I’m fond of reading. In fact, I recommend it. There’s no better way to avoid talking to weirdoes on the bus. Reading is good for you and everybody says so, even LeVar Burton, and he should know. Despite a visual impairment, he rose to the rank of chief engineer on a starship. I know these things because of how much I read.
Since the day Shakespeare ghostwrote the Bible for King James, we Anglophones have regarded reading as big stuff. But there’s no way you can read everything. Scientists calculate that it would take twelve hundred clones of Burgess Meredith—with fully functioning spectacles—a minimum of four hundred years just to read all the Count Saint-Germain novels.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t have that kind of time. So it’s only natural that if you wish to present yourself as a well-read person, a certain degree of complete bullshit is required. There’s no shame in lying about what you’ve read. There’s only shame in getting caught. Then you look like a doofus, and an illiterate one at that. And there are few things upon which the literate world heaps more scorn than doofi.
When dealing with science fiction and fantasy fans, it’s especially crucial to avoid accidental self-doofication. As a general rule, one must appear to have read everything ever written. Fail to do so and you’ll instantly be bombarded with statements of disdain. “Oh my fucking god, you haven’t read Cryptonomicon? What are you, Amish?”
And so, lest we be tarred with such stinging epithets, we must learn to lie. Allow me to teach you my five simple rules for lying about books.
Rule #1: Change the Subject
When engaging in the secret art of literary bullshittery, the goal is to change to subjects as quickly as possible to something you actually do know a lot about. It’s not necessary to appear to be an authority on everything in a sustained dialogue. If you’re talking to someone who wrote a doctoral thesis on the use of Platonic philosophy in Ubik, but you’ve never read it, don’t start jabbering on about the Theory of Forms. Your chicanery will be exposed like a senator in a public restroom. Mention instead that you once saw an image of Philip K. Dick on a tortilla.
Rule #2: Be a Psychologist
While waiting for the opportune moment to steer the topic toward something you know about, pretend the person you’re talking to is your patient and you are an analyst. Say “Hmm” and “Really?” a lot, and “Why do you say that?” and “How does that make you feel?” This is called active listening but could just as well be called, getting ready to hijack the conversation. When a salient point comes along, pounce on it. “I see what you’re saying, and that’s exactly why I always wanted to be a cyborg.” Presto, the conversation is yours.
Rule #3: Don’t Be Negative
Some folks get the notion that ignorance is best camouflaged by aggressive displays of being a dick. They think the best thing to do is to gesticulate madly, yelling, “Watership Down? I wouldn’t wipe my sphincter with Watership Down!” This is the literary equivalent of a cornered lizard unfurling its neck frill and hissing. It doesn’t mean the lizard has read the book.
Rule #4: Carry a Picture of a Kitten in Your Wallet
You’re at a room party at a convention and find yourself in a totally indefensible position, surrounded by unyielding fantasy experts perseverating on Anne McCaffrey. They all want to know what you think of Rengades of Pern. You begin to sweat. Should you jump off the hotel balcony or punch one in the face and jet down the hall? Then you remember the picture of the kitten in your wallet. It’s a tabby covered in spaghetti. You whip it out and they all go “aww.” Every one of them has at least four cats at home. It’s going to be OK.
Rule #5: Remember Titus Alone
Sometimes your only recourse is to out-lit-nerd your opponent, to bring up something they haven’t read. For this, there’s no better ammunition than the third book of the Gormenghast series. Why? Because no one has ever read it. Not even Mervyn Peake himself. He wrote it while drunk in the late 1950s and couldn’t remember a word. His editor supposedly cut big parts of it, but the truth is he just didn’t read it. They printed it anyway since there was a paper surplus that year. The person who wrote the wikipedia page is guessing. (I’m sure someone in the comments section of this post will claim they’ve read it. It’s all right. I won’t contradict you. Your secret is safe with me.)
These five rules will cover up your ignorance in most cases. A little additional help is required to bullshit yourself out of a conversation about a few particular authors, though, so I’m offering more specific information. Feel free to add your own suggestions.
Sir Terry Douglas Pratchett Adams: Rumored to be two people, Sir Terry D.P. Adams is a British humorist famous for Hitchhikers Guide to Discworld and posthumously granted knighthood for his ongoing work with endangered monkeys. Influenced by P.G.K. Wodechesterhouserton, he is a confirmed atheist who might believe in God.
Isaac Asimov: If you stack all the books Asimov wrote end-to-end, bring a parachute. The best thing about such a prolific author is you can just make up a book. People mostly talk about the Foundation series, but you can invent your own. Call it The Subatomic Monster. No, wait, that’s a real title.
Octavia E. Butler: Conversations about Butler generally revolve around vague references to race and gender issues. The vagueness, here, is a clear indicator that they haven’t read her either, so you’re safe. If you come across a serious, specific and detailed discussion of Butler, which may or may not include race and gender, just nod a lot and wait it out. If you don’t know anything about race or gender, you’re probably a sentient Dixie cup and whom you have or haven’t read is the least of your concerns. Your kitten photo will be of little use.
Neil Gaiman: Make up a humorous anecdote about the time you met him. This method is readily accepted because everyone knows someone who claims to have met him. Talk about how nice he is and how he’s fascinated by whatever it is you actually want to talk about. “There I was, in the hotel bar of the Atlanta Sheraton, practicing my Tuvan throat singing, when along comes this British guy and he busts out a perfect Dumchuktaar. It was Neil Gaiman. Turns out he’s half Mongolian. Nice guy!” This also works for Tim Powers.
Frank Herbert: My brother would be repulsed to learn that I’ve never read Dune. I’ve gotten around this gap in my reading by watching the movie and proclaiming that it was nothing at all like the book. No one has ever questioned this statement.
Ursula Le Guin: She’s won more awards than you’ve had hot mistakes. She’s most famous for A Wizard of Earthsea, which I may have read. She also writes poetry. Memorize this one and recite it to anyone who doubts you’re a big fan. Crows are the color of anarchy / and close up they’re a little scary. / An eye as bright as anything. / Having a pet crow would be / like having Voltaire on a string.
H. P. Lovecraft: The basic idea is that what you don’t understand will drive you insane and/or devour you or mate with you and it’s probably wet and gibbering and full of tentacles and this is also what he thought of Black people and Jews.
Neal Stephenson: If Stephenson comes up in conversation, ask the people around you if Stephenson is cyberpunk or post-cyberpunk. Let them battle it out while you eat corn chips. Also, sometimes Stephenson has this really amazing beard. It’s like a wizard beard. It’s the kind of beard you could defeat Flash Gordon with, or yell “Alakazam!” in all seriousness. Sometimes he trims it, which is disappointing.
J. R. R. Tolkien: You saw the movies, right? All you need to know is there’s no dwarf tossing in the book and no Tom Bombadil in the movies. Tom Bombadil is a sort of immortal hippy. For extra credit, mention that the loneliness of the Ents makes you sad.
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 01:42pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 01:43pm EDT
Thursday May 28, 2009 01:44pm EDT
Oh, and Tim Powers really is a nice guy. I remember one time I was on a panel with him at Baycon....
Thursday May 28, 2009 01:46pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 01:50pm EDT
Thursday May 28, 2009 01:51pm EDT
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:09pm EDT
I've tried to read the dude, but he leaves me cold. But there are legions of his fans hijacking every conversation. Help me. Please. I beg you.
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 02:14pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 02:16pm EDT
3
Tim Powers is the nicest person in the history of publishing, I think. And an excellent throat singer.
4
I'm sure he was just pretending. Maybe using it as a meditation technique.
5
You are being far too honest. Have I taught you nothing?
6
Tor declined my novel a while ago (very graciously, I might add. Nicest rejection ever!) but hey, any other publishers out there who are interested? Hmm? You don't have to actually read it. Just publish it and pretend you love it. I'll be satisfied.
7
Perhaps the best technique for bs-ing about King is to employ the Dune method and complain about how the movies are nothing like the books. This works well.
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:16pm EDT
Well, almost. I will allow as how Titus Alone is eminently forgettable, except for the fact that it made little or no sense. You are certainly safe in claiming to have read it, since even those who have read it probably don't remember much and will therefore be unable to catch you out.
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:19pm EDT
And yes, the lonliness of Ents makes me sad. However when they wreck Saruman's tower, they are bad ass.
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:20pm EDT
Gene Wolfe
If a conversation about whether or not Wolfe's narrator is unreliable in a given book is too much for you, you can always divert the conversation away by bringing up how he invented Pringles (or the machine that makes Pringles, or that cool metal can, or a far-future citadel made entirely of said cans).
