Science Fiction

[Dark Muse]

I don't think of myself as really being a Science Fiction reading, but when I think about it, there are books which can be classified in the science fiction genre which I have read and have enjoyed so I don't know if I can really say I don't read Sci-Fi but I do think I am very trepidatious about the Sci-Fi genre, and have certain assumptions and prejudices about it. When I think of Sci-Fi I think of Star Trek, which just isn't really my thing.

I have always had more of a preference for Fantasy over Sci-Fi. I find exploring worlds molded after the past more interesting to read than venturing into the future. I like mythological creatures better than extra-terrestrial ones, and I like magic better than fancy high-tech.

But I do love Dystopian Fiction which is a Sci-Fi sub-genre, I am a fan of the works of H.G. Wells, and even though I know she denies being considered Sci-Fi, I like Atwood's works.

I have recently started reading the Lathe of Heaven by Ursula K. Guin and so far I am enjoying it.

So as I do begin to dip my toes into this pool, I am interested in recommendations for Science Fiction works for someone who is uncertain about the genre.

I don't want anything too "hard core" for lack of a better word.

I do tend to gravitate towards Futuristic type stuff and I like Post-Apocalyptic situations and settings.

[Iain Sparrow]

The best recommendation I can give you, a book that I absolutely loved... The Diamond Age: Or, A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer, by Neal Stephenson. Technically speaking it's Science Fiction, a bit post-cyberpunk/steampunkish but not overly so... but actually reads more like a gritty fantasy tale.

And btw, don't feel bad about not being into Star Trek.
Between Star Trek and Star Wars, and all the crap spinoffs of video games, the SF genre has been dying a slow death. In general SF doesn't get much respect from the literary world, and in most cases in doesn't deserve any respect.

Hope that helps.

[TheFifthElement]

I wouldn't have called dystopian fiction a sub-genre of science fiction. Mostly dystopian fiction deals with political issues so I'd consider this a political genre.

What science fiction does really well is explore real world issues in an environment which seems removed, and so can reveal a kind of 'truth' by presenting an unfamiliar setting. This is something the TV series Battlestar Galactica (recent version - very, very good) achieves extremely well. It also helps to explore scientific ideas and has been the source of a number of scientific developments like geosynchronous orbits and the three laws of robotics.

I expect that you would enjoy the work of China Mieville, whose work is probably best classified as cyberpunk. J G Ballard is also good, particularly The Drowned World which predicts global warming and its outcomes. There is also Crash which is (literally) auto-erotic, in which he explores humanity's relationship with the machine in a quite...graphic way.

In the more 'hardcore' science fiction books like To Your Scattered Bodies Go by Philip Jose Farmer and The Mote in God's Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle are good for bridging the gap between soft and hard science fiction. Both are interesting and enjoyable, particularly Mote. The work of Philip K Dick is also more borderline. Asimov's robot stories are interesting. I've heard good things about Ursula K LeGuin, but haven't read her work yet. I also understand that Anne McCaffrey is pretty good though she swings between fantasy and science fiction in her work.

[kev67]

In the more 'hardcore' science fiction books like To Your Scattered Bodies Go by Philip Jose Farmer and The Mote in God's Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle are good for bridging the gap between soft and hard science fiction. Both are interesting and enjoyable, particularly Mote. The work of Philip K Dick is also more borderline. Asimov's robot stories are interesting. I've heard good things about Ursula K LeGuin, but haven't read her work yet. I also understand that Anne McCaffrey is pretty good though she swings between fantasy and science fiction in her work.

I read that book about twenty-five years ago. I thought it was very good. The other books they co-wrote were pretty good too. I was surprised my step-mother liked Lucifer's Hammer, while a family friend picked up and read The Legacy of Heorot. Larry Niven was better at the science. His Ring World books were good, but sometimes I found his characters and plots a bit flip.

I am wary of science fiction books which are really only covers for alternative histories or fantasy. In one instance, a civilization has landed on a planet centuries ago, some terrible war or disaster occurred which reset their civilization back to the Iron Age, and now they are re-living Medieval Europe. In the other instance, the fall out from a nuclear war has caused groups of people to mutate into races resembling elves, dwarfs, orcs and such like. Then there are some sci-fi books in which the protagonist just flits from planet to planet, shooting up his adversaries with his lazer cannon. I am a bit sniffy about science fiction books that do not contain any science.

I read William Gibson's Neuromancer several years ago, which was one of the first examples of the cyberpunk sub-genre. I decided I did like this genre because I could not follow who was doing what to whom. It might have been better written as a graphic novel.

