Discussion:
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
(too old to reply)
Lynn McGuire
2019-01-01 20:11:39 UTC
Permalink
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston

https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/

I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".

Lynn
David Johnston
2019-01-01 21:41:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Lynn
The Three Body Problem is not at all a galactic empire book.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2019-01-01 22:34:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Lynn
The Three Body Problem is not at all a galactic empire book.
Neither is _Triplanetary_. (The blurb sounds like _First Lensman_).
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Jack Bohn
2019-01-02 19:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Lynn
The Three Body Problem is not at all a galactic empire book.
Neither is _Triplanetary_. (The blurb sounds like _First Lensman_).
Over in another thread about whether the loss of the Death Star meant the collapse of the Empire, I was going to ask if the Star Wars Empire was not even a Kardashev level 2 civilization, but putting those two concepts in such close proximity shorted out my brain. I'm thinking there should be a quantitative difference. If you have to calculate the number of star systems to determine if it's Galactic, it isn't.
--
-Jack
Greg Goss
2019-01-02 06:38:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Lynn
The Three Body Problem is not at all a galactic empire book.
Several others are not (the Honorverse does have 1 polity that rules a
sphere with a radius about 100 light years, give or take; _Shards of
Honor_ has an empire that rules 3 inhabited planets*; _Gateway_, IIRC,
only has one inhabited star system; it is my impression that the Culture
does cover an appreciable amount of space, but not a big enough fraction
of the galaxy to describe it as a galactic empire).
* There is another that has 8 major worlds amongst other holdings
In the Honorverse, the Solarian League is not an empire, but is huge
-- but not galaxy-spanning. Haven has been imperial, but not in name.
Much bigger than three (about a hundred?) but far from
galaxy-spanning.

I haven't read Gateway for a very long time, but I thought that there
was a colony mentioned. Settling a colony on five-person spaceships
would be a challenge, but possible. The discoverer of the colonizable
world provided an example of the huge bonuses that could be earned.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
J. Clarke
2019-01-02 07:16:26 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 21:42:41 -0800, Robert Woodward
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Lynn
The Three Body Problem is not at all a galactic empire book.
Several others are not (the Honorverse does have 1 polity that rules a
sphere with a radius about 100 light years, give or take; _Shards of
Honor_ has an empire that rules 3 inhabited planets*; _Gateway_, IIRC,
only has one inhabited star system; it is my impression that the Culture
does cover an appreciable amount of space, but not a big enough fraction
of the galaxy to describe it as a galactic empire).
If I understand The Culture correctly it does not govern the entire
galaxy but it is one of if not the most powerful polity and so can
dictate policy whenever it feels that doing so suits its purposes.
Kind of like the US on Earth today except it doesn't take its ball and
go home when it gets bored.
* There is another that has 8 major worlds amongst other holdings
Robert Carnegie
2019-01-02 11:22:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Lynn
The Three Body Problem is not at all a galactic empire book.
Several others are not (the Honorverse does have 1 polity that rules a
sphere with a radius about 100 light years, give or take; _Shards of
Honor_ has an empire that rules 3 inhabited planets*; _Gateway_, IIRC,
only has one inhabited star system; it is my impression that the Culture
does cover an appreciable amount of space, but not a big enough fraction
of the galaxy to describe it as a galactic empire).
* There is another that has 8 major worlds amongst other holdings
_Gateway_ has at least one major human base in another
star system, but since "galactic empire" was defined
as "hundreds" of worlds - but not necessarily billions -
it must be counting the mysterious Heechee.
(I forget if they're being called Heechee then, or why.)
Greg Goss
2019-01-02 16:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
_Gateway_ has at least one major human base in another
star system, but since "galactic empire" was defined
as "hundreds" of worlds - but not necessarily billions -
it must be counting the mysterious Heechee.
(I forget if they're being called Heechee then, or why.)
Wikipedia says that the word "Heechee" had been assigned to them as of
the original "Merchants of Venus" before Gateway was written.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
David Johnston
2019-01-03 03:16:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Lynn
The Three Body Problem is not at all a galactic empire book.
Several others are not (the Honorverse does have 1 polity that rules a
sphere with a radius about 100 light years, give or take; _Shards of
Honor_ has an empire that rules 3 inhabited planets*; _Gateway_, IIRC,
only has one inhabited star system; it is my impression that the Culture
does cover an appreciable amount of space, but not a big enough fraction
of the galaxy to describe it as a galactic empire).
* There is another that has 8 major worlds amongst other holdings
I'm going to let it slide as long as it's at least an interstellar
empire. But Three Body Problem isn't even that. The hostiles don't even
intend to rule more than one star system.
Default User
2019-01-01 22:35:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
Post by Lynn McGuire
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Also 12/18 for me. Most of the ones that I haven't read I considered
and passed on for one reason or another. Only Pilot X and Forever Hero
were unfamiliar to me. This is one of my preferred sub-genres.


Brian
Jaimie Vandenbergh
2019-01-02 02:26:13 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 22:35:31 -0000 (UTC), "Default User"
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
Post by Lynn McGuire
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Also 12/18 for me. Most of the ones that I haven't read I considered
and passed on for one reason or another.
Eleven here, and another five in the SBR.

I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.

Cheers - Jaimie
--
Never sleep with anyone crazier than you are.
Default User
2019-01-02 06:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.


Brian
Peter Trei
2019-01-02 14:36:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.

pt
Robert Carnegie
2019-01-02 15:44:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>

So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
Ahasuerus
2019-01-02 16:28:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)

On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)

In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Dimensional Traveler
2019-01-02 18:00:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Ahasuerus
2019-01-02 18:47:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
Dimensional Traveler
2019-01-02 18:59:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-02 21:32:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
I'll point out that the original meaning of "romance" (from
"Rome") was a tale of adventure and derring-do, activities
usually conducted by males. Women come into these stories only
in later periods, starting out as goals to be achieved, later
developing personalities and actions of their own.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Dimensional Traveler
2019-01-03 22:33:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
I'll point out that the original meaning of "romance" (from
"Rome") was a tale of adventure and derring-do, activities
usually conducted by males. Women come into these stories only
in later periods, starting out as goals to be achieved, later
developing personalities and actions of their own.
So werewolves and vampires know how to buckle their swashes better than
normal men?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Ahasuerus
2019-01-03 22:45:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
I'll point out that the original meaning of "romance" (from
"Rome") was a tale of adventure and derring-do, activities
usually conducted by males. Women come into these stories only
in later periods, starting out as goals to be achieved, later
developing personalities and actions of their own.
So werewolves and vampires know how to buckle their swashes better than
normal men?
I guess you are more likely to lead a life of adventure and derring-do if
you are superhumanly strong, mostly invulnerable to normal weapons and
forced to hide all kinds of things from society (triple-digit age,
dietary preferences, sun/moon allergies, etc.)
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-04 00:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Peter Trei
On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 1:00:19 PM UTC-5, Dimensional
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
I'll point out that the original meaning of "romance" (from
"Rome") was a tale of adventure and derring-do, activities
usually conducted by males. Women come into these stories only
in later periods, starting out as goals to be achieved, later
developing personalities and actions of their own.
So werewolves and vampires know how to buckle their swashes better than
normal men?
Perhaps, since if they were to be discovered as werewolves and
vampires they'd be in a world of hurt, they've learned to
swashbuckle more spectacularly than the average Joe.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Robert Carnegie
2019-01-04 10:07:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
I'll point out that the original meaning of "romance" (from
"Rome") was a tale of adventure and derring-do, activities
usually conducted by males. Women come into these stories only
in later periods, starting out as goals to be achieved, later
developing personalities and actions of their own.
So werewolves and vampires know how to buckle their swashes better than
normal men?
I was going to remark on attributes expected of
beings whose natural prey is attractive young women
(if that distinguishes those creatures from human
males), but it isn't the case in the "original"
sources. Only when the requirements of book covers
and movie posters arise. The traditional monsters
prey on everything.
Kevrob
2019-01-04 03:25:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
I'll point out that the original meaning of "romance" (from
"Rome") was a tale of adventure and derring-do, activities
usually conducted by males. Women come into these stories only
in later periods, starting out as goals to be achieved, later
developing personalities and actions of their own.
...and proto-scientifiction was known as "scientific romance."

http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/scientific_romance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_romance

Somehow SCIENTIFIC ROMANCE was never a title for a love comic.

It sounds like a natural.....

[Thought balloon from raven-haired beauty in a skin-
tight outfit, with jet-pack accessory.]

("Adam and I have quite a time when he comes to visit,
but after a few days, it's like he's light-years away!")

Read MY LOVE WAS CAUGHT BETWEEN TWO WORLDS!!!

.....or, sometimes, between 2 Alannae!

https://www.comics.org/issue/18366/cover/4/

Also: I Married a Nerf Herder!!!

