4 ms·

> SF is pretty much always about the current day. SF is often speculative fiction that extrapolate current trends into the future - frequently taking them to t

> SF is pretty much always about the current day. SF is often speculative fiction that extrapolate current trends into the future - frequently taking them to their logic conclusion - to explore and critique. Good SF anyway.

throw1234651234 3y ago
Is it even worth reading? Genuine question. I thought it was campty sort of satirical old-timey stuff, but I never read it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- piperswe 3y ago
  Are you talking about Soviet sci-fi or speculative sci-fi? If the latter, there's plenty of speculative sci-fi worth reading. I'd recommend giving "I, Robot" a read - much of it is about reasoning through a sort of moral philosophy, through the lens of robotics.
- AlotOfReading 3y ago
  Sci Fi is often a way to talk about the present without getting bogged down in the minutae of accurate facts and "what's realistic" for critics. Whether that's worth reading depends on you. It's a big genre too, different authors and works don't all cover the same themes. If you want to see someone experience about what it's like to be a foreigner in a racist society, Arkady Martine's Teixcalaan series explores that. If you want to read an optimistic vision of how computation could look and what ethical implications follow from that (set against a massive backdrop of geopolitics), read Ian Banks's Culture series. If you want to read a discussion of how society shapes our thoughts and beliefs, read pretty much anything by Ursula K. Guin (though The Dispossessed comes especially to mind). If you just want to explore the implications of different physical laws, Greg Egan. And of course, there's plenty of the campy stuff too. You don't always need to read high-minded narrative philosophy with sci-fi if you don't want to.
  - avar 3y ago
    I'd like to second the Culture, but just to add (minor spoilers ahead) that it's also a distopian depending on your point of view, which makes it even better. In the Culture all real agency humanity has is lost to machines (Minds). Humans have about as much say in important matters in the Culture as dogs do in ours, when anything really important happens (e.g. the events of Excession) they're not even involved. For any individual human it's a utopia, I'd probably prefer to live in the Culture, but whether it's a good thing to aspire to is something the reader needs to decide for themselves.
    - consilient 3y ago
      > In the Culture all real agency humanity has is lost to machines (Minds). Humans have about as much say in important matters in the Culture as dogs do in ours. The Culture is explicitly a direct democracy, it's just that the books are mostly about what is effectively a somewhat-rogue intelligence agency's activities in other civilizations. > Politics in the Culture consists of referenda on issues whenever they are raised; generally, anyone may propose a ballot on any issue at any time; all citizens have one vote. Where issues concern some sub-division or part of a total habitat, all those - human and machine - who may reasonably claim to be affected by the outcome of a poll may cast a vote. Opinions are expressed and positions on issues outlined mostly via the information network (freely available, naturally), and it is here that an individual may exercise the most personal influence, given that the decisions reached as a result of those votes are usually implemented and monitored through a Hub or other supervisory machine, with humans acting (usually on a rota basis) more as liaison officers than in any sort of decision-making executive capacity; one of