I am mulling over reading some historical science fiction, in particular H.G. Wells' The Time Machine. I listened to a radio series about science fiction in which the presenter's hypothesis was that in writing science fiction, authors were really expressing anxieties about their own times. I read Jack London's People of the Abyss a few months ago, in which London describes the conditions of the East End of London in 1903. He describes how misshapen and brutish many of them appeared to be. At the time thinkers such as Herbert Spencer were applying Darwin's theory of evolution to human beings, and were worried the human species would degenerate because the stupid and brutish were out-breeding the educated and refined. The Time Machine is an extrapolation of these anxieties. It might also include some criticism of the class divides and the unequal distribution of wealth. Socialism was in the air. In The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, the Robert Owen character regularly complains about how much money the upper and middle classes receive for doing relatively easy or unimportant tasks, while the workers were forced to sweat for starvation wages.

[Paulclem]

What science fiction does really well is explore real world issues in an environment which seems removed, and so can reveal a kind of 'truth' by presenting an unfamiliar setting. This is something the TV series Battlestar Galactica (recent version - very, very good) achieves extremely well. It also helps to explore scientific ideas and has been the source of a number of scientific developments like geosynchronous orbits and the three laws of robotics.

I expect that you would enjoy the work of China Mieville, whose work is probably best classified as cyberpunk. J G Ballard is also good, particularly The Drowned World which predicts global warming and its outcomes. There is also Crash which is (literally) auto-erotic, in which he explores humanity's relationship with the machine in a quite...graphic way.



I think the exploration of current ideas is defnately one of sci fi's strengths, though I HG Wells linked this too closely in The Time Machine to the evolution of the working masses. It ended up being not very relevant to the extent that the two films had to radically alter the causes of the development of the Morlock's to reflect more relevant trends - Nuclear war and environmental damage respectively.

Iain M Banks' book "Surface Detail" explores the concept of heaven, hell, the end justifying the means and punishment very well within the context of virtual worlds.

[PeterL]

You might look at the works of G. C. Edmondson, Roger Zelanzy, and C. M. Kornbluth. Zelazny mostly wrote Fantasy, so his Science Fiction isn't far from that. Kornbluth wrote social and political comment novels; try to find "Not This August" and "Marching Morons"; his short sdstory "The Little Black Bag" is very famous, but Kornbluth died some years ago, so his works are not frequently published any more. Edmondson did not bless the world with many books, but "The Ship That Sailed the Time Stream", "To Sail the Century Sea", "The Aluminum Man", and others were great, and I mean truly great. I wouldn't be surprised if "The Ship That Sailed the Time Stream" won't be regarded as the greatest novel of the 20th century in the future; I'll have to wait and see.

[user name]

Arthur C. Clarke said, "If someone does not like Science Fiction, there is something wrong with them".

[user name]

You might look at the works of G. C. Edmondson, Roger Zelanzy, and C. M. Kornbluth. Zelazny mostly wrote Fantasy, so his Science Fiction isn't far from that. Kornbluth wrote social and political comment novels; try to find "Not This August" and "Marching Morons"; his short sdstory "The Little Black Bag" is very famous, but Kornbluth died some years ago, so his works are not frequently published any more. Edmondson did not bless the world with many books, but "The Ship That Sailed the Time Stream", "To Sail the Century Sea", "The Aluminum Man", and others were great, and I mean truly great. I wouldn't be surprised if "The Ship That Sailed the Time Stream" won't be regarded as the greatest novel of the 20th century in the future; I'll have to wait and see.

I've been a Science Fiction reader all my adult life and have never read any Kornbluth.
Maybe I will soon be thanking you for your recommendations?
I shall look for the Aluminium Man as well.

[Dark Muse]

Thank you everyone so far for the great response, I will have to start looking up some of these books and no doubt I will soon have compiled myself yet another list of books to read, which is one of the things I love about this group.

[Dark Muse]

I wouldn't have called dystopian fiction a sub-genre of science fiction. Mostly dystopian fiction deals with political issues so I'd consider this a political genre.

I think that Dystopia is pretty widely associated with being linked to the Sci-Fi genre, it you look up Sci-Fi genres, Dystopia fiction is usually listed as being a sub-genre as Sci-Fi.

Though I can understand why someone may not agree with that classification many of the Dystorpian books I have read do have Science Fiction elements to them and are usually set in a futuristic setting and deal with advanced technology.


I really enjoyed The City and The City by China Mieville and am curious to read more works of Mieville's but not sure where to start next, can you give some good recommendations?

[Dark Muse]

Iain M Banks' book "Surface Detail" explores the concept of heaven, hell, the end justifying the means and punishment very well within the context of virtual worlds.

I have a couple of Iain M Banks books that are a part of his Culture series. Does it matter what order these books are read in?

[Calidore]

I have a couple of Iain M Banks books that are a part of his Culture series. Does it matter what order these books are read in?

They're standalone, but it probably wouldn't hurt to start with the first two (Consider Phlebas & The Player of Games) as an introduction. Those two sold me completely on the series.

You might like Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle's novel Lucifer's Hammer, which is a post-apocalyptic novel following the survivors of a massive comet impact upon Earth. And while it isn't sci-fi, The Stand by Stephen King is excellent.

[Dark Muse]

They're standalone, but it probably wouldn't hurt to start with the first two (Consider Phlebas & The Player of Games) as an introduction. Those two sold me completely on the series.

You might like Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle's novel Lucifer's Hammer, which is a post-apocalyptic novel following the survivors of a massive comet impact upon Earth. And while it isn't sci-fi, The Stand by Stephen King is excellent.

Thank you for the info. I loved The Stand.

[Iain Sparrow]

I think that Dystopia is pretty widely associated with being linked to the Sci-Fi genre, it you look up Sci-Fi genres, Dystopia fiction is usually listed as being a sub-genre as Sci-Fi.

Though I can understand why someone may not agree with that classification many of the Dystorpian books I have read do have Science Fiction elements to them and are usually set in a futuristic setting and deal with advanced technology.


Dystopian themed stories fall into what's called "Alternate History", and that is usually considered Science Fiction. A perfect example is Nineteen Eighty-Four. No real wizbang technology in 1984, people and places are familiar, the setting is in the future (when Orwell wrote it) but beyond that it's a cautionary tale of 'what-ifs'.

[Iain Sparrow]

I have a couple of Iain M Banks books that are a part of his Culture series. Does it matter what order these books are read in?


If you're not really-really-really into SF you may want to think twice about Iain Banks and his Culture books.
They're very hardcore SF and in a narrative style that isn't for everybody. I've read Surface Detail and The Hydrogen Sonata and at times was lost. You sort of have to just let the story wash over you sometimes, and not expect everything to make sense.

[PeterL]

I've been a Science Fiction reader all my adult life and have never read any Kornbluth.
Maybe I will soon be thanking you for your recommendations?
I shall look for the Aluminium Man as well.

The Aluminum Man is hilarious.

Kornbluth is certainly worth reading.

[Dark Muse]

If you're not really-really-really into SF you may want to think twice about Iain Banks and his Culture books.
They're very hardcore SF and in a narrative style that isn't for everybody. I've read Surface Detail and The Hydrogen Sonata and at times was lost. You sort of have to just let the story wash over you sometimes, and not expect everything to make sense.

Thanks for the heads up, I might at least attempt the book I already happen to own just to see.

[Iain Sparrow]

Thanks for the heads up, I might at least attempt the book I already happen to own just to see.


Yeah, the Culture novels aren't the best entry level drug into the SF genre.:)

You may also want to stay clear of "golden age" sf. I noticed some recommendations by others that were written way back in the 50s, 60s and 70s, and simply put, they weren't written with young women in mind. Horribly sexist, subtly racist, and usually pretty silly. The modern era stuff is much, much better.

[Paulclem]

Thanks for the heads up, I might at least attempt the book I already happen to own just to see.

I recently re-read the Player of Games, which is a good read. The Guardian Book club recently discussed Use Of Weapons by Banks:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/audio/2012/oct/12/iain-banks-book-club-podcast

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/jul/27/use-of-weapons-iain-banks-bookclub

I did like Surface Detail for its exploration of virtual possibilities - virtual wars to resolve conflicts and virtual hells for punishment.

I was a bit disappointed with Hydrogen Sonata, but that was because I enjoyed Surface Detail so much.

The Algebraist was a quirky and fascinating book, and my introduction to Banks' work. I really liked it.

The Culture novels are stand alone - as has been said, and posit a very ordered, safe super computer run environment for humans to live. The stories are set at the edges of this civilisation in brutal and often totalitarian planets which draw culture citizens to them in the same way that we are drawn to the fiction of these conflicting worlds. I wouldn't describe them as hard core sci fi, though perhaps I'm thinking of Hard Science there. The advanced culture technology acts as a kind of techno-magic - there are a lot of assumptions such as the possibility of "copying" minds in case of sudden death on a mission. Bodies can be regrown again, but the plots are interesting with lots of ideas and speculations. There are a few space opera ones such as Excession. I did like this too, but it depends upon taste.

I enjoyed The City and The City by Mieville - it is odd and fascinating too. I don't know if much interpretation has been done upon it, but I read it as a metaphor for the differences that exist within a society - or city - in the contrasts between the two.

