A Sci Fi Reading Odyssey - 50 Novels

Firstly, we limited it to the post Wells/Verne era.... Then we nixed a couple because mostly they were too long or already read (Dune mostly). Non officially, I kind of limited it to pre-1990's. So from the 30's probably through the 1980's.

ahhh.. now its making more sense to me. I was wondering why some of the grand daddy authors weren't on your list. Specifically 'Doc' Smith and Verne.

My review represents a particularly subjective "reader response" format. Would be great to hear any specific comments on my review..... Yes, the goal was to get the widest spread of styles, themes, subjects, possible within 16 "classics" (like a lit. survey class). Another goal was to include books that originated ideas, tropes, etc. and that influenced many succeeding works.

After re-reading your review, I thought about it and what stuck with me from Ringworld, after all these years, wasn't the characterization or the plot (although, I am partial to the "lucky" genetics introduced lol, even though I know it has no scientific basis at all). But I think what got me was the BDO (Big Dumb Object) and exploring it - I think one of the first novels to really do that. As did the Rama series, which soon followed in publication, I believe. Kind of what both novels are known for.

You also said that you had trouble visualizing the ringworld, which is interesting. This is going to sound weird, but when I'm 'immersed' in a book (or other form of entertainment), my brain fills in the gaps and creates its own "world". So I didn't have any trouble with envisioning the ringworld. It's like I enter a state where I don't even really register that I'm reading (even though I obviously am). I don't know how to describe it, but I think the phenomena effects all readers who 'escape' to some degree or another.

Admittedly, I am very biased when it comes to books that trigger my sense of wonder.
 
...when I'm 'immersed' in a book (or other form of entertainment), my brain fills in the gaps and creates its own "world". So I didn't have any trouble with envisioning the ringworld...
Kris, yes, it's a wonderful thing about reading. I guess we all do that to an extent. The most fun-to-read books sketch in a few details and the mind, like you said, fills in the gaps. I didn't consciously ponder every description in Ringworld to make sure I had a clear picture of it. I just found myself a bit dis-engaged from the story at certain points and asked myself why. Then I realized my mind was doing too much work trying to create a picture that matched the story. I can and do gloss over parts of a book that are hard to visualize, I guess it's just a matter of how much is too much. Any further comments welcome.

Thanks again for the response and the fun discussion. :)
 
img022.jpg


The Kraken Wakes by John Wyndham (1953)
Penguin Books
240 pages
Reader Response by Matt H. [v 1.7] from Reading Odyssey
Rating: Recommended

Story Summary

A journalist couple (narrator and wife) witness an odd phenomena from a ship during their honeymoon. They see several red fireballs falling from the sky into the sea. Soon it becomes clear that this is happening elsewhere in the world too. From their variance in speed it seems they are not meteors but perhaps some kind of craft. They are much wondered at in the press but prove impossible to study. Later it becomes clear that something, probably connected to the fireballs has entered the “Deeps” of the ocean.

The story concerns the dire struggle that slowly unfolds between humankind and the “bathies” of the Deeps. First, shipping is attacked. Many military and passenger ships are lost. Then “Sea Tanks” begin to appear out of the ocean to collect people in a particularly gruesome manner. Humankind duly gains the upper hand against the Sea Tanks. But then the visitors begin to wage war on a gigantic, environmental scale.

Critical Reader Response

The Kraken Wakes is a highly realistic-seeming account of an alien invasion. The use of intelligent details and omniscient tone both contribute to its plausibility. It’s a very enjoyable book. Certain readers, though, might be put off by some aspects of it which are mentioned below.

In keeping with an emerging dictum of mine – simplicity is power, this book is very spare in terms of plot, action and characters. The reader is free to enjoy the way in which the story unfolds, instead of expending energy figuring out a complex plot or keeping track of characters. This is centrally what makes it a good read.

The book is not “action packed”, but it is well-planned, giving a satisfying mix of action and commentary. It’s a sense of restraint that gives it realism and enhances the mystery. The events describes are not hyped, in fact the contrary. A wise, cautious, global view of events is predominant and that gives it an objective flavor. Journalist as narrator is not an unfamiliar choice for a writer, and in this case it fits well. It makes the detailed first, second or even third-hand accounts of events more credible as “narrations.” And it serves double duty since the story itself largely revolves around journalism – media corporations scripts and radio broadcasts, especially the inside workings of these activities.