the few rules the Culture adheres to with any exactitude at all is that a person's access to power should be in inverse proportion to their desire for it. The sad fact for the aspiring politico in the Culture is that the levers of power are extremely widely distributed, and very short (see entry on megalomaniacs, above). The intellectual-structural cohesion of a starship of course limits the sort of viable votes possible on such vessels, though as a rule even the most arrogant craft at least pretend to listen when their guests suggest - say - making a detour to watch a supernova, or increasing the area of parkland on-board.
- dee-bee 3y ago
  Yes. I'm going to specifically recommend Octavia Butler, Kim Stanley Robinson, and Ursula Le Guin for particularly socially-focused fiction that is, in many ways, much more relevant to our current social issues than most contemporary fiction you can pick up off the rack. Not to knock fiction of course, but it can be hard to explore issues thoroughly while also delivering a believable and enjoyable story set in current times. For the campy stuff, people seem to really enjoy The Expanse, both the books and the tv show.
- globular-toast 3y ago
  What do you read? I pretty much only read science fiction. Are you thinking it's all like Star Trek or something? It's not.
  - throw1234651234 3y ago
    See above, public apology to everyone. Meant to reply to "Stirlitz, the Russian James Bond" specifically. I read most "good" sci fi I can get my heads on. To me it goes something like Stephenson, Vernor Vinge, Gibson, Harry Harrison for the "campy" stuff, Asimov very much in that order, though I know I will be crucified for putting Asimov last. Then there are good one-offs like The Forever War, Ender's Game, the Oumuamua book (whatever the actual title is). I specifically dislike The Three Body problem and the fact that modern Nebula awards can no longer be trusted. Out of historical fantasy, the Merlin Trilogy by Mary Stewart is absolutely amazing, at least as a teenager. Which reminds me that "The Nine Princes in Amber" is horrible. Hopefully someone recommends something.
    - globular-toast 3y ago
      That's a shame about The Three Body Problem. I have it on my list to read. There's a chance I might like it, of course, but because you said you like The Forever War I think perhaps not. Where would you start with Neal Stephenson? Have you read Iain M. Banks?
      - throw1234651234 3y ago
        Snow Crash is definitely the place to start with Stephenson, but it's also a bit dated at this point and in many ways seems like his least "visionary" book. Stephenson went very much from a balance of style and substance to the latter over time, and it gets a bit tedious. Anathem and Diamond Age are pretty good too. From there, you will have enough context to figure it out. As far as The Three Body Problem - it's ok and starts off really strongly, but then just completely falls apart. I have not read Iain M. Banks, what do you recommend as a start?
- pjc50 3y ago
  I find it hard to understand how anyone could possibly be this dismissive about something they have no experience of, in public? OK, so some of it is campy adventure pulp, but fortunately someone's collated the best and most long-lived works into the SF Masterworks series for people to pick from. Phillip K Dick would probably get the same kind of praise as Joyce if he hadn't been ghettoized as "SF".
  - throw1234651234 3y ago
    I meant to comment on "Stirlitz, the Russian James Bond" specifically, not all of Sci Fi (you can see me recommending Russian Sci Fi" in another response here from yesterday. Pretty big mistake on my part and people have been pretty understanding given the misconception!

