Brilliant SF books that got away
Lynn McGuire
10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
I have read none of these.
Lynn
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
I've read a couple, heard of a few more, but I'm not terribly impressed.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Mike Schilling
"Lynn McGuire" <l...@winsim.com> wrote in message
news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I've read a few. It's hard to think of Earth Abides as lost though -- it's
familiar in both SF and mainstream circles. And We is well-known, at least
by name, as the major precursor to 1984.
Will in New Haven
I have considered reading each of them at one time or another. I read
_Earth Abides_ and thought it was quite interesting but not
compelling. Still worth reading. I thought _The Cyberiad_ was ok. I
never got any of the others further than my "I might read this some
day" list except _Last and First Men_ which I started but very quickly
stopped.
--
Will in New Haven
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
I've read two, heard of all of them. I'm not sure any would be on my
own list of ten great SF novels nobody's read.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
I'm serializing novels at http://www.ethshar.com/TheFinalCalling01.html
and http://www.watt-evans.com/realmsoflight1.html
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>
>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>
>> I have read none of these.
>
> I've read a couple, heard of a few more, but I'm not terribly impressed.
>
>
I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see 11
sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Kurt Busiek
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:02:02 -0500, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>
>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>
>> I have read none of these.
>
> I've read two, heard of all of them.
I'm planning to read one of them, eventually. EARTH ABIDES.
> I'm not sure any would be on my
> own list of ten great SF novels nobody's read.
What would? Or is that a new thread?
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
Dorothy J Heydt
Oh, I've read a couple of them.
_The Listeners_ is great. I still have my copy (in hb, yet) and
reread it every year or so.
_Dark Universe_ is also pretty damn good. I still have my copy
but haven't read it in a while.
_Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
remember anything about it except it goes far into the
incomprehensible future.
_Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
read it, don't care to read it again.
I've heard of these:
The Journey of Joenes
The Cyberiad
New Maps of Hell -- which is a survey, by the way, not a work of
fiction
We (heard of only because Le Guin praised it in some essay)
Floating Worlds
And there's one or two on that list that I never heard of before
this morning.
--
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.
Dorothy J Heydt
As I said elsethread, Le Guin praises it in some essay or other.
I've never even seen a copy.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>On 2010-10-26 09:53:30 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>
>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:02:02 -0500, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>
>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>
>>> I have read none of these.
>>
>> I've read two, heard of all of them.
>
>I'm planning to read one of them, eventually. EARTH ABIDES.
>
>> I'm not sure any would be on my
>> own list of ten great SF novels nobody's read.
>
>What would? Or is that a new thread?
Are we doing SF or science fiction? Because in the former case, most
of mine would be fantasy.
ravenlynne
I've already read "Earth Abides"....have put a couple of them on my
reading list.
--
Currently reading: The Good House by Tannarive Due
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Heydt) wrote:
>_Dark Universe_ is also pretty damn good. I still have my copy
>but haven't read it in a while.
I have it, but haven't read it yet. I like Galouye's other work,
though.
>_Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
>the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
>read it, don't care to read it again.
I inherited my mother's copy. Haven't read it yet.
>I've heard of these:
>
>The Journey of Joenes
It's one of the two I've read. It's fun, but nothing all that very
special.
>New Maps of Hell -- which is a survey, by the way, not a work of
>fiction
I may have my father's copy, I'm not sure.
>We (heard of only because Le Guin praised it in some essay)
I've read it. It's very good, in a didactic sort of way, and weirdly
similar to Ayn Rand's _Anthem_, to the point I get details confused
between the two. (_We_ is better than _Anthem_, by rather a lot.)
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> In article<ia702u$gob$5...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>
>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>
>>> I have read none of these.
>>
>> I've read a couple, heard of a few more, but I'm not terribly impressed.
>>
>>
>
> I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see 11
> sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
How did you notice the different ads? I don't look at the ads; I just
clicked through the pictures. I have no idea (other than what you said)
whether the ads were the same or different (aside from not realizing
that the 11th image would be an ad).
Andrew Plotkin
_The Cyberiad_ is one of those books which isn't major, but which (I
thought) (and I recommend) everyone reads because it's just so much fun.
I found _Dark Universe_ a few years ago, and it was quite good. I can
easily imagine that it was startlingly imaginative for its era.
_Last and First Men_ isn't much of a novel, but as a torrent of SF
ideation it's both impressive and foundational. (Of Lovecraft, as much
as of the SF future-history tradition.) I'd recommend reading it if
you're interested in the history of SF.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
Dorothy J Heydt
Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>In article <ia702u$gob$5...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>
>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>
>>> I have read none of these.
>>
>> I've read a couple, heard of a few more, but I'm not terribly impressed.
Two of them are very good. See upthread.
>>
>
>I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see 11
>sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
>
Ads? I don't think most of those things are in print.
It's a "slideshow", used on the web quite a lot, and I'm going to
guess that that format generates less lag or something. Anybody
know?
Kurt Busiek
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:01:58 -0700, Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-10-26 09:53:30 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>>
>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:02:02 -0500, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>>
>>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>>
>>>> I have read none of these.
>>>
>>> I've read two, heard of all of them.
>>
>> I'm planning to read one of them, eventually. EARTH ABIDES.
>>
>>> I'm not sure any would be on my
>>> own list of ten great SF novels nobody's read.
>>
>> What would? Or is that a new thread?
>
> Are we doing SF or science fiction? Because in the former case, most
> of mine would be fantasy.
Your choice, I'd think. I'm more interested in fantasy, anyway.
I just think it might be more interesting to change the reaction to
this sort of list from "Boy, are those guys wrong" to "That's what they
picked, here's what I'd pick."
I take it THE WOODENHEADS would be on your list?
Kurt Busiek
<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> said:
> On 10/26/10 12:55 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> In article<ia702u$gob$5...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>>
>>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>>
>>>> I have read none of these.
>>>
>>> I've read a couple, heard of a few more, but I'm not terribly impressed.
>>
>> I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see 11
>> sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
>
> How did you notice the different ads? I don't look at the ads; I just
> clicked through the pictures. I have no idea (other than what you said)
> whether the ads were the same or different (aside from not realizing
> that the 11th image would be an ad).
I crab about lists that make you click multiple times if they load
slowly, like the lists on the Huffington Post
If they clck as smoothly as this one did, I don't care. Click or scroll
down, not much difference in effort.
I didn't look at any of the ads either, at least that I noticed. But I
did know the 11th would be an ad -- it seems to be the way these things
work.
Wayne Throop
:: I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see
:: 11 sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
: djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
: Ads?
Yeah, those animated graphics to the right and below saying things like
"make a lasting impression with a new scientist gift subscription".
: It's a "slideshow",
I normally see "slideshow" used to mean "displays pages in sequence,
proceeding to the next after a timed pause without an additional user
action". A series of connected pages like that isn't (to my vocabulary)
a slideshow unless it displays them automagically.
But in any event, whatever it's called, putting information on a bunch
of connected pages to click through is imo a very annoying format,
for several reasons, ad bloat being only one among many, and not even
the foremost.
: I'm going to guess that that format generates less lag or something.
: Anybody know?