It quickly becomes clear that the reader is to be immersed in a clique of two. The narrator and his wife are fairly similar. Their banter, cleverness and most of all irony permeates almost every paragraph. Wyndham’s style is a little erudite at times but still clean and very comprehensible. Occasionally one has to interpolate the meaning of deep British-isms of that time-period. There is an almost Shawian or Wildeean feel sometimes to the dialog. It is entirely possible a reader could find this stilted and unappealing and think the main characters kind of stuffy. If that were the case, it might affect the enjoyment of the book.

The author undoubtedly made vivid use of his and his country’s experience during World War II -- everyday life, propaganda, the press, public safety, etc. It’s hard not to see more than a hint of allegory, especially of the earlier stages of the War. The lack of “facing up” to the fact that Germany was a threat, the way in which the threat affected both the West and the Soviets, the underwater attack on shipping, the threatened invasion of the British coast all have their wartime parallels, as does the ways in which the populace responds. Though imperfect the comparison can be stretched. The fireballs as the airborne component could be paired with the Battle of Britain. The maximum deluge can be paired with the apogee of Axis domination in Europe.

Politics, economics and markets are important themes in the book. The co-protagonists even make a smart stock investment in the earlier stages of the crisis. Other themes include media "spin", word-on-the-street, and disastrously fickle public opinion. The publication date was 1953 and one can clearly see the influence of that era and its history. There are Cassandras, atom bombs and ostriches. To the author’s credit, it is a sophisticated take; he is hard on both the Soviets and the West. Though every item of information from the Soviets is highly absurd and predictable. Wyndham makes it very funny. In the end one could say it’s a book, that though fairly balanced, ultimately celebrates capitalism, the West and most of all the toughness of the Brits.
 
Last edited:
Hi guys,

Finished Kraken and wrote my response here. Liked it a lot! Can imagine some lack of appeal for some owing to certain characteristics noted in my review.

Now it's time to get Crackin' on Odd John. I'm a few chapters in so far. Mums the word until finished.

As always, would love to hear from the gallery with any responses to my review!
 
Last edited:
So I've managed 5 of your list. Looking forward to your reviews so I can fill in some gaps. I'm particularly looking forward to seeing what you think of Kraken...
Hi Sea Serpent, thank you so much for making an appearance. :) It was on your account I included this book in my list and I'm glad I did! It's awesome to think about what influence an "entertainment" book can have on one's life, huh? Would be pleased to hear what you think of my review. Did I get it mostly right, IYO?
 
Thanks Vince. Appreciate you chiming -in. Any comments on my reviews of Solaris or Ringworld?
I haven't read your Solaris review but will do so soon. You Ringworld review is technically very good, however, you never actually say whether you would recommend reading it. I think you need to plant your flag when you review a book.
 
...you never actually say whether you would recommend reading it. I think you need to plant your flag when you review a book.
Hi Vince, thanks for the comments. I have been thinking about the thumbs up/down issue, since Mark also brought it up. Both Solaris and Ringworld are border-line cases so it was easier not to go binary yes/no on them. Both of these "classics" are of course far from worthless, and had moments of deep reading enjoyment, but for me they had more than counter-balancing issues too. The reviews are subject to edits and clarifications. Perhaps you read the Ringworld review before I added:

"...Unfortunately, with all these positive attributes comes substantial negatives, which on balance make it hard to recommend this book..."

Whether to include an additional thumbs up/down or some kind of numeric rating is something I'm mulling... Any additional thoughts welcome as always.

Btw, got a new review - The Kraken Wakes. Read the book? Take a look when you have time. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Hi guys, thanks to @Vince W and @Hobbit saw more clearly the need for a rating, so added it to the beginning of each review. It was a legit point. It's nice how you all are helping to improve the list, the thread and the reviews. Thank you!
 
Hi Vince, thanks for the comments. I have been thinking about the thumbs up/down issue, since Mark also brought it up. Both Solaris and Ringworld are border-line cases so it was easier not to go binary yes/no on them. Both of these "classics" are of course far from worthless, and had moments of deep reading enjoyment, but for me they had more than counter-balancing issues too. The reviews are subject to edits and clarifications. Perhaps you read the Ringworld review before I added:

"...Unfortunately, with all these positive attributes comes substantial negatives, which on balance make it hard to recommend this book..."

Whether to include an additional thumbs up/down or some kind of numeric rating is something I'm mulling... Any additional thoughts welcome as always.

Btw, got a new review - The Kraken Wakes. Read the book? Take a look when you have time. Thanks!
Actually, I haven't read The Kraken Wakes, which is odd since I've read quite a few of Wyndham's books. After reading your review I will be reading it.

