>>of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>>
>>The Nebulas: 1967
>>
>> Novels
>> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
>> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
>> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
>>
>> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
>>Nebula. Take that, Bob.
>
>Remember, this was the crashing edge of The New Wave.

Somewhere in Jo Walton's Hugo posts on tor.com is an interesting account
by Dozois of the New Wave/Grognard Wars as acted out in the awards.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 23:02:29 GMT, Mark Zenier
<mze...@eskimo.com> wrote in
<news:kj73r...@enews1.newsguy.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:

> In article <kj36aq$gvs$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:

>>You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>>of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."

>>The Nebulas: 1967

>> Novels
>> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
>> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
>> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress

>> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
>>Nebula. Take that, Bob.

> Remember, this was the crashing edge of The New Wave.

None of the nominees can reasonably be described as New
Wave.

Brian

[Mark Zenier]

In article <1ikt3xu4dlf1f$.iaihrqvv...@40tude.net>,

So? The point is that Heinlein's (arguably) best book didn't win because
other things were going on.

You'd have a very hard time trying to classify Delany as "not New Wave".

[Howard Brazee]

On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:44:37 GMT, mze...@eskimo.com (Mark Zenier)
wrote:

>So? The point is that Heinlein's (arguably) best book didn't win because
>other things were going on.

That happens a lot. For instance, with Bester's best book. (and
other rewards such as Oscars).

--
Anybody who agrees with one side all of the time or disagrees with the
other side all of the time is equally guilty of letting others do
their thinking for them.

[James Nicoll]

In article <u5jjl8tuvkn6eqfen...@4ax.com>,

Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:44:37 GMT, mze...@eskimo.com (Mark Zenier)
>wrote:
>
>>So? The point is that Heinlein's (arguably) best book didn't win because
>>other things were going on.
>
>That happens a lot. For instance, with Bester's best book. (and
>other rewards such as Oscars).
>

Good books seem to come in waves; there are years where any of the
nominees would be reasonable choices and years where none of them are.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:44:37 GMT, Mark Zenier
<mze...@eskimo.com> wrote in
<news:kjc4t...@enews1.newsguy.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:

Not being an idiot, I wouldn't waste my time classifying
*authors* when *novels* are in question. There is nothing
particularly New Wave about _Babel-17_.

[Rich Horton]

On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 04:46:18 +0000 (UTC), jdni...@panix.com (James
Nicoll) wrote:

>
>You may ask how important it was to SFWA to have a consistent number
>of nominees back in the 1960s and the answer is "Not very."
>
>The Nebulas: 1967
>
> Some years are easier to do than others.
>
> I am not going to use the organization I did for the previous one
>because the number of items nominated was much, much smaller than for
>the '66 Nebulas. Also, I am still hilariously underinformed (a real time
>saver).
>
> Novels
> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
>
> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
>Nebula. Take that, Bob.
>
> I think the original form of Flowers for Algernon is superior to the novel.
>And I'm not super-keen on the Delany. At the same time, Moon has lots of
>issues too. Kind of tempted to pull a John W. Campbell Memorial Award for
>Best Science Fiction Novel, announce no novel was worthy of the award that
>year and give it to a novel from a different year.
>
> If we use the "Is it it in print" test, they all pass with flying colours.
>All are in print, all have had multiple editions. As far as I know, Flowers
>for Algernon is the only one to have a movie.
>

I suppose a three-way tie might have been OK -- I like them all,
really, even though they all have their problems, too.

>
> Novellas
>
> Jack Vance* "The Last Castle"
> Avram Davidson "Clash of Star-Kings"
> Charles L. Harness "The Alchemist"
>
> I've read the winner, "The Last Castle". It's kind of hard to second-guess
>SFWA without reading the other two but despite the fact I own a copy of the
>Harness I am not going to go read it. The Vance has appeared in multiple
>locations, as recently as 2007, but the Davidson seems to have gone out of
>print by the 1980s and the Harness last saw print in 1999 and it didn't see
>a lot of appearances before that.
>
> If staying in print is any indication of quality, SFWA made the right
>call.
>

"Clash of Star-Kings" (Wollheim's title, not Davidson's) is a really
good story when it's about American expatriates living in Mexico (no
prizes for guessing where Davidson lived then), a little less
interesing when it's about alien being taking the form of Axtec gods
and, er, "clashing".

"The Alchemist" is OK, kind of wacky.

"The Last Castle" is the obvious right choice for a winner.

>
> Novelettes
>
> Gordon R. Dickson* "Call Him Lord"
> Robert M. Green, Jr. "Apology to Inky"
> Charles L. Harness "An Ornament to His Profession"
> Hayden Howard "The Eskimo Invasion"
> Roger Zelazny "This Moment of the Storm"
>
> The only one I've read is the winner, a tale of a space feudalism and how
>they handle the problem of an heir who is not up to the job. Odd detail about
>this story; the sequels were by Ben Bova. I don't know how that happened.
>
> The Dickson was avidly collected until about 1990, when suddenly it
>wasn't. The Green fell out of print pretty quickly but did make it into
>a few anthologies (more than more short works can say). The Harness got
>collected in a number of places in the 1960s and 1970s and once in the
>1980s and then nothing until 1999 and nothing since. The Howard seems to
>have been reprinted once, in Italian. The Zelazny has been collected many,
>many times.
>
> My suspicion is the Zelazny may have stood the test of time better than
>the others but this is one of the cases where I am absolutely sure I have
>not read it.
>
>

I like the Zelazny a lot. I recently read "Apology to Inky", it's a
pretty effective timeslip story. The Harness is good. The Howard is
the first of the stories that became the novel of that name, it's OK.
I liked the Dickson -- its award seem fair enough, but an award to
Zelazny would have been OK too.