Not sure the motivation for breaking things up that small. One might
be that early pages can be read without having to load all the graphics
for the later pages, but modern browsers and broadband connections make
that motive pretty moot. The browser doesn't wait to render the page,
but starts displaying right away, and broadband connections mean the
wait isn't long anyhows. To my experience, it creates *more* lag,
since it won't be loading subsequent images until I click. One of the
annoying bits. Another is, it makes it much less convenient to scroll
back and forth in the material (unless you use tabbing, and even that's
often not very convenient).
Basically, imo, the method has mainly downsides, and what upsides it has
are mostly moot on modern machines. Well... from the reader's point of
view; there are aditional upsides from the advertizer's points of view, or
web-statistics-of-how-many-pages-folks-view-from-the-site point of view.
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Jerry Brown
wrote:
>Brilliant SF books that got away.
I've read three: Journey of Joenes (my copy is retitled Journey Beyond
Tomorrow), The Cyberiad, Last & First Men.
Jerry Brown
--
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Brian M. Scott
<news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
Lem's _The Cyberiad_ was fun. According to a Polish
colleague, the translator did a brilliant job with the
wordplay. I've read Zamyatin's _We_; I'll grant it
historical importance, but it's dated enough to be a bit of
a slog. I wasn't taken with Holland's _Floating Worlds_,
but I don't remember why.
Brian
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/26/10 12:55 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> In article<ia702u$gob$5...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>>
>>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>>
>>>> I have read none of these.
>>>
>>> I've read a couple, heard of a few more, but I'm not terribly impressed.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see 11
>> sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
>
> How did you notice the different ads? I don't look at the ads; I just
>clicked through the pictures. I have no idea (other than what you said)
>whether the ads were the same or different (aside from not realizing
>that the 11th image would be an ad).
>
>
There's a New Scientist flash subscription ad on the right side of the page
that refreshes every time you change slides. It was annoying enough wiht
flash & javascript turned off (which is the way I normally surf) with flash
on, it is beyond the pale. Presumably if they could sell the ad space,
each page load would bring up a different ad.
Also, requiring 11 page loads rather than a simple scroll down is painful,
and generally something I will not do. (Ie, if I had just found the page
rather than seeing the link here and wanting to go through the list to
follow the ensuing discussion).
All that spleen vented, some of the books aren't bad, though classic would
be overstating:
Dark Universe by Daniel F. Galouye -- recall as entertaining.
Journey of Joenes by Robert Sheckley -- Haven't read, but usually
find Sheckley flags at novel lengths.
The Cyberiad by Stanislaw Lem -- recall as amusing.
Random Acts of Senseless Violence by Jack Womack -- haven't read.
New Maps of Hell by Kingsley Amis -- haven't read.
We by Eugene Zamiatin -- haven't read.
Last and First Men by Olaf Stapledon -- recall as epic in scope and
well worth reading, but not very exciting. Sort of like
Van Vogt without the compelling weirdness.
Floating Worlds by Cecelia Holland -- haven't read.
The Listeners by James Gunn -- haven't read
Earth Abides by George R. Stewart -- haven't read, but thought it
was well known and generally acknowledged as a classic.
Lynn McGuire
> was well known and generally acknowledged as a classic.
"Earth Abides" has 349 reviews on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Abides-George-R-Stewart/dp/0345487133/
That is a LOT of reviews for a speculative fiction book.
Lynn
Szymon Sokół
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:02:02 -0500, Lynn McGuire
> <l...@winsim.com> wrote in
> <news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org> in
> rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
>> I have read none of these.
>
> Lem's _The Cyberiad_ was fun. According to a Polish
> colleague, the translator did a brilliant job with the
> wordplay.
IIRC that was Michael Kandel, and indeed, he did about as well as humanly
possible, taking into account that "The Cyberiad" has *plenty* of wordplay,
including neologisms.
--
Szymon Sokół (SS316-RIPE) -- Network Manager B
Computer Center, AGH - University of Science and Technology, Cracow, Poland O
http://home.agh.edu.pl/szymon/ PGP key id: RSA: 0x2ABE016B, DSS: 0xF9289982 F
Free speech includes the right not to listen, if not interested -- Heinlein H
Joel Olson
news:9d860f05-169a-4af8...@l20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Didn't they make a movie of _Earth Abides_?
Somehow missed getting _The Cyberiad_ :-(
So little Stapledon that everything he wrote should automatically
be a classic. But _Last and First Men_ was very slow going. Still
the largest scale of anything I've seen along that dimension.
Well, maybe Lessing has larger, but its close.
Brian M. Scott
<t...@loft.tnolan.com> wrote in
<news:8ioljc...@mid.individual.net> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
> In article <ia745f$t6l$2...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>On 10/26/10 12:55 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
[...]
>>> I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11
>>> times to see 11 sets of ads rather than just putting
>>> the content on one page!
On dial-up the existing arrangement is better: the
individual pages loaded quite quickly, while a mammoth
single page would have taken bloody forever.
>> How did you notice the different ads? I don't look at the
>> ads; I just clicked through the pictures. I have no
>> idea (other than what you said) whether the ads were
>> the same or different (aside from not realizing that
>> the 11th image would be an ad).
> There's a New Scientist flash subscription ad on the right
> side of the page that refreshes every time you change
> slides.
There is? Flashblock didn't display a placeholder icon.
Ah, now I see: Adblock Plus is blocking a bunch of images
and scripts.
[...]
Brian
Joel Olson
news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I have half of them. Of the rest, Gunn, Sheckley and Lem I respect,
and attribute not having them to the vagaries of used bookstores'
stocks.
The Womack and Holland I'll be looking for.
The Stewart and Stapledon I'd hardly consider overlooked, but
maybe so by this younger generation.
And I'm surprised that, here, no one seems familiar with the Amis
book. There haven't been all that many discussing the field:
Sam Moskowitz, _Explorers of the Infinite_, 1960
Darko Suvin, _Metamorphoses of Science Fiction_, 1979
Mark Rose, _Alien Encounters_, 1981
Are there others I should know about?
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>On 2010-10-26 10:27:23 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>
>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:01:58 -0700, Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-10-26 09:53:30 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:02:02 -0500, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>>>
>>>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>>>
>>>>> I have read none of these.
>>>>
>>>> I've read two, heard of all of them.
>>>
>>> I'm planning to read one of them, eventually. EARTH ABIDES.
>>>
>>>> I'm not sure any would be on my
>>>> own list of ten great SF novels nobody's read.
>>>
>>> What would? Or is that a new thread?
>>
>> Are we doing SF or science fiction? Because in the former case, most
>> of mine would be fantasy.
>
>Your choice, I'd think. I'm more interested in fantasy, anyway.
>
>I just think it might be more interesting to change the reaction to
>this sort of list from "Boy, are those guys wrong" to "That's what they
>picked, here's what I'd pick."
>
>I take it THE WOODENHEADS would be on your list?
Probably, yeah. As would THE CIRCUS OF DR. LAO.
Richard R. Hershberger
> _Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
> the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
> read it, don't care to read it again.
I'll go all in: I think that Earth Abides is brilliant, and a genuine
classic. (Not, as has been pointed out elsethread, all that obscure,
but that is a different discussion.) It not only is (one of?) the
earliest plague-wipes-out... novels, but (one of?) the earliest post-
apocalypse novels, and (one of?) the best.
