Unreadable SF.

**Kamakhya** · March 28th, 2004, 11:34 PM

It always amazes me what some readers find hard to read. Some of the authors mentioned are favorites of mine. At the same time, my least favorite authors, I know to be favorites aroud here, namely Philip K. Dick, Roger Zelazny and Harlan Ellison. It is indeed a situation of what is one person's trash is another's gold. I really don't like (in general) the whole "let's get metaphysical and obtuse" phase of SF in the late 70's and early 80's. But, this was a major phase of SF and I do respect it for what it was.

Have no fear, Gregg Bradley, we are not here to trash authors. We do not tolerate indescriminate author bashing here. But, no author can reach out to all readers. We all have our likes and dislikes.

**Gregg Bradley** · March 29th, 2004, 06:54 AM

Originally posted by Kamakhya
It always amazes me what some readers find hard to read. Some of the authors mentioned are favorites of mine.

Have no fear, Gregg Bradley, we are not here to trash authors. We do not tolerate indescriminate author bashing here. But, no author can reach out to all readers. We all have our likes and dislikes.

Just like you, Kamakhya, some of those authors listed for distain are also some of my favorites. I don't believe that one author who writes several or hundreds of novels should be trashed.
However, I can understand when a particular book can be labeled as "trash" or "it stinks" or "is very hard to follow".
Trying to write a 356 page novel or more is not an easy chore.

On the other side, free speech is a God-given human right. Everyone has an opinion on who they like and who they are displeased with. I'm attitude is the same on Amazon.com.
One star to five stars!

**knivesout** · March 29th, 2004, 07:24 AM

It certainly is subjective - to the extent that the Kevin Anderson book I panned earlier actually had very glowing blurbs on it by other SF writers like Gregory Benford. Threads like this are really only about opinion - nothing is carved in stone and I certainly wouldn't take offence at others panning some of my faves (actually a couple have!). It is useful however, in that, if you know of a member who has similar tastes, you can get a heads-up on what you may want to avoid.

**Archren** · March 29th, 2004, 11:29 AM

The Mars trilogy was science filled but I liked it.
But....I found The Years of Rice and Salt SOOOOOOOOOOO boring. Reincarnation....blech!!

Let me completely second that sentiment, tbird. I've never been able to get more than 2 chapters into "Rice and Salt."

C.J. Cherryh is one that I have real trouble with, but I probably haven't given her a fair shot. I tried "Foreigner," hated it, and never tried anything else.

Let me add Tad William's "Otherland" series in here. Talk about incomprehensible! Again, put the first one down halfway through and never looked back. Way too many storylines, it seemed like there was no center to that book at all.

**Thekherham** · March 29th, 2004, 12:34 PM

A lot of people might disagree with me, but one novel that was an absolute struggle to read was Dune.

I haven't even bothered to read any of the sequels.

**Erfael** · March 29th, 2004, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by Thekherham
A lot of people might disagree with me, but one novel that was an absolute struggle to read was Dune.

Just.........wow.........

**Mugwump** · March 29th, 2004, 02:59 PM

I must admit that I loved Dune when I was in my mid to late teens. Subsequent readings (from age 28+) are proving increasingly wearisome though.

**emohawk** · March 29th, 2004, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by Mugwump
I must admit that I loved Dune when I was in my mid to late teens. Subsequent readings (from age 28+) are proving increasingly wearisome though.

I had the same problem. Thought it was fantastic when I read it in my late teens but when I read it again last year, after reading a few hundred other novels in between, I didn't like it as much. Unlike The Lord of the Rings which seems to get better with subsequent readings, I'm not sure that Dune holds up as well. I'm sure that statement will foster a lot of disagreement from plenty of people.

**trentdick2882** · March 29th, 2004, 09:38 PM

I read Dune for the first time this year and thought it was pretty good, but didn't really get what all the fuss was about. The plot seemed to rush too much at points. Especially the end.

**Kamakhya** · March 29th, 2004, 11:20 PM

I had the same problem with Dune. I *loved* it as a teen and read all the sequels. Then, 15 years later I tried to reread it with the intention of reading the sequels and could barely plow through the first book and gave up any hope of re-reading the sequels.

That said, I loved Mars and I thought Otherland was wonderful and while Kiln People wasn't Brin's best novel, it wasn't so bad. CJ Cherryh's Cyteen is a fabulous novel, but Down Below Station was only so-so.

**Gregg Bradley** · March 30th, 2004, 07:08 AM

When i was in my teens, I was not even interested in reading Frank Herbert's Dune. I remember a good friend or two recommended the novel, but still I refused to read it at the time, thinking it was too long involved and too cerebral for a naive 17 year old to comprehend.

Years later, just after the 1984 movie came out, i read it for the first time and was amazed at the literary genius of Frank Herbert.
The plots within plots, the knowledge of past history and references to religious ideology of past and present--made Dune a true masterpiece.
However, like alot of other readers, his follow-up sequels were really hard to get into. "Dune" is still and always will be one of my favorites. Unfortunately, you really really have to be a die hard fan of Frank Herbert in order to fully read and complete his Dune trilogy.

**fortytwo** · March 30th, 2004, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by Gregg Bradley
...........Unfortunately, you really really have to be a die hard fan of Frank Herbert in order to fully read and complete his Dune trilogy.

I wish it had only been a trilogy.
Like others here, I enjoyed it first time out and it's still one of my favourites. I just believe it went steadily downhill after that. I read the first 6, more out of a sense of loyalty rather than pleasure. I don't have the time or inclination to that anymore.

42

**Archren** · March 30th, 2004, 10:25 AM

Speaking of things that become unreadable with age: I know it's not SF, but the Xanth series. I loved it when I was 12, but when I tried to read them again in college I couldn't believe how bad they were!

To put this post firmly back on topic, I found all Piers Anthony SF unreadable, mainly for the absolutely horrendous, graphic and gartuitous use of violence. I'm thinking specifically of "Bio of a Space Tyrant" here, although there are others.

**Gregg Bradley** · March 30th, 2004, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by Archren

I found all Piers Anthony SF unreadable, mainly for the absolutely horrendous, graphic and gartuitous use of violence. I'm thinking specifically of "Bio of a Space Tyrant" here, although there are others.

Wow! Piers Anthony? I haven't seen or heard of that name in a long time! Thanks for bringing him up. He used to be a favorite of mine back in the 1970's. Can't remember his books, but I grabbed and read every single one he wrote. Unfortunately, sold them all on a hungry day to help feed my kids.

**toriphile** · March 30th, 2004, 11:42 AM

I didn't like the first two books much - they were great, but not what I expected them to be.
The other novels in the Chronicles (esp. Lord Emperor... and Heretics...) are absolutely brilliant. The whole story is probably the most ambitious work in modern science fiction (and one of the more interesting ones in modern literature.)
I wish the movies/prequels/projected seveth book fiasco never happened...