> Short Stories
>
> Richard McKenna* "The Secret Place"
> Brian Aldiss "Man In His Time"
> Bob Shaw "Light of Other Days"
>
> I've read two of these, McKenna's winning story and Bob Shaw's nominee.
>Looking at my notes for Casey Agonistes and Other Science Fiction and Fantasy
>Stories I see I didn't care for the McKenna (among other things, apparently
>his female characters are awful, although at least in this one he didn't
>write them out of evolution). A lot of people disagree with me on this one,
>because despite McKenna dying young (and being unable to encourage publishers
>to keep his stuff in print) this story was collected many times, although not
>in the last decade that I can see.
>
> The Aldiss was also avidly collected. Don't know anything about it.
>
>Crap, I totally forgot the Shaw in my original version of this. It was praised
>by Campbell as one of the genuinely original ideas he'd seen in years and a lot
>of people agreed because it has been collected often and continually over the
>years. It was also adopted to radio at least twice.
>
>I'm inclined to go with the Shaw here.

Of course "Light of Other Days" should have won, it's one of the great
SF stories ever. "Man in his Time" is good, too. I don't much recall
"The Secret Place", though I think I did like it back in 1974 or
whenever I read it.

[William December Starr]

In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:

> James Nicoll said:
>
>> Novels
>> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
>> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
>> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
>>
>> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
>> Nebula. Take that, Bob.
>
> The novel of "Flowers" was greatly inferior to the original story.
> Between the other two, I honestly don't know which I'd choose.

I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?

(Note: I'm talking only about expansion, not extension, where the
original story, essentially unchanged, becomes part of a longer
novel.)

-- wds

[Larry Headlund]

Does 2001 an expansion of "The Sentinel" or an extension?

Nightfall was a famous short story and a novel I never read.

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

Maybe Brin's _The Postman_? It got expanded AND extended.

[James Nicoll]

In article <kk3i36$o9a$1...@panix2.panix.com>,

William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>
>> James Nicoll said:
>>
>>> Novels
>>> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
>>> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
>>> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
>>>
>>> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
>>> Nebula. Take that, Bob.
>>
>> The novel of "Flowers" was greatly inferior to the original story.
>> Between the other two, I honestly don't know which I'd choose.
>
>I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
>were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
>are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?
>

David Weber's PATH OF THE FURY, expanded without adding anything of
value.

[Andrew Plotkin]

Here, William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
> In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
> >

> > The novel of "Flowers" was greatly inferior to the original story.
> > Between the other two, I honestly don't know which I'd choose.
>
> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
> novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
> were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
> are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?
>
> (Note: I'm talking only about expansion, not extension, where the
> original story, essentially unchanged, becomes part of a longer
> novel.)

This is one of those statistical gotchas, like a notable author going
downhill at the end of his/her career. An award-winning short story is
the most likely candidate for expansion into a novel, and since
authors have no way to produce a reliably award-winning novel...(*)

(* Jokes about "Be named Connie or Lois" aside.)

My only example here is "Nightflyers", a GRRM short story that was
expanded into a novella (not a novel) and became slightly worse (not
terrible).

As the counterexample, Herbert managed to expand and extend "Dune
World" without disappointing people. Or maybe people *were*
disappointed? I wasn't around back then.

--Z

--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*

[J. Clarke]

In article <kk3voj$e6r$1...@reader1.panix.com>, jdni...@panix.com says...

>
> In article <kk3i36$o9a$1...@panix2.panix.com>,
> William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
> >In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
> >Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
> >
> >> James Nicoll said:
> >>
> >>> Novels
> >>> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
> >>> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
> >>> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
> >>>
> >>> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
> >>> Nebula. Take that, Bob.
> >>
> >> The novel of "Flowers" was greatly inferior to the original story.
> >> Between the other two, I honestly don't know which I'd choose.
> >
> >I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
> >original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
> >novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
> >were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
> >are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?
> >
> David Weber's PATH OF THE FURY, expanded without adding anything of
> value.

Stardance comes to mind.

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <kk3v85$7v1$1...@dont-email.me>,

Fredric Brown extended someone else's story in "Knock", and it went
pretty well..
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[Joseph Nebus]

In <kk3i36$o9a$1...@panix2.panix.com> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) writes:

>I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
>were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
>are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?

>(Note: I'm talking only about expansion, not extension, where the
>original story, essentially unchanged, becomes part of a longer
>novel.)

How would you characterize the difference between the
novella ``The End of Eternity'' and the novel? The novella got only
a very belated, scrapheap publication, and there's a lot of major
changes between them, but the basic setting and core idea carry through
despite a lot of (really worthwhile) rethinking on Asimov's part.



--
http://nebusresearch.wordpress.com/ Joseph Nebus
Current Entry: Reading the Comics, April 5, 2013 http://wp.me/p1RYhY-rz
--------------------------------------------------------+---------------------

[David DeLaney]

On 10 Apr 2013 07:23:18 -0400, William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
>were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
>are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?
>
>(Note: I'm talking only about expansion, not extension, where the
>original story, essentially unchanged, becomes part of a longer novel.)

Oh, so fillin'-in-in-the-middle-with-undetected-love-interest-and-extra-
travelogue doesn't count? Bah. Also I think that leaves out Weber's recent
vampire novel which was just being discussed on another thread. I liked the
shorter story, but could see from looking at the book that the novel-length
one didn't get any further, so must have had artifical flavorings and colorings
added...