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 02:26pm EDT
I really wish you had a picture of the beard that could defeat Flash Gordon so I could imitate, and then defeat Flash Gordon wannabes.
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:34pm EDT
So... I'm the guy to avoid at cons. But you knew that.
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 02:37pm EDT
Good point. Also, you could always start a diversionary argument among listeners by comparing the Lynch version and SciFi Channel version.
12
Pringles! What a vast, unparalleled contribution to science fiction fandom! Oh, little salty potato saddles of joy.
13
good pic of it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Neal_Stephenson_2008.jpg
14
Look at this while I flee:
http://www.sonolta.com/sony-photos/d/1020-3/_DSC2291_beautiful+white+kitten
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:44pm EDT
Thank you.
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:47pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 02:53pm EDT
Thursday May 28, 2009 02:56pm EDT
And, I did meet Neal Gaiman once, almost, sort of. We were in the same room at San Diego ComicCon, and he walked by me close enough to reach out and touch (but I didn't do it).
And I thought about reading The Cryptonomicon. i did read Snow Crash and The Diamond Age, and Neuromancer and Burning Chrome. (You see how hip I was back in the 90s?)
Um, where can I get some good kitten pictures for my wallet?
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 03:04pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 03:10pm EDT
Thanks everso.
Thursday May 28, 2009 03:21pm EDT
Ambrosial stuff for the brain.
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 03:39pm EDT
Is that really Goodkind? Please, for his claim at being an adult male, say thats not him.......OMG hahahah
Thursday May 28, 2009 03:46pm EDT
I've met Tim Powers once. He did indeed come off as nice and intelligent, but I know nothing of his throat singing skills I'm afraid. I was attending a con in Tulsa. When I met him it was late. I was half asleep and more than a little drunk. I wish I could remember the conversation I had with him because in my half conscious state it seemed very enjoyable. I had to apologize to him for not being able to finish the conversation and I hope I actually finished the apology before my head actually hit the table.
As for Terry Brooks, The Sword of Shannara was such a blatant rip-off of The Lord of the Rings that anyone who doesn't realize this has not read both. I refuse to read anything written/stolen by Terry Brooks again.
Thursday May 28, 2009 03:52pm EDT
This was a brilliant blog, thank you!
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 03:57pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 04:39pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 04:46pm EDT
And many thanks and kudos to Archne Jericho for turning me onto the Fanwank Wiki. Many fun times.
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 04:52pm EDT
Back away slowly or hope you have something better than a Garfield Cartoon in your wallet?
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 04:53pm EDT
I've read it, of course. What did you think of it?
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 04:57pm EDT
Thursday May 28, 2009 05:23pm EDT
And another piece of advice: Read Alice in Wonderland. You can steer any conversation in a suitable direction by commenting on some aspect of the story.
Alice does seem to be a lot more lonely than the ents, yet it doesn't make us sad, does it?
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 05:45pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 06:32pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 06:36pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Thursday May 28, 2009 06:57pm EDT
Thursday May 28, 2009 07:51pm EDT
Friday May 29, 2009 06:11am EDT
"Gravity's Rainbow only really starts to make sense the third time you read it."
When hearing that line, the brain of Cthulhu itself began to melt.
There may be some person on the planet not reduced to gibbering by this line Probably a refugee from some animist Siberian minority hiding in a cave deep under the Urals since Czarist times, teaching each generation to read and write from the single sacred text, the collected works of Dostoevsy. Asked by this weird and eldricht creature, what that sense can be, just say one word: perihelion. Then touch your lips with a trembling finger.
Works for me.
Friday May 29, 2009 07:50am EDT
Friday May 29, 2009 08:32am EDT
I hope this finds you well. I can agree with the comparisons, however I have read both and prefer the easier read of Terry Brooks that J.R. Tolkein.
To say that it is a blatant ripoff is a bit harsh. I also want you to look at the shannara series, It currently has over 20 titles related to it, all by the same man, spanning many generations. Do you think J.R. could have continued his series and have been as successful?
I think if you continued the series, you would have an appreciation for it, and I think you may end up liking it. Take care
Friday May 29, 2009 09:23am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 09:37am EDT
eltonshane and Terry Brooks Fan: what looks from a distance like a rip-off may turn out at closer inspection to be a genre convention. Agatha Christie wrote many books about how a clever private detective with a stupid sidekick outwits a stupid police detective. She stole this idea off Conan Doyle, who stole it off E.A. Poe. Her fans are well aware of this, and don't mind; it's the more specific details of her plots which are new. I'm sure something similar is true of Tolkien and Brooks.
Friday May 29, 2009 09:57am EDT
My advice? Take a four week vacation and read something fat by Pynchon. Gravity's Rainbow or Against the Day for real masochists. (Not three times, please, Barista). If anyone has the temerity to ask, 'Yes, but what does it mean?' remember that Pynchon, like so much modern fiction resists traditional forms of exegeis. Shorthand for 'I haven't a clue' and a riposte that works pretty well for pretty much anything on your syllabus written since 1910.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 09:58am EDT
But certainly it's a lot more hilarious to say that he wrote his final book "while drunk." I look forward to more wonderfully funny gags about the illnesses and disabilities of SF and fantasy authors, here on Tor.com.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:08am EDT
Your reaction startles me, I must say. I wasn't making fun of anyone's disabilities. Why on earth would I make fun of someone for having Parkinson's?
I got the "drunk while writing" idea from Stephen King, who wrote Cujo in a blackout (or so he says in On Writing). As for Peake's suffering from Parkinson's, this is the first I've heard of it. My comments were meant as a joke about a ponderous and difficult to read book, and no more than that.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:20am EDT
Usually the humour in this sort of thing comes in revealing a deeper truth about the thing being parodied, and I don't see that here at all.
But my real problem with it is that the attitude that seems to pervade it that anyone who takes books and reading seriously deserves to be mocked, that people who talk about books are only doing it as a form of pretentious social competition, not because we really love books and care about them.
This bothers me, because books, and conversation about books, matter a lot to me. There's already so much of this kind of thing, so many people who do despise people who take books seriously, who despise anyone who reads, and doubly despise anyone who reads SF. I'm sorry to see this sort of thing here, and even more sorry that we're at 42 responses with nobody saying a word against it.
Obviously I should relax and take a joke at my own expense that feels like being kicked in the teeth, but I'll save that for something funnier.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:34am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:35am EDT · amended on Friday May 29, 2009 10:38am EDT
Thanks for the Buzz kill
EDIT:
AND @ 47 and @ 46. Like the police and a fun party.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:37am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:39am EDT
There are other genres, and categories of human activity, where this is equally true.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:41am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:46am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:49am EDT
But, as PNH and Jo brought up, this was a roast more than a parody. Now, I love roasts, but hot damn can they be pretty mean, and I have to wonder "these are that guy's friends?" I think it says something for thick skin that the GoH at a roast can take it, but at the same time, is it really that funny?
I have to wonder, if this same post had come from someone who is "amazingly well read" (or at least claimed to be), and was giving a guide to the "pleabs" that could not keep up, would it have seemed as offensive, or would the "in good humor, taking a shot at myself" have won out?
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 10:59am EDT
Do you feel better? Now that thats out of your system, do you feel better? lol I thinks its funny you have taken this much offense and are now lashing out at us. I will allow you to throw your tantrum. Place you in your room and allow you to pitch your fit in there. Once you have calmed down, maybe you'll lighten up a bit.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 11:00am EDT
If the post had come from the "well read" this conversation would not be occuring. Lets go back over to the reread Fife.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 11:03am EDT
Friday May 29, 2009 11:38am EDT
making assumptions about why other people don't agree is really inappropriate, but personally i thought this was pretty good parody, written by an affirmed sf fan. seems to me it says more about the fears of the less-well-read than about the behavior of the more-well-read, anyway.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 11:38am EDT
Yes, that would be possibly offensive to the "lesser beings", but in the end, jokes typically do have a butt, someone of whom they are at the expense. Gods know that I am probably going to burn in seven different theological hells for all the things I can find funny, even if I know they are hideous, inappropriate things to laugh it.
Friday May 29, 2009 12:00pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 12:19pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 12:44pm EDT
Jose Vasconcelos Library in Mexico City. I've never been there, but I'd love to go. Beautiful, isn't it?
Friday May 29, 2009 01:27pm EDT
wave my kitten pictures and back quietly away.
