Zachary Ricks Talks About Onramp Science Fiction

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

And I pimp my readers!

UPDATE: There is new content in the subscriber space tab.

*Keep in mind these are Zachary Rick’s recommendations, not mine, which would be different!  (And I can do if you really want me to.)  And thank you to Monsieur le Mollusc for the pimping of my readers’ books (I ain’t never seen books in mini-skirts and go-go boots before, is all I’m saying.)*

The Science Fiction Onramp

So, apparently there has been talk about a need for “entry-level” science fiction and fantasy. Who is talking about this and why they feel it I leave to you, dear reader. But I’d bet it has something to do with the fact that the giant movie blockbusters of the last, oh, decade or longer, have been largely science fiction and fantasy tales. With movies like The Avengers pulling in beaucoup bucks, with the success of the Hobbit, one would anticipate that we’d see similar big numbers in science fiction and fantasy books.

Something tells me that just isn’t happening.

I took a gander at the top selling books of 2013 at Amazon. And the results were… interesting.

In the top 20 books, you had eight works of fiction. (Jeff Kinney’s latest Wimpy Kid book, Dan Brown’s Inferno, Rick Riordan’s The House of Hades, F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, John Green’s The Fault in Our Stars, Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief, R.J. Palacio’s Wonder, and Veronica Roth’s Divergent.) (Incidentally, three of the top ten books were written by conservative commentators of some sort. Rush Limbaugh, Charles Krauthammer, and Bill O’Reilly. And at least three of them had specifically religious themes. So much for the thought that conservatives / the religious don’t read. Take THAT, vile progs!)

Anyway, two of those books are recognizably science fiction or fantasy. And both of those are YA. Which is what I’d consider definitionally to be onramp material.

The trend gets a little more stark when you look at the top Kindle books of last year. All 20 of those were fiction. Five of them were science fiction or fantasy (Three in Veronica Roth’s Divergent series, the final Hunger Games book, and… Ender’s Game.) All of these would be considered YA.

We don’t need an onramp for science fiction. Those books are science fiction. And they’re hitting new readers – the YA group. So the more interesting question is… what happens to these kids between the time they’re devouring books like The Hunger Games, Twilight, or Percy Jackson and later life? Do they switch genres? Do they stop reading altogether? Do they no longer have time? YA keeps putting out science fiction and fantasy blockbusters. Percy Jackson, Katniss Everdeen, and of course, Harry Potter are cultural icons, beloved by millions. And they’re smack dab in the middle of the science fiction / fantasy landscape, selling plenty. But adult sales of science fiction / fantasy aren’t that high (unless you’re George R. R. Martin).

So, what’s happening?

Well, looking at the people who were asked about “entry-level” science fiction and fantasy, and reading their comments, I have to say that maybe we’re losing a significant number of those because we keep recommending things that poke them in the eye. Remember that list of top 20 in 2013? With three books by conservatives and at least another three with overtly religious themes? Maybe… just maybe… what’s being written, published, and promoted is hostile to their worldview.

I mean, well, duh, right? Those people SHOULD have their worldview adjusted! Ha ha!!! But we have not yet devised a means to make people read those books once they’ve left school. And for some reason, people don’t buy and read books that are overtly hostile to their deeply held beliefs. Those books wind up against a wall, or in the recycling bin.

And then authors wonder why people aren’t reading their overtly hostile, condescending, sarcastic, bitterly acidic prose. Since the Progressive Era began, it’s been said that the goal of education should be to make a man as different from his father as possible. And SF has long been nothing if not progressive.

A good example – Arthur C. Clarke’s Childhood’s End.

WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW FOR A BOOK OVER SIXTY YEARS OLD.

Childhood’s End tells the story of how human beings evolve to a level where they become no longer human. In fact, the end of the book has all human life abandoning their bodies, joining in some sort of energy-hive-mind thing, and leaving Earth forever. Which is cool and all, until you start considering what that says about human beings and who we are and what our role is in the universe. Personally, I thought it was a pretty downer ending, but apparently a bunch of people thought it was the cat’s pajamas. “Yeah, humanity will be totally awesome once we ditch every thing that makes us human! Whoo!

SPOLIERS COMPLETED. THANK YOU.

Other recommendations included The Handmaid’s Tale. Apparently, it’s all about the oppression of women. I’ll admit to never having read it. My better half, however, did. And she hates that book with a flaming purple passion. But she’s an avid reader, having devoured the Divergence and Beautiful Creatures books herself around the holidays. (I think she set a personal record for Beautiful Creatures. Four books. Three days. Merry Christmas.) She loved them. Except the end of the last Divergence novel, which she didn’t like that much. (She has similar feelings about the last Hunger Games book.) Her perspective is that there’s a lot of great science fiction out there, and more coming.

Let’s humor the “industry insiders” for a minute and assume that an on-ramp is needed, even though it looks like that may not be the case based on my admittedly anecdotal evidence above. Every science fiction and fantasy fan worth his salt has a favorite book – something they spring on other people who claim not to like science fiction, and I’m no exception. Mine is and pretty much always has been Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card – a marvelous book. It’s full of fantastic ideas, interesting characters, and the climax is both thrilling and slightly horrifying. Apparently, that’s no longer a viable choice. It appeared on the list that kicked off this rant, but was surrounded with a groveling apology for having suggested it now that the author has been outed as someone who happens to believe in and practice his religion – a religion that has proven unwilling to change its practice and beliefs to fit in with current fashion.

Well, in my admittedly arrogant opinion, current fashion sucks.

At any rate, the talk about a need for entry-level science fiction as an industry is sheer folly. There’s not a need for entry-level science fiction and fantasy. There’s a need for good science fiction and fantasy. And there is plenty of that.

But let’s say that you really do need an onramp book. Maybe you have a friend who’s an avid reader, but they don’t touch science fiction or fantasy because cooties or something. Maybe keep the following in mind.

First, make allowances for taste. Some people do prefer other genres, and that’s totally legitimate. [Pfui.  Prove it — SAH :-P]

Second, keep your audience in mind. I think everyone should be able to read and appreciate Lois McMasters Bujold – especially Shards of Honor and Barrayar. (Combined by Baen into one handy volume – Cordelia’s Honor.) But the ladies may not appreciate, say, Scott Sigler’s The Rookie. (Football. In the 27th century. With aliens. Who are also gangsters. Four books so far. And a fifth up for pre-order on Saturday. All totally indie published in hardback.)

After that, make sure the book is interesting. I mean, that goes without saying, right? But if you’re trying to get someone to read a piece of science fiction because it’s important or progressive or transgressive or a bunch of other similar adjectives? You’re doing it wrong. Likewise if your book features the Sledgehammer Of Morality on any side – prog or non-prog. You want to hook someone, making them feel guilty for their deeply held beliefs is probably not the best way of doing it.

So, that’s it. Allowances for taste. Keep the audience in mind. Fun.

I’ll kick it off with one of my all time favorites – Alfred Bester’s Demolished Man (which is just barely edging out Bester’s The Stars My Destination in my preference at the moment.) Bester plays with great concepts, wrapping questions about free will, justice, and power into a fairly tight police drama. When the cops are telepaths, how do you get away with murder?

And I turn it over to the Huns. What’s your onramp book?

Not that we need one…
And NOW For the PIMPING:
Another happy Saturday, Huns and Hoydens! We’ve a small selection this week; apparently you lot were feeling bashful this week about shameless self-promotion. Repent ye, repent ye, and plug your work without qualm! And for now, go check out these books from fellow fans. As always, future entries can (and should!) be sent to my email. Happy reading!
Jason Dyck, AKA The Free Range Oyster
Promotion Wrangler, Mercenary Wordsmith, and Minion Extraordinaire

Michael Kingswood

Glimmer Vale

Glimmer Vale
Lydelton, a small fishing town in a remote valley called Glimmer Vale, is the perfect place for two fighting men on the run to stop and decide on a plan. But when Julian and Raedrick arrive they find the town besieged by a ruthless band of brigands. Worse, the brigands have taken up station in the mountain passes, blocking the two friends’ escape. With no way around the brigands and no option of returning the way they came, Julian and Raedrick accept an offer of employment. Their mission: defeat the brigands and restore peace to Glimmer Vale.

They are outnumbered at least twenty to one, long odds even if they recruit help. But that help may not be enough when the specter of their past rears its head, forcing Julian and Raedrick to openly face what they are fleeing or risk losing not just their freedom but the lives and fortunes of Lydelton’s inhabitants.

Also available from these fine sources:

Dan Melson

Empire and Earth (Rediscovery Book 3)

Empire and Earth
Earth needed help – and nobody else was going to step up. Graciela Juarez has gone from a late-twenties college student to Second Order Guardian and one of the Empire’s better pilots. But events on Earth are building to a climax, and the Empire is determined to let Earth sort things out for itself – or not. It really doesn’t matter to them. But it matters to Grace. By whatever means necessary, she will save Earth from the demons – and from its own insanity.

 

247 thoughts on “Zachary Ricks Talks About Onramp Science Fiction”

  1. I’d usually start with the funny ones.

    For SF, I’d probably go with the Hitchhiker’s Guide books. Easy to get people started with those.

    For fantasy, Pratchett. Different starting places for different people – Vimes books for some, Granny Weatherwax for others.

    Of course, to get people started the sneaky way, I’d go with something seemingly innocuous – like Schlock Mercenary. “Just” a SF webcomic – which sneaks in just about all of the major hard-SF tropes along the way.

    Then there are the people you really have to edge in. If you’re working with a romance reader, then Gail Carriger works from the fantasy/steampunk side. Sharon Lee/Steve Miller for SF romance.

    Military? Weber or Ringo.

    Like

    1. I remember enjoying the first HG book, after that they just got… weird. But my kids love the Marvin the Robot song, so maybe?

      Pratchett’s Tiffancy Aching series for my oldest daughter was a really good choice. She is now older, and reading most of the series Zachary recommends in the post. Her sisters just begged me for Allegiant.

      Are we talking about books for YA, or adults? Because Beautiful Creatures, Divergence, those are YA. Rick Riordan, Harry Potter, those are juvenile reads. Not that adults can’t read them, but some may feel talked-down-to if those are what you’re handing them to start off in SFF with.

      Like

  2. The more I think about this question, the less I am convinced that there is any such thing as “Science Fiction”.

    I’m not sure that I can find any points of commonality between, say, Ursula K Le Guin’s “The Lathe Of Heaven”, Michael Swanwick’s “Vacuum Flowers”, Phillip Dick’s “The Man In The High Castle” and Spider Robinson’s “Mindkiller” beyond the fact that they are books that contain made-up stuff.

    Which is kind of a definition of fiction in general.

    I am less interested in building on-ramps and more concerned with tearing down the dividers. Why do we need to put “books with speculative elements” into a category apart from “fictional books”? The whole One Book/One Genre Label/One Shelf paradigm is a relic of a marketing strategy that has become obsolete. On-line marketing, for good or ill, has changed the way that books are sold.

    I think that’s maybe why the YA market is so open to speculative elements. Kids who grew up with the internet aren’t concerned with genres, they just want books that are fun to read.

    Like

    1. I agree with the theory, but I’m not sure the practical application is here — at least not for the bulk of readers. We’ve been trained to search by genre.

      As to the newer generations, I think (and hope) you’re right.

      Like

      1. Well, consider that Michael Crichton seems to have successfully broken free of the genre ghetto. What he writes clearly has sci-fi elements, (some works more than others) but he’s considered a mainstream author, by and large.

        Like

        1. I actually heard a Canadian sci-fi writer railing against Crichton for being anti-science. Same sci-fi writer also averred that Star Wars “killed” science fiction because it was all space shoot-em-up and no “big serious ideas.” Plus Star Wars is about slavery and racism. I can see why I’d never heard of this writer’s books, if he writes like he lectures.

          Like

          2. Um. He was an MD. While I won’t say it’s impossible to have an anti-science MD (I’ve known too many doctors to say something that naive) it is outside the norm.

            ‘Course any writer or fan that starts railing about somebody such-n-such and how they “killed science fiction” I generally walk away from. I’m not interested in what usually follows: “Look at me! I iz special!!”

            Like

          3. I was vaguely tempted to ask for the name so I may avoid this writer, but then again, that’s also giving the writer the attention. I am somewhat torn.

            I’m also more likely to read a book that is enjoyable to read, not just stuffed with ‘big serious ideas’ that disguise that the plot is constantly lost and the fact that the characters are so shallow and flat they’re one-dimensional. I picked up a huge, thick book based on the first chapter being interesting at the airport heading to Melbourne a couple of Christmases ago, with the intention of enjoying a good ‘hard’ sci-fi. By the time we landed in Melbourne, my hubby and I regretted buying the book, I kept apologizing for spending the nearly 40 dollars, and we had no desire to inflict the thing by giving it away to anyone. Rhys decided we use it for target practice instead.

            I *still* apologize to him for it now and again, a couple of years on. It was that bad, and we love reading and books.

            Like

        3. I remember way-back that it was said that Chrichton was initially hated by the SciFi elites when he came out. He did not come up through the magazines, he did not do the things a writer was supposed to do ,he was not a science fiction writer, and Andromeda Strain was a successful main-stream movie. I really think it was Jurassic Park that made him acceptable. Until State of Fear.

          Like

          1. The fact that Andromeda Strain seemed to be a rip-off of Harry Harrison’s Plague from Space (Expanded and reissued as The Jupiter Plague) didn’t help with mainstream SF fans. (Is “mainstream SF fans” an oxymoron?)

            Like

      2. Genres make it easier to find something similar to what you enjoyed before. Problem is when the whole genre morphs into something different, like what happened with science fiction.

        I started with the older writers, and loved most of them. Main characters who mastered the challenges they faced, worlds which seemed to offer more opportunities than what I lived in did – and come to think of it, one problem I had growing up, and which has gotten worse as I have gotten older always was too many rules. I also liked wild west stories, and other historical fiction where it seemed the main characters could DO things without having to first find out about a whole bunch of rules which told them, with exact and nitpicky details about every aspect possibly connected to their enterprise, what they could and could not do. Historical fiction offered those worlds which seemed wider, so did fantasy, and perhaps best were the SF stories where humanity was spreading to the stars. And even those SF stories of a dystopia which ended with a revolution, and people who did overthrow the old order, and seemed to at least now have a chance for real freedom. And with SF I could often also get something else I like, which is exploring, the way it was hundreds of years ago. That ‘going where no man has gone before’ thing you can no longer really have in our world. There may be lots of places you have never personally visited, and lots of new is still found, but there is nothing which would be all new to anybody as an adult unless that person was raised in a barrel and fed through a hole. That thing you could feel as a small child when you saw your first horse, or the sea for the first time, or was taken to an airplane for the first time. Something truly new.

        Unknown worlds. And with no red tape. Or at least with a lot less red tape. And people who could use that freedom in good ways.

        Only it started to shift. Most of the new books, by new writers, seemed to be about people every bit as constrained in their worlds than I felt like in mine, or even more trapped. And the main character changed to ones who either didn’t even try for freedom, or did and failed. Not much fun to visit those places. I kept looking, though.

        Categories matter because they help you to find what you need, or want. I really do hope this Human Wave idea will catch on. It would make finding stuff I’d enjoy reading a lot easier.

        Like

        2. Amen, sister.

          I confess to reading little fiction any more. What little I do tends to be science fiction or fantasy, but often it’s re-reading old favorites even then. You’ve nicely pegged why.

          Like

        3. It’s not the grouping that bothers me. We’re human (Most of us. Right, guys?) we group things. It’s that the groups then become rigid categories and genre becomes a wall. People become ‘mystery readers’ and ‘romance readers.’ The select and special few get mocked for being ‘SF/F readers.’ And quite a few people of my acquaintance stay in a category they started reading in childhood because that’s what they are.

          Categories ought be guides, I think. And in our much touted ‘information age’ descriptive space doesn’t have the same limits as it once did. We can blend categories with a bit more abandon. And let some stories be told in ways that are unexpected.

          Rigid genre expectations undermine that. And lead to annoying twits turning their nose up at a good read because it’s not “hard science” or “epic fantasy” or — pick your own twit example.

          Mind, I’m not advocating abandoning (entirely) the formulas of genres, they exist (broadly) for good and solid reasons. It just seems there’s an awful lot of product out there that doesn’t pigeonhole neatly and so many people (not talking about anyone here) who want to then — cast it into the outer darkness. Or shove it into the rigid genre box and chop off the bits that don’t fit.

          It’s that aspect of genres, aided and abetted by Evil Empire Publishing and their no-talent hack ad departments that I’d like to see revamped.

          I’d also like people to quit arguing about Canon and Nikon, if we’re invoking special powers.

          Like

          1. I trust we can all agree that advances in cruise missiles, rocket barrages and “smart” bomb technology have rendered Canon obsolete.

            Like

              1. The Baker Street Irregulars have reportedly declared that “You can take my canon when you pry it from my cold dead hands.”

                Like

                1. N.B. — I am not sure, but believe that the Baker Street Irregulars are either a militia group or a constipation support group.

                  Like

                1. I don’t know if your question is serious or not (because I naturally don’t know anything about markets in Finland), but I’m going to treat it as if it is. If I am missing a joke, I’m sorry to not get it:

                  Besides being both a weapon (when spelled “cannon”) and a description of established properties of a story, Canon is a camera manufacturer, and Nikon is one of their competitors.

                  Like

                  2. Shame on you for not mentioning Zeiss. Also how could you overlook the All-American Kodak? Please don’t take my Kodachrome away!

                    Like

                    1. Honest? My last SLR was a Praktica. (Built East German Tough!) Every time I shot with color film I was supposed to feel like a class traitor.

                      Like

                    3. I worked for a time in a photography store as the clerk for the repair desk. I hated dealing with Sony products and their “repair and replacement system”…

                      ::mutter, mutter, mutter::

                      Like

    2. Maybe the one-genre / one-shelf is going away. I think that has to do with the writers and how well they can blend things together. I mentioned Sigler above, and he’s primarily a horror writer, but his books always have a strong science / science-fiction spin to them. (And all seem to take place in the same universe).

      But at the same time, readers like the familiar. That’s one of the reasons the marketing strategy has worked as well as it has for as long as it has. I LIKE reading about space ships and ray guns and daring adventure, have since I first read the Barsoom books lo these many years ago. So, more of that tickles my fancy no end and gets my dollars. Expanding on what I said above, it’s not a question of entry-level anything, I suppose. It’s a question of “what’s good?” For various values of good.

      If you haven’t read it, David Farland’s article “Why People Read” tries to address the question of genre.

      Like

      1. One shelf made sense in a traditional bookstore where you had one place to put something. But go to amazon, you can select a number of categories and be on multiple virtual shelves at the same time.

        (Except the Erotica shelf, apparently)

        Like

        1. Amazon needs to fix that actually and have a lot more shelves/shadings — in erotica/hot stuff too. How many of you here were fanfic readers? Remember the old system of signaling from “no sex” to “you don’t want to read this unless you have boutique tastes?” Amazon needs that.
          (Well, I did go to the Jasmine Gardens — the “spicy” site of Austen fanfic– when my friends posted there. Not very often, but enough that yes, I figured out the codes.)

          Like

          1. I think they do that because they don’t want to be accused of mixing the blatant porn and mainstream stuff. In a way, that’s pure marketing too. “You want the hot stuff? Right there through that curtain.”

            Like

  4. I remember “The Demolished Man” from my childhood. “Tenser, said the tensor; Tenser, said the tensor; tension, apprehension, and dissension have begun” (BUMP). And all those telepathic conversations depicted as woven word structures on the page.

    I think I would recommend “The Left Hand of Darkness,” or maybe “The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress.” Also “The Mote in God’s Eye” and the surprisingly overlooked “Jem.”

    Like

    1. SO many people love “The Left Hand of Darkness”, and I just can’t understand it. I was barely able to slog through it. It’s been nearly 30 years, so maybe I should give it another look, but from what I remember, I’m not optimistic.

      Not that the whole, “Non-Binary Gender” thing bothered me. I’ve read a short set on the same planet, called, “Coming of Age in Karhide”, and thought it was fairly good (it dealt with the main character coming into her first, “Kimmer”, as it was called.). But I thought LHoD just dragged on and on.

      Like

      1. As I remember it nothing much seemed to happen, and it was slow going for me even if the premises seemed interesting. I liked the first Earthsea books, but not how she concluded those stories. Her stories are among those which tend to give me that feeling of being trapped, although her skill with words, and the fact that the worlds are interesting (for me the problem are the characters and what happens to them in the story) can make them readable. But apart from those first Earthsea novels I always preferred her shorter stories, they allowed me to take a peek without having to stay in long enough that I’d start getting depressed.

        Like

        1. The premise was great. Which is why my first 8 books were an answer to it. No. I don’t think I’ll indie publish them. Not without serious rewrite and NOT under my own name ;)

          Like

        1. LHoD is a bit like my mom’s avocado green blender and mixer. They still do their thing, but you know instantly how old they are and what was trendy at the time.

          Like

          2. Like ++

            The only good thing i can think to say about shag carpet is that when Clyde had her kittens in our then apartment she could place them on the green shag in the living room, go out the patio door to the yard and fetch back crickets and grasshoppers for their training. Both kittens proved to be superb hunters.

            Yes, I crossed the streams of today’s and Thursday’s posts. I pray it is not catastrophic.

            Like

    2. “The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress.” Also “The Mote in God’s Eye”

      No. No. AND NO!! While they are both excellent books, they are also both TOO LONG. “Gateway Science Fiction” is best when it’s modest in length, light in tone, and moves along at a nice clip. Science Fiction equivalents to Lieber’s Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser stories.

      Heck, want to really pull a fast one one somebody? Recommend one of the very best time travel books ever, not to mention one of the very first.

      A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, by the esteemed Samuel Longhorn Clemens. What’s more sci-fi than the disrupting effects of technology, and the resistance folks can have to new tech? Sure, it’s a bit long for a gateway book, but it meets the other criteria handily.

      Like

              1. When I committed the page count to memory* my ppb edition clocked in at 300 pages.

                *Necessary in order to rant: “Heinlein only needed 300 pages for Moon, why can’t [fill in author of choice, especially Mr Martin] write a !@$# novel in under 750?”

                Like

  5. I’ve always been a character driven reader, it’s why I’ve read every genre at one point or another. (And still no cooties) In that sense, a lot of the classics of SF have complications. They were written from a cultural viewpoint subtly but noticeably different from ours, and that (sometimes) makes character motivations seem a bit off.

    As Cedar pointed out, I think the age of the prospective reader will play a factor, but if I were to pick some out to recommend ‘off the cuff’ as primer’s for speculative fiction it’d go something like this:

    The Baen Library, adjust choices by age.

    Sabrina Chase’s Sequoyah novels. (Just finished ’em, loved ’em, highly recommend ’em.) – Action, adventure and space without blowing the scope up so big you lose the characters, and without pushing the science so hard you lose the neophyte.

    Citizens edited by John Ringo. Short stories to tempt the military minded. So many places to go from there. Marko Kloos has two great books for this as well. Ric Locke’s Temporary Duty should always get a mention in this category.

    Andrew Mayne has written some interesting stories, I’d probably toss out the Chronological Man books for the present purposes.

    In a contemporary fantasy, Ben Aaronovitch does a fun detective cross-over in the Rivers of London/Peter Grant series.

    There’s some fun (and mocking) takes on vampire fiction out there, but — in theory, anyway, those roots are more horror. Even if the current crop aren’t really aiming at horror tropes.

    I don’t wanna keep going because…well, I could. And it’d eat up bytes somebody else might wanna chew on. But, the theme of my recommendations would be contemporary, (usually) fast paced and accessible for the targeted individual. Sort of a get into their brain, rewire it, and get out kind of mission.

    Like

  6. I was very fond of Clarke as a teenager, but I despised Childhood’s End. Still do. For the reasons you give.

    I resisted pressure from a professor I was working with in graduate school to read The Handmaid’s Tale. She knew I was Mormon, and her motives were too transparent.

    It would not have occurred to me to classify Ender’s Game as YA fiction. I liked it very much, though, curiously, I do not care at all for his Alvin Maker series.

    Like

    1. I never could read Clarke — his stuff was all too easy to put down and difficult to pick up again. There were several other acknowledged “Masters of the Field” with whom I had similar problems. Asimov could be pleasant, but works like the Foundation series tended to be a bit of a slog, read because it was supposedly an important touchstone in the field rather than because I was burning to know how it turned out.

      I suspect Ender’s Game is deemed YA because it has a child protagonist and (superficially) deals with a child’s problems (fitting in, accommodating the desires of adult authority while maintaining your integrity and peer relationships — you know, the kind of stuff adults don’t have to bother with.)

      Like

      1. First novel by Clarke I read was ‘A Fall of Moondust’ (as a translation). That is a good disaster (or what are they called when it’s an accident and only one vehicle and not that many people are involved? And it’s mostly about the rescue anyway) novel, and something I really liked. Still do. After that I read most of his I could find, and since he was a very well known author most of his novels actually were available in Finland during the 80’s, and several also as translations, but while they were okay I never found anything else by him I would have liked even nearly as much as that first sample. And I rather hated a few, like ‘Childhood’s End’. It began interestingly, but while the transformation was presumably intended by Clarke to be something good, to me it read as if humans had been tricked by something which either was or might as well had been the devil himself. Depressing.

        Like

        1. I read ‘Childhood’s End’ at age 10 and I didn’t understand why it gave the adults around me the creeps. Looking back . . . :)

          Like

        2. I didn’t have a problem with “Childhood’s End”. I thought it did a fair job of showing why the aliens were seen in racial “pre-memory” as depictions of the Devil, and while the elevation of the children into something different and possibly transcendent was weird, it didn’t bother me.

          However, I just recently read, “Ghost From the Grand Banks”, and it seemed to be the descent of a good storyteller into the depths of gray goo.

          Like

      2. I did enjoy the post-2001 novels – 2011, 2061, and whatever the last one was. But Childhood’s End? Meh. Extreme meh. I much prefer Johnny Rico’s attitude that his descendants should have to make do with the same set of tools he had.

        Like

    2. Card’s interesting. Hit or miss, actually. Outside of the Ender series, only Pastwatch and Enchantment really held my interest.

      Like

  7. Hmmm, what would I start people out with to lure them to the dark-with-stars side? (Just sticking with the older classics for now.) Perhaps McCaffrey’s original Dragonriders trilogy, or the first of Norton’s Witchworld books if my reader likes a little grey mist in his stories (not goo, just, eh, the mists of Witchworld). If they want more science with a strange twist, Azimov’s The Gods Themselves. Clark’s short stories from The Nine Billion Names of God are fun, as are his Tales from the White Hart. Weber’s first Honorverse books perhaps, or, for the military minded, the Falkenberg books by Pournell and Sterling. And Hammer’s Slammers (my first taste of mil-sci-fi) by Drake. Larry Niven’s collected Drako Tavern shorts are also fun for those interested in aliens and/or bars. Which leads to Spider Robinson and Callahan’s Saloon.

    Fantasy? Um, I’ll get back to you.

    Like

  8. Years ago the Record Industry expanded sales data collection beyond the few shops they tracked in NY, LA, SF, Boston & Chicago and were astounded to learn how popular Country Music was, with albums often matching or exceeding Rock sales. Geeze, whodda thunk those rubes in Duluth, Houston, Omaha and elsewhere in flyover weren’t queuing up to hear the stuff their betters the sophisticates were liking?

    The reason the industry thinks Christians don’t read is a) they don’t track sales through Logos, Lifeway, FCB and other outlets and b) they don’t care to — they have their stereotype of Christians and they don’t want to abandon their Other.

    SF/F was long the neglected stepchild of the publishing industry — as was, frankly, all genre fiction. Romance could claim antecedents in Austen, the Brontes, Hawthorne and a few others, and “contemporary” practitioners such as Heyer wrote works of such undeniable complexity and excellence that the industry was forced to recognize that work of literary quality was being produced in the genre. Mysteries had a similarly (for certain values of similarity) long pedigree, going back to Poe and Wilkie Collins and Doyle, as well as being a “guilty pleasure” of many lit students and professors. Additionally, the need to actually credibly provide and solve a mystery tended to impose certain demands of craftsmanship in the field. Add in such irrefutable talents as Christie, Simenon, Stout, Sayers, Chandler, Hammett and later stylists like MacDonald, Westlake and Parker and it became necessary for the publishing class to legitimize their enjoyment in reading in the genre (insert sub-essay, to be written at a later date, on their raging hatred of Spillane.) Add in the fact that those two genres were also extremely popular cinema fodder and they became recognized and semi-respectable.

    Westerns … well, through the 1930’s their cinematic appeal was mostly lower-grade and the tremendous popularity of the published genre also meant a vast amount of substandard literary work was sold. While I am not a student of the genre’s history I would name several works of merit — The Virginian, Shane, True Grit — that were largely swamped by the Hopalong Cassidy’s of the field. But in many ways the huge popularity of the field meant that standards were difficult to maintain and authors who succeeded in the genre were easily able to move up to the more “respectable” neighborhoods. (Asserted without evidence nor any interest in researching the idea.)

    SF/F … we tried, we really tried to claim a pedigree. We cited Verne & Wells and that frog swordsman with the huge honker. But the fact is that the field’s early writers were cranking out stuff at a ha’penny a word or so, for magazines that carried lurid easily ridiculed covers, usually working within the limits of Westerns in story motif and trend — except they required more effort for the reader to imagine the events. Films based on SF were expensive to do properly in a time before CGI FX and thus often looked cheap and attracted few “name” actors or directors. Yet, oddly, there was a significant body of work demonstrating the genre could be well and imaginatively produced. Serling’s Twilight Zone, Outer Limits and Roddenberry’s Star Trek were works of obvious quality whose efforts to raise the genre profile were undermined by the fact that Hollywood producers had no idea why they were successful and why such drek as Lost In Space were not — except as camp.

    Meanwhile, back at the lab, talented and imaginative authors were toiling away, expanding the definitions and concepts of the field, yet still largely working within the framework imposed by selling first to the magazines. Heinlein, Praise Be Unto Him, broke through the ghetto walls, first into the “slicks” and them into HB first publication. The influx of money helped raise the standards of the field, but there were still plenty of John Normans to be pointed at derisively. So, while the quality of the work within the genre grew, respect for it did not.

    It also didn’t help that most of the kids reading it in High School were, to put it kindly, social maladroits. Girls who swooned over Romance were easily categorized as Sylvia Plath’s in waiting, guys who read Westerns and Sports (BTW – try the John R. Tunis books for some superb work within a genre, addressing such issues as racism, anti-Semitism, the effort to recover from the experiences of war all within the confines of novels about a baseball team; I also strongly recommend the Henry Wiggens books, particularly the first two, The Southpaw and Bang the Drum Slowly. But Sports offers an easy metaphor for Life, as Malamud demonstrated in the The Natural. End digression) could be recognized as active and healthy boys, but the kids who read SF were too easily dismissed as nerds, geeks, weirdos and worse. The fact that most SF had not been character driven and required a higher level of intelligence knowledge of Science helped further ostracize its readers, particularly the female ones.

    I’m sorry — what was the point I was trying to make? Oh, yeah: because the people who went into publishing were primarily the nation’s Holden Caulfields, not the “Kip” Russells means that, like the Christian book vendors, that they don’t see themselves in the books and thus have no interest in publishing them, promoting them or (ick) reading them.

    Like

    1. I want to agree with all of this, I really do. And much of it is in fact spot-on. But:

      “the fact that Hollywood producers had no idea why they were successful and why such drek as Lost In Space were not — except as camp.”

      In Nielsen terms, Lost in Space was in fact much more successful than Star Trek, at least after it turned to camp. The earlier episodes of Lost in Space actually had some intriguing ideas; I’m thinking particularly of the episode with the planet in a highly elliptical orbit, whose whopper of a winter was followed by a whopper of a summer. But the series really caught on after it turned to camp.

      Appalling, I know. You and I and others who would have preferred more episodes like the early one are apparently an odd minority. Whoda thunkit?

      Like

      1. Yeah – I probably ought have qualified the term “successful” as artistic rather than popular. Proof that SF/F’s appeal is to a narrower swath of the public. (Says I, defensively. We SF/F geeks are elite. We knows stuff, we can haz Science!)

        Like

  9. A big problem with the “on ramp” is that it requires you to know what the “target” is already reading. If somebody is a fan of Brad Thor I would certainly give them John Ringo but not perhaps Sarah Hoyt. For the Regency readers I would cough up the Magical British Empire series but probably not the Legacy of the Aldenata.

    This is one reason why Baen’s ads advising “If you like [this author] you would probably also like [these authors.]” is a perfect marketing strategy.

    Like

    1. For Regency readers I also recommend Naomi Novik’s Temeraire books. The air forces during the Napoleonic wars were manned by dragons. Totally science fiction.

      Like

  10. >> I mean, well, duh, right? Those people SHOULD have their worldview adjusted! Ha ha!!! <<

    That being so (wicked laugh included), what's the objection to Heinlein and OSC?

    If Ender's Game is too … something (militaristic, what-have-you)… perhaps Mikal's Songbird might be preferable?

    M

    Like

    1. Mark, Heinlein reads as “dated.” Both his use of language and descriptive terms, his total failure to see the IT revolution and the effect of Moore’s Law, and the counter-factual nature of the solar system his stories are set in result in many readers new to SF having trouble with suspension of disbelief for long enough to engage with the story. Once you manage to mash down the suspension of disbelief button, it’s all good, but if you’re recommending a Heinlein to someone who has not read a LOT of SF, stick to the stories which are not set in our solar system, and which don’t involve piloting ships. They all feel wrong to new readers. This shrinks the list rather dramatically. Also, new SF readers are wanting novels. Many just can’t handle short stories. Reading short stories is a skill.

      So, if I’m recommending Heinlein to someone who is not a very experienced SF reader, here’s my list:

      “The Puppet Masters” “Citizen of the Galaxy” “Stranger” and POSSIBLY “Farnham’s Freehold” assuming that the person in question isn’t going to go all racist on me.

      Like

      1. A few additions to the Heinlein list … Glory Road, Time Enough for Love, Door Into Summer IF properly introduced as a novel written in 1957, set in 1970 and 2000, and Starship Troopers hold up pretty well, and I ask whether leaving Moon off the list was an oversight or deliberate (and if the latter, why?)

        I agree about short stories being a (sorta) lost skill, which is a shame as SF’s history is written in short stories and anybody who hasn’t read Sturgeon (among others) is sadly deprived.

        Like

      2. My kids didn’t feel Heinlein was dated — possibly because it’s sf, the language is supposed to be weird. And they didn’t know the dates of writing — they assumed it was parallel history. :-P

        Like

        1. I suppose you could posit “no-solid state” as easily as you could posit FTL or magic technology. What is important is not so much the whiz-bang technology any more as much as the characters that are using it and who are affected by it. George O Smith’s Venus Equilateral is no more jarring in making vacuum tubes the size of a building in space stations than using Mentats in Dune or David Drake using single-shot rifles alongside plasma cannon and laser guns.

          Like

          1. I love love Venus Equilateral. I wish the steampunk retro types would rediscover it. (And the thing about different personality types being attracted to different new technologies has turned out to be a true word.)

            Like

            1. Smith wrote in his biograpy-ish book that he was the new technology nerd. On December 7 1941 he was in the lab trying to resolve a bug that was preventing the Philco radio station- search feature from working so they could introduce it into cars. I think he was kind of surprised that he had been working with radios all day and had to step outside to get any information that Pearl Harbor had occurred.

              Like

      3. Eh, most of Heinlein’s grittier stuff was written before anyone had a handle on the computer progression, and before Moore made the statement that has become known by his name. But you’re right that a lot of modern people who aren’t used to making allowances for the time period when something was written could be put off

        Like

        1. This isn’t a problem with Verne & Wells, is it? Perhaps Heinlein’s present just feels so much like our own (with slide-rules) that causes people to be thrown off stride.

          Like

      4. I think “Citizen”, and “Have Space Suit” are both good choices, and my preferred ones. Ditto “Tunnel in the sky” as a good choice. “Moon is a Harsh Mistress” – despite being hard science and not contrafactual – not so much because of the linguistic translation that needs to be done just to understand it.

        Like

        1. My friend who works in a bookshop says the way to make a young girl — eight to 12 — a Heinlein fan for life is to give her Door Into Summer. Having been a girl that age, I concur.

          Like

      5. Rick;

        I think you missed my point, which had nothing to do with RAH’s currency and everything to do with challenging people’s worldviews.

        M

        Like

    1. Also, of course, we’re reading The January Dancer by Michael Flynn for February. Which is not an entry-ramp book.

      Like

  12. What I take away from your article (spot on and well done by the way) is that the on ramp is solid and filled with traffic. And once you proceed past a certain point it delivers you into a morass of pity and self loathing, the majority of SF put out by the usual suspects. But there just before the crest of the hill are small poorly defined exits that lead to any number of “blue highways” which convey the reader to fascinating worlds yet to be experienced.
    As for suggestions on “gateway” SF, those shiny bits to lure adult readers, or more precisely high school age through adult, you can’t go wrong with classic Heinlein. For current authors I’d suggest John Ringo, Larry Correia, Jim Butcher, Sara of course, but then I and those I’d mentor lean towards military SF. Mostly I just tell anyone looking for a good read to hit the Baen free library for a taste. If I really want to get someone hooked I trot out a copy of one of the Baen book CDs. If that doesn’t work they’re hopeless.

    Like

    1. Fans of The Handmaid’s Tale might be given Wen Spencer’s A Brother’s Price or Sarah’s Darkship series … if only for the pleasure of watching their head explode.

      Like

      1. Now that you remind me I was gobsmacked by “A Brother’s Price.” Talk about taking a meme and turning it on its ear. Better even that Wen’s Tinker series which I love as well.

        Like

        1. A Brother’s Price was a good read, and delicious. I think I started with the Ukiah Oregon series, caught Brother’s along the way and have read the first 2 Tinker books. Publication delay caught me on those and I haven’t made it back around.

          On topic, those Ukiah Oregon books make for an interesting intro to speculative thought with an odd cast. I’m not sure if they’d be a hook or a repulsor, though?

          Like

    2. Blue Highways … ah … I read that when I was HUGEly pregnant with #1 and was wistfully thinking “gee I coulda bought a motorcycle and camped across America, but instead I got this here thing … ” Heh.

      Like

    3. Andy Weir’s The Martian was a big hit with my sons and their friends (audiobook for car trip). My sons read fantasy almost exclusively so I was pretty pleased. My husband loved it, and loaned it to a friend of ours. She’ll be a good test case as a non-SF reader.

      Like

  13. For a hard SF, sense of wonder and imagination, exploration of the universe, without any “jingoistic, myrmidon, mil porn”, I’d recommend Niven’s Known Space series of short stories.

    Like

        1. I personally can credit the realization that Pournelle – and later Drake – cribbed a lot of stories straight out of history (one of the Falkenberg stories is basically the Nika revolt in Carthage, TWO of Drakes Hammer novels are…) for my love of history.

          Like

          1. I grew up reading military history, so finding Drake and Pournelle was the icing on the cake in a lot of ways. Tanks . . . with lasers! Wheeee! *ahem* Sorry. Been a long week.

            Like

      3. Centurion, John Ringo. Janissary books by Pournelle. Anything by Col. Kratman.
        You forgot GOOD jingoistic, myrmidon, mil porn. Because there ain’t anything wrong with it.

        Like

        1. Agreed on all points. I’m a fan of jingoistic, myrmidon, mil porn. One of my WIPs is a para-mil porn type. But I wasn’t sure quite where Mr. Whisler was coming from and didn’t want to trounce on toes unnecessarily.

          Like

            2. I LOVE the Bolo stories. But then I’m a huge fan of non-evil AI. (One my favorite characters that I’ve ever written is an AI. With a horrifyingly cartoonish Russian accent. Boris and Natasha cartoonish.)

              Like

              1. Non-Evil AI?? Like, f’rinstance, Willams’ humanoids? With folded hands?

                Seems to me there is a GREAT comic SF novel to be written featuring a non-evil AI forever frustrated in its attempts to help and serve humanity.

                Like

                1. One of the really awesome parts about the Well of Souls series was the AI moon the villains built to let them make stuff out of nothing. The moon, as it turned out, had a stronger moral core than its creators, and ended up being something of a good version of the malicious genie.

                  He had to do anything that he was ordered to, but that didn’t mean that he wouldn’t interpret his orders as broadly as possible to undermine them.

                  Like

                  1. Nit, Obie’s morality came from his creator Dr. Gilgam Zinder. The bad guys (including Dr. Zinder’s assistant) gained “control” of Obie by kidnapping Dr. Zinder’s daughter.

                    Like

                2. Track down some copies of John C. Wright’s Golden Age, Phoenix Exultant, and Golden Transcendence. Many non-evil AIs find humanity frustrating. At one point they admit that they would not have created humanity, if the choice had been up to them — though that’s a moot point, humanity exists, and they will deal, just as a parent must not willfully create a disabled child and yet must care for a disabled child once created.

                  Like

                  1. Golden Age is sitting on a shelf behind me and is on my reading list largely because I’ve been reading his blog lately.

                    I mean, his series on “Saving Science Fiction from Strong Female Characters”? WOW.

                    Like

          2. There’s also…

            Elizabeth Moon does write some mil-pornish titles, though more naval than grunt (and it’s somewhat pinkish, though Sheepfarmer’s Daughter is still quite good). William C. Dietz’s Legion of the Damned is fun. So is Ian Sherman & Dan Cragg’s Starfist series (marine porn). Graham Sharp Paul writes the Helfort series, another enjoyable one. Though I disagree with his politics, Ian Douglas writes some I’ve liked. Larry Correia & Mike Kupari’s Dead Six I definitely like, and is quasi-mil-porn (more gun porn than mil porn, really).

            Keith Laumer’s got a wicked sense of humor in the Reteif series, but the Bolo series is tanker military sci-fi (which I just saw RES comment on above). I read those along with David Drake’s Slammers, and they are good together. The newer ones have David Weber and others spinning Bolo tales, which are quite comfortable. The lost fleet series may or may not be mil-porn, but for space naval combat it’s quite an interesting read.

            There’s Naomi Novik, if you like your Napoleonic naval combat with flying dragons. More than that, the ones I’m thinking of fall out of focus with military action and go into more esoteric realms. Or works in other languages, and the Aeneid, while good, might be something of an acquired taste. *grin*

            Sidenote, whenever he finishes the damn thing, I think y’all will like his jingoistic para-mil porn stuff. *Prod prod* back to the wiring desk with you, sir!

            Like

            1. *Hangs head, shuffles feet*

              Life, ’tis complicated.

              But these people yammering in my head don’t get any quieter with time — I’ll be back.

              Like

              1. It’s and addiction, you know.

                You write to make the voices quiet. And, for a time, it works.

                Then they come back. With friends. Louder. And you have to write again. You begin to twitch uncontrollably when someone mentions “story?” You may lose sleep over it. There could be other complications, I dunno…

                Of course, I would know *nothing* of these things. I could just be making it all up, you know. It could be harmless, enjoyable, even. *chuckle*

                Good luck to you, sir. *grin* Happy writing!

                Like

                1. Mountain folk. Twisted.

                  It was so much easier all those years when I was telling the stories to myself, once I got the details worked out and ran through the narrative mentally all would fall quiet. Somehow, somebody or another caught wind of the possibility of living outside my canted brain — and that idea has been passed around rather thoroughly. Persistent bassoons, I ought to redshirt the lot of ’em. But who wants to listen to whiny ghosts??

                  Like

        2. Much of John Ringo is great fun. Some of it including Centurion is worthwhile but Tiger by the Tail should have been returned by Baen with a thanks but no thanks I wonder why it wasn’t just as I wonder why it was ever submitted in that form.

          The Janissary books would I think to be a great suggestion for old fashioned Avalon style game fans with lookup tables at their fingertips. I tend to avoid suggesting incomplete series as on-ramp books. Maybe Mote….

          I don’t really write sci fi, by the way. Not really or, at least, not much

          Tom Kratman
          Wednesday January 18, 2012 Maybe not the best on-ramp for science fiction but my friends are likely to enjoy books by Col. Kratman. Maybe start with one of the avowedly non-fiction essays to forestall a recoil reaction from a longer work.

          I’d suggest Alfred Bester’s shorts before his novels for on-ramp books. In fact in most all cases I’d suggest short form which may extend from novella to novelette to books once sold as novels but too short for today’s market.

          For folks I’m likely to consider friends who are looking for something to read I’d probably start with something by David Drake because there is something there for most tastes – certainly for anybody I’d call friend – from Old Nathan to The Redliners. The Voyage verges on YA. Stories in The World Turned Upside Down worked once for some aware readers and might work again. But mostly for on-ramp the two Kipling themed anthologies A Separate Star and Heads to the Storm.

          Like

          1. Tiger by the Tail was the result (I think) of a Baen practice of pairing a relatively new writer with an established writer. The established writer outlines, the new writer writes, and a book is born. Usually. Tiger by the Tail proves this does not always work. IMputativelyHO.

            Unfortunate, really, and I have no idea who thought using that universe for guest stories made sense. It’s a dark and difficult story to tell, and in the absence of Ringo’s humor it devolves to — torture and violence porn? Worse? And now I hear that the next one is written by somebody new as well. Hmph.

            Like

            1. Apologies for pursuing a somewhat distasteful (and completely off the) subject but I’d really love some answers from a Baen insider.

              I’d heard that Ringo was overcommitted and this was an effort to offload some work.

              Be that as it may the book as published is IMHO silly beyond words – and tarnishes earlier books in the series as much as the notion that it was all a hypoxia induced dream and Mike died in the wheel well. But I must note that I have not and likely never will read the book beyond the teaser pages.

              The humor may not be Ringo’s but the first page at least is hilarious or maybe ridiculous? The second paragraph of the book says of the first named Keldara character in the book Until five days ago, he [Vanel Kulcyanov] had never been more than ten miles from home……..valley of the Keldara in Georgia, in the Caucasus Mountains of Eastern Europe……..Unlike many of the Keldara, who weren’t comfortable around large bodies of water, Vanel felt as home in or on it as he did on dry land. This is apparently not only his baptism of fire but his baptism in warm salt water. The SEALS do give a little extra work their target, a small cluster of lights five hundred meters away………Yosif led them on their one-klick swim to the target And so it goes. I don’t see how it could rise to the level of porn anymore than a cable version of Flesh Gordon would compare to The Story of O as erotica.

              Like

              2. Oh, don’t read any further. No point. At the moment I can’t even imagine any canon that could or should come out of the book (except maybe the acquisition of some boats). Maybe I should caveat and say bad amateur porn? Or — I don’t know.

                My larger point is were it my universe I’d never hand it off to anybody else. It takes a deft hand and a certain sensibility that Ringo possesses and I’m not sure anybody else can duplicate. It’s a niche story line with dark themes, why let anybody else mess about in there?

                But nobody asked me. :P I’m not an insider, or anywhere close by the way. I hope somebody might have better insight.

                Like

                  2. Now I am trying to recall a short story about an inventor who developed a helmet that allowed him to command “Yehudi, the little man upon a stair” by nodding his head and issuing a command. It ends with him having tippled a bit over much and nodding while advising a friend to “suit yourself.”

                    Like

                  3. In fairness to the co-author, the only MZW book I didn’t finish is — The Hero, co-written with Ringo. Huge MZW fan, but I read that one before I’d read anything else from him and it threw me out pretty quickly and I’ve never gone back.

                    I’d probably try another book by that author, as long as it wasn’t a Paladin of Shadows book.

                    And, now I’ll go do penitence for being a mean bassoon.

                    Like

          1. I use a definition of military science fiction that puts the Childe Cycle in the category of space opera. I lost much of my original affection for the series as the later books in the series either followed or helped set current fashion by taking an immense number of words to say very little. That said the defense of Dorsai – the planet – is pretty gritty IMHO.

            Like

              1. He had a great sense of duty in his own life. He cared for his mother in her last years in his home himself.

                Like

              2. This is not to accuse Dickson of this flaw, but many authors of that period suffer that flaw. My theory is that as their presence in the field grew they were under fewer requirements for taut story-telling and scientific accuracy. In part this is because they were selling to publishers who had less expertise in SF demands (and less interest in acquiring any) than SF magazine editors and in part because they had greater ability to tell an editor “No, I don’t want to make the changes you suggest; I’ll sell it elsewhere.”

                Like

        4. I was going to say Mike Moscoe, and add that he should write more books, and then I look and he writes as Mike Shepherd. Gotta go back to the bookstore.

          Like

  14. ramps have slopes that are more than one book long.

    So, ramps from the top sellers… if you liked Harry Potter and are looking for an adult story, Terry Pratchett’s “Colour of Magic” followed by the rest of Discworld and specifically “The Unseen University Challenge” After that, let’s list Bob Asprin’s Myth Adventures, In “lesser known titles” I would toss in Tom Holt’s “Expecting someone taller” — how can you not enjoy a book where the protagonist is badgered by a badger?

    If you liked Ender’s Game and are looking for a next step up, not YA book, Gordon Dickson’s “Tactics of Mistake” if possible, hand over “Dorsai!” at the same time. The rest of this list aren’t “like” Ender, but they’re good choices for next steps: Scalzi’s “Old Man’s War” Haldeman’s “Forever War”, Brin’s Uplift books and specifically “Startide Rising”, the previously mentioned Vor books by LMJ and specifically “Cordelia’s Honor” and “The Vor Game”, and finally, although I admit it’s a stretch, but why not? Kevin Hearne’s Iron Druid chronicles,

    If you liked Divergent, or Hunger Games, (both female heroines who instigate revolutions) then Cassandra Clare’s “Mortal Instruments” and the prequel “Infernal Devices” are hard to beat. Oh? You didn’t want more YA? So, I shouldn’t mention “Battle royale” huh? Ok. Grown up dystopian revolutions… Gee, there’s this cool evolving series by Sarah Hoyt!

    Other dystopian novels I reccomend… Ballard’s “The Drowned World”, As mentioned above, “The Handmaid’s Tale” sucks, it’s as dystopian a novel as was ever written, but the frame makes it clear that the bad guys eventually lose.

    Oh heck, back to YA. John Christopher’s Tripods series, which classically starts with “The White Mountains” but has a prequel “When the tripods come” — total of four books, highly reccomended.