I think there are a couple of things that put people off this book. A
lot of people go into a post-apocalypse novel with certain
expectations which this novel doesn't fulfill. In other words, no Mad
Max stuff. I count this as an asset, but tastes vary. Another is
that the book is darned depressing in parts. The section about
<semi-spoiler>
the son (Joey? It's been a while since I read it.) is designed to rip
your heart out. And that was before I had kids of my own. Reading
that section would be very hard today. Then there is the overall
theme. The book is a meditation about civilization. The conclusion
is that the protagonist is not able to rebuild civilization, but that
is OK. It is like Orson Scott Card's early short stories (when he was
really good) where everything bad that can possibly happen to the
protagonist happens; he is utterly miserable; until in the end he is
content with his lot. Feel-good fun this ain't.
That being said, there is a reason why people are still reading it a
half-century later.
Richard R. Hershberger
Dorothy J Heydt
For one thing, it was published back in 1949.
For another, Stewart wasn't one of us crazy Buck Rogers types, he
was IIRC a professor of English at UC Berkeley, so he wasn't
classed as a science-fiction writer and his novel wasn't
considered science fiction, so it was reviewed as a work of
literature.
"'SF's no good!' they bellow till we're deaf.
'But this is good!' 'Well, then, that's not SF.'"
Will in New Haven
> In article <ia7851$va...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>
> >> Earth Abides by George R. Stewart -- haven't read, but thought it
> >> was well known and generally acknowledged as a classic.
>
> >"Earth Abides" has 349 reviews on Amazon:
> > http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Abides-George-R-Stewart/dp/0345487133/
>
> >That is a LOT of reviews for a speculative fiction book.
>
> For one thing, it was published back in 1949.
>
> For another, Stewart wasn't one of us crazy Buck Rogers types, he
> was IIRC a professor of English at UC Berkeley, so he wasn't
> classed as a science-fiction writer and his novel wasn't
> considered science fiction, so it was reviewed as a work of
> literature.
>
> "'SF's no good!' they bellow till we're deaf.
> 'But this is good!' 'Well, then, that's not SF.'"
>
That doesn't have anything to do with why there are that many Amazon
reviews. Of course, I don't know that having that many Amazon reviews
means very much but it has little to do with what people thought of
the book back in 1949 or with critical acceptance in general.
Peter Huebner
>
> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
> I have read none of these.
>
Read most of them.
Dark Universe is one of the books that seriously got me started/hooked on Science Fiction.
I haven't read it in a very long time, but I believe I found a beat up copy in
a junk shop a few years back ... must check it out for my next re-read.
Floating Worlds seemed brilliant to me at the time I read it. I believe I briefly
mentioned Holland when somebody started a thread here about 'authors I wish had
written more or were still alive' and somebody said she had moved to writing historical
fiction. Still on the shelf. Still wish she'd written more sf/f.
I have problems recalling the Cyberiad. I think I'm conflating it in my mind with
the 'Futurological Congress', a Lem that I really couldn't get into. Don't own it
any more; I had a German translation of it, never seen the English one. I will try
to acquire it again if I get a chance. Most of Lem's stuff is pretty darn wonderful i.m.o.
A few years ago I revisited the (1972, Tarkovsky directed) film made of Solaris. Brilliant!
The Amis I haven't seen, but heard of, The Listeners I can't recall although the title is
familiar.
I much preferred Sheckley's anarchic and funny short stories at the time I read Joenes. Maybe
time to dust that one off.
WE I recall as being awfully dry and dusty. Not to my taste.
Earth Abides, I am pretty sure, I have never owned.
Womack used to be on my 'automatic buy' list. Haven't seen him on any bookshop shelves
(new or 2nd hand) in well over a decade.
-P.
Dorothy J Heydt
Now, that one is interesting.
But
/takes deep breath
THE MOVIE WAS BETTER.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<no....@this.address> wrote:
>WE I recall as being awfully dry and dusty. Not to my taste.
I wonder whether we read different translations.
(I read it in English; my Russian isn't that good.)
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Heydt) wrote:
>In article <orcec6tsvo047gjub...@reader80.eternal-september.org>,
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:09:53 -0700, Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 2010-10-26 10:27:23 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>>>
>>>I take it THE WOODENHEADS would be on your list?
>>
>>Probably, yeah. As would THE CIRCUS OF DR. LAO.
>
>Now, that one is interesting.
>
>But
>
>/takes deep breath
>
>THE MOVIE WAS BETTER.
No, it wasn't. It was different and it wasn't bad, but it was not
better.
Marcus L. Rowland
<djh...@kithrup.com> writes
>In article <ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>>Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>
>>10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>
>>I have read none of these.
>
>
>_The Listeners_ is great. I still have my copy (in hb, yet) and
>reread it every year or so.
>
>_Dark Universe_ is also pretty damn good. I still have my copy
>
>_Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
>it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
>remember anything about it except it goes far into the
>incomprehensible future.
>
>_Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
>the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
>read it, don't care to read it again.
>
Try 1890s and probably many much earlier - it's a staple theme long
before modern SF.
>I've heard of these:
>
>The Journey of Joenes
>The Cyberiad
>New Maps of Hell -- which is a survey, by the way, not a work of
>fiction
>We (heard of only because Le Guin praised it in some essay)
>Floating Worlds
>
>And there's one or two on that list that I never heard of before
>this morning.
>
--
Marcus L. Rowland www.forgottenfutures.com
www.forgottenfutures.org
www.forgottenfutures.co.uk
Forgotten Futures - The Scientific Romance Role Playing Game
Diana: Warrior Princess & Elvis: The Legendary Tours
The Original Flatland Role Playing Game
Marcus L. Rowland
<l...@winsim.com> writes
>Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
>10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
>I have read none of these.
>
>
Nine out of ten here. Not the Holland, I'm not a fan of her work, but
I've read the rest. Most of them are pretty good, New Maps was for many
years the best short guide to SF, and still holds up pretty well today.
Dorothy J Heydt
Peter Huebner <no....@this.address> wrote:
>
>The Listeners I can't recall
>although the title is
>familiar.
It takes off from the Walter de la Mare poem....
http://www.poetry-archive.com/m/the_listeners.html
And it's about SETI, and things like that.
Mike Schilling
news:LAwpL...@kithrup.com...
>
> _Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
> it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
> remember anything about it except it goes far into the
> incomprehensible future.
It portrays a series of (about a dozen?) descendent species of man, in
Stapledon's patented "tell, don't show" fashion.
>
> _Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
> the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
> read it, don't care to read it again.
It was one of the books I was assigned in high school that I actually
enjoyed. (This isn't that small a category for me, as it also includes Huck
Finn, the Grapes of Wrath, The Great Gatsby, etc, so be warned.)
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Marcus L. Rowland <forgotte...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>In message <LAwpL...@kithrup.com>, Dorothy J Heydt
><djh...@kithrup.com> writes
>>In article <ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>>>Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>
>>>10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>
>>>I have read none of these.
>>
>>Oh, I've read a couple of them.
>>
>>_The Listeners_ is great. I still have my copy (in hb, yet) and
>>reread it every year or so.
>>
>>_Dark Universe_ is also pretty damn good. I still have my copy
>>but haven't read it in a while.
>>
>>_Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
>>it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
>>remember anything about it except it goes far into the
>>incomprehensible future.
>>
>>_Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
>>the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
>>read it, don't care to read it again.
>>
>
>Try 1890s and probably many much earlier - it's a staple theme long
>before modern SF.
>
Noah, for instance..
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Mike Schilling <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Dorothy J Heydt" <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in message
>news:LAwpL...@kithrup.com...