You might like Perdido Street Station - a sprawling book which is hard to classify - dystopian, steampunk, sci fi, fantasy - all the labels fit parts of it. There is a word for it which I have forgotten, but it is multi-genre. I also liked The Iron Council by him, which grew on me as it progressed. That too is set in the same sprawling city. Mieville is well known for his socialist views, and these are evident in this book, though to cite it as political is to really address only a part of it.

[desiresjab]

The short book by Stanislaw Lem The Futurological Congress is a wondeful satire of not Science Fiction, but a future society reminiscent of directions today. Like all great satire, the book is a howl.

[Vota]

1. Dune by Frank Herbert. This is a sci-fi must read. Has strong elements of economics, politics, geology, theology and more in it.
2. Rendezvous With Rama by Arthur C. Clarke. Humans meet alien object. They explore the object. Classic first encounter type book.
3. Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein. Pre-Vietnam war pro-military training and aliens combat book with political/social tones. Classic.
4. The Forever War by Joe Haldeman. Post-Vietnam war book about soldiers fighting aliens in space. The book is a futuristic allegory about Vietnam. Classic.
5. Sphere by Michael Crichton. Alien craft encountered. Lot's of stuff happens inside. WAY better than the crappy movie.
6. The Stars My Destination by Alfred Bester. The Count of Monte Cristo in the future, with tattoos and psi powers. Bad *** classic.
7. Altered Carbon by Richard K. Morgan. Hard edged cyberpunk detective novel. Imho, classic.
8. Wool by Hugh Howey. Post-apocalyptic novel with an intelligent and pragmatic female protagonist. Good stuff.
9. The Player of Games by Iain M. Banks. Space chess/classic board game "War" on steroids and more. Fantastic.
10. The Night's Dawn Trilogy by Peter F. Hamilton. If I remember this is like a +3000 page trilogy, but imho, one of the most engrossing sci-fi reads I have ever read. The pages flew by for me.

[Calidore]

If you're not really-really-really into SF you may want to think twice about Iain Banks and his Culture books.
They're very hardcore SF and in a narrative style that isn't for everybody. I've read Surface Detail and The Hydrogen Sonata and at times was lost. You sort of have to just let the story wash over you sometimes, and not expect everything to make sense.

I don't think of Banks' Culture books as "hardcore SF", though I haven't read the two you cited. His earlier ones at least fall IMO well into the category of space opera. They are detail-heavy (Banks was both highly intelligent and very imaginative), but I always found them very accessible. They're also very funny.


1. Dune by Frank Herbert. This is a sci-fi must read. Has strong elements of economics, politics, geology, theology and more in it.
2. Rendezvous With Rama by Arthur C. Clarke. Humans meet alien object. They explore the object. Classic first encounter type book.
3. Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein. Pre-Vietnam war pro-military training and aliens combat book with political/social tones. Classic.
4. The Forever War by Joe Haldeman. Post-Vietnam war book about soldiers fighting aliens in space. The book is a futuristic allegory about Vietnam. Classic.
5. Sphere by Michael Crichton. Alien craft encountered. Lot's of stuff happens inside. WAY better than the crappy movie.
6. The Stars My Destination by Alfred Bester. The Count of Monte Cristo in the future, with tattoos and psi powers. Bad *** classic.
7. Altered Carbon by Richard K. Morgan. Hard edged cyberpunk detective novel. Imho, classic.
8. Wool by Hugh Howey. Post-apocalyptic novel with an intelligent and pragmatic female protagonist. Good stuff.
9. The Player of Games by Iain M. Banks. Space chess/classic board game "War" on steroids and more. Fantastic.
10. The Night's Dawn Trilogy by Peter F. Hamilton. If I remember this is like a +3000 page trilogy, but imho, one of the most engrossing sci-fi reads I have ever read. The pages flew by for me.

1. I found Dune a total snore, but it's an acknowledged classic of the genre, so feel free to take my opinion with a grain of salt.
3. Haven't read this one, and I'm not much of a Heinlein fan in general, but I did enjoy The Puppet Masters a whole lot (though some of the writing of women and man-woman relations can be generously called dated). I remember Tunnel in the Sky, about a high school survival class final exam going very wrong, being pretty good also.
4. Forever War is good, though it's also straight-up military SF, so I don't know if it's what Dark Muse is looking for.
9. Still my favorite of the Culture books I've read.
10. Night's Dawn was terrific, but Hamilton is even more detailed than Banks, and this trilogy does require very attentive reading to keep up with it.

Haven't read the others Vota listed, though I'm not at all a Crichton fan.

[Paulclem]

I don't think of Banks' Culture books as "hardcore SF", though I haven't read the two you cited. His earlier ones at least fall IMO well into the category of space opera. They are detail-heavy (Banks was both highly intelligent and very imaginative), but I always found them very accessible. They're also very funny.


I thought they were very accessible too. Another British writer is Neal Asher who has written quite a few sci fi actioners. The best one was The Voyage of the Sable Keech with an elaborate, exciting plot and a story full of ideas.

I read and enjoyed Dune and a number in the series and a few years ago I returned to his son's Brian Herbert and Kevin J Anderson's writing. He's continued the Dune writing, but has gone back to do prequels such as House Corrino, House Harkonnen and House Atreides. They are less mystically influenced and are very accessible.

I started the Night's Dawn trilogy enthusiastically. The first book was excellent. I don't know why but the appearance of Al Capone put me off the second book. I completed it, but have not gone for the third instalment yet. I will probably read it sometime, but I was a bit disappointed. Great ideas and a thumping plot too.

A surprise was both Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C Clarke and Solaris by Stanislav Lem. Rendesvous was hard sciece but exciting and speculative. Solaris was reflective and more thoughtful about how unfathomable the alien entity may be.

[kev67]

I was reading a bit about C.P. Snow's famous Two Cultures speech today, in which he said he had been at a gathering of humanities academics where conversation had turned towards the lamentable literacy of their scientific colleagues. Snow complained that that was all very well, but their knowledge of science was hardly any better than their stone age ancestors. Ask them what the 2nd law of thermodynamic was and they'd just look blank, yet not knowing that would be the scientific equivalent of admitting you had never read a play by Shakespeare. I think things have changed since then. Even so, you could argue that science fiction was a way of bridging the two cultures. The only problem to me about that is that most science fiction has very little scientific explanation in it. It might as well be called magic fiction. One author I know who does not exactly write science fiction, but writes books that discuss technology is Ian McEwan. Solar was about a physics professor who steals an idea for synthetic photosynthesis from a PhD student. I would say that was almost science fiction. He wrote another book called The Innocent about an electronics engineer engaged on spying under the Berlin Wall.

[mal4mac]

J G Ballard is a must read if you want post-apocalyptic dystopian fiction - The Drowned World, as someone said, is a key work, but there's also Super-Cannes, The Wind from Nowhere, and several others... He drew on his childhood experience of Singapore under Japanese occupation. I read his auto-biography recently and that's also superb. John Wyndham is another dystopian Brit. worth reading - Day of the Triffids, The Midwich Cuckoos,...

[Calidore]

I started the Night's Dawn trilogy enthusiastically. The first book was excellent. I don't know why but the appearance of Al Capone put me off the second book. I completed it, but have not gone for the third instalment yet. I will probably read it sometime, but I was a bit disappointed. Great ideas and a thumping plot too.


Capone surprised me too, but then I thought, well, why not? Maybe that's just local pride from a lifelong Chicagoan. Anyway, he's a pretty good character here. I can wholeheartedly recommend finishing the trilogy.


John Wyndham is another dystopian Brit. worth reading - Day of the Triffids, The Midwich Cuckoos,...

It's sad that Wyndham is mostly forgotten now; his work was consistently very good.

[mortalterror]

Try these lists: http://www.npr.org/2011/08/11/139085843/your-picks-top-100-science-fiction-fantasy-books and http://scifilists.sffjazz.com/lists_books_rank1.html

I'll personally vouch for:
Dune
Enders Game
1984
Stranger in a Strange Land
Fahrenheit 451
Neuromancer
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
Slaughterhouse Five
Snow Crash
Lord of Light
Cat's Cradle
The Day of the Triffids
I Am Legend
Old Man's War
Starship Troopers (though the first chapter was the best part)
A Canticle for Liebowitz
Ringworld (could have been better)
The Forever War ( a little high on the list like Ringworld but not bad)
Midshipman's Hope (not on either list but a favorite of mine nonetheless)

[kimchi]

In the case of the OP I would recomande.

To say nothing about the dog by Connis Willis

Seeker by Jack Mcdevitt

A little suprised not to see Peter Watts rifter trilogy or John Varley millenium in this list seems to be close of what the OP is liking without being hardcore the ways banks is.

[Paulclem]

Capone surprised me too, but then I thought, well, why not? Maybe that's just local pride from a lifelong Chicagoan. Anyway, he's a pretty good character here. I can wholeheartedly recommend finishing the trilogy.



It's sad that Wyndham is mostly forgotten now; his work was consistently very good.

It was consistent with the returning dead, but I felt that the author was basically lazy to do this. On the other hand I finished it, and it was enjoyable in parts - though not as good as the first part. I think it must be difficult to keep the ideas fresh in sci fi, once the environment has been established, then it's down to the quality of the story.

