posted
Star Trek / Star Wars books are STILL better than @#$%*ing GOOSEBUMPS.
After years of fighting series books, librarians came around to the viewpoint of "Hey, at least the kid is reading SOMETHING." Because it seems as though a lot of people who read series books might not read regular novels.
Why this is, I don't know. Lots more kids read "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" who wouldn't have been willing to read books half that size before him.
And sometimes lowly series books are jumping-off points to other books. Kids who liked Harry Potter often ended up checking out the Chronicles of Narnia. Some people decide to read certain books because they were authored by the author of a media tie-in... or am I the only person here who went from "Imzadi" to "Sir Apropos of Nothing"?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Judging by sales figures, yeah, just about. Not so much with David, who's sort of a mini-multimedia force, but guys like Michael Kube-McDowell are forced to post pleas to Usenet asking fans of his Star Wars books to pick up just one copy of his non media efforts too.
(I'm almost certain this was Kube-McDowell, but I also thought I remembered him mentioning it on his webpage, and nothing there appears. So I suppose it could be an elaborate illusion.)
At any rate, he has mentioned that only a tiny percentage of people purchase media tie-ins based on the author's name, though I couldn't tell you where he was gathering his statistics.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I usually find that ST novels are not worth the money spent. They are so contrived that it takes no imagination to read one so, 9 or 10 bucks for 3-4 hours of unimaginative reading is not worth it. But I live in a relatively small town and the SF bookshelf is filling with this stuff rapidly. It is hard to find many new SF novels on the shelf. I also find myself going more and more to used book store. They usually have a better selection.
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:(I'm almost certain this was Kube-McDowell, but I also thought I remembered him mentioning it on his webpage, and nothing there appears. So I suppose it could be an elaborate illusion
I believe that your actually refering to Michael Stackpole web page as you can see here.
As to media tie in versues science fiction, James Blish is probabley better known for his TOS novels then his Cities in Flight series.
Of course orginal science fiction might do better if most of it wasnt just Vingean/Banks rehshes. Take Chasm City by Alister Reynolds for instance, there's a sub plot about the Hero and all the nasty things he's done and how he ins't who he says he is. The whole thing comes of as a cheap Use of Weapons rip off. Of course the fact that alot of the classic stuff isn't in print dosen't help, I mean I've been lucky in the fact that the used book store near where I worked carried some classics and hard to get stuff (The war aganist the Chotorr by David Gerrolds, Fury by knutter, the Flandry Series by Anderson, the Sector General stuff by James white)otherwise I never would have read any of them.
Of course here in Australia the media tie-ins are usually stuck on single half shelf and are about 4 years old means that the public does see the science ficton stuff, expect it's drowned out by multi-part Fansty series.
So are media tie-ins the end of science fiction? No I'd look eslewhere(Future Shock?)
Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Trek books are not IMO as good as non-media sci-fi; some of them can be quite a good read but they're not on the same level as some of the 'hard' sci-fi out there. I'm not sure what it is really; perhaps it's that the characters who work well on TV don't work quite as well on paper. I often wonder what an ST novel written by Stephen Baxter or Kim Stanley Robinson would be like...
One thing I've never really understood; where does all the anti-sci-fi bias come from?
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Those are very interesting points, Hunter, though I confess I'm not quite smart enough to discuss them. I take it you're refering to the Banksian "nastyness"? I can't say I've seen that being overused, but then I'm not as current as I should be.
As for Vinge...are you speaking of the Singularity here? It does seem to be a constant these days, but then a lot of authors (and others) are convinced that any science fiction that's going to be relavent has to address that issue.
Re: popular bias against science fiction: Well, that's sort of what my rant was about. People think science fiction is disposable garbage because that's the most visible sector.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I know it's not much help, but pretty much the only tie-in novels I pick up now are PAD's, and he's not as good as he used to.
The thing is, fantasy seems to have a similar image, only instead of being swamped with tie-in novels, you're swamped with "Demon Sword: Book 1 in the 'Bloody Fanny' Saga" on every shelf.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:The thing is, fantasy seems to have a similar image, only instead of being swamped with tie-in novels, you're swamped with "Demon Sword: Book 1 in the 'Bloody Fanny' Saga" on every shelf.
With no end in site, Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series has been going on for years and years.
P.S. Captain Mike did I get the book title format correct this time, I know how anal you are about that.
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Sol, that was one hell of a long post.... but quite right....
Nobody has mentioned Larry Niven.... and his follow-on writers....
The boob-tube generations need to kick the habit... I am still waiting for a patch for that....
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
quote: I take it you're refering to the Banksian "nastyness"?