>>
>> _Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
>> it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
>> remember anything about it except it goes far into the
>> incomprehensible future.
>
>It portrays a series of (about a dozen?) descendent species of man, in
>Stapledon's patented "tell, don't show" fashion.
>
And IIRC, had a really odd English view of "Americans". As I said, I would
have preferred the Van Vogt version.
Mike Schilling
"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
news:pq3ec659rtfi0g3ft...@reader80.eternal-september.org...
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:01:58 -0700, Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2010-10-26 09:53:30 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>>
>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:02:02 -0500, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>>
>>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>>
>>>> I have read none of these.
>>>
>>> I've read two, heard of all of them.
>>
>>I'm planning to read one of them, eventually. EARTH ABIDES.
>>
>>> I'm not sure any would be on my
>>> own list of ten great SF novels nobody's read.
>>
>>What would? Or is that a new thread?
>
> Are we doing SF or science fiction? Because in the former case, most
> of mine would be fantasy.
Enough coyness -- out with it.
Mike Schilling
"Lynn McGuire" <l...@winsim.com> wrote in message
news:ia7851$va4$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
It's more a mainstream book that includes SF themes. Stewart was an English
professor at Berkeley, and wrote novels in a variety of genres.
Mike Schilling
"Joel Olson" <joel....@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3_idnRc5fMuJtFrR...@supernews.com...
James Blish's _The Issue at Hand_
Damon Knight's _In Search of Wonder_
Will DuPower
>
> James Blish's _The Issue at Hand_
> Damon Knight's _In Search of Wonder_
Fredric Jameson's Archeologies of the Future
Stephen R. L. Clarke How to Live Forever
Peter Palik From Utopia to Apocalyse, Sterling raved about it... Now I see
why, the analysis of Alan Moore was worth the price. Moreover, the
introduction provides a fine apologetic for SF.
Brian ALdiss Billion Year Spree
Adam Roberts On Science Fiction
John Clute's stuff is worth tracking down, but its expensive. His Fantaska
essay is somewhere out on web, which is a nice piece of SF criticism.
There's more in my library, but those I've only sampled.
Default User
> In article
> <orcec6tsvo047gjub...@reader80.eternal-september.org>,
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>Probably, yeah. As would THE CIRCUS OF DR. LAO.
>>
>
> Now, that one is interesting.
>
> But
>
> /takes deep breath
>
> THE MOVIE WAS BETTER.
I saw the movie as a kid. I liked it, although parts were slightly scary for
me at the time. Never read the book.
Brian
--
Day 629 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project.
Current music playing: "Dream" (Priscilla Ahn)
Dorothy J Heydt
Mike Schilling <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
You had a better selection of American literature than I had to
read. We got Ralph Waldo Emerson and Willa Cather.
Dorothy J Heydt
Mike Schilling <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"Joel Olson" <joel....@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:3_idnRc5fMuJtFrR...@supernews.com...
>> "Lynn McGuire" <l...@winsim.com> wrote in message
>> news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>
>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>
>>> I have read none of these.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>>
>> I have half of them. Of the rest, Gunn, Sheckley and Lem I respect,
>> and attribute not having them to the vagaries of used bookstores'
>> stocks.
>>
>> The Womack and Holland I'll be looking for.
>>
>> The Stewart and Stapledon I'd hardly consider overlooked, but
>> maybe so by this younger generation.
>>
>> And I'm surprised that, here, no one seems familiar with the Amis
>> book. There haven't been all that many discussing the field:
Well, I know *of* them.
Dorothy J Heydt
Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 20:26:53 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>Heydt) wrote:
>
>>In article <orcec6tsvo047gjub...@reader80.eternal-september.org>,
>>Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:09:53 -0700, Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2010-10-26 10:27:23 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> said:
>>>>
>>>>I take it THE WOODENHEADS would be on your list?
>>>
>>>Probably, yeah. As would THE CIRCUS OF DR. LAO.
>>
>>Now, that one is interesting.
>>
>>But
>>
>>/takes deep breath
>>
>>THE MOVIE WAS BETTER.
>
>No, it wasn't. It was different and it wasn't bad, but it was not
>better.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this. The story was seriously
grim without any point to its grimth. It was like the collection
of beatnik cartoons a friend of mine had in about 1955, entitled,
_Life Is a Lousy Drag._
Dorothy J Heydt
><djh...@kithrup.com> writes
>>In article <ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
>>>Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>
>>>10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>
>>>I have read none of these.
>>
>>Oh, I've read a couple of them.
>>
>>_The Listeners_ is great. I still have my copy (in hb, yet) and
>>reread it every year or so.
>>
>>_Dark Universe_ is also pretty damn good. I still have my copy
>>but haven't read it in a while.
>>
>>_Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
>>it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
>>remember anything about it except it goes far into the
>>incomprehensible future.
>>
>>_Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
>>the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
>>read it, don't care to read it again.
>>
>
>Try 1890s and probably many much earlier - it's a staple theme long
>before modern SF.
If you say so. Do you have some titles?
Will DuPower
"Lynn McGuire" <l...@winsim.com> wrote in message
news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
> I have read none of these.
>
>
I think Jack Womack's Random Acts of Senseless Violence is justly called
brilliant. There's a lot of mass market drek out there. For me two things
separate the wheat from the chaff, compelling world building and engaging
characters. The background political scene in RASV is chilling, and apt.
It's a very cruel, cold dysphoric world he paints. It's hard to witness the
this family's destruction. The daughter's descent from an insular gated
Manhattan to the street is powerful. Just 'watching' the changes in her
language is a special treat.
best,
robo
none Chuk Goodin
Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>
> Random Acts of Senseless Violence by Jack Womack -- haven't read.
This was an excellent, excellent book. Extremely well written and really
takes you into the character. The advice "show, don't tell" was followed
very well, and the book shows an economic collapse of society through
the eyes of one teenage girl. I haven't read all the other books in the
same setting -- I'm actually having trouble finding some of them. Jo
Walton reviewed it for Tor.com and I was intrigued, but it was even
better than she said it was.
> Last and First Men by Olaf Stapledon -- recall as epic in scope and
> well worth reading, but not very exciting. Sort of like
> Van Vogt without the compelling weirdness.
Yeah, that one was good and I can see how it probably influenced other
stuff that came later, but I like the later stuff better. Sort of like
how the Wright Brothers are awesome for the whole heavier than air
flight thing, but I'd rather ride in a modern airliner.
--
chuk
(formerly cgo...@sfu.ca)
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Haven't compiled it yet.
It'd actually be easier for me to come up with Ten Great Fantasy
Novels People Haven't Read Because They Came Before the Great Wave of
Tolkien Imitators; deciding which of those to then bump in favor of
under-appreciated science fiction or later fantasy would be the hard
part.
Oh, and here's 60% that list, just off the top of my head:
The Wooden Heads, by C.L. Hales
The Princess and the Goblin, by George Macdonald
The Circus of Dr. Lao, by Charles G. Finney
The Silver Stallion, by James Branch Cabell
You're All Alone, by Fritz Leiber Jr.
The Charwoman's Shadow, by Edward Moreton Drax Plunket, Baron Dunsany
"Red Nails," by Robert E. Howard, would make the list if it were a
novel, rather than a novelet.
Bill Snyder
and _More Issues at Hand_.
