[Hobbit]

From an article on 'Hard SF' by Charles Sheffield, in The Washington Post:

'However, no reader seeking well-written stories that respect, emphasize and depend on modern science should be disappointed by the works of any of the following: Roger MacBride Allen, Catherine Asaro, Stephen Baxter, Greg Bear, Greg Benford, Ben Bova, David Brin, Octavia Butler, Michael Cassutt, Greg Egan, Michael Flynn, Joe Haldeman, James Hogan, Nancy Kress (who happens to be my wife, and I originally thought it unwise to include her; it seems, however, less than fair to leave her out), Geoffrey Landis, Paul McAuley, Jack McDevitt, Larry Niven, Gerald Nordley, Kim Stanley Robinson, Rob Sawyer, Bud Sparhawk, Joan Slonczewski, Neal Stephenson, Bruce Sterling, John Stith and Vernor Vinge.'

Hmm. Discuss!

(Incidentally, 'greats' such as Clarke Asimov Heinlein and Bradbury were mentioned earlier in the article at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62465-2002Apr4.html

The aim was to try and show new or recent (and still living!)authors.

Hobbit

[Rob B]

I skimmed this list over. Though I enjoy fantasy more, I do dip into SF occasionally. Of the authors mentioned by Sheffield I've tried:

Greg Bear. I've been happy with most of his stuff: Darwin's Radio, Eon

Jack McDevitt. Hit or miss with him, I think, though even the misses are pretty good.
Ancient Shores (hit)
Moonfall (Big Hit)
The Engines of God (minor hit)
Infinity Beach (minor hit/near miss)

Robert J. Sawyer.
Factoring Humanity Pretty good, if a bit sappy
Starplex Good

Ben Bova Mars was all I've read by him and it was pretty good, though I haven't been particularly moved to read anything else by him.

Octavia Butler
Xenogenesis (now repacked by TimeWarner Aspect as Lilith's Brood) One of the best, most thought provoking science fiction works I've read. Truly fascinating. Keep meaning to try some of her other work

David Brin
The Postman was a disappointment (didn't see the movie)

Kim Stanley Robinson - I couldn't finish Red Mars even after 2 attempts-a rarity for me.

Neal Stephenson
Absolutely loved Snow Crash and (as I have stated before) Cryptonimicon was one of my biggest reading disappointments.

and Vernor Vinge A Fire Upon the Deep & A Deepness in the Sky AFUtD was good, but I had a very tough time with DitS-very disappointed.


(Guess I read more of this stuff than I thought http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif)

[Corwwyn]

Perhaps modesty caused him to neglect including himself in the list.

I found Between the Strokes of Night by Charles Sheffield easily good enough to place him firmly in that list.

[fortytwo]

Looking at the list above I noticed Kim Stanley Robinson as one of the authors.I thought the Mars series (Red,Green and Blue)
was a fascinating story (sorry Fitz!) which convinced me that Robinson has travelled in time and seen it all happen.I must admit though I am a sucker for stories about Mars.
I blame my mother who bought all those Edgar Rice Burroughs stories many years ago that I also read and enjoyed.

[hariseldon]

to be honest, i kind of have my doubts about greg bear...i wasn't really convinced of him after reading 2 books (forgot the title, something with song... i think)...
he also wrote one of the three books making up the "second Foundation trilogy", but i thought it wasn't really all that good, the other two books (one by Brin the other by Benford) were much better...
but that's just my opinion and personal experience of course...

keep on reading guys

[Hobbit]

Hari - That'll be the 'Songs of Earth and Power' - early stuff.

Let me recommend 'Eon' to you - think Rendezvous with Rama, but bigger! or 'Moving Mars' - fast moving, very clever space opera - as alternatives. The ones you've read are OK but not up to the standard of these in my opinion.

42 - I really, really like the Mars series, and think Stan is one of the best living around ('The Years of Rice and Salt' looks very cool!) but can also see some didn't like it - expecting something with a little more action in. Me, I just lapped up the details....

Hobbit

[Kamakhya]

I thought the Mars trilogy was incredible. What I liked most about it was the way Robinson developed the whole picture of Martian society, from culture to politics to science. But, yes, it is this same aspect that drives some people crazy.

[Priestvyrce]

I have read most of the authors in the list(Big fan of Red Mars), but Joan Slonczewski's novels are just the best. They balance sensitivity,heroics,goofiness and ideas. I first read her Brain Plague thenWall Around Eden and her fantastic A Door Into Ocean . I haven't been able(okay, I haven't tried THAT hard) to find anything else by her.

[Luke_B]

From an article on 'Hard SF' by Charles Sheffield, in The Washington Post:

'However, no reader seeking well-written stories that respect, emphasize and depend on modern science ...

Hobbit

Hard SF isn't to my tastes. If I wanted a lesson in modern science I'd read a textbook. The level of scientific veracity in a science fiction book doesn't really interest me. I like science fiction which blends mind-blowing extrapolation with strange and beautiful imagagery and situations, to point that it could almost be called "fantasy". Iain M. Banks is therefore one of my favourite science fiction writers, as he does what I've just mentioned very well.

Also, if the aim was to try and show new or recent authors, I find the inclusion of many on this list, such as Joe Haldeman, Greg Benford and Larry Niven a little confusing as these writers have been around for years. What about great new British authors like Alastair Reynolds, Justina Robson and Richard Morgan? This seems like a very myopic view of the field to me.

EDIT: Sorry, this thread started back in 2002. Explains the exclusion of Morgan, and perhaps Robson and Reynolds. My main points stand.

[ironchef texmex]

Hard SF isn't to my tastes. If I wanted a lesson in modern science I'd read a textbook.

A word of advice: avoid Robert L. Forward. Some of his stuff actually ends with page after page of chemistry equations.

I understand what your saying. I like most of the authors mentioned, but my problem with hard sci/fi has always been that every month I read about some scientific concept or another that gets debunked. If much of the less foundational bits are just going to be disproven anyway, then why not go for the "mind-blowing extrapolation"?

Niven is a favorite. I've read most of his stuff, both by himself and with Pournelle and Co. Somehow in all that time I never noticed that he was writing hard sci/fi. That's, uh... news to me. :confused: