[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 20 KB, 301x286, arthur_c_clarke_1029.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4885564 No.4885564[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Clarke>Asimov>>>>Heinlein

>> No.4885575
File: 54 KB, 400x411, LeGuinGoogle-thumb-400x411-32843.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4885575

>>4885564
Agreed

>> No.4885579

Dick > *

>> No.4885586

>>4885564
They're all pretty boring

>> No.4885595

>>4885586

Not everyone can be Poul Anderson.

>> No.4885599

>>4885579

Lem > Dick.

>> No.4885601

>>4885586
>Doesn't know what science fiction is.

>> No.4885613

>>4885599
Dick>=Strugatsky>Lem>Heinlen

>> No.4885634

>>4885613
Strugatsky>Lem>Penis>Vance>Heinlein>Bradbury

>> No.4885640

>>4885634
Lem is so fucking boring and romantic though. I've only read Solaris; can you recommend a piece of Lem's work that isn't about a girl?

>> No.4885650

>>4885601
Science-fiction is a little boring, yeah? One-dimensional characters, ridiculously heavy-handed allegories, too much detail, an obsession with world-building, and a general disdain for plot and prose, these are all characteristics that are fairly common within the genre.

It can be entertaining; I like some pulp and a couple of Clarke's short stories, but more often than not sci-fi is pretty dull.

>> No.4885657

I really dislike Asimov. All I've read from Clarke is Childhood's End, which was an interesting read, but not enough to get me to read more. Love Dick though. Rereading through Valis right now

>> No.4885666

>>4885564
>Heinlein
It isn't untill months after reading his stuff that I actually realized how embarassing it was. There certainly is a charm to his writing but when it fades you wonder why you even picked up the books, which is a pity because he wasn't even a dumbass.

>> No.4885678

>>4885650
>more often than not sci-fi is pretty dull.
Welcome to Sturgeon's Law, where he said "90% of everything is crap." He said it responding to people who 60 years ago had for years been making the exact same arguments you're making right now.

>> No.4885690

>>4885678
fucking rekt

>> No.4885709

>>4885678
>Sturgeon
Vonnegut's Kilgore Trout is apparently based on him. One of the characters in Slaughterhouse 5 complains that Trout would be the best writer alive if only he could write.

>> No.4886037

>>4885650
William gibsons Necromancer pretty much says fuck off to all your points.

>> No.4886043

So what are the most "highbrow" or /lit/ approved Sci-Fi books and authors? It seems like Dick gets thrown around a bit.

>> No.4886077

>>4885640
Why does Solaris have the most disgusting cover art? I've never found a copy that didn't have some irl photo of a girl or a guy/girl kissing. Makes me FUCKING SICK.

>> No.4886188

>>4886043
R.A. Lafferty has a spectacular flair for writing that exceeds his own genre

at times in dips between nonsensical grand spiritual/governmental conspiracy and then into slightly wacky heinlein esque stuff that never actually pervades the work keeping it still fresh but still reminding you of the author's era

>> No.4886203

>>4885564
what are Clarke's top 3 books
And can i get away with just watching the Kubrick film

>> No.4886280

Why do you you all like Dick so much?

>> No.4886471

>>4886203
The City and the Stars, Rendezvous with Rama, Childhood's End.

And yeah, you can just watch 2001 as the movie is superior to the book. The book does fill in some details that are left mysterious in the movie, though.

>> No.4886490

>>4886077
Google shows many editions without the things mentioned by you.

>> No.4886509

>>4885564
But Clarke books are so boring compared to Asimov's and Heinlein's

>> No.4887020

>>4886037
*Neuromancer

still pretty pulpy, being the prototype for cyberpunk. The epitome of style over substance. Gibson didn't even know how computers worked when he wrote it!

>> No.4887037

>>4885640
are you fucking kidding me? Pretty much every Lem book is abstract, and romance barely fits into Solaris.

Humor: Cyberiad, Pilot Pirx
Dealing with the Alien: Solaris, The Invincible, Fiasco

I don't know why Solaris gets two shitty movies, when the Invincible is so tailor made to be an action flick, rewritten with a successful hollywood ending.

>> No.4887043

>>4886280
everyone has heard of Dick because Hollywood sucks his. I can't think of an SF author with more film adaptions. I think it is mostly because they all happened after his death, and his estate just can't say "no".

>> No.4887094
File: 20 KB, 233x307, Philip_k_dick_drawing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4887094

>>4885650
Check good sci-fi. Like pic related.

>> No.4887098

>>4887043
also kind of difficult to adapt works like "the foundation."

hmm, i wonder how that would turn out after having been filtered through hollywood.

>> No.4887103

>>4887037
>Tarkovskys Solaris
>Shitty

I'm rustled.

>> No.4887153

>>4885564
>>Clarke
> Reading pedofaggot books
> ever

>> No.4887162

>>4887153
>childhood's end

yeah i bet, you perv!

>> No.4887211

>>4887098
As if they haven't tried. Not that you are unaware of that.

>> No.4887256

>>4887211
>In 1965, the Foundation trilogy beat several other science fiction and fantasy series (including The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien) to receive a special Hugo Award for "Best All-Time Series". It is still the only series so honored. Asimov himself wrote that he assumed the one-time award had been created to honor The Lord of the Rings, and he was amazed when his work won.

>By 1998, New Line Cinema had spent $1.5 million developing a film version of the Foundation Trilogy. The failure to develop a new franchise was partly a reason the studio signed on to produce The Lord of the Rings film trilogy.[16]

I guess Tolkien had the last laugh.

>> No.4887259

>>4885564

Herbert>Clarke>Asimov>>>>Heinlein

>> No.4888963

>>4886077
Tell that to Foundation's cover art. It's the most cheesy thing ever.

>> No.4888979

>>4887256

More like the first chance to spin in his grave.

>> No.4888998

>>4886280
He went completely nuts in in life, becoming extremely paranoid. You can see this in his later writings. He also had a big influence from Greek philosophy, and existentialism, and would write about fairly abstract subjects like the nature of reality. Basically, he hits all the right chords of the"serious literature" crowd. Also there's the fact that he's pretty good too.

>> No.4889375

>>4887037
romantic is not the same as romance tho