>Damon Knight's _In Search of Wonder_
Panshin's _Heinlein in Dimension_, if a study of a single author
is of interest to you.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]
Mike Schilling
"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
news:1olec69r5efaq7pt6...@reader80.eternal-september.org...
> You're All Alone, by Fritz Leiber Jr.
And here I thought I'd read, or al least heard of, all of Leiber's best
work. Thanks.
Mike Schilling
"Bill Snyder" <bsn...@airmail.net> wrote in message
news:8goec691kgsgrfilp...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:51:09 -0700, "Mike Schilling"
> <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Are there others I should know about?
>>
>>James Blish's _The Issue at Hand_
>
> and _More Issues at Hand_.
But he never finished _The Last Issues at Hand_.
>
>>Damon Knight's _In Search of Wonder_
>
> Panshin's _Heinlein in Dimension_, if a study of a single author
> is of interest to you.
Warning: it contains things other than slavish, fulsome praise. Avoid it if
that would bother you.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
It was originally written as erotic horror. The eroticism is so mild
as to be imperceptible for modern sensibilities.
Brian M. Scott
<l...@sff.net> wrote in
<news:1olec69r5efaq7pt6...@reader80.eternal-september.org>
in rec.arts.sf.written:
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:41:10 -0700, "Mike Schilling"
> <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
>>news:pq3ec659rtfi0g3ft...@reader80.eternal-september.org...
[...]
>>> Are we doing SF or science fiction? Because in the
>>> former case, most of mine would be fantasy.
>>Enough coyness -- out with it.
> Haven't compiled it yet.
> It'd actually be easier for me to come up with Ten Great
> Fantasy Novels People Haven't Read Because They Came
> Before the Great Wave of Tolkien Imitators; deciding
> which of those to then bump in favor of under-appreciated
> science fiction or later fantasy would be the hard part.
> Oh, and here's 60% that list, just off the top of my head:
> The Wooden Heads, by C.L. Hales
> The Princess and the Goblin, by George Macdonald
> The Circus of Dr. Lao, by Charles G. Finney
> The Silver Stallion, by James Branch Cabell
> You're All Alone, by Fritz Leiber Jr.
> The Charwoman's Shadow, by Edward Moreton Drax Plunket, Baron Dunsany
_Shy Leopardess_, by Leslie Barringer.
Brian
Andrew Plotkin
Some William Hope Hodgson has to go on that list. I'm not sure which.
_Sinai Tapestry_ (Edward Whittemore) is not antediluvian (it's 1977)
but its fantasy owes nothing to Tolkien.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
Robert Bannister
> On 10/26/10 12:55 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> In article<ia702u$gob$5...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>>
>>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>>
>>>> I have read none of these.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see 11
>> sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
>
> How did you notice the different ads? I don't look at the ads; I just
> clicked through the pictures. I have no idea (other than what you said)
> whether the ads were the same or different (aside from not realizing
> that the 11th image would be an ad).
>
>
I haven't seen any ads for decades. I didn't train myself deliberately,
but it just happened. Occasionally, I miss something good in the
newspaper because something in the layout triggers my "ad - look away"
response.
--
Rob Bannister
Cryptoengineer
> In article <ia70cb$ec...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>
> Mike Schilling <mscottschill...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Lynn McGuire" <l...@winsim.com> wrote in message
> >news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> >> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> >> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
> >> I have read none of these.
>
> >familiar in both SF and mainstream circles. And We is well-known, at least
> >by name, as the major precursor to 1984.
>
> As I said elsethread, Le Guin praises it in some essay or other.
> I've never even seen a copy.
I'd say 'We' qualifies as a lost important book. It was a direct
inspiration for both 1984 and Ayn Rand's 'Anthem' (and, arguably,
'Brave New World'). The others, I've read 5 of them, and I'd say
they're all pretty good.
pt
Cryptoengineer
> In article <$nTPugDnJ0xMF...@00.d0.59.f5.d0.2a>,
> Marcus L. Rowland <forgottenfutu...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >In message <LAwpLE....@kithrup.com>, Dorothy J Heydt
> ><djhe...@kithrup.com> writes
> >>In article <ia6u2f$i2...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >>Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:
> >>>Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
> >>>10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> >>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
> >>>I have read none of these.
>
> >>Oh, I've read a couple of them.
>
> >>_The Listeners_ is great. I still have my copy (in hb, yet) and
> >>reread it every year or so.
>
> >>_Dark Universe_ is also pretty damn good. I still have my copy
> >>but haven't read it in a while.
>
> >>_Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
> >>it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
> >>remember anything about it except it goes far into the
> >>incomprehensible future.
>
> >>_Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
> >>the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
> >>read it, don't care to read it again.
>
> >Try 1890s and probably many much earlier - it's a staple theme long
> >before modern SF.
>
> If you say so. Do you have some titles?
Richard Jeffries 'After London' (1885) is the first that springs to
mind.
there's also Mary Shelley's 'The Last Man' (1826)
pt
Dorothy J Heydt
I developed that response too, about a decade ago when I first
had access to the Web. Before I learned to let my eyes just
unfocus and slide away from the ads, they drove me *nuts*.
Richard Todd
> I developed that response too, about a decade ago when I first
> had access to the Web. Before I learned to let my eyes just
> unfocus and slide away from the ads, they drove me *nuts*.
Reminds me of this bit of dialogue:
"Advertising!"
"Advertising. You do not perceive yours, either, as you drive?"
-- Virgil Samms, talking to his Rigellian driver about the odd things by
the side of the road, things which upon closer inspection turn out to be
the Rigellian equivalent of billboards, in _First Lensman_.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Don't know that one!
Joy Beeson
<rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> I haven't seen any ads for decades. I didn't train myself deliberately,
> but it just happened. Occasionally, I miss something good in the
> newspaper because something in the layout triggers my "ad - look away"
> response.
It's really annoying when I'm looking for the ad for an event I want
to attend.
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
Brian M. Scott
<l...@sff.net> wrote in
<news:nl8fc65hnfsjkmq2p...@reader80.eternal-september.org>
in rec.arts.sf.written:
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 20:08:14 -0400, "Brian M. Scott"
> <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
[...]
>>_Shy Leopardess_, by Leslie Barringer.
> Don't know that one!
You've a treat in store. It's the third, last, and best of
his Neustrian Cycle, all of which can stand alone very
nicely. (The other two are _Gerfalcon_ and _Joris of the
Rock_.) The first two were originally published in the 20s,
_Shy Leopardess_ in 1948; Newcastle Forgotten Fantasy
republished them in 1976-7. (And since my copy is likely to
wear out before I do, I'm delighted to see that it's
available from Fictionwise.)
Brian
John F. Eldredge
> On Oct 26, 12:53 pm, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>
>> _Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
>> the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've read
>> it, don't care to read it again.
>
> I'll go all in: I think that Earth Abides is brilliant, and a genuine
> classic. (Not, as has been pointed out elsethread, all that obscure,
> but that is a different discussion.) It not only is (one of?) the
> earliest plague-wipes-out... novels, but (one of?) the earliest post-
> apocalypse novels, and (one of?) the best.