To a large degree, yes. Admitdley it seems much more prevalant in the new Britsh authors then any where else.Plus there some of them who attempt to mimic Banks writting style. A good example of both is Chasm City by Alastair Reynolds, as I mentioned above. Of course most of them also seem to have left wing politics as well(a reaction to Thatchers polices?)So they all seem a little samey, now in some case thats forgivable such as Ken Mcleod, who I understand is a friend of Banks, but I want something new.
quote: As for Vinge...are you speaking of the Singularity here?
Again yes. The problem I have with a lot of the stories around it is that they have touch of almost religous overtones, in the sense that with the right technology there will be a new heaven and a new earth, not to mention a new humanity. They also seem to grossly over state the ability of the technology i.e. Nanotech is the most offten abused in that it is fast,requires no power or supplies, produces no excess heat or allows magical abilites(Trek does the same thing adimttdly). Something else that bothers me about it is how they forget about physical limatons. A good example is Moore's law, which is often used to prove how close we are to the singularity, states that proccesor speed increases every eighteen months and gets cheaper(actually by now its closer to twelve months)which means in about 15 years we should have a proccesor wilth more connections then a human brain. The only problem is that in about a deacade (less due to various factors) the pysical limit to chip size will be reached. Whilest there optronic and quantam computing may alivate that problem they're bound to have physical limits of their own.
quote: I often wonder what an ST novel written by Stephen Baxter or Kim Stanley Robinson would be like...
As long as it's Baxter form his Xelee-Anti Ice-Voyage-Timeships period and not from his Titan-Wholly Mammoth on mars peroid, then it might be fun.It would probaley cover the univerise and have something to do with the laws of physics. So something about supersymmetry breaking down due to warp dirves and wierd alien life from subspace? As for Kim Stanley Robinson can't say I paricular like him (I have heard that his lates Alt-histroy thing is good) but a colony peice might be intersting. It might be possible to get a hard science writter in to trek some have done it before i.e. Greg Bear, James Blish, George Zebrowski. One of the easiset to ask would probably be David Brin, who I think is a Trek Fan(is it in Startide Rising about all engineers being scottish?) and has done some trek work I think.
As to fantasy, would I be stoned if I said I have all of the WOT Books and am looking forward to the next one ? Personaly there does seem to be to much of it on the shelves and lot of it is the same(expilitly so in the case of David Eddings, who has far as I tell has written the same trilogy three or four times.)Beside there are Fanatsy medi-tie ins, I mean I've seen alot of people reading those Fellowship of the Rings movies novelazations
I cant speak of Larry Niven, as I think that I've only read one short story of his(About a hotshot pilot who is hired by an earth spy to find out why ships have been disapering before reaching earth. it turns out to be a short guy from a high grav world who cant get laid and is therfore using his pet black hole to destory earth ships). As to turning off the tv I have seen reports that tv use among 18-25 year olds is falling as they are logging on to the 'net more.
As to Star Trek novels I have read worse origanl science fiction. I've never wanted to burn the book or at the very least have the bad guys massacre the "Good Guys" from reading them. Nor have I found them to be exercises in "I have a degree in Physics and you don't" like some books(Cosm by benford? about a reascher who makes a proto universe and then does nothing for large portion of the book)with very little plot. Which I suppse is the point, no point doing something outrageous id it is all invaldiated in nex weeks episode. Of course the recent stuff seems better in that respect as there are new episodes to worry about.
Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
quote: [QUOTE] I often wonder what an ST novel written by Stephen Baxter or Kim Stanley Robinson would be like...
As long as it's Baxter form his Xelee-Anti Ice-Voyage-Timeships period and not from his Titan-Wholly Mammoth on mars peroid, then it might be fun.As for Kim Stanley Robinson can't say I paricular like him (I have heard that his lates Alt-histroy thing is good) but a colony peice might be intersting.
Actually, I thought Titan was quite good, although slightly farfetched. I couldn't actually bring myself to look at the mammoth books...
Perhaps the story of the Trek universe's Martian colonisation programme...
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Personally, I can't stand Robert Jordan's writing style. And be careful about heaping all Trek and Star Wars books in the same pile. I personally love the original Han Solo trilogy by Brian Daley, as well as quite a few Trek books over the years. A Stitch In Time is one of the best I've ever seen from the franchise.
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Why the frell is my last post, and possibly this one, in bold? I didn't ask for bold, and it looks frelling ugly.
Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
? Personaly there does seem to be to much of it on the shelves and lot of it is the same(expilitly so in the case of David Eddings, who has far as I tell has written the same trilogy three or four times.)Beside there are Fanatsy medi-tie ins, I mean I've seen alot of people reading those Fellowship of the Rings movies novelazations ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