Friday May 29, 2009 01:51pm EDT
Friday May 29, 2009 02:43pm EDT
Friday May 29, 2009 02:49pm EDT
Friday May 29, 2009 04:01pm EDT
I have to admit that I am somewhat stunned at your negative response here. The post isn't roasting those who take books seriously. Nor is it being any more critical of literature than anyone else might be (I am sure you have read published stuff you found horrible - my favorite on that is D. Steele). What is being criticized is the amazing vitriol heaped on people who haven't read a body of work that someone else thinks is brilliant. And yet we, as fans and professionals, still have to live in this world of folks who are building their own little value structure and imposing it on others to make themselves feel better. last time I checked that is called bullying, and *no one* can deny that fandom is full of literary bullies.
We all have felt the sting of condescention. My Lit profs in University would have scoffed at any of body of work in the Sci-Fi or Horror genere as "great literature". Fortunately, I think most of them were complete twits who hadn't figured out that material written post 1900 can be "great literature". But I still had to manage them to get my degrees. I took this post to be much of the same thing. Note the line at the beginning of the post: "...there are few things upon which the literate world heaps more scorn than doofi." I am sure that the attempt not to look like a doofus in ones social circles is something you would understand. Everything else in the post is nothing more than literary criticism, which you yourselves level at authors every time you decide not to publish.
Now don't get me wrong - I have spent *a lot* of money with TOR. And I like pretty much everything from Bob Asprin thru Misty Lackey all the way to Tolkien. But that doesn't mean that I can't appreciate the wry humor when someone calls a good friend of mine's Myth series mind candy. From a academic lit crit perspective, it is! I still read it over and over.
I am disappointed in the fact that you who are in the business of writing and editing missed the point of the post. One that was made at the beginning even! What do you do to avoid being condescended to when around people whos opinion you (however slightly) value? All the rest is literary opinion which you can disagree with, but is hardly mean spirited.
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 04:09pm EDT
Friday May 29, 2009 04:20pm EDT
The post is about a situation we've all found ourselves in from time to time--we're talking to people who are knowledgeable about a certain subject, and we don't want to look like an idiot.
Friday May 29, 2009 04:51pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday May 29, 2009 05:16pm EDT
OTOH, I can see why this hit PNH and Jo crossways. If you've spent your life being marginalized for loving something, some jokes will never ever be funny. E.g., I can't laugh at "stupid Southerner" jokes.
OTGH, I wish to mention that the noun meaning "the action of making oneself look like a doofus" is properly "self-doofification." Please see the two preceding paragraphs for an example of the process.
*I'll cop to getting halfway through my Gormenghast omnibus and putting it down, fully intending to read it later. Four years on, my intentions haven't changed.
Friday May 29, 2009 07:28pm EDT
Saturday May 30, 2009 04:07am EDT
I also have never read Cryptonomicon. Woot for being Amish!
I sorta saw this post as poking gentle fun at the person who has to one-up their acquaintances or deride them for their lack of knowledge. I've not usually run into this in the book world--probably because I AM the person going, "Get thee to a library before I revoke your nerd card,"--but I am put in mind of the sort of folk who get very upset when you admit to not knowing who this or that indie band is. Hipster cred be damned!
(And as a potential mockee, I still found it mostly amusing.)
VIEW ALL BY · Saturday May 30, 2009 11:52am EDT
I didn't have Patrick and Jo's reaction, but I don't take well to "how dare you not laugh at X" for any value of X. Also, who on Earth is this "uncrowned king" who is nobly giving Patrick permission to say things on Tor.com?
VIEW ALL BY · Saturday May 30, 2009 01:29pm EDT
Personally I found the post totally hilarious, mostly because I've been on both sides of the setup. Also because I've grown up enough to refrain from taking myself too seriously. Also because I've grown up enough to refrain from taking other people too seriously if we disagree. There you have it. On a forum like this, if it bothers you to the point of raising your blood pressure, don't read it. Pretty simple, really. Even if you work for Tor.
VIEW ALL BY · Saturday May 30, 2009 02:26pm EDT
That said with that exception I found the post very funny. I definitely sympathize with the underlying dilemma, even though my reaction is to just admit I haven't read the book. And sometimes this does result in the interlocutor responding with astonishment and making me feel rather dull.
However, it's probably preferable to lying reading the book and thereby buying into whatever literary pecking order game the other person is playing. And that's where the humor lies, in the ridiculous solution to a common problem. So I thought the target (if any) is those people who feel superior because of the books they've read and perhaps secondarily ourselves for letting the snobs get to us.
Saturday May 30, 2009 02:43pm EDT
I read it twice and kept commenting about it to my partner all morning and adding on to it all afternoon (he already thinks I'm delusional).