>
> I think there are a couple of things that put people off this book. A
> lot of people go into a post-apocalypse novel with certain expectations
> which this novel doesn't fulfill. In other words, no Mad Max stuff. I
> count this as an asset, but tastes vary. Another is that the book is
> darned depressing in parts. The section about
>
> <semi-spoiler>
>
> the son (Joey? It's been a while since I read it.) is designed to rip
> your heart out. And that was before I had kids of my own. Reading that
> section would be very hard today. Then there is the overall theme. The
> book is a meditation about civilization. The conclusion is that the
> protagonist is not able to rebuild civilization, but that is OK. It is
> like Orson Scott Card's early short stories (when he was really good)
> where everything bad that can possibly happen to the protagonist
> happens; he is utterly miserable; until in the end he is content with
> his lot. Feel-good fun this ain't.
>
> That being said, there is a reason why people are still reading it a
> half-century later.
>
> Richard R. Hershberger
_Earth Abides_ was re-released in mass market paperback a couple of years
ago, and is still in print. I saw a copy of it in a Borders bookstore a
few weeks ago, which would suggest that it is selling well enough for the
bookstore to find it worth stocking.
--
John F. Eldredge -- jo...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly
is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
Matt Hughes
> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
I'd add one: Limbo, by Bernard Wolfe, a great dystopian novel written
in the early 1950s, and recently republished by Westholme, a small
press I'd never heard of. Here's an Amazon link:
http://www.amazon.com/Limbo-America-Reads-Rediscovered-Nonfiction/dp/1594161291/ref=tmm_pap_title_0
Matt Hughes
http://www.archonate.com
Dorothy J Heydt
Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:02:08 +0800, Robert Bannister
><rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>> I haven't seen any ads for decades. I didn't train myself deliberately,
>> but it just happened. Occasionally, I miss something good in the
>> newspaper because something in the layout triggers my "ad - look away"
>> response.
>
>It's really annoying when I'm looking for the ad for an event I want
>to attend.
The last time I saw an ad for an event I wanted to attend was a
couple months ago in a paper brochure from Cal Performances --
Benjamin Bagby doing Beowulf. (We're going Friday night.)
Dorothy J Heydt
Yup. Not having a sense of perception, I see ads not as
blanked-out space, but as amorphous blobs of color on the margins
of whatever I'm reading.
Bill Snyder
<mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"Bill Snyder" <bsn...@airmail.net> wrote in message
>news:8goec691kgsgrfilp...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:51:09 -0700, "Mike Schilling"
>> <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Are there others I should know about?
>>>
>>>James Blish's _The Issue at Hand_
>>
>> and _More Issues at Hand_.
>
>But he never finished _The Last Issues at Hand_.
>
>>
>>>Damon Knight's _In Search of Wonder_
>>
>> Panshin's _Heinlein in Dimension_, if a study of a single author
>> is of interest to you.
>
>Warning: it contains things other than slavish, fulsome praise. Avoid it if
>that would bother you.
Well, yes, admittedly a critical study that actually contains
criticism is anathema to residents of the World As Myth, but I
thought we were talking about books that might be of interest to
actual, y'know, adults.
Joel Olson
>
Thanks all, for the list.
Single author analyses are a different topic.
I have a few, but none on Heinlein.
Joel Olson
news:ia6u2f$i2g$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
> I have read none of these.
>
> Lynn
>
Richard Dawkins
James Lovelock
Sean Carroll
William Gibson
Robert May
Margaret Atwood
Stephen Baxter
Kim Stanley Robinson
Seth Shostak
Freeman Dyson
I wonder who else they asked.
Jack Bohn
>> On 10/26/10 12:55 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>>> On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>>>>
>>>>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>>>>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>>
>>> I tend to discount any web page which makes you click 11 times to see 11
>>> sets of ads rather than just putting the content on one page!
>
>I crab about lists that make you click multiple times if they load
>slowly, like the lists on the Huffington Post
>
>If they clck as smoothly as this one did, I don't care. Click or scroll
>down, not much difference in effort.
If the link is easy to find. Now scrolling and clicking is
abominable. The cover images of these books didn't fit completely on
my screen, but most of the blurbs did, in only a few cases did I have
to scroll down, then back up to the "Next" link.
Ads are ads, and either interesting enough to look at or not.
At the intersection of the web and commerce is one particular
annoyance: on-line stores that list 10-12 items per page out of a few
thousand available. A line of links allows skipping over some list
pages (if you knew what was on them; sometimes the whole list is
sortable by price, reviewers' rating, or best-sellerdom or date (less
than helpful for old books or movies, it is the first printing of the
edition they are selling); one site has never heard of "alphabetical
by title," and "alphabetical by author" seems beyond the grasp of
most).
I suffer through it as I do clearance racks where multiple copies of
the same book are distributed randomly through unordered rows. (One
person told me that, no, the clerks didn't purposefully jumble the
books as a form of penance for shoppers who didn't pay full price,
that the disorder is created by shoppers picking up the books and
putting them back carelessly. I don't quite believe it.)
--
-Jack
David DeLaney
>On 10/26/10 12:02 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>>
>> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>>
>
Eeeh. I reviewed a Galouye tri-book here a while back, so seeing that the
first on the list is a Galouye doesn't make me want to scroll further down
all that much. But let's see... heard of Sheckley; own & have read The
Cyberiad, two robotic digits up; heard of Womack, I think; heard of Amis,
I think; ...okay, I've heard of Yevgeny Zamyatin, but NOT of "Eugene Zamiatin"
thanks, and have actually heard of _We_; own, have read, and recommend often
_Last and First Men_ (and _Star Maker_); not sure if I've heard of Holland;
own _The Listeners_ but not sure if I've read it; don't think I've heard of
Stewart; don't subscribe to New Scientist thanks.
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.
David DeLaney
>Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>I haven't seen any ads for decades. I didn't train myself deliberately,
>>but it just happened. Occasionally, I miss something good in the
>>newspaper because something in the layout triggers my "ad - look away"
>>response.
>
>I developed that response too, about a decade ago when I first
>had access to the Web. Before I learned to let my eyes just
>unfocus and slide away from the ads, they drove me *nuts*.
Whereas I developed it from reading newspapers; it doesn't translate perfectly
to the Web, but enough of it does. I'll almost literally not -see- the 72% of
a given newspaper page that's ads, just the various stories...
Peter Huebner
says...
>
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:43:09 +1300, Peter Huebner
> <no....@this.address> wrote:
>
> >WE I recall as being awfully dry and dusty. Not to my taste.
>
> I wonder whether we read different translations.
>
> (I read it in English; my Russian isn't that good.)
Definitely different translations, I read a German one.
And I do realize what a huge difference translators can make.
I intensely disliked the first German translation of the 2nd
Dune book - yet when I read al alternate version by a different
translator I liked it a great deal. (ofc, I've read it in
English as well by now but with my vocabulary at that
time I would've struggled to make my way through most
novels in English, except maybe Edgar Wallace).
But I generally have difficulties staying with Russian authors.
Dostojevski doesn't work for me, Pasternak doesnt. The Strugatzki
Brothers (sp?) never managed to rope me in (I tried "Die Schnecke
Am Hang" which is the German title, loosely translatable as
'snail on a slope'). I did read and enjoyed the 'Goulag Archipelago'
and Tolstoi's autobiography of his childhood/youth, but that's about
the grand total of what I've tried and managed to finish. De gustibus
non disputandum ..., I guess.
-P.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>
>> I developed that response too, about a decade ago when I first
>> had access to the Web. Before I learned to let my eyes just
>> unfocus and slide away from the ads, they drove me *nuts*.
>
> Reminds me of this bit of dialogue:
I knew which one you would refer to before my eye even continued on.
