On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:23:11 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

minor snipage


I didn't like that book... the movie was awful

Do you read Science Fiction, Miss De Plume? I devoured science
fiction novels when I was young. I haven't read a science fiction
novel in years, though. The genre became too...commercial and
gratuitously salacious, as far as I was concerned. The last good
novel I've read, recently, was actually a humorous work by Leornard
Wibberley, "The Mouse that Roared." Dune was not a nascently
intellecutal book of the type you might find written by Stanislaw Lem,
Ursula Le Guin, or Phillip K. Dick. But, Herbert wove a wonderful
tapestry of story, future, distant shores, culture, intrigue and
memorable characters that spawned at least two movies. I thought the
work was incomparably imaginative. I have read other works since,
though.


Em is fine. I really like, no let me say it differently, I'm a huge fan of
Usula Le Guin (favorite story is The Darkness Box) and Phillip K. Dick (Do
android dream of electric sheep aka Blade Runner). I also love Azimov (I
Robot and the Foundation novels - except the last one), Heinlein (Stranger
in a strange land... I still re-read it), and Bradbury (too many to list).
Heinlein is actual exceptional. I saw the movie version of The Mouse that
Roared when I was a child and thought it was so much fun, but I never like
The Wizard of Oz. I didn't like the Dorothy charcter and the monkeys scared
me when my mom took me to see it.

"Em" seems so CSS, Em. But it works for me. Ursula Le Guin did write
the Earth Sea Trilogy, too, which I enjoyed. Those books were more in
the Fantasy or Heroic Fantasy genre. I thought her "Left Hand" more
masterly. To be honest, I haven't read "The Darkness Box."

She did do some wonderful work - "Darkness Box" is one of her best,
but it's hard to get into initially. Once you get the rythym of the
work, it becomes a joy to read.

I read a lot of Asimov when
I was in my teens, including "I Robot," and I would have to reread the
books to discuss them adequately. I do remember that Asimov was
markedly proud of his three laws of robotics.

Heh - once, in an unguarded moment during an interview, Asimov said
that he regretted not doing more with Dr. Susan Calvin. When he was
asked why, he said that she could be the prototypical female version
of himself. Nobody ever said that Asimov didn't lack in the ego
department.

Interesting little tidbit about the Three Laws. The Second Law was
actualy rewritten by John Campbell - Asimov didn't like the rewrite,
but went with it because of publishing pressure. Campbell did it
again to Asmimov in the short story "Nightfall" which is one of
Asimov's more famous stories - rewrote part of the ending and again
Asimov had to go with it. Those two particular rewrites had critics
falling all over themselves about Asimov's genius. It ****ed him off
so bad that he never spoke directly to Campbell again. :)

And I'd read "Stranger
in a Strange Land," too. I read a lot of Heinlein back then
(including "The Rolling Stones," the possible genesis for Gerrold's
"The Trouble with Tribbles"). (In fact one of my research papers in
college used references from Heinlein's testimony before Congress
concerning NASA spinoff technology.)

Actually, it was on the value of the space program and aging -
basically how space and the micro-gravity of High Earth Orbits (HEO)
and LaGrange Point habitats could lengthen the life spans of humans
and keep them productive twice as long.


That could be. My paper was on NASA spinoff technology. I can't say
that I remember the focus of Heinlein's testimony, other than it was
pertinent and germane to my paper. I could dig the paper out, though.
I have it buried deeply in a filing cabinet somewhere in the recesses
of my home...

The one heralded author that I
never really explored much as I probably should have was Arthur C.
Clarke. I had read a couple of his books, I know. I don't remember
the titles, though.

He was indeed a pioneer and one of the "Masters" although he tended to
wander off the reservation from time-to-time - which is perfectly fine
- the works were good stories. Oddly, my favorite Clarke story line
was the "Rama" series - that was really fun to read, but by the third
book, it got lost.

Bradbury was an intriguing author, also, I'd have
to agree. I don't think he ever forgave Michael Moore for 'borrowing'
the title from his "Fahrenheit 451."

Actually no - Bradbury wasn't happy about the use of the name, but it
had nothing to do with politics. Bradbury accepted Moore's explanation
of the error as a misjudgement on his part and while not exaclty
friends, they aren't enemies.

I didn't imply that it was a politically motivated circumstance. And
it's been sometime since I've read the article. At the time that I
read the article, I don't believe Bradbury was that far along. But
then, my memory may be failing me on this.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access