Thanks for a great read!
Monstru [MEX]
VIEW ALL BY · Saturday May 30, 2009 03:06pm EDT
Saturday May 30, 2009 11:09pm EDT
Sunday May 31, 2009 12:19am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Sunday May 31, 2009 01:12am EDT
Sunday May 31, 2009 08:16am EDT
Sunday May 31, 2009 01:51pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Sunday May 31, 2009 04:00pm EDT
Sunday May 31, 2009 05:39pm EDT
I bet I could get away with that.
Sunday May 31, 2009 08:16pm EDT
Jason's post, for me, had nothing to do with trashing SFF and everything to do with celebrating it. Celebrating how passionate readers are about it, how many different interests readers have concerning it, how overly seriously we take ourselves sometimes about things we care about, how at a loss so many of us feel when facing people who seem to be more well read than we are (and our only defense is a kitten picture,) and about how SFF fans and writers have developed their own language, complete with historic touchstones and catch phrases. It was written by a writer who quite clearly cares about SFF and knows it well, and it was read by fans of the same who regularly argue with each other, and know that those arguments can get a little silly. It wasn't mean; it was a love poem. And a cleverly written one at that.
And if he does get a novel published, he's got a definite purchase from me.
Monday June 01, 2009 02:34am EDT
I have read Titus Alone (though not recently enough to remember much detail besides the cool steampunk robots and the giant marionettes); my recollection is that it only seems bad in comparison with the amazing brilliance of the first two books. It was plenty enjoyable to keep me reading to the end and make me plan to read it again, though I haven't done so yet; I re-read really long books and series less often than short ones.
Right after The Fellowship of the Ring movie was released, I was talking to my cousin, and mentioned to her that I'd just been re-reading the books for the first time in eight or nine years; she got uncomfortably silent for a while, and then admitted that she didn't actually like Tolkien much and hadn't finished LotR. I immediately felt bad about that and tried to make her feel better by admitting I'd bounced off Huckleberry Finn twice and never finished it (at that time; I have read it once since then).
This reminds me of some parts of Hilaire Belloc's Caliban's Guide to Letters where he gives advice to young journalists on writing articles on subjects one knows nothing about.
VIEW ALL BY · Monday June 01, 2009 09:00am EDT
Additionally I thought it was kind of a send-up of our focus on our collective literary past (as in Science Fiction Without the Future). I would submit either or both of these as the deeper truths of this article.
Ethan
VIEW ALL BY · Monday June 01, 2009 09:47am EDT
It was decent... though I like the idea better as a short, SFF-focused blog post :)
Monday June 01, 2009 11:07am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Monday June 01, 2009 04:24pm EDT
I guess if you'd want to be really snooty you could talk about Titus Aged (the fourth book of which Peake only wrote about a page before his Parkinsons got too bad)
Monday June 01, 2009 05:40pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Monday June 01, 2009 06:21pm EDT
But they were actually pretty cool about it, IIRC. Oh, and Hickman himself? Really nice guy.
Nowadays, I understand that doofi exist in plenty of places, not just scifi fandom. Not giving them my attention has worked out pretty well so far. But the kitten picture... I'm going to have to try that.
Oh, and 91 - SirBruce? Yeah. I think if you wanted a place to stick a marker for the flip from Heinlein juveniles to Heinlein later weirdness, he lost me at Number of the Beast. I have no idea what the heck happened between Tunnel in the Sky and that but... whoa. Just... whoa.
Monday June 01, 2009 11:15pm EDT
Nowadays if it isn't re-enacted by bunnies in 30 second-long flash cartoons(http://www.angryalien.com/)I'm probably going to give it a miss, so hard luck, Cryptonomicon (and for that matter Titus Alone).
Monday June 01, 2009 11:21pm EDT
I suppose it gives everyone a chance to try out their lying skills at least. ;)
Tuesday June 02, 2009 10:21pm EDT
Friday June 19, 2009 07:10pm EDT
Monday June 22, 2009 11:19am EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Friday June 26, 2009 03:12am EDT
Would it be possible for me to include this piece on a SFF website that I am creating? I am looking for more articles to include and I would love to include this one.
Thanks,
Simcha
www.42scifi-fantasy.com
VIEW ALL BY · Friday June 26, 2009 09:39am EDT
Unfortunately, no, you may not. Please email me if you have additional questions.
Tuesday July 21, 2009 03:27pm EDT