    Right, so away from YA… Well’s “The Time Machine.” Jack London’s “The Iron Heel.” and Ward Moore’s “Bring the Jubilee”

    Argh… why is it so easy for my brain to serve up dystopias… Oh yeah, I spent a decade reading almost nothing else in my 20’s.

    Like

    2. Tripods was probably among the first SF I ever read. That and the Mushroom Planet books.

      Like

      1. The Tripods series was the only time I’ve ever looked up a series or more from an author after having to read it in school.

        Like

      1. After the Mushroom Planet, I was soon bound for Barsoom. In many respects, I’m still there.:-)

        Like

  15. I started on Fantasy with The Horse and his Boy, which is part of The Chronicles of Narnia. I read through the rest of the series and really enjoyed it but then went back to looking for horse books. I ended up reading every book in the Mary Sue Gets a Pony series and was completely hooked on fantasy by the time I was done.

    Star Trek novels got me into reading Sci-Fi, which I then followed with The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. The weirder they got, the more I loved them.

    On a side note, I had an abusive, asshole of a boyfriend try and get me to read more “serious” science fiction. His first recommendation was Childhood’s End because I wasn’t willing to commit to a series. Should have been my first indication of what was to come. I hate that book so, so much. The kids leave with the aliens and the parents nuke themselves.

    After the Blue, a sci-fi book that treats a lot of the major tropes like an elaborate in-joke, made me laugh.

    Like

    1. I forgot about the Myth Adventures books! A different boyfriend got me hooked on those. Loved them so much.

      Also, I actually liked Brave New World. I’m weird, I know, but there it is.

      Like

  16. We seem to have overlooked Zelazny’s Amber and his explorations of Egyptian and Hindu mythology. Rick Riordan’s fan base might likely enjoy those.

    Harry Potter fans might be offered Marion Zimmer Bradley’s Darkover series or Lackey’s Valdemar books (the early ones, at any rate.) I’m not sure if any SF authors have explored the Brit Boys’ School meme …

    Like

      1. Oh. Yah, Dah!! Jones’s Lives of Christopher Chant is current audiobook on my MP3 player (Some Buried Caesar is running in the car) so I ought have thought of it … but Chrestomanci’s world is so very different from Potters, far more matter of fact in its magic that I wasn’t thinking of it as Fantasy (I think it may be our world that’s the fantasy, not hers.)

        Like

      3. You know, I read that as “chestomancy” for a moment. Wrong kind of fantasy . . . ;-)

        Like

    2. One your latter recommendation, I’m suddenly recalling a series I read as a teen that I enjoyed. Zenna Henderson’s “The People” series.

      Of course, you’re going to be seriously trolling used bookstores to find them.

      Like

  17. Thanks for the pimpage! :)

    My “on-ramp” was The Hobbit, in….1st grade? 2nd? Something like that. Though in truth, it came earlier than that. My folks took me to Star Wars in the theater when I was 3. I remember running away when the Sandman beat up Luke on the cliff. :) Aside from that, it was Star Trek in syndication. A Wind In The Door, and really that whole series. Voltron – the lions though, not the gathering of ships and cars. Somewhere in there I discovered D&D. Then in Junior High, The Belgariad and The Sword of Shanara. Then Timothy Zahn and R. A. Salvatore. And on, and on…

    So yeah, I’m not convinced “on-ramps” are needed either. About any good book will do.

    I concur about Childhood’s End, btw. Listened to it on Audiobook recently. Talk about a depressing, unfulfilling, jacked up ending. Ugh.

    Like

  19. It all depends on what the prospective reader already reads. If it’s one of my kids, I leave books lying around and say “Oh, you wouldn’t like these. These are adult.” Then the books move around, and get confiscated from under their math books when they’re supposed to be doing school work and aren’t really, but no one admits to having been reading them. Kids!
    Since there are all sorts of readers–I’d try a romance reader on A Civil Campaign. I’d try someone who loves those books about middle-aged women finding their real purpose in life (I don’t know the genre name, but I know women who read nothing but) on Paladin of Souls, which is fantasy more than SF.
    Computer geek? Rick Cook’s Wiz Biz series–more for programer types and those who love them.
    Literary reader? Norton Book of Science Fiction, edited by Brian Attebery and Ursula K. LeGuin. I haven’t read it though it’s around here somewhere, but I know Brian (he taught me cello) and I figure his tastes are about as literary as literary gets.
    Someone who likes their special effects movies? Monster Hunters Inc.

    Like

  20. My first ever SF book was The White Mountains, checked out of the Jr High school library. I read every SF book they had, which wasn’t many. Some Asimov robot stuff, Verne.

    Early fantasy reading was Narnia and The Hobbit. I finally got to The Lord of the Rings in college.

    I read Childhood’s End as an older teen and was astonished at the end where the subsumption (or whatever) of all humans was played out as a good thing … all through the book I thought the good guys were the ones resisting it.

    And I read Handmaid’s Tale many long years ago and don’t remember it well, except for feeling ever so slightly sorry for the male characters. Could also be I”m thinking of something else, it was long ago.

    It’s with shamefaced irony that I admit that what really launched me into SF/F was a “Feminist Science Fiction” book group in college. I attended their first meeting out of curiosity and took their book/author list. I didn’t go back to the group (they creeped me out for reasons I see clearly only in the light of adult understanding), but I spent years dipping into that list (Cherryh’s Downbelow was the first item), which led to other things found nearby on the shelves …

    Now I have to ration my SF/F and force myself to read other things in between or in parallel. Otherwise, I’ll just turn into Warlock’s mother … still a possibility for other reasons, of course.

    Like

    1. Cherryh! In the right mood I’m a huge Cherryh fan. Wouldn’t normally picture her as an intro, though.

      Like

        1. That’s one of the things I like about Cherryh, there’s never a two-party conflict in her stories. Multiple competing, nominally allied, shifting groups, frequently told from the perspective of one outsider or another.

          It’s also why the mood has to be right.

          Like

    2. A libertarian friend pushed some libertarian science fiction on me when I was in graduate school, and it was fairly dreadful stuff. Though not nearly as dreadful as the green socialist science fiction someone left in the astronomy student lozenge at Caltech.

      Ya wanna send a message, use Twitter.

      Thinking more about Clarke: My favorite, believe it or not, was Against The Fall of Night. I absolutely detested the rewrite. And the second Clarke I absolutely detested was Imperial Earth. Ptahh ptahh ptahh.

      Like

      1. Though the African safari scene in Imperial Earth would have been a brilliant parody of the modern eco-tourist, except that Clarke didn’t seem to mean it as a parody.

        Like

          1. Ark to him. Mark ye the day. I IS subtle, or at least someone thinks so — struts. I who normally need a plank with nails upside the head just to stop and pay attention!

            Like

            1. You only need a plank? Just one? With nails? Oh, man, I am so jealous. When people talk about my obliviousness, event horizons are mentioned due to density. I bow to your superior acumen, Miss Hoyt!

              And that’s no sh- err, no kiddin’. My last g/f had to tackle me in the hallway for me to get the idea she was attracted. Sheesh.

              Like

                1. This is not the proper venue for self-deprecatory self-revelatory tales, so I will simply say that there a places a person’s hand should not get to until well after you have sussed their intentions. Comparative obtuseness is probably a road down which we need not go.

                  Like

            2. Subtler, my dear, subtle-er. It is a comparative term which does not necessarily reach its goal. Other examples might include “prettier than a toad,” “humbler than Obama (either one),” “smarter than a Republican leader,” or “younger than Granny Weatherwax.”

              Which is not to say you are not subtle, merely to observe he hadn’t said it.

              Also, the example you proffer is not germane, as it addresses your ability to perceive subtlety while the assertion at issue refers to your ability to be subtle.

              Like

  21. Timothy Zahn’s Dragonback series — which I think is out of print — is also a good choice for YA readers.

    Like

  22. My first sf book was 20,000 leagues beneath the sea– Jules Verne. I was probably ten or eleven. I have been a ferocious reader of sf and fantasy since then. (yes, I used ferocious instead of voracious)

    Like

  23. Late to the party – but I think that this posting brings up a very, very good point – especially given that i09 article that Mike Z Williamson railed about, and the

    1) It’s amazing how much more mainstream and centrist – including Heinlein, bester, more classics, Drake, etc. – the suggested titles in the comments were than those of the cliquish “in-crowd” of the main article.

    2) The nature of the choices – and the Newspeak/PC style “I must wash myself of my sins for uttering this” for mentioning OSC shows exactly what kind of ideological bubble they live in.

    3) I think the observation here that Harry Potter, Hunger Games/Tolkein etc. doing so well but SF appreciation stopping there is absolutely crucial – because all of those works resonate for various reasons with many different sides of the spectrum – often despite the author’s personal politics (HP can easily be taken as libertarian/anti-authoritarian lite in many of its core themes). Then turn and see what those who consider themselves to be the gatekeepers recommend, and suddenly Larry Correia’s screed agains the posting at Tor makes much more sense – and leads me to believe that Larry is far more likely to be correct than his detractors about the impact of insisting on such groupthink, as we already have evidence before us that such groupthink is keeping people from going deeper.

    Like

    2. If the game wasn’t so darn rigged, I’d be happy to let the market sort this out – and as indie comes up and continues to hit it’s stride, I think we’ll get there… maybe. As long as people keep writing great fiction (science fiction / fantasy / anything), and people keep passing it around, we’ll get there. The danger is that political correctness is contagious – dangerously so. Going back to your #2 mention there, the most transgressive pick in the whole list that kicked this off was the Ender’s Game recommendation, and you KNOW it’s transgressive because the guy made such a HUGE deal out of how rotten he thought OSC was.

      In short, the small-government / pro-personal responsibility / pro-freedom-of-speech and real tolerance viewpoint is now definitively counter-culture. Take THAT, Vile Progs!

      In the meantime, I will confess to making my daughter read Monster Hunters International. She loved it. Except for all the gun talk.

      Like

      1. That, and Jemisin’s half-hearted recommendation of Childhood’s End, where every other sentence was a complaint about how white Clarke was. She could just barely bring herself to recommend it.

        Like

    3. The funny thing is, I was talking books with one of the people I work with, and we ended up trading book recommendation. He pointed me to Snow Crash, and I tossed a copy of Spellbound his way.