>
> "Advertising!"
>
> "Advertising. You do not perceive yours, either, as you drive?"
>
> -- Virgil Samms, talking to his Rigellian driver about the odd things by
> the side of the road, things which upon closer inspection turn out to be
> the Rigellian equivalent of billboards, in _First Lensman_.
Yep. And a so very true thing. Including the prior observation of a
spectacular new method of advertising which managed to force Samms to
pay attention to it.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Peter Huebner
>
> In article <8ioljc...@mid.individual.net>,
> Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
> >
>
> > Last and First Men by Olaf Stapledon -- recall as epic in scope and
> > well worth reading, but not very exciting. Sort of like
> > Van Vogt without the compelling weirdness.
>
> Yeah, that one was good and I can see how it probably influenced other
> stuff that came later, but I like the later stuff better. Sort of like
> how the Wright Brothers are awesome for the whole heavier than air
> flight thing, but I'd rather ride in a modern airliner.
As I remember it, I liked 'Sirius' a great deal better that this one.
Been a long long time though.
-P.
Peter Huebner
>
> I developed that response too, about a decade ago when I first
> had access to the Web. Before I learned to let my eyes just
> unfocus and slide away from the ads, they drove me *nuts*.
>
I have my browser set up that animated gifs don't get displayed
and shockwave content needs an encouraging mouse-click from me
before it even gets downloaded, never mind displayed.
I don't need to let my eyes slide off, and that's just as well
because overly animated ads can trigger migraines for me.
Sites that are entirely flash based get a 'tough shit'
reaction from me, I refuse to go there.
In addition I have a host file that redirects many ad storage
servers' addresses to 127.0.0.1
Very, very few ads make it past all that.
-P.
Harri Tavaila
> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
> I have read none of these.
I've read Lem, Samyatin and Stapledon.
H Tavaila
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Jack Bohn <jack...@bright.net> wrote:
>
>At the intersection of the web and commerce is one particular
>annoyance: on-line stores that list 10-12 items per page out of a few
>thousand available. A line of links allows skipping over some list
>pages (if you knew what was on them; sometimes the whole list is
>sortable by price, reviewers' rating, or best-sellerdom or date (less
>than helpful for old books or movies, it is the first printing of the
>edition they are selling); one site has never heard of "alphabetical
>by title," and "alphabetical by author" seems beyond the grasp of
>most).
>
Amazon is very bad here. I mean, why *not* show me 500 hits? They
even have a horrible habbit of not showing all the tracks on an album
without an extra clik if there's more than around 20.
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Piglet
>On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:39:21 -0400, Lawrence Watt-Evans
><l...@sff.net> wrote in
>> It'd actually be easier for me to come up with Ten Great
>> Fantasy Novels People Haven't Read Because They Came
>> Before the Great Wave of Tolkien Imitators; deciding
>> which of those to then bump in favor of under-appreciated
>> science fiction or later fantasy would be the hard part.
>> Oh, and here's 60% that list, just off the top of my head:
>> The Wooden Heads, by C.L. Hales
>> The Princess and the Goblin, by George Macdonald
>> The Circus of Dr. Lao, by Charles G. Finney
>> The Silver Stallion, by James Branch Cabell
>> You're All Alone, by Fritz Leiber Jr.
>> The Charwoman's Shadow, by Edward Moreton Drax Plunket, Baron Dunsany
>_Shy Leopardess_, by Leslie Barringer.
_The Well at the World's End_, William Morris.
--
Piglet, pig...@piglet.org
"That may be YOUR point. MY point is to live each moment so as
to maximize the amount of complaining that can be done about said
moment, after the fact. It's not as easy as it looks." --jankplus
Michael Stemper
>10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
_Dark Universe_: Never even heard of it, but I think that I've heard
of the author.
_The Journey of Joenes_: Never heard of it, but I've liked all of the
short Sheckley that I've read.
_The Cyberiad_: I've heard of it, but never seen a copy. The only
Lem that I've read was _The Futurological Congress_, which I don't
remember much about.
_Random Acts of Senselsee Violence_: I've heard the phrase, but never
heard of either the book or the author.
_New Maps of Hell_: I think that I've read something by Amis, but
it wasn't this. Looking at the wikipedia page about him doesn't help.
_We_: Finally, a hit! Lawrence said, cross-thread, that it's better
than _Anthem_. To which I'll agree, but note that that's setting
the bar really low.
_Last and First Men_: Two in a row. However, I didn't go into
engineering because I enjoyed reading history books. This one's
no exception.
_Floating Worlds_: Well, there goes my streak.
_The Listeners_: Starts off more like a tech thriller than like
science fiction, but quickly turns into a puzzle story before
getting very serious. Very unexpected ending.
_Earth Abides_: A classic, which I've dutifully read. I'll try
it again some day, since it is so well-regarded around here.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
No animals were harmed in the composition of this message.
Michael Stemper
>On 10/26/10 11:52 PM, Richard Todd wrote:
>> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>>> I developed that response too, about a decade ago when I first
>>> had access to the Web. Before I learned to let my eyes just
>>> unfocus and slide away from the ads, they drove me *nuts*.
>>
>> Reminds me of this bit of dialogue:
>
> I knew which one you would refer to before my eye even continued on.
>
>>
>> "Advertising!"
>>
>> "Advertising. You do not perceive yours, either, as you drive?"
>>
>> -- Virgil Samms, talking to his Rigellian driver about the odd things by
>> the side of the road, things which upon closer inspection turn out to be
>> the Rigellian equivalent of billboards, in _First Lensman_.
I thought of that bit of dialogue, as well.
> Yep. And a so very true thing. Including the prior observation of a
>spectacular new method of advertising which managed to force Samms to
>pay attention to it.
That would be "Smith Bros.", right?
I was reminded of that scene while driving to work two or three weeks back.
I was going south on 494, near Olson Memorial [1]. The sun hadn't come
up yet, so my attention was drawn to a van about a quarter of a mile
ahead of me. My first reaction was "that's a really big TV screen that
they have in back". As I gradually overtook it, I realized that what
I had thought was a drop-down interior screen to keep the kiddies
entertained on the way to day care, turned out to be the entire rear
window. It was alternately displaying:
"Caught you looking!" and "Your message here" (with a phone number).
As if animated billboards weren't enough of a highway distraction!
If these haven't made it to your market, expect them soon.
[1] Details only of interest to Twin Cities residents, at most.
none Chuk Goodin
Peter Huebner <no....@this.address> wrote:
>
>Womack used to be on my 'automatic buy' list. Haven't seen him on any
>bookshop shelves
>(new or 2nd hand) in well over a decade.
He did a guest spot on William Gibson's blog some time in the last year
or two, several long-ish entries. (And he is mentioned in the
Acknowledgements of Gibson's new novel.) But yeah, I haven't seen
anything by him either.
--
chuk
(formerly cgo...@sfu.ca)
Norm D. Plumber
That's enough to make a guy long for an untended brick.
--
What is trumps what should be, and what we expect, every time.
Richard R. Hershberger
> On Oct 26, 5:58 pm, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <$nTPugDnJ0xMF...@00.d0.59.f5.d0.2a>,
> > Marcus L. Rowland <forgottenfutu...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > >In message <LAwpLE....@kithrup.com>, Dorothy J Heydt
> > ><djhe...@kithrup.com> writes
> > >>In article <ia6u2f$i2...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > >>> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
>
>
> > >>_The Listeners_ is great. I still have my copy (in hb, yet) and
> > >>reread it every year or so.