As for your review itself, it was well written and clearly expressed. You obviously enjoyed the book and that comes across. You criticised the flaws well and didn't reveal too many details of the plot. Wyndham was never a two-fisted pulp action sort of writer and people who have read his stories before wouldn't be expecting it.

I agree with your dictum, simplicity is power. I find that the best writers are the ones who not only know what to say, but what not to say. They treat the reader as an intelligent person who can 'fill in the blanks' as they see fit. I think it makes the story more personal for each reader and thus more memorable. When a book is jammed with reams of useless detail then we all end up with the exact same experience and is ultimately less satisfying.

Great review and keep up the good work.
 
Still fiddling on the list, thinking of extending it to 20... Some compare/contrast essays are going to be fun if I ever get this list under my belt with reviews of each...

The gimmick here (tabula rasa) is that I haven't read any Sci Fi novels for a long, long time -- Solaris being the first for many decades. So am foolishly pretending my brain is somehow blank and that I am consciously constructing a kind of "readership" that will support a worthy Sci Fi "writership." The fantasy is that I could digest all of these books very thoroughly and extract the best of each in terms of theme, style, technique, and synthesize that into a original style of my own. (as well as add humbly to the body of criticism, and enjoy the stimulation of our discussion here!) So that's part of the point of the list.

I ordered a few more paperbacks...I know many of you have read these... any comments or advice? Looking to fill in some chronological gaps... 30's, 40's especially... It's complicated when the original writing date is decades before the book publishing date, but have to deal with that...

  • Triplanetary - Doc Smith (Fills in a spot for the earlier decades, and for some reason hoping for a more self-contained story and less of a part-of-series from this book. No idea if that's true)
  • Little Fuzzy (others) Piper (Helps round out time spot, and perhaps a set of themes . Just looks like a fun read - but I really don't know. It was recommended by users here. Gather it was pretty influential.)
  • The World of Null A - Van Vogt (Been hearing this writer's name since I was a kid... believe he is a core golden ager. Couldn't resist the fun here because this novel has been called horrific trash and also the greatest Sci Fi of all time. Must see what the hub-bub is all about. )
  • Double Star - Heinlein (Will most likely swap this one in for Citizen of the Galaxy, since Mark and others I think recommended this one as a good, perhaps better representative Heinlein novel. Finally found it in cheap paperback!)
  • Way Station - Simak (Has an impressive reputation, and this writer's name is always popping up in discussions of Sci Fi)
  • Hyperion - Simmons (Has an awesome reputation among its followers. Fills in a spot at the latest end of the time period. Arbitrarily decided to limit to books before 1990, this one is 1989)
Thoughts from the expert panel are deeply appreciated! :)
 
Last edited:
Still fiddling on the list, thinking of extending it to 20... Some compare/contrast essays are going to be fun if I ever get this list under my belt with reviews of each...

The gimmick here (tabula rasa) is that I haven't read any Sci Fi novels for a long, long time -- Solaris being the first for many decades. So am foolishly pretending my brain is somehow blank and that I am consciously constructing a kind of "readership" that will support a worthy Sci Fi "writership." The fantasy is that I could digest all of these books very thoroughly and extract the best of each in terms of theme, style, technique, and synthesize that into a original style of my own. (as well as add humbly to the body of criticism, and enjoy the stimulation of our discussion here!) So that's part of the point of the list.

I ordered a few more paperbacks...I know many of you have read these... any comments or advice? Looking to fill in some chronological gaps... 30's, 40's especially... It's complicated when the original writing date is decades before the book publishing date, but have to deal with that...

  • Triplanetary - Doc Smith (Fills in a spot for the earlier decades, and for some reason hoping for a more self-contained story and less of a part-of-series from this book. No idea if that's true)
  • Little Fuzzy (others) Piper (Helps round out time spot, and perhaps a set of themes . Just looks like a fun read - but I really don't know. It was recommended by users here. Gather it was pretty influential.)
  • The World of Null A - Van Vogt (Been hearing this writer's name since I was a kid... believe he is a core golden ager. Couldn't resist the fun here because this novel has been called horrific trash and also the greatest Sci Fi of all time. Must see what the hub-bub is all about. )
  • Double Star - Heinlein (Will most likely swap this one in for Citizen of the Galaxy, since Mark and others I think recommended this one as a good, perhaps better representative Heinlein novel. Finally found it in cheap paperback!)
  • Way Station - Simak (Has an impressive reputation, and this writer's name is always popping up in discussions of Sci Fi)
  • Hyperion - Simmons (Has an awesome reputation among it's followers. Fills in a spot at the latest end of the time period. Arbitrarily decided to limit to books before 1990, this one is 1989)
Thoughts from the expert panel are deeply appreciated! :)
Those are great additions.
 