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "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://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[Lonnie Clay]

On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:27:20 AM UTC-7, David DeLaney wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2013 07:23:18 -0400, William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> >I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>
> >original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>
> >novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
>
> >were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
>
> >are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?
>
> >
>
> >(Note: I'm talking only about expansion, not extension, where the
>
> >original story, essentially unchanged, becomes part of a longer novel.)
>
>
>
> Oh, so fillin'-in-in-the-middle-with-undetected-love-interest-and-extra-
>
> travelogue doesn't count? Bah. Also I think that leaves out Weber's recent
>
> vampire novel which was just being discussed on another thread. I liked the
>
> shorter story, but could see from looking at the book that the novel-length
>
> one didn't get any further, so must have had artifical flavorings and colorings
>
> added...
>

So you weren't charmed?

Lonnie Courtney Clay

[J. Clarke]

In article <kk40t8$nl6$1...@reader1.panix.com>, erky...@eblong.com says...

I've never read the original story--wore out two copies of the novel
though. It would be interesting to dig up the necessary back issues and
read it.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:16:35 +0000 (UTC), James Nicoll
<jdni...@panix.com> wrote in
<news:kk3voj$e6r$1...@reader1.panix.com> in
rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> David Weber's PATH OF THE FURY, expanded without adding
> anything of value.

No, that was actually an improvement. _Out of the Dark_
would be a much better example.

Brian

[Brian M. Scott]

On 10 Apr 2013 07:23:18 -0400, William December Starr
<wds...@panix.com> wrote in
<news:kk3i36$o9a$1...@panix2.panix.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:

> In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>
>> James Nicoll said:
>>
>>> Novels
>>> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
>>> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
>>> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
>>>
>>> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
>>> Nebula. Take that, Bob.
>>
>> The novel of "Flowers" was greatly inferior to the original story.
>> Between the other two, I honestly don't know which I'd choose.
>

> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb
> that when an original short-form work is expanded to
> novel length, the resulting novel isn't as good," but
> then all I could think of as data points were "Flowers
> for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there are
> more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?

I very much liked William Rotsler's novel _Patron of the
Arts_, but the original novelette was probably better.

Brian

[Robert Carnegie]

On Wednesday, 10 April 2013 12:23:18 UTC+1, William December Starr wrote:
> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
> novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
> were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
> are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?

I'm not sure about the rule. But in sci-fi, expanding a short work
as you describe probably doesn't mean adding more sci-fi; significant
sci-fi anyway - you may give the hero a flying car or a robot monkey
or a ride on a "Subway Train" that wasn't in the short piece, but
if the story is to be substantially the same, at least the plot,
all that you can do is to add boring stuff about /characters./

With stories of the kind that the mundanes like... is it even possible
to expand s short story that is only about people in the first place,
to novel size, without absolutely changing what it is? You can with
sci-fi, because in our stories characters /don't matter/.

And anyway, what about the other way around? If you take a novel
and shorten it, you're probably adapting for TV or a movie that
leaves a lot out from the original story. And fans of the original
work seldom see /that/ as an improvement.

[Howard Brazee]

How many different versions of "Flowers for Algernon" won awards?

I'm thinking story, book, movie, & play.

[Kip Williams]

Howard Brazee wrote, On 4/10/13 8:40 PM:

> How many different versions of "Flowers for Algernon" won awards?
>
> I'm thinking story, book, movie, & play.

By "play," do you mean the original teleplay?


Kip W
rasfw

[Ahasuerus]

On Apr 10, 7:23 am, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
[snip]

> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
> novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
> were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game".  I know that there

> are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow.  Help? [snip]

I think that the novella version of Robert Silverberg's "Hawksbill
Station" (http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?52394) was better
than the novel version (http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?8736).
The added material is mildly interesting in a, um, "the way the future
was" kind of way, but it dilutes the impact. FWIW, Silverberg prefers
the novella version as well -- see http://www.majipoor.com/work.php?id=429
.

[Richard Todd]

wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) writes:

> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
> novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
> were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
> are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?

Having read both the short-story and novel version of Greg Bear's Blood Music,
most of the interesting bits of it were in the short story part, not in the
Extra Added Material, IMHO.

[Robert A. Woodward]

In article <kk3voj$e6r$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote:

> In article <kk3i36$o9a$1...@panix2.panix.com>,
> William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
> >In article <kj3abv$bla$1...@dont-email.me>,
> >Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
> >
> >> James Nicoll said:
> >>
> >>> Novels
> >>> Samuel R. Delany Babel-17
> >>> Daniel Keyes Flowers for Algernon
> >>> Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
> >>>
> >>> Only three candidates and two of them, the first two, shared the
> >>> Nebula. Take that, Bob.
> >>
> >> The novel of "Flowers" was greatly inferior to the original story.
> >> Between the other two, I honestly don't know which I'd choose.
> >
> >I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
> >original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
> >novel isn't as good," but then all I could think of as data points
> >were "Flowers for Algernon" and "Ender's Game". I know that there
> >are more (probably lots more), but Brain Is Slow. Help?
> >
> David Weber's PATH OF THE FURY, expanded without adding anything of
> value.

That was an extension (though before the beginning rather than
after the end).

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

[ppint. at pplay]

- hi; in article,
<e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>,
rja.ca...@excite.com "Robert Carnegie" asserted:

> William December Starr wrote:
>
>> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting

>> novel isn't as good," [..]

>
>I'm not sure about the rule. But in sci-fi, expanding a short work
>as you describe probably doesn't mean adding more sci-fi; significant
>sci-fi anyway - you may give the hero a flying car or a robot monkey
>or a ride on a "Subway Train" that wasn't in the short piece,

- hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...

- it isn't the props that make a story science fiction: and
they can be replaced throughout by their historical equiva-
lents from any other period without destroying the story, it
wasn't science fiction in the first place.

>but if the story is to be substantially the same, at least the plot,
>all that you can do is to add boring stuff about /characters./
>
>With stories of the kind that the mundanes like... is it even possible
>to expand s short story that is only about people in the first place,
>to novel size, without absolutely changing what it is? You can with
>sci-fi, because in our stories characters /don't matter/.