      It took him a while to get through it, but he absolutely loved it.

      Like

    4. That article felt cliquish, recommending only those within the in-group. (It might not have been, but it felt that way.)

      Like

      1. I have been pondering, of late, the tendency of “on-groups” toward the “membership hath its privileges” syndrome. For example, Sarah and others have comprehensively written of the pressure they felt to moderate their social & political views in order to be accepted and promoted within the publishing world.

        While some degree of conformity is absolutely necessary — employees of the Coca~Cola company can hardly be seen drinking Pepsi in their cubicle; I worked a stint at VF headquarters where jeans were deemed acceptable office attire, but only Wranglers (their brand), never Levis — much of it is merely incidental or wholly irrelevant to the group purpose. The purpose of a publisher is (ostensibly) to produce books readers desire to pay money for, preferably in HB editions, ideally in leather-bound gilt-edge editions and possibly even purchasing film and/or television adaptation rights. The political views of the author, except as they get in the way of story-telling and characterization, ought be irrelevant. Whether or not a book is “good” or “bad” by some arbitrary scale of values should be equally secondary tertirary irrelevant to the issue of whether the public is willing to force the author and publisher to accept large wads of cash for the privilege of possessing it.

        But it just ain’t so, and the clique dominating the nation’s cultural landscape is very very bad at sharing. Conservatives largely accept a live-and-let-live laissez-faire attitude, although perhaps only because they lack the cultural confidence to impose uniformity, perhaps because having been victims of Liberal King-on-the-Mountain games they have (at present) greater sympathy for the excluded. Psychologists, Sociologists, Political Scientists and drinkers in bars can work that over; it is largely hypothetical and thus amenable to subjective bias.

        OTOH, Liberals have demonstrated great tolerance for diversity so long as it is, in Henry Ford’s coinage, Liberal. The blocking of Rush Limbaugh’s efforts to buy into the ownership of an NFL team was a minor and petty annoyance of Limbaugh but to conservatives in general it was a message: you cannot be full participants in our culture, you will not be allowed nice things.

        Happily, their grasp on the heritage they have seized is slipping away, thanks to such developments as blogs, indie publishing (of books, music and — soon — cinema/television.) Like all cliques, the more tightly they cling to their artifacts the less their grasp will hold.

        Like

        1. ” Conservatives largely accept a live-and-let-live laissez-faire attitude…..”

          Well duh, what conservatives (for some values of conservative small <l libertarian) consider a market solution large L Liberals consider market failure.

          To no small extent that’s behind the Tor.com kerfuffle on default gender. The positive economics of the market place have given us actual books not matching the hypothetical books that would be produced by the normative economics of the in-group.

          Market failures must be adjusted by force if necessary (or even when possible, approving the use of force “in a good cause there are no failures” is a marker for liberals – coercion can be one axis in a Pournelle Chart along with maybe markets good/markets bad)

          Like

          1. I need new glasses and to compose in Notepad or something. Please read a closing tag after Large L

            Am I correct in believing there is no edit capacity here?

            Like

  24. I’m surprised no one has mentioned James Schmitz. Now there is a farsighted writer—when I first encountered his work, back as a young’un, I thought his work had been published “recently” due to the writing style and subject matter—yet it was decades old by that point. When his contemporaries were still having the turn of the story be “OMG that protagonist is a woman,” he was instead having fully-realized characters of both genders and all ages (including an old grandmother who is actually a galactic agent.) In short, he knew all the tropes of his time and short-circuited them by having realistic people react in real-world ways, not ways defined by the default stories around him.

    And, well, he’s entertaining. The Witches of Karres is still a hilarious novel on so many levels. (Don’t bother with The Wizard of Karres, a somewhat failed attempt at a sequel by other writers years after his death… they tried, and they obviously loved the source material, but it fell a bit flat, unfortunately. “Spy ray,” really?)

    Like

    1. The first Telzey story was published in Analog the year before Space Viking was serialized, if that helps put it in context. (I have a number of Analogs from 1962 and 1963)

      Like

    2. Good call – one of the unfairly neglected writers who made SF great. The field has too great a tendency to focus on the giants and forget the many excellent writers who “filled out” the pages of Analog, Galaxy and the rest. It is somewhat like looking at a football team’s quarterback while ignoring the offensive line who support his efforts.

      I think it would be remiss to overlook Clifford Simak, Richard Matheson, Robert Sheckley, Fred Pohl, Cyril Kornbluth, Cordwainer Smith or H Beam Piper, whose Little Fuzzy is a terrific gateway drug for young’uns of all ages (accept no substitute nor imitation.)

      Like

      1. Poul Anderson — Three Hearts and Three Lions, de Camp and Pratt’s Harold Shea stories, Dickson’s Dragon & the George series, Stasheff’s Wizard In Rhyme (the first few, at any rate.) More randomly cited authors.

        Like

        2. With the prior three or four comments I think there’s all of three authors on there I *haven’t* read. It’s glorious having had people who really knew good science fiction as book-pushers…

          I’ll throw in R.A. Lafferty, whose style is utterly unmatched (aside from one Neil Gaiman pastiche; he thinks he failed but I think he got close enough for a good yarn.)

          Like

  26. Edgar Rice Burroughs and E.E. “Doc” Smith worked well for me. This was the early 70s, when both writers were being reprinted.

    Like

  27. Ye who recommend staring Pratchett with The Colour of Magic deserve to force-fed a sausage in a bun and hung up by the figgin! That book depends so much on familiarity with the tropes of fantasy (it is a PARODY, after all, rather than Satire like his later works) that a person who is unfamiliar with those tropes is just not going to go far. There are many debates about which Pratchett book to start with, but the consensus (if there could be such a thing among Discworld fans) is do not begin with those first two. (My recommendation? Start with Guards! Guards! and go from there.)
    Another voice here for Diana Wynne Jones–it is a pity that Rowling’s Potter series so quickly overshadowed Wynne Jones. She deserves to be more widely read–she’s an excellent stylist, character maker, and world builder.

    Like

    1. I don’t like the Rince Wind books. Well, I don’t by comparison to the other Pratchett. I second Guards Guards. I’ve turned many a person onto Pratchett that way. Old son though prefers Thief of Time.

      Like

      1. I was started with Equal Rites, close to the time it was published. Actually, the one I’ve thrown at the most people is Maskerade, because I have a lot of friends who love opera and I keep finding copies at the library sales for a quarter.

        Like

  28. My initial introduction to science fiction (after straying from Trek and Star Wars books) consisted mostly of Asimov and Heinlein. After abandoning the genre, David Drake and Eric Flint’s Belisaurius series and Eric Flint’s 1632 got me back into science fiction.

    I’d toss in Larry Correia’s Monster Hunter International as well. I lent my copy to a friend who left on a military exercise for a couple months. I never got it back *and* it made the rounds through his entire squad during that time.

    Like

  30. Personally, I like stories that make me think, which is one reason I enjoyed Ann Leckie’s “Ancillary Justice” so much. But it’s not for entry-level SF readers, that’s for sure. (It’s the same sort of reason I read many of Sarah’s SF books, including “Darkship Thieves” and sequels. I want to think and am not interested in books that solely reinforce my own worldview. I know what my own worldview is, and I want to think about something else for a while and challenge myself — otherwise I’d be navel-gazing all the time, which is boring as Hell and completely uninspiring, besides.)

    The books I read when I grew up were a lot more fun than the ones I see now, for whatever reason — Andre Norton’s Witch World series, “Ice Crown” and “Forerunner Foray” were my favorites (though I devoured everything she wrote, loved the Time Traders stuff), Poul Anderson’s Dominic Flandry series (an interstellar James Bond, definitely not PC, but really fun and with excellent science and spy stuff), Madeleine L’Engle (though some of hers were much, much better than others). James Blish’s Star Trek anthologies (based off the episodes, mostly), Alan Dean Foster’s Flinx stories, all of that served to keep me interested in the diversity of opinions and worlds available in SF.

    I think it’s a mistake only to read the things that we agree with. Personally, I’m not a huge fan of Ann Coulter’s writing — I think there’s a lack of facts and way too much spouting off — but I read many things she writes because occasionally she comes up with a way to look at something I don’t agree with. I like George Will’s writing *far* more even though I rarely agree with him, either, because I think his knowledge base is much deeper and he gets to the heart of problems. (This is why those of you who are libertarian or “deeply red” should at least occasionally read an in-depth analysis over at “The Nation.” They have really good sports articles, so I’d suggest starting there if you can abide it.)

    Now, does this mean I read a lot of John Nichols’ writing at “The Nation” because I like him and agree with him? Yes. But I don’t get challenged very often by what he writes, and I like to be challenged.

    In other words, I read all sorts of things because I detest boredom, I like new things and new ideas and have from at least age ten (which is when I started reading Madeleine L’Engle, probably the first fantasy author I ever read), and I *don’t* want to just be locked inside my own head, unable to get out, challenges and prejudices never examined.

    Like

    1. Well, here’s the thing. ALL of us who lean right or libertarian or human wave or whatever are reading things that we disagree with by default. See earlier discussions re: gatekeepers, etc. So it’s not like we’re unfamiliar with other points of view. See also Sarah’s reference to studies that show that libertarians and conservatives do a good job emulating left / liberal thought (man, I hate that “liberal” has been owned by the left) while the reverse is not true. For a cite, check Jonathan Haidt’s “The Righteous Mind”.

      So, while I may not go out of my way to read something from that perspective, the culture sort of has me soaking in it by default.

      Like

      1. I can understand that, Zachary. And I can see where it would be deeply upsetting.

        I don’t like to play to anyone’s prejudices, personally — that’s mostly where I was trying to go with my comment. I like to see what people are saying from various angles/aspects and then figure out if there’s merit to it. I know I have kneejerk reactions like anyone else, I know there’s a tendency for most people to make a decision first and rationalize it later and I’m not immune from this (though at least I know about it and I can fight it, that way) . . . but I try not to fall prey to them, if this makes any sense.

        Please do not think that everyone who’s a moderate or Independent or left is bad or somehow evil, though, merely because there some people out there who insist that everyone right of center or Libertarian is that way. There are gradations of thought to consider, as well as the intentions of the actual individual person . . . I distrust mob psychology (what I call “get on the bandwagon psychology,” too, which isn’t always the same thing), and want to remember that I’ve been given brains for a reason. (To use ’em.)