>
> > >>_Dark Universe_ is also pretty damn good. I still have my copy
> > >>but haven't read it in a while.
>
> > >>_Last and First Men_ I read long ago; like most or all Stapledon
> > >>it goes far into the incomprehensible future so that I can't
> > >>remember anything about it except it goes far into the
> > >>incomprehensible future.
>
> > >>_Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
> > >>the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
> > >>read it, don't care to read it again.
>
> > >before modern SF.
>
> > If you say so. Do you have some titles?
>
> Richard Jeffries 'After London' (1885) is the first that springs to
> mind.
> there's also Mary Shelley's 'The Last Man' (1826)
I have not read either, but based on the descriptions in Wikipedia
your point is well taken. 'Earth Abides' may have claim to the weaker
status of coming in the front of the mid-20th century fad for such
books, but it had clear antecedents.
Richard R. Hershberger
Mike Van Pelt
I've got the SFBC hardcover of this one somewhere in my office.
I read it back in the 70s; it's a decent enough "SETI finally
hears something" story, as I recall. If I'm recalling correctly,
it sticks to known physics; we hear the signal and can decode
it, but there's no possibilty of conversation on a less than
decades-long scale, much less physical contact.
--
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in | Mike Van Pelt
the first place. Therefore, if you write the code | mvp at calweb.com
as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not | KE6BVH
smart enough to debug it. --- Brian W. Kernighan
Dorothy J Heydt
Mike Van Pelt <m...@web1.calweb.com> wrote:
>In article <8ioljc...@mid.individual.net>,
>Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>> The Listeners by James Gunn -- haven't read
>
>I've got the SFBC hardcover of this one somewhere in my office.
>I read it back in the 70s; it's a decent enough "SETI finally
>hears something" story, as I recall. If I'm recalling correctly,
>it sticks to known physics; we hear the signal and can decode
>it, but there's no possibilty of conversation on a less than
>decades-long scale, much less physical contact.
Yes.
Shorter-term communication and physical contact are also obviated
by ....
REALLY BIG SPOILER FOLLOWS
.....
.....
REALLY
The aliens have been dead for centuries -- their sun went off the
main sequence -- and a computer has been sending out signals in
the direction of any it receives.
Christopher Henrich
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
> In article <4cc890b8$0$17803$d36...@news.calweb.com>,
> Mike Van Pelt <m...@web1.calweb.com> wrote:
> >In article <8ioljc...@mid.individual.net>,
> >Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
> >> The Listeners by James Gunn -- haven't read
> >
> >I've got the SFBC hardcover of this one somewhere in my office.
> >I read it back in the 70s; it's a decent enough "SETI finally
> >hears something" story, as I recall. If I'm recalling correctly,
> >it sticks to known physics; we hear the signal and can decode
> >it, but there's no possibilty of conversation on a less than
> >decades-long scale, much less physical contact.
>
> Yes.
>
> Shorter-term communication and physical contact are also obviated
> by ....
>
>
>
>
>
> REALLY BIG SPOILER FOLLOWS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> REALLY
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The aliens have been dead for centuries -- their sun went off the
> main sequence -- and a computer has been sending out signals in
> the direction of any it receives.
Ohhh, now I see why, upthread, you compared it to Walter de la Mare's
spooky poem of the same name.
--
Christopher J. Henrich
chen...@monmouth.com
http://www.mathinteract.com
"A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver." -- Boon
Dorothy J Heydt
Uh-huh. And why Gunn quotes the poem, bit by bit, throughout the
book.
Joel Olson
news:ia9mr6$gne$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
There's an Olson Memorial up there?
(Oklahoma resident, originally from Cedric Adams' home town.)
Michael Stemper
>"Michael Stemper" <mste...@walkabout.empros.com> wrote in message news:ia9mr6$gne$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <ia96ap$trn$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> writes:
>>>On 10/26/10 11:52 PM, Richard Todd wrote:
>> I was reminded of that scene while driving to work two or three weeks
>> back.
>>
>> I was going south on 494, near Olson Memorial [1]. The sun hadn't come
>There's an Olson Memorial up there?
Olson Memorial Highway, also known as Highway 55. It's named after
Floyd B. Olson, governor from 1931 to 1936. It even has a wikipedia page:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Highway_55>
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
91.2% of all statistics are made up by the person quoting them.
Joel Olson
news:ia9lsa$bth$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>
Is this the place to mention _Lilith_ and _Islandia_?
j...@xmission.com
> Brilliant SF books that got away.
>
> 10 scientists and writers nominate their lost sci-fi classics:
> http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/lost-worlds
>
> I have read none of these.
>
>
I have read one, Earth Abides. I thought it was one of the most
thoughtful SF books written. Very realistic, I think, especially for
the time it was written.
j...@xmission.com
> On Oct 26, 12:53 pm, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>
>> _Earth Abides_ is perhaps the earliest plague-wipes-out-most-of-
>> the-human-race-and-the remnant-struggle-to-survive story. I've
>> read it, don't care to read it again.
>
> classic. (Not, as has been pointed out elsethread, all that obscure,
> but that is a different discussion.) It not only is (one of?) the
> earliest plague-wipes-out... novels, but (one of?) the earliest post-
> apocalypse novels, and (one of?) the best.
>
> I think there are a couple of things that put people off this book. A
> lot of people go into a post-apocalypse novel with certain
> expectations which this novel doesn't fulfill. In other words, no Mad
> Max stuff. I count this as an asset, but tastes vary. Another is
> that the book is darned depressing in parts. The section about
>
> <semi-spoiler>
>
> the son (Joey? It's been a while since I read it.) is designed to rip
> your heart out. And that was before I had kids of my own. Reading
> that section would be very hard today. Then there is the overall
> theme. The book is a meditation about civilization. The conclusion
> is that the protagonist is not able to rebuild civilization, but that
> is OK. It is like Orson Scott Card's early short stories (when he was
> really good) where everything bad that can possibly happen to the
> protagonist happens; he is utterly miserable; until in the end he is
> content with his lot. Feel-good fun this ain't.
>
> That being said, there is a reason why people are still reading it a
> half-century later.
>
> Richard R. Hershberger
I agree. Out of all the post-apocalyptic books I have ever read, it was
the only one that seemed both realistic and hopeful. No Mad Max, no
brilliant discoveries to keep the old civilization going, etc. But very
real.
Joel Olson
>
Have you read Philip Wylie's (1972) _The End of the Dream_?
Gene Wirchenko
<jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:02:08 +0800, Robert Bannister
><rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>> I haven't seen any ads for decades. I didn't train myself deliberately,
>> but it just happened. Occasionally, I miss something good in the
>> newspaper because something in the layout triggers my "ad - look away"
>> response.
>
>It's really annoying when I'm looking for the ad for an event I want
>to attend.
I was recently looking in a weekly student newspaper for news of
an event that they have been teasing about. I could not find it on a
quick look. There was an ad for it right above my puzzle of the week
which I did find.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Doug Wickström
mste...@walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote:
>I was going south on 494, near Olson Memorial [1]. The sun hadn't come
>[1] Details only of interest to Twin Cities residents, at most.
My grandfather was (at least one of) Olson's bootlegger(s).
--
Doug Wickström