- if you don't care about the characters, how can you care what
happens to them, or what they achieve, or whether they fail?

>
>And anyway, what about the other way around? If you take a novel
>and shorten it, you're probably adapting for TV or a movie that
>leaves a lot out from the original story. And fans of the original
>work seldom see /that/ as an improvement.
>

- even if they never see it?

- the essence of creating great short fiction has been
described as conceiving a novel in full, identifying the
crucial turning-point, and then throwing away everything
not truly essential to portraying that.

- love, ppint.
[drop the "v", and change the "f" to a "g", to email or cc.]
--
"the life of a vegetable is of no interest whatsoever,
and this includes, to the vegetable in question
- i speak from experience."
- yr hmbl srppnt, c. autumn 1990

[Brian M. Scott]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:13:20 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in
<news:e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> With stories of the kind that the mundanes like... is it
> even possible to expand s short story that is only about
> people in the first place, to novel size, without
> absolutely changing what it is? You can with sci-fi,
> because in our stories characters /don't matter/.

They certainly matter to me. If I'm not offered some
appealing characters, or if the author consistently kills
off any appealing characters, I probably won't finish the
story at all.

[...]

Brian

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Yeah, that kind of stqtement rather boggles me. I'm hardly the sort of
writer into heavy character drama and all that, but still, even the
Jason Wood stories would be very different if they had a different
character in them. All my stories may have plot twists and various
tricks in them, but the action's still dependent on characters who act
in particular ways because of what they're like, not because I as the
author shove them in that direction. Yes, I as the author have DESIGNED
them to go in that direction so the ultimate responsibility for their
actions is mine, but a different character would approach the problem
differently.


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

[Greg Goss]

"J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net> wrote:
>In article <kk40t8$nl6$1...@reader1.panix.com>, erky...@eblong.com says...

>> As the counterexample, Herbert managed to expand and extend "Dune
>> World" without disappointing people. Or maybe people *were*
>> disappointed? I wasn't around back then.
>
>I've never read the original story--wore out two copies of the novel
>though. It would be interesting to dig up the necessary back issues and
>read it.

Was it "extended", or just two novels published as a giant novel?

In one of my magazines, I've got a segment of "Prophet of Dune", the
original sequel novel that I believe became the second half of the
book.
--
I used to own a mind like a steel trap.
Perhaps if I'd specified a brass one, it
wouldn't have rusted like this.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Thursday, 11 April 2013 12:00:46 UTC+1, Brian M. Scott wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:13:20 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in
> <news:e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>
> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
> [...]
> > With stories of the kind that the mundanes like... is it

> > even possible to expand a short story that is only about

> > people in the first place, to novel size, without
> > absolutely changing what it is? You can with sci-fi,
> > because in our stories characters /don't matter/.
>
> They certainly matter to me. If I'm not offered some
> appealing characters, or if the author consistently kills
> off any appealing characters, I probably won't finish the
> story at all.

You're forgetting that the idea of a sci-fi story is that
while you're reading, you imagine that it's happening /to you/ -
not to whichever blank placeholder the author put in!
So /obviously/ you don't want to read more of the story
if "your" character just got killed.

Al@hough, if there aren't appealing characters, you may read on
because someone needs to be punched in the face and you want to
see it. For instance.

And then there's the story with a bad ending, where justice isn't
done in the story and so you have to go out and punch someone in
the face for real, such as a scientist who is breeding intelligent
apes. Bad scientist! No! This is why science fiction is important.

I'm being not entirely serious and not entirely unserious
about this (really). And also about the proposition that a
sci-fi short story probably doesn't have /room/ for
psychologically engaging characters. Most of them get eaten
by the monster anyway. Ideally not "your" character, so the
author has to get /that/ right...

Or, to be a /little/ less unserious, a sci-fi piece usually
isn't just a character study. Unless it's a character study
of a Martian! Or, an interview with a vampire, or something...

[Howard Brazee]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 21:04:34 -0400, Kip Williams <mrk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I'm not sure which stage version won rewards. I see in Wikipedia
that it was both a regular stage play and a stage musical.

[Joseph Nebus]

In <20130411.091...@i-m-t.demon.co.uk> v$af$pp...@i-m-t.demon.co.uk ("ppint. at pplay") writes:

> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...

> - it isn't the props that make a story science fiction: and
> they can be replaced throughout by their historical equiva-
> lents from any other period without destroying the story, it
> wasn't science fiction in the first place.

Doesn't this equally well prove that the story wasn't really
a western to start with, if the props can be swapped out from the
19th century to the 29th century tropes and the story goes unchanged?

[Jerry Brown]

I prefer Clarke's "The City and the Stars" to "Against the Fall of
Night", but I suspect that I'm in a minority, at least on rasfw.

--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

[Juho Julkunen]

In article <kk6lhl$c98$1...@reader1.panix.com>, nebusj-@-rpi-.edu says...

>
> In <20130411.091...@i-m-t.demon.co.uk> v$af$pp...@i-m-t.demon.co.uk ("ppint. at pplay") writes:
>
> > - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
> > series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
> > quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
> > steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>
> > - it isn't the props that make a story science fiction: and
> > they can be replaced throughout by their historical equiva-
> > lents from any other period without destroying the story, it
> > wasn't science fiction in the first place.
>
> Doesn't this equally well prove that the story wasn't really
> a western to start with, if the props can be swapped out from the
> 19th century to the 29th century tropes and the story goes unchanged?

No.