Adding Double Star is a good idea but don’t drop Citizen of the Galaxy. One reason is that one is the first of his “adult" novels and the other the best of the "juvenile" novels that he built his reputation on. They both are 'quick reads' and provide an overview of his 1950s output.

For Van Vogt, consider his two "Weapon Shop of Isher" novellas as a single work, they present an unpopular idea in a different light and give a different window into the author’s work in this period.

A valid approach is a consideration of Science Fiction of each decade as it changes and most of the "masters" did change a fair bit with each passing era. Consider some others such as Harry Harrison, both his 'serious' work such as the Deathworld trilogy and most importantly his humorous works including a few of his Stainless Steel Rat tales and a few of his broad satirical books such as "Star Smashers of the Galaxy Rangers" and the first of his"Bill the Galactic Hero" The humorous works of his and a few others would provide you with a sort of leavening or palate cleansing between the decades.

Also some works are perhaps a touch hard to judge when plucked out of a given period of an author’s work. Ringworld for example smith in Niven's Known Space series and some of the faults you found perhaps recede when you consider that the folks that voted the Hugo and Nebula awards did so considering their other supporting work of the period.

Keep up the good work.
 
Thank you, Windy. Sage as always, well-considered and useful.
Adding Double Star is a good idea but don’t drop Citizen of the Galaxy. ...
Will definitely read them both. Wanted to keep one book per author for the list, so have to chose one for the review...
For Van Vogt, consider his two "Weapon Shop of Isher" novellas as a single work, they present an unpopular idea in a different light and give a different window into the author’s work in this period....
You recommend that over World of Null A?
Consider some others such as Harry Harrison
Will take a look at Harrison.
Also some works are perhaps a touch hard to judge when plucked out of a given period of an author’s work
There are some interesting questions here.. One thing is plucking out something in isolation from the overall sweep of a writer's work... I understand that considering the rest of the work often forms a kind of support for each individual peice. (As perhaps with Ringworld). But a trouble-maker might ask - should it?

Another big dilemma for me is the huge prevalence of novel series! (Assume this is partly an economic thing for the writers...) One wonders, is there such a thing as a standalone, non sequalized Sci Fi novel? They seem very rare. This is just strange to me, coming from a more regular English Lit type background where things are the other way around.
 
Last edited:
While there are many science fiction series there are also many stand-alone novels. Asimov, Heinlein, Bradbury, Bester, Clarke, Ursula LeGuin, and Samuel Delany all wrote several novels without sequels or such. Most of Phillip K. Dick's novels are stand-alone. Kurt Vonnegut's novels are all stand-alone, and with the exception of the Dune chronicles, all of Frank Herbert's books are stand alone.

That said, writing series only makes good economic sense for both the writer and publisher. Give the fans what they want.
 
While there are many science fiction series there are also many stand-alone novels..
Yeah, I get it Vince. Mostly venting.:-)

But you must admit there is a huge prevalence of sequels, series, prequels, etc. in Sci Fi. Is it just a market driven thing?

My frustration is partly in picking single works for list that are as stand-alone as possible. One obvious thing - Chose the first work in any series. It's more likely to be self-contained as a story.
 
You aren't wrong about the prevalence of series. I do think it's the market. Publishers just want proven sellers and it's easier to sell something readers already know.
 
I do think it's the market....
Agree, it's the market. But this same pressure should exist to the same extent for the rest of fiction. In pop fiction series may be more common.

Still I wonder if the nature of Sci Fi may be a contributing factor. Adventure stories often beg to be continued. Once you create a world, I think a certain drive arises to expand it. And there's never enough space to give imaginative creatures and civilizations the detailed backstories they may be wanting.... Another reason for series?
 
Last edited:
Mystery fiction is almost all series it seems. There are many series in modern fiction, but probably in equal measure with stand-alone.
 
:) Glad you enjoyed it Matt. I enjoyed your review! The WW2 analogy had never occurred to me but now you mention it ..., and of course writing in 1953 it would have been fresh in the public consciousness ! After all, they still had rationing!!!

Hi Sea Serpent, thank you so much for making an appearance. :) It was on your account I included this book in my list and I'm glad I did! It's awesome to think about what influence an "entertainment" book can have on one's life, huh? Would be pleased to hear what you think of my review. Did I get it mostly right, IYO?
 

Sponsors


We try to keep the forum as free of ads as possible, please consider supporting SFFWorld on Patreon


Your ad here.
Back
Top