        Hoping that makes sense . . . appreciate your comment.

        Like

        1. Taking this one at a time:
          a) of course people who don’t agree with me aren’t (necessarily) evil (and those who agree with me aren’t necessarily good. It gets complicated. I think we call this “nuance”.). The vast majority of leftists and low-information people here just start from differing starting premises than I do, or honestly haven’t given the matter much thought / haven’t heard the arguments of the other side. If I’ve implied differently, I’m sorry, that wasn’t my intention. I grew up in one of the most conservative places in the US back home in SE Idaho. And I went to law school at one of the top three liberal law schools in the country. Center for American Progress recruited out of my law school. I’ve seen both sides of the ideological divide, and I have a healthy distrust of unthinking knee-jerkism from either one. Merciful heavens, how many times have I seen someone in a comment or in an online discussion say something and thought to myself “It’s great that you’re with me, I guess, but oh, how I wish you hadn’t said that”?
          b) I think it’s safe to say that everyone on the libertarian / small government side does or has read the other side’s stuff. It’s inescapable, and I’m not trying to tell anyone that they need to stop doing that. That’s what I was getting at when I said that we’re soaking in it because of the culture. Example – Joss Whedon. Definitely to the left of me. But you better believe I own a full set of Firefly, Serenity, and The Avengers, and my hind end will be in a chair when Avengers 2 comes out… next year? I am totally for Joss having a voice, doing his work (which I enjoy for the most part) and advocating for his causes. But the left doesn’t necessarily give me the same tolerance that I give them.
          Used to be that I was a regular reader of an up and coming author, loved his blog, bought a bunch of his non-fiction books, supported him, etc. Then, some time last year, he wrote something about the tea party that was just hateful and full of mis-characterizations and untruths. Knowing that, I just… I can’t bring myself to go back there, and I’ll probably not buy any more of his books. Note: EVEN HERE, I’m attempting to exercise a degree of tolerance by a) not naming him, and b) emphasizing that it’s a personal decision – I don’t want him not to be able to support his family. I wholeheartedly support his ability to make a living and his right to say what he wants about who he wants. He’s just kicked me out of his audience is all. There’s a couple of people that’s happened with, but not many, thank G-d.
          c) So, while I understand that the lefties themselves may not be evil (good intentions, roads, etc.), and I wish them no harm, their ideas and their methods of attempting a stifling of debate ARE evil and must be addressed. And so here I find myself on the battlefield of ideas, engaged in what amounts to an ideological war. It’s absolutely true that I may not be interested in war, but THIS war has shown that for whatever reason it is interested in ME. And that’s where I am today.
          It happens that the hill I find myself on is the one labeled “science fiction and fantasy”. It’s not the only hill where this fight occurs. It just happens to be the one I’m on because I’d like to make a go of things as a science fiction / fantasy author. (I’m in my forties. I must be out of my stinking mind.) But the hill is swarming with lazy thinking, vile progressivism, and this desire to shut up and shut down people who believe what I believe and say what I say.
          What, then, am I to do? How, then, am I to act? And what responsibility do I have to others who may feel what I feel and not have the words to express it? Or who may have this sense that things are wrong, but can’t put their finger on why? What responsibility do I have to my family, to my descendants? What duty have I inherited from my parents, both biological and ideological?
          I am here on this field. Even now, I’m MUCH less vocal than I used to be, much less active and involved. Do I try and turn that around? Do I speak and attempt to strike down what I see as error? Or should I abandon the fight altogether and allow myself and those to whom I owe a duty to come a step closer to despair?
          Looking back over that, I’m thinking “Wow, that’s super melodramatic”. But make no mistake, this is ideological warfare. And I believe it needs to be fought.

          Like

          1. I actually think we have a number of similarities, Zachary. Please don’t mistake me. I hate what you’re describing the same way you do, mostly because I believe two things — one, we have free speech in this country for a reason. (Me, personally, I believe it’s so we can *learn* something.) Two, I think it’s wrong to muzzle others because they don’t believe the same thing you do, providing they’re not doing something like yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theatre or something so heinous that anyone with half a brain agrees it shouldn’t be tolerated. (I’m not even going to try to define it even further than that.)

            Because I’m left-of-center, people will sometimes come out of the woodwork and attack me for the same reason you feel attacked yourself. I am a Hillary Clinton Democrat — actually an independent — I like her, didn’t at first but watched what she did and how she did it, and I’m not ashamed to say that. But I tell you this not because I want you to agree with me (I know you don’t), but because as a HRC Dem I’ve seen all sorts of stupid things in the name of “party unity” since May 31, 2008.

            (This is the date of the infamous “Rules and Bylaws Committee Meeting” of the DNC, which made a terrible “compromise” that kept some of Mrs. Clinton’s delegates from her, gave Barack Obama a bunch of delegates he didn’t earn, and pissed off all the HRC Dems something fierce. It was at this time that we found out the Democratic Party really didn’t care about us — Mrs. Clinton battled to an effective tie in delegates, and the DNC was shutting us up. This did not sit well with me, then or now.)

            The Ron Paul supporters were just as muzzled as the HRC Dems were in 2008, this past year at the Republican National Convention. I’m well aware of how much support there was for Ron Paul, how little support there was for Mitt Romney, and how many of the Paul delegates were muzzled in the same way HRC Dems were muzzled.

            So I see many of the same things you do. Not from the same angle, no. But I see the same things, and dislike them as much as you do, for many of the same reasons you do.

            I’d say a lot more, but I don’t think this is the right forum to say it in. If you do FB, add me there and we’ll talk. (If you don’t, and you want to keep chatting about this, I’m willing to do it, but I don’t want to take up Sarah’s bandwidth to do it.)

            Like

    2. Oh yeah, one of my coworkers turned me onto Alan Dean Foster. In particular “A Call to Arms” and the rest of The Dammed series. I would have no hesitation recommending those to someone new to sci-fi who you want to enjoy their first taste.

      Like

      1. One of the things I got to cross off my bucket list is when I got a chance to interview ADF a few years ago (when he was putting out his non-fiction book about his travels), and we wound up talking about The Damned, which was a heck of a good read, IMHO.

        Of course, I’d probably point new readers to the Tar-Ayim Krang or For Love of Mother-Not. Or maybe Icerigger.

        Hmmm… I need to re-post that audio some place.

        Like

      2. He’s another really good one, BornLib.

        I forgot to mention my friend Stephanie Osborn’s work, too. She has written a number of excellent modern-day mysteries featuring Sherlock Holmes using the whole “world of myth” conception along with up-to-the-minute particle physics. Stephanie even came up with a worthy partner to Sherlock, Skye Chadwick, a hyperspatial physicist . . . those aren’t Stephanie’s only novels by a mile, but if you’ve a taste for mysteries, those are excellent.

        And yes, I have recommended them to readers who love mysteries but aren’t sure they really want to dip their toes into the SF end of the ocean just yet . . . and usually the readers come back and say, “Has she written any more?”

        Like

  31. BTW, I knew I was forgetting someone — Heinlein. Read many of his juvies at age ten, also . . . though I found very quickly I enjoyed the adult novels much, much more. (I first read “Time Enough for Love” at thirteen.)

    Entry-level readers need books that inspire and interest them. I don’t know if “Darkship Thieves” is an entry-level book or not because I’m not an entry-level reader any more.

    The ones I tend to recommend to people now, being written by contemporary writers . . . Lois McMaster Bujold, Sarah A. Hoyt, Katharine Eliska Kimbriel, Rosemary Edghill, all have books that I think are accessible to modern-day readers and will be understood. (I may point someone to a book that I think will work better than another by these authors, but all of ’em have _something_ that will intrigue a reader.) I also like Ryk Spoor, Eric Flint and Dave Freer, who also have a number of offerings that should interest and intrigue readers.

    This doesn’t mean there aren’t other books I’m going to recommend to those who *already* read SF — take it as read those seven authors are clearly at the top of my list — including those by Kate Paulk and Amanda S. Green, among others. There are. But those seven authors are the ones I’m sure nearly *anyone* will understand right away. (Clear as mud, no?)

    Like

  32. What? No love for William Gibson’s Neuromancer? 30 years after publication, and WE still haven’t caught up with it, yet it was damned prophetic.

    Laumer’s Retief series, already mentioned, would be a fine gateway.

    For those with an affection for rogues, Harry Harrison’s Stainless Steel Rat would be good.

    Like

    1. Neauromancer was influential, I’ll grant you. It was also, IMNSHO, a steaming pile of crap as a story. The worldbuilding is slipshod, the characterization is shallow at best, the plot is only semi-coherent. The themes (as I see them) are at odds with the Human Wave I strive for, but the quality of the story is poor without even considering that. The nihilistic pessimism of it… might actually make it a decent gateway drug for one of the literati, now that I think about it, but it’s still a lousy book.

      Why yes, the world is entitled to my opinion, and I do strive to see that entitlement fulfilled. :D

      Like

    2. Neuromancer was hugely innovative and influential, but it’s also dull. Masamune Shirow ripped Neuromancer off wholesale but I still vastly preferred Ghost in the Shell as cyberpunk.

      Like

      1. This. I tried reading Neuromancer and … I still keep hearing how good it is, so I’ll have to give it another go. But the first time I tried it came to me at a time when the publishers loooooooved tiny font and BIG FAT pocket books. I wear glasses with a high enough grade!

        Like

    3. Agreed on the Stainless Steel Rat series, up through at least the first four or five. Stainless Steel Rat is Born kind of lost me, but everything earlier than that was fantastic.

      Like

  33. As a reader, not a writer, I love Nathan Lowell’s Solar Clipper series, except for the ending. But he promises we’ll hear more from Ishmael Wang.

    Like

  34. It’s been a while so I can’t be certain but my sci-fi onramp was either Jurassic Park by Michael Crichton, Ringworld by Larry Niven, or The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams. No reason why they can’t do the job now just as well as back in my day.

    For fantasy my onramp was almost certainly The Hobbit.

    I kind of had a second wind of reading enthusiasm starting a decade ago, prompted by my reading Lord of Light by Roger Zelazny and The Curse of Chalion by Lois McMaster Bujold. So I would say those are great onramp books too.

    Like

Comments are closed.