--
Juho Julkunen

[Kip Williams]

Howard Brazee wrote, On 4/11/13 9:36 AM:

> On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 21:04:34 -0400, Kip Williams <mrk...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Howard Brazee wrote, On 4/10/13 8:40 PM:
>>> How many different versions of "Flowers for Algernon" won awards?
>>>
>>> I'm thinking story, book, movie, & play.
>>
>> By "play," do you mean the original teleplay?
>

> I'm not sure which stage version won rewards. I see in Wikipedia
> that it was both a regular stage play and a stage musical.

I have it as a television play, and more recently found the stage
adaptation, so that just made me wonder which one it was.


Kip W
rasfw

[Robert Carnegie]

On Thursday, 11 April 2013 16:40:37 UTC+1, Joseph Nebus wrote:
> In <20130411.091...@i-m-t.demon.co.uk> v$af$pp...@i-m-t.demon.co.uk ("ppint. at pplay") writes:
> > - it isn't the props that make a story science fiction: and
> > they can be replaced throughout by their historical equiva-
> > lents from any other period without destroying the story, it
> > wasn't science fiction in the first place.
>
> Doesn't this equally well prove that the story wasn't really
> a western to start with, if the props can be swapped out from the
> 19th century to the 29th century tropes and the story goes unchanged?

Not necessarily; it only means that other settings, such as
some science fiction frontier planets or a bandit-bothered
Japanese village, correspond to Western scenarios.

[Bill Dugan]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:28:02 -0600, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:

>"J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net> wrote:
>>In article <kk40t8$nl6$1...@reader1.panix.com>, erky...@eblong.com says...
>
>>> As the counterexample, Herbert managed to expand and extend "Dune
>>> World" without disappointing people. Or maybe people *were*
>>> disappointed? I wasn't around back then.
>>
>>I've never read the original story--wore out two copies of the novel
>>though. It would be interesting to dig up the necessary back issues and
>>read it.
>
>Was it "extended", or just two novels published as a giant novel?
>
>In one of my magazines, I've got a segment of "Prophet of Dune", the
>original sequel novel that I believe became the second half of the
>book.

At one time I had the original Analog serial version of Dune, but it
disappeared during a move some time ago. IIRC, it was published as one
3-part serial and one 5-part.

[David Johnston]

On 4/11/2013 3:10 AM, ppint. at pplay wrote:
> - hi; in article,
> <e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>,
> rja.ca...@excite.com "Robert Carnegie" asserted:
>> William December Starr wrote:
>>
>>> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>>> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>>> novel isn't as good," [..]
>>
>> I'm not sure about the rule. But in sci-fi, expanding a short work
>> as you describe probably doesn't mean adding more sci-fi; significant
>> sci-fi anyway - you may give the hero a flying car or a robot monkey
>> or a ride on a "Subway Train" that wasn't in the short piece,
>
> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...

If it's so popular, why haven't I ever seen it?

[Brian M. Scott]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:57:32 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in
<news:a5ca139a-f412-4397...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:

> On Thursday, 11 April 2013 12:00:46 UTC+1, Brian M. Scott wrote:

>> On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:13:20 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
>> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in
>> <news:e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>
>> in rec.arts.sf.written:

>> [...]

>>> With stories of the kind that the mundanes like... is it
>>> even possible to expand a short story that is only about
>>> people in the first place, to novel size, without
>>> absolutely changing what it is? You can with sci-fi,
>>> because in our stories characters /don't matter/.

>> They certainly matter to me. If I'm not offered some
>> appealing characters, or if the author consistently kills
>> off any appealing characters, I probably won't finish the
>> story at all.

> You're forgetting that the idea of a sci-fi story is that
> while you're reading, you imagine that it's happening /to
> you/ -

No, I don't. Ever. With any kind of story.

[...]

Brian

[ppint. at pplay]

- hi; in article, <lrrdm85ap5867inb2...@jwbrown.co.uk>,
je...@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid "Jerry Brown" forbode:

>
>I prefer Clarke's "The City and the Stars" to "Against the Fall of Night",
>but I suspect that I'm in a minority, at least on rasfw.

- possibly;but i liked both and found them different enough
in atmosphere to not think of either as the other manque'.

- love, ppint.
[drop the "v", and change the "f" to a "g", to email or cc.]
--

"sunspots are important because scientists now know
they can affect the british climate."
- horizon: global weirding, bbc4, 20:35 bst (19:35 gmt) 2/4/13

[Stephen Harker]

From the ISFDB:

Dune World (Part 1 of 3) (1963) - Frank Herbert
Dune World (Part 2 of 3) (1964) - Frank Herbert
Dune World (Part 3 of 3) (1964) - Frank Herbert

The second set is Prophet of Dune, which was also available as a novel

The Prophet of Dune (Part 1 of 5) SERIAL Variant 1965-01-00 Frank Herbert
The Prophet of Dune (Part 2 of 5) SERIAL Variant 1965-02-00 Frank Herbert
The Prophet of Dune (Part 3 of 5) SERIAL Variant 1965-03-00 Frank Herbert
The Prophet of Dune (Part 4 of 5) SERIAL Variant 1965-04-00 Frank Herbert
The Prophet of Dune (Part 5 of 5) SERIAL Variant 1965-05-00 Frank Herbert

I am one of those who think the quality dropped with _Prophet of Dune_.
The first serial was much more satisfying to me. The second was
readable, but seemed far less satisfying.

--
Stephen Harker s.ha...@adfa.edu.au
PEMS http://sjharker.customer.netspace.net.au/
UNSW@ADFA

[Tina Hall]

Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote
>> Brian M. Scott wrote:
>>> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote

>>> [...]

>>>> With stories of the kind that the mundanes like... is it
>>>> even possible to expand a short story that is only about
>>>> people in the first place, to novel size, without
>>>> absolutely changing what it is? You can with sci-fi,
>>>> because in our stories characters /don't matter/.