throw1234651234 3y ago

Is it even worth reading? Genuine question. I thought it was campty sort of satirical old-timey stuff, but I never read it.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
piperswe 3y ago
Are you talking about Soviet sci-fi or speculative sci-fi? If the latter, there's plenty of speculative sci-fi worth reading. I'd recommend giving "I, Robot" a read - much of it is about reasoning through a sort of moral philosophy, through the lens of robotics.
AlotOfReading 3y ago
Sci Fi is often a way to talk about the present without getting bogged down in the minutae of accurate facts and "what's realistic" for critics. Whether that's worth reading depends on you. It's a big genre too, different authors and works don't all cover the same themes. If you want to see someone experience about what it's like to be a foreigner in a racist society, Arkady Martine's Teixcalaan series explores that. If you want to read an optimistic vision of how computation could look and what ethical implications follow from that (set against a massive backdrop of geopolitics), read Ian Banks's Culture series. If you want to read a discussion of how society shapes our thoughts and beliefs, read pretty much anything by Ursula K. Guin (though The Dispossessed comes especially to mind). If you just want to explore the implications of different physical laws, Greg Egan. And of course, there's plenty of the campy stuff too. You don't always need to read high-minded narrative philosophy with sci-fi if you don't want to.
- avar 3y ago
  I'd like to second the Culture, but just to add (minor spoilers ahead) that it's also a distopian depending on your point of view, which makes it even better. In the Culture all real agency humanity has is lost to machines (Minds). Humans have about as much say in important matters in the Culture as dogs do in ours, when anything really important happens (e.g. the events of Excession) they're not even involved. For any individual human it's a utopia, I'd probably prefer to live in the Culture, but whether it's a good thing to aspire to is something the reader needs to decide for themselves.
  - consilient 3y ago
    > In the Culture all real agency humanity has is lost to machines (Minds). Humans have about as much say in important matters in the Culture as dogs do in ours. The Culture is explicitly a direct democracy, it's just that the books are mostly about what is effectively a somewhat-rogue intelligence agency's activities in other civilizations. > Politics in the Culture consists of referenda on issues whenever they are raised; generally, anyone may propose a ballot on any issue at any time; all citizens have one vote. Where issues concern some sub-division or part of a total habitat, all those - human and machine - who may reasonably claim to be affected by the outcome of a poll may cast a vote. Opinions are expressed and positions on issues outlined mostly via the information network (freely available, naturally), and it is here that an individual may exercise the most personal influence, given that the decisions reached as a result of those votes are usually implemented and monitored through a Hub or other supervisory machine, with humans acting (usually on a rota basis) more as liaison officers than in any sort of decision-making executive capacity; one of the few rules the Culture adheres to with any exactitude at all is that a person's access to power should be in inverse proportion to their desire for it. The sad fact for the aspiring politico in the Culture is that the levers of power are extremely widely distributed, and very short (see entry on megalomaniacs, above). The intellectual-structural cohesion of a starship of course limits the sort of viable votes possible on such vessels, though as a rule even the most arrogant craft at least pretend to listen when their guests suggest - say - making a detour to watch a supernova, or increasing the area of parkland on-board.
dee-bee 3y ago
Yes. I'm going to specifically recommend Octavia Butler, Kim Stanley Robinson, and Ursula Le Guin for particularly socially-focused fiction that is, in many ways, much more relevant to our current social issues than most contemporary fiction you can pick up off the rack. Not to knock fiction of course, but it can be hard to explore issues thoroughly while also delivering a believable and enjoyable story set in current times. For the campy stuff, people seem to really enjoy The Expanse, both the books and the tv show.
globular-toast 3y ago
What do you read? I pretty much only read science fiction. Are you thinking it's all like Star Trek or something? It's not.
- throw1234651234 3y ago
  See above, public apology to everyone. Meant to reply to "Stirlitz, the Russian James Bond" specifically. I read most "good" sci fi I can get my heads on. To me it goes something like Stephenson, Vernor Vinge, Gibson, Harry Harrison for the "campy" stuff, Asimov very much in that order, though I know I will be crucified for putting Asimov last. Then there are good one-offs like The Forever War, Ender's Game, the Oumuamua book (whatever the actual title is). I specifically dislike The Three Body problem and the fact that modern Nebula awards can no longer be trusted. Out of historical fantasy, the Merlin Trilogy by Mary Stewart is absolutely amazing, at least as a teenager. Which reminds me that "The Nine Princes in Amber" is horrible. Hopefully someone recommends something.
  - globular-toast 3y ago
    That's a shame about The Three Body Problem. I have it on my list to read. There's a chance I might like it, of course, but because you said you like The Forever War I think perhaps not. Where would you start with Neal Stephenson? Have you read Iain M. Banks?
    - throw1234651234 3y ago
      Snow Crash is definitely the place to start with Stephenson, but it's also a bit dated at this point and in many ways seems like his least "visionary" book. Stephenson went very much from a balance of style and substance to the latter over time, and it gets a bit tedious. Anathem and Diamond Age are pretty good too. From there, you will have enough context to figure it out. As far as The Three Body Problem - it's ok and starts off really strongly, but then just completely falls apart. I have not read Iain M. Banks, what do you recommend as a start?
pjc50 3y ago
I find it hard to understand how anyone could possibly be this dismissive about something they have no experience of, in public? OK, so some of it is campy adventure pulp, but fortunately someone's collated the best and most long-lived works into the SF Masterworks series for people to pick from. Phillip K Dick would probably get the same kind of praise as Joyce if he hadn't been ghettoized as "SF".
- throw1234651234 3y ago
  I meant to comment on "Stirlitz, the Russian James Bond" specifically, not all of Sci Fi (you can see me recommending Russian Sci Fi" in another response here from yesterday. Pretty big mistake on my part and people have been pretty understanding given the misconception!