I enjoyed Wyndham too - particularly The Trouble with Lichen, which was a very thoughtful book on an aging population.

My son and I are currently collecting the Gollancz Sci Fi Masterworks, which is a great way to catch up with some brilliant authors such as Pohl Anderson and the less well known of Philip K Dick's novels. My son intends to keep the collection - I've given up due to the constraints of space for a library.

[qimissung]

Enchantress from the Stars by Sylvia Engdhal. It's for young adults, but it is really good. Also Ender's Game.

[kev67]

Capone surprised me too, but then I thought, well, why not? Maybe that's just local pride from a lifelong Chicagoan. Anyway, he's a pretty good character here. I can wholeheartedly recommend finishing the trilogy.



It's sad that Wyndham is mostly forgotten now; his work was consistently very good.

I am not sure Wyndham is forgotten. Quite a few Booktubers (YouTubers who post videos about books) seem to read his books.

[Paulclem]

I did try an Asimov once but found it incredibly boring and difficult to get into. Perhaps I didn't give it enough time.

Another trilogy I've tried is David Bryn's Uplift Trilogy. I've read 2 of them and I intend to complete the third at some point. He's described as hard science, but I didn't feel that this limited the imaginative scope of the novels. The second is set on a water planet with a spaceship that is piloted by genetically modified dolphins who have been uplifted by humans and share command and responsibility. There's a fair bit of space opera in there too. A great read.

[luhsun]

Which asimov's work did you read, Paulclem?

[Paulclem]

Which asimov's work did you read, Paulclem?

I don't recall except that it was The Foundation or one of the Foundation series.

[luhsun]

I started with foundation's edge..complicated and gaia was a disappointment (technological supremacy and mental supremacy defeated by hippy sai baba) , but i suppose he was trying to insert the robots by hook or by crook. Foundation (the first book) was the best book in the series, in my humble opinion.

[kev67]

I have been looking up some top 100 sci fi lists. They are quite interesting lists. Enders Game often appears near the top, which is a book I hadn't heard of before. It surprises me some of the books that are listed as science fiction, even excluding fantasy books like The Hobbit and the Disc World series, which I consider part of a separate genre. Watership Down is sometimes listed as a science fiction book - why? It's about rabbits leaving one warren to establish another. What's science fiction about that? To me, it is odd to see The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy listed as science fiction, as I regard it as a comedy. To be fair, it does have more science in it than many so-called science fiction books. For example, the infinite improbability drive was a joke on quantum mechanics. The dystopias seem more a separate genre too. I would only tenuously regard 1984 as science fiction.

Still, I am in the mood for reading a few more science fiction books, when I can find the time. On my mental list is The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula Le Guin (shelved under G not L in the local bookshop) and The Day of the Triffids by John Wyndham. Which Arthur C Clarke and Issac Asimov book would you recommend, as I do not want to read an entire series. Oh yes, and Frankenstein too.

[Helga]

I love science fiction, both on tv and in literature and most of the classics have already been mentioned so I am going to mention a book I guess not many if any here have read 'Lovestar' it's by an author from the ice: http://www.amazon.com/LoveStar-Novel-Andri-Snaer-Magnason/dp/1609804260/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1402152503&sr=8-1&keywords=andri+snaer+magnason

this is one of the islands best authors and this book is brilliant, also his children book 'The Blue Planet'

a brilliant work of sci-fi from the ice

[mal4mac]

I have always had more of a preference for Fantasy over Sci-Fi. I find exploring worlds molded after the past more interesting to read than venturing into the future. I like mythological creatures better than extra-terrestrial ones, and I like magic better than fancy high-tech.

Try Dragonflight by Anne McCaffrey. It fits all these categories, and is great fun. I read it as teenager and again recently (several decades later!) and was surprised how well it held up. Don't expect the depth of characterisation found in Atwood, it is pure SF after all :), but the story zings along. As fantasy escapism it works really well! If you like it, the sequel Dragonquest is up to the same standard, there's a bit of a falling off after that, so only continue if you *really* like those two and just have to read more.

[kev67]

You may also want to stay clear of "golden age" sf. I noticed some recommendations by others that were written way back in the 50s, 60s and 70s, and simply put, they weren't written with young women in mind. Horribly sexist, subtly racist, and usually pretty silly. The modern era stuff is much, much better.


Here (http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/jun/17/old-school-sci-fi-sandra-newman) is a defence of those books.

[Poetaster]

I am not sure Wyndham is forgotten. Quite a few Booktubers (YouTubers who post videos about books) seem to read his books.