[stare]

They're the only thing that matters to me. The rest is just
backround excuse to show them. In a setting that isn't this world.

I am not interested in reading about real people, the world's full
with real real people.

>>> They certainly matter to me. If I'm not offered some
>>> appealing characters, or if the author consistently kills
>>> off any appealing characters, I probably won't finish the
>>> story at all.

>> You're forgetting that the idea of a sci-fi story is that
>> while you're reading, you imagine that it's happening /to
>> you/ -

> No, I don't. Ever. With any kind of story.

!!!!

Ohh, I remember when I was 12 or so. Friend staying over night and I
were, while we should be sleeping, imagining if it were us in a book
we'd read.

That was the only time.

What used to fascinate me about sci-fi was the wonders and mystery
of space. These days (I think it was the characters spoiling it) I
stick to funny documentaries about the universe and planets and
stuff, rambling on in the backround while I play some computer game.

Some series or movies on TV might still spark the wonder, but I
don't expect as much from characters on a screen. Riddick is a good
example of cool atmosphere and cool main character. Reading that in
a story, I wouldn't even want a hero or just one main character.

--
"I'm sure Gorash has a good reason for not chucking both of you
into the ocean." -- Pherneahl, to Lanar and Tashen,
Seasons & Elements I: Controlled by Magic
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>

[David Johnston]

On 4/11/2013 4:08 PM, Tina Hall wrote:
> Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote
>>> Brian M. Scott wrote:
>>>> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote
>
>>>> [...]
>
>>>>> With stories of the kind that the mundanes like... is it
>>>>> even possible to expand a short story that is only about
>>>>> people in the first place, to novel size, without
>>>>> absolutely changing what it is? You can with sci-fi,
>>>>> because in our stories characters /don't matter/.
>
> [stare]
>
> They're the only thing that matters to me.

Since you don't read science fiction...so bloody what?

[ppint. at pplay]

- hi; in article, <kk6lhl$c98$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
nebusj-@-rpi-.edu "Joseph Nebus" sought enlightenment:

> ppint. at pplay") writes:
>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>
>> - it isn't the props that make a story science fiction: and
>> they can be replaced throughout by their historical equiva-
>> lents from any other period without destroying the story, it
>> wasn't science fiction in the first place.
>
>Doesn't this equally well prove that the story wasn't really a western
>to start with, if the props can be swapped out from the 19th century to
>the 29th century tropes and the story goes unchanged?

- no.

- love, ppint.
[drop the "v", and change the "f" to a "g", to email or cc.]
--

"...and then, because she's blonde, i thought, "we'll kill her.""
- lindsay davis, "book club"
bbc radio4, 16:20 bst 8/6/06 (6/8/06 for merkins)

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Apparently, massive ignorance of the field. For the level of detail
described, he's covering everything from Doc Smith at the invention of
genre science fiction (and before that name was assigned to it) up
through Firefly / Serenity today, and lots of stuff in between. It is
indeed a popular form.
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <ylfkwqs7...@dd-b.net>,

David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>David Johnston <Da...@block.net> writes:
>
>> On 4/11/2013 3:10 AM, ppint. at pplay wrote:
>>> - hi; in article,
>>> <e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> rja.ca...@excite.com "Robert Carnegie" asserted:
>>>> William December Starr wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>>>>> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>>>>> novel isn't as good," [..]
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure about the rule. But in sci-fi, expanding a short work
>>>> as you describe probably doesn't mean adding more sci-fi; significant
>>>> sci-fi anyway - you may give the hero a flying car or a robot monkey
>>>> or a ride on a "Subway Train" that wasn't in the short piece,
>>>
>>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>
>> If it's so popular, why haven't I ever seen it?
>
>Apparently, massive ignorance of the field. For the level of detail
>described, he's covering everything from Doc Smith at the invention of
>genre science fiction (and before that name was assigned to it) up
>through Firefly / Serenity today, and lots of stuff in between. It is
>indeed a popular form.

Asuming a literal interpretation of the question, I think the archetypical
"Bat" featured only in a "you'll never see it in 'Galaxy'" promotional
blurb, and as an example of uninspired writing in Sturgeon's "The Travelling
Crag".
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[Robert Bannister]

On 13/04/13 4:30 AM, ppint. at pplay wrote:
> - hi; in article, <kk6lhl$c98$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> nebusj-@-rpi-.edu "Joseph Nebus" sought enlightenment:
>> ppint. at pplay") writes:
>>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>>
>>> - it isn't the props that make a story science fiction: and
>>> they can be replaced throughout by their historical equiva-
>>> lents from any other period without destroying the story, it
>>> wasn't science fiction in the first place.
>>
>> Doesn't this equally well prove that the story wasn't really a western
>> to start with, if the props can be swapped out from the 19th century to
>> the 29th century tropes and the story goes unchanged?
>
> - no.
>
> - love, ppint.
> [drop the "v", and change the "f" to a "g", to email or cc.]
>

"The Glorious Seven" seems to disprove that - samurais, cowboys, it
doesn't matter.

--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

Whoops! I first saw it as "Die glorreichen Sieben", but of course I
meant "Magnificent".

--
Robert Bannister

[Kurt Busiek]

On 2013-04-13 03:28:37 +0000, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> said:

> On 13/04/13 4:30 AM, ppint. at pplay wrote:
>> - hi; in article, <kk6lhl$c98$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
>> nebusj-@-rpi-.edu "Joseph Nebus" sought enlightenment:
>>> ppint. at pplay") writes:
>>>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>>>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>>>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>>>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>>>
>>>> - it isn't the props that make a story science fiction: and
>>>> they can be replaced throughout by their historical equiva-
>>>> lents from any other period without destroying the story, it
>>>> wasn't science fiction in the first place.
>>>
>>> Doesn't this equally well prove that the story wasn't really a western
>>> to start with, if the props can be swapped out from the 19th century to
>>> the 29th century tropes and the story goes unchanged?
>>
>> - no.
>

> "The Glorious Seven" seems to disprove that - samurais, cowboys, it
> doesn't matter.

That story, of course, _wasn't_ a Western to start with, though it made
a fine one.

But HIGH NOON is a Western, OUTLAND nothwithstanding.

kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!

[Robert Bannister]

Welcome back, Tina. You haven't been around for a while.

--
Robert Bannister

[Joy Beeson]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:25:01 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
wrote:

> If it's so popular, why haven't I ever seen it?

Mostly because a slush reader saw it first.

I've long since lost the magazine -- wish I'd kept it -- which
included a story in which it was painfully obvious that a cheap
western had been made into "science fiction" by using Search and
Replace to change "ranch" to "planet" and "jeep" to "rocket ship". The
owner of a neighboring planet dropped in on his way to town, the
children walked to a remote part of their father's planet, they
removed the distributor cap from their kidnapper's rocket ship to keep
him from pursuing them, etc.

I've no notion of title or author. I think that the children's ranch
was called "Theros".

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net

[David Johnston]

On 4/12/2013 3:33 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> David Johnston <Da...@block.net> writes:
>
>> On 4/11/2013 3:10 AM, ppint. at pplay wrote:
>>> - hi; in article,
>>> <e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> rja.ca...@excite.com "Robert Carnegie" asserted:
>>>> William December Starr wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>>>>> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>>>>> novel isn't as good," [..]
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure about the rule. But in sci-fi, expanding a short work
>>>> as you describe probably doesn't mean adding more sci-fi; significant
>>>> sci-fi anyway - you may give the hero a flying car or a robot monkey
>>>> or a ride on a "Subway Train" that wasn't in the short piece,
>>>
>>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>
>> If it's so popular, why haven't I ever seen it?
>
> Apparently, massive ignorance of the field. For the level of detail
> described, he's covering everything from Doc Smith

That doesn't describe Doc Smith.

at the invention of
> genre science fiction (and before that name was assigned to it) up
> through Firefly / Serenity today, and lots of stuff in between.

Firefly was far from interminable. In fact it was very terminable.

[David DeLaney]

David Johnston <Da...@block.net> wrote:
>On 4/12/2013 3:33 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>>>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>>>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>>>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>>
>>> If it's so popular, why haven't I ever seen it?
>>
>> Apparently, massive ignorance of the field. For the level of detail
>> described, he's covering everything from Doc Smith
>
>That doesn't describe Doc Smith.

Parts of it it describes quite well, if you look. I'm thinking in particular
of Wild Bill Williams, maverick asteroid miner... Sure, he was telepathic,
but a lot of cowboys had special bonds with their steeds, no?

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "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://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[Tina Hall]

Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
> Tina Hall wrote:
>> Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>>> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote

[differing opinions on whether characters matter in sci-fi or not]

>>>> You're forgetting that the idea of a sci-fi story is that
>>>> while you're reading, you imagine that it's happening /to
>>>> you/ -
>>
>>> No, I don't. Ever. With any kind of story.
>>
>> !!!!
>>
>> Ohh, I remember when I was 12 or so. Friend staying over night
>> and I were, while we should be sleeping, imagining if it were us
>> in a book we'd read.
>>
>> That was the only time.

[...]

> Welcome back, Tina. You haven't been around for a while.

Heh, thanks.

Was never properly gone though, just not posting much, or reading,
and neglected getting new posts more regularly. But I kept thinking
I should, and the actual software and option to jump in again was
just waiting to be started.

I don't think that will ever change. It's still running on the old
no-internet computer. DOS window in OS/2... Comfortable, no-hassle
thing. Just booting the old computer sometimes becomes rarer. But it
also has my stories, an the only environment where I can write and
read them (OS/2 Systemeditor).

Anyway. Hi. :) (Huh, now I'm tempted to quote something from one of
my stories... [checking] Oh well, a bit too long.)

--
"Being raised by the secret order of not-being-very-informative
doesn't mean you can't tell us." -- Ranes, Magic Earth 7/6
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>
Misc bits: <http://ath-stories.livejournal.com/>

[Robert Bannister]

On 13/04/13 9:38 PM, David DeLaney wrote:
> David Johnston <Da...@block.net> wrote:
>> On 4/12/2013 3:33 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>>>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>>>>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>>>>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>>>>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>>>
>>>> If it's so popular, why haven't I ever seen it?
>>>
>>> Apparently, massive ignorance of the field. For the level of detail
>>> described, he's covering everything from Doc Smith
>>
>> That doesn't describe Doc Smith.
>
> Parts of it it describes quite well, if you look. I'm thinking in particular
> of Wild Bill Williams, maverick asteroid miner... Sure, he was telepathic,
> but a lot of cowboys had special bonds with their steeds, no?

When a man's without a woman for months at a time, he will turn to
anything that's warm and breathing. I'm not sure about bonds, though.
That verges on kinky.

--
Robert Bannister

[David DeLaney]

Well, he's ALREADY using reins, a bridle, and a bit...