He's been included in the Masters of Sci-fi series now, he might not be widely read but forgotten he is not.

[kev67]

He's been included in the Masters of Sci-fi series now, he might not be widely read but forgotten he is not.

I am reading his Day of the Triffids. It seems strangely dated, but then it would.

[Poetaster]

I am reading his Day of the Triffids. It seems strangely dated, but then it would.

I'm really not surprised. I've actually not read it myself, but I've been tempted by it on more than one occasion. I've been tempted to read his Chrysalids too - so much to read, so little time.

[kev67]

Started reading Ursula LeGuin's Left Hand of Darkness. It's an odd thing with science fiction that it's a genre with strongly identifiable sub-genres or recurring themes. For example, Day of the Triffids was a post-apocalyptic story. It reminded me of a book I read a couple of years ago by Terry Nation called Survivors, which was alright. Small bands of survivors try to find a way of living without descending into barbarism. Triffids was better, although the plot was more unlikely. It had a strong cold war vibe about it. I am only three chapters into Left Hand of Darkness, but it reminds me of a book by Iain M Banks called Inversions. In both a visitor from a more advanced planet has arrived on a planet in which the civilization has reverted to feudalism. Inversions was a pretty good book.

[Pumpkin337]

An author you may not think of as sci-fi or as a sci-fi writer is Edgar Rice Burroughs - Barsoom series

You can try Alan Dean Foster - Pip and Flinx or some of his other books such as Alien, Cyborg, or Alien Nation (and if those sound like movies ... well he was the author)

Julian May - Pliocene Exiles and Galactic Milieu series

Audrey Niffenger - Time Traveller's Wife doesn't immediately say 'sci-fi' and yet it is.

Phillip Pullman (Dark Materials) skirts the border between sci-fi and fantasy.

Carl Sagan's Contact is a good read

Old but good authors are Clifford D. Simak and Robert Silverberg and L Modesitt Jnr

Any of Sherri S. Tepper's books will give you an excellent intro into the sub-genre of sci-fi dealing with feminist gender issues.

[kev67]

Just finished Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula Le Guin. That is a strange book. I recommend it though. It's a bit like science fiction meets John Le Carré meets queer literature.

[Nick91]

I have been looking up some top 100 sci fi lists. They are quite interesting lists. Enders Game often appears near the top, which is a book I hadn't heard of before. It surprises me some of the books that are listed as science fiction, even excluding fantasy books like The Hobbit and the Disc World series, which I consider part of a separate genre. Watership Down is sometimes listed as a science fiction book - why? It's about rabbits leaving one warren to establish another. What's science fiction about that? To me, it is odd to see The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy listed as science fiction, as I regard it as a comedy. To be fair, it does have more science in it than many so-called science fiction books. For example, the infinite improbability drive was a joke on quantum mechanics. The dystopias seem more a separate genre too. I would only tenuously regard 1984 as science fiction.

Still, I am in the mood for reading a few more science fiction books, when I can find the time. On my mental list is The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula Le Guin (shelved under G not L in the local bookshop) and The Day of the Triffids by John Wyndham. Which Arthur C Clarke and Issac Asimov book would you recommend, as I do not want to read an entire series. Oh yes, and Frankenstein too.

I find it a bit strange that you would distinguish Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy as a comedy and not science fiction. Can't it be both? Science fiction is after all not necesarilly focused mainly on future tech, space ships etc. It can also just be a story set in a time and place where technology is more advanced than it presently is. It can be used to showcase humanity from a different perspective, or to explore a variety of social structures (Iain M. Banks' Culture series comes to mind). Sci-fi that has a specific focus on technology and science is usually called hard science fiction, at least if the hypothetical tech and science is well researched and grounded in actual, real world science.

1984 on the other hand features fantastic (for it's time) technology; mass surveilance, real time rewriting of history. Besides it is set in the future, which in my admittedly quite loose definition of Sci-fi definitly makes it at the very least halfway science fiction in and of itself.

I do agree with you about Watership Down though, because it is in no way, shape or form science fiction. I feel pretty safe putting a big, fat fantasy lable on it. And yes, the border between science fiction and fantasy is getting increasingly murky with every passing year, but not that murky!

[kev67]

I find it a bit strange that you would distinguish Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy as a comedy and not science fiction. Can't it be both? Science fiction is after all not necesarilly focused mainly on future tech, space ships etc. It can also just be a story set in a time and place where technology is more advanced than it presently is. It can be used to showcase humanity from a different perspective, or to explore a variety of social structures (Iain M. Banks' Culture series comes to mind). Sci-fi that has a specific focus on technology and science is usually called hard science fiction, at least if the hypothetical tech and science is well researched and grounded in actual, real world science.