Dave, handcuffs are problematic, true

[David Dyer-Bennet]

David Johnston <Da...@block.net> writes:

> On 4/12/2013 3:33 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>> David Johnston <Da...@block.net> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/11/2013 3:10 AM, ppint. at pplay wrote:
>>>> - hi; in article,
>>>> <e3d4fe56-0754-479a...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> rja.ca...@excite.com "Robert Carnegie" asserted:
>>>>> William December Starr wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was about to say "It seems like a good rule of thumb that when an
>>>>>> original short-form work is expanded to novel length, the resulting
>>>>>> novel isn't as good," [..]
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure about the rule. But in sci-fi, expanding a short work
>>>>> as you describe probably doesn't mean adding more sci-fi; significant
>>>>> sci-fi anyway - you may give the hero a flying car or a robot monkey
>>>>> or a ride on a "Subway Train" that wasn't in the short piece,
>>>>
>>>> - hence the abiding popularity of the seemingly interminable
>>>> series featuring bat durston, fastest draw in the west-ern
>>>> quadrant, and his trusty six-shoot^W blasters, ever-faithful
>>>> steed^W rocket-ski^W -sled^W scoutship...
>>>
>>> If it's so popular, why haven't I ever seen it?
>>
>> Apparently, massive ignorance of the field. For the level of detail
>> described, he's covering everything from Doc Smith
>
> That doesn't describe Doc Smith.

Seaton and DuQuesne are both expert gunmen, as demonstrated fairly
extensively in the first Skylark book.

I admit to ignoring "seemingly interminable"; after all that was from
somebody who apparently doesn't like such things. Still, Skylark and
Lensman were both serious series before that was the norm....

[David Dyer-Bennet]

A feather is kinky; the whole chicken is perverse.

[Bill Dugan]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:12:37 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net>

Kimball Kinnison was as well.

[David Johnston]

Well yeah but they also did stuff like inventing shiny new technologies
on the spur of the moment and running into Disembodied Intelligences,
and having to escape the gravity well of a "dead star" that would fit
pretty awkwardly into a western.

[Robert Bannister]

On 14/04/13 1:51 PM, David DeLaney wrote:
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>> On 13/04/13 9:38 PM, David DeLaney wrote:
>>> Parts of it it describes quite well, if you look. I'm thinking in particular
>>> of Wild Bill Williams, maverick asteroid miner... Sure, he was telepathic,
>>> but a lot of cowboys had special bonds with their steeds, no?
>>
>> When a man's without a woman for months at a time, he will turn to
>> anything that's warm and breathing. I'm not sure about bonds, though.
>> That verges on kinky.
>
> Well, he's ALREADY using reins, a bridle, and a bit...
>
> Dave, handcuffs are problematic, true
>

What works with chaps, might not work with women.
--
Robert Bannister

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:12:37 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet

<dd...@dd-b.net> wrote in <news:ylfkip3p...@dd-b.net> in
rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> Seaton and DuQuesne are both expert gunmen, as
> demonstrated fairly extensively in the first Skylark
> book.

Not to mention Neal Cloud.

[...]

Brian

[David Dyer-Bennet]

You ride over the next hill and something exciting happens; same concept.

[David Johnston]

"Something" always happens. Except in great literature that sucks.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Sunday, 14 April 2013 21:19:42 UTC+1, David Johnston wrote:
> [Our heroes have always been cowboys]

> Well yeah but they also did stuff like inventing shiny new
> technologies on the spur of the moment and running into
> Disembodied Intelligences, and having to escape the
> gravity well of a "dead star" that would fit pretty awkwardly
> into a western.

Well, the last one is quicksand; disembodied intelligences...
may be the gods and spirits of whatever-we-call-Indians-now;
inventing stuff - hmm, there was _Wild Wild West_ of course,
but that's really an exception - but IIRC a lot of stories
were about conflict of interest between different and
innovative forms of economic activity, e.g. railroads,
mining, agriculture and livestock farming.
Ostrich for instance (maybe). It /would/ be novel -
or, /would/ it?

<http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300127362>

"entrepreneurial farms in the American West"

"Yup!" :-)

"Jews fostered and nurtured the trade across the global commodity chain" -
ooookay. This is the feathers, by the way. And the meat, but apparently
it isn't kosher. Not that I'd know. Anyway, the market collapsed,
but you can still get ostrich products if you want.

[David Johnston]

On 4/15/2013 6:48 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Sunday, 14 April 2013 21:19:42 UTC+1, David Johnston wrote:
>> [Our heroes have always been cowboys]
>> Well yeah but they also did stuff like inventing shiny new
>> technologies on the spur of the moment and running into
>> Disembodied Intelligences, and having to escape the
>> gravity well of a "dead star" that would fit pretty awkwardly
>> into a western.
>
> Well, the last one is quicksand; disembodied intelligences...
> may be the gods and spirits of whatever-we-call-Indians-now;

But bring those into a western and it stops being a western and starts
being a period fantasy.

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 09:22:33 +0800, Robert Bannister
<rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:

[snip]

>When a man's without a woman for months at a time, he will turn to
>anything that's warm and breathing. I'm not sure about bonds, though.
>That verges on kinky.

But perhaps explains bankers.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[David Johnston]

Or at least a crossover.

[Walter Bushell]

In article <slrnkmke8...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,

d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:

> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
> >On 13/04/13 9:38 PM, David DeLaney wrote:
> >> Parts of it it describes quite well, if you look. I'm thinking in
> >> particular
> >> of Wild Bill Williams, maverick asteroid miner... Sure, he was telepathic,
> >> but a lot of cowboys had special bonds with their steeds, no?
> >
> >When a man's without a woman for months at a time, he will turn to
> >anything that's warm and breathing. I'm not sure about bonds, though.
> >That verges on kinky.
>
> Well, he's ALREADY using reins, a bridle, and a bit...
>
> Dave, handcuffs are problematic, true

And so would putting blue suede shoes on his horse.

--
Gambling with Other People's Money is the meth of the fiscal industry.
me -- in the spirit of Karl and Groucho Marx

[Walter Bushell]

In article <8djhm85e7p2rq1hrv...@4ax.com>,

A friend of mine in 6th grade had a comic book the plot of which was
obviously taken from a detective story from a city with interplanetary
cabs and expressways in space (Stop pay toll etcetera.).