To me the comedy subverts the science fiction. It is difficult to imagine a comedy crime novel or a comedy horror novel. Science fiction generally takes itself quite seriously. Science fiction authors have a difficult tas in making an alternative world seem plausible. That is not to say that characters in sci-fi books cannot have a great sense of humour.



1984 on the other hand features fantastic (for it's time) technology; mass surveilance, real time rewriting of history. Besides it is set in the future, which in my admittedly quite loose definition of Sci-fi definitly makes it at the very least halfway science fiction in and of itself.


Part of the trouble I have with regarding 1984 as science fiction is that the technology in the book is hardly more advanced than the time in which it was written. Television cameras were not widespread in 1948/9 when the book was written, but they had been invented. Apart from the surveillance technology, hardly any other aspect of technology had changed. By the same dint, Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go does not seem like science fiction either. By contrast, Brave New World seems far more like science fiction.

[Nick91]

To me the comedy subverts the science fiction. It is difficult to imagine a comedy crime novel or a comedy horror novel. Science fiction generally takes itself quite seriously. Science fiction authors have a difficult tas in making an alternative world seem plausible. That is not to say that characters in sci-fi books cannot have a great sense of humour.

Well, I guess we have different opinions in the matter, to me it seems strange to draw such a distinct line between comedy and something else; black humor could for example i some cases be comedy-horror. Whether it's called comedic science fiction or science comedy or whatnot doesn't really matter, it has space ships, advanced technology, galactic government, aliens and it is funny in -here comes the point- that context. The comedy often comes from the main character, Arthur Dent, being cast into to him alien and unfathomable situations, places, ideas and possibilities. Sure, the situations are mostly in and of themselves comedic in nature, but they are also squarely in sci-fi territory; time travel, gigantic murderous robots, interstellar travel, aliens etc. Just because science fiction in general takes itself very seriously doesn't mean Hitchhiker's Guide to the galaxy isn't sci-fi, it just means that it's unusual. Sci-fi as a genre has come to a point where it's progenitors, Asimov, Verne, Wells, would hardly recognize it. There is such an endless amount of subgenres in sci-fi, and fantasy for that matter, endless combinations and mergings of different genres, that it to me seems faulty not to include comedy in that merry family.


Part of the trouble I have with regarding 1984 as science fiction is that the technology in the book is hardly more advanced than the time in which it was written. Television cameras were not widespread in 1948/9 when the book was written, but they had been invented. Apart from the surveillance technology, hardly any other aspect of technology had changed. By the same dint, Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go does not seem like science fiction either. By contrast, Brave New World seems far more like science fiction.

Yes, the technology might not be so strange. But 1984, and other dystopian fiction isn't hard science fiction, its more social science fiction. Concepts like superstates, mass brainwashing, real time history revision, the eradication of the individual. Science fiction doesn't just take the technology into account, but also the manner in which it is used. Newspeak, the language Orwell invented, is for example science fiction through and through, every last syllable.
Now, that doesn't mean that I would put 1984 squarely into a folder, put a stamp on it and say: this is science fiction - THE END-, but you won't ever hear me say that it isn't science fiction. Because it is, but it is also many other things; it is a novel which, to me at least, falls into that ever expanding borderland of sci-fi, a grey zone; where all the interesting things happen.

[Nick91]

Whoops, double post, sorry!

[New Secret]

3. Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein. Pre-Vietnam war pro-military training and aliens combat book with political/social tones. Classic.


Starship Troopers was a real great action sci-fi book and I enjoyed the movie a lot when I was a teen. I discovered Robert Heinlein early on when I was getting into sci-fi. What really impressed me was "Stranger in a Strange Land" because at that time I was getting obsessed with the planet Mars and read all the library fictions that were on the shelf and looked at all the space photo albums. (I owned a text book published in 1951 that claimed it was scientific fact that people with wings on their backs lived on Mars and there were drawings to prove it.)

"Stranger in a Strange Land" was impressive because it was about a human raised under the Martians brought back to Earth. The main character had magical powers that made him godlike (but every Martian had) and he actually came to own half of Earth all on his lonesome. Things about this book that I disliked were all the religious references and the incorporation of hippy free love propaganda leftish foolishness. (It was written and published at the end of the 60s if I remember correctly.) One of the characters is based on Hugh Hefner and there are a lot of other pop-culture tie-ins with this novel that set it apart from it's contemporaries. The mentality of the main character is a real mind trip because he does not think like a human and Robert Heinlein did a great job of making him convincingly so. Considering all the science fictions that I read as a teen this one always stands out in my memory. I must've read it six or seven times.