Kevin R
Greg Goss
2019-01-04 15:57:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
...and proto-scientifiction was known as "scientific romance."
http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/scientific_romance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_romance
Somehow SCIENTIFIC ROMANCE was never a title for a love comic.
It sounds like a natural.....
In fact, relationship and character development in an SF setting is
cosidered questionable content.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-04 16:29:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Kevrob
...and proto-scientifiction was known as "scientific romance."
http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/scientific_romance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_romance
Somehow SCIENTIFIC ROMANCE was never a title for a love comic.
It sounds like a natural.....
In fact, relationship and character development in an SF setting is
cosidered questionable content.
As to relationship, I don't know if that's a hold-over from the
days when SFF was [considered to be] read by teenaged boys and
engineers (who were considered to be still teenagers at heart).
I also don't know whether it's still true; I kind of doubt it.
Teenagers grow up, and not infrequently reach mental and
emotional maturity.

As to character development, a while ago Patricia Wrede posted:

[/e searches disk]
Post by Greg Goss
Incredibly strong, living, fascinating characters will make
a weak plot work ... for a certain segment of the readership.
A fast-moving, intricate, exciting plot will make a book work
in spite of cardboard characters ... for a different segment
of the readership. And each segment tends to throw the
others' books across the room with cries of "Who PUBLISHES
this junk?!?!!
--Patricia Wrede, rec.arts.sf.composition, Sept. 23, 1997

So it takes all kinds.

Right now I'm working with three characters, two of whom are
nicely developed, thanks, and the third is determined to be
either a camera or a Watson and I'm trying to pump some life into
him. Watsons are all very well in their place, but these three
carry nine-tenths of the story and I can't let one of them just
stand around and report. I need the literary equivalent of an AED
and so far I haven't got one.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
D B Davis
2019-01-04 17:54:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
Or that men are not romantic?
That could be why all the women want to sleep with werewolves and vampires.
I'll point out that the original meaning of "romance" (from
"Rome") was a tale of adventure and derring-do, activities
usually conducted by males. Women come into these stories only
in later periods, starting out as goals to be achieved, later
developing personalities and actions of their own.
...and proto-scientifiction was known as "scientific romance."
http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/scientific_romance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_romance
Somehow SCIENTIFIC ROMANCE was never a title for a love comic.
It sounds like a natural.....
[Thought balloon from raven-haired beauty in a skin-
tight outfit, with jet-pack accessory.]
("Adam and I have quite a time when he comes to visit,
but after a few days, it's like he's light-years away!")
Read MY LOVE WAS CAUGHT BETWEEN TWO WORLDS!!!
.....or, sometimes, between 2 Alannae!
https://www.comics.org/issue/18366/cover/4/
Also: I Married a Nerf Herder!!!
You've a knack for the genre. Let me lay a clown confessional on you:



All You Zombies

By Robert A. Heinlein

2217 Time Zone V (EST) 7 Nov. 1970-NTC- "Pop's Place": I was polishing
a brandy snifter when the Unmarried Mother came in. I noted the
time-10: 17 P. M. zone five, or eastern time, November 7th, 1970.
Temporal agents always notice time and date; we must.

The Unmarried Mother was a man twenty-five years old, no taller than I
am, childish features and a touchy temper. I didn't like his looks - I
never had - but he was a lad I was here to recruit, he was my boy. I
gave him my best barkeep's smile.

Maybe I'm too critical. He wasn't swish; his nickname came from what
he always said when some nosy type asked him his line: "I'm an
unmarried mother. -- If he felt less than murderous he would add: "at
four cents a word. I write confession stories. -- ...



CONFESS ANONYMOUSLY

Weird crushes on cartoon characters

Posted Dec 17, 2018 20:23:17 by anonymous
15 views | 0 comments
Follow

There are many cartoon characters that actually turn me on so bad, im
not even trolling, I got a huge on the characters such as
Fiona Human Form from shrek
Andy’s Mom from Toy Story 3
Jessica Rabbit from Roger Rabbit
Elastigirl from Incredibles
Elsa & Anna from Frozen
Rapunzel from Tangled
Even Jessie from Toy Story 3

https://www.rawconfessions.com/confession/show/weird-crushes-on-cartoon-characters



Thank you,
--
Don
Sjouke Burry
2019-01-02 22:19:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
Are you saying that women are paranormal? :P
No, they like you to think they are....
Peter Trei
2019-01-02 19:33:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
I'm under the impression that the romance and paranormal romance genres
flip the gender biases: Male authors often use female nom-de-plumes to
match the expectations of their audience.

pt
Ahasuerus
2019-01-02 20:05:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
I'm under the impression that the romance and paranormal romance genres
flip the gender biases: Male authors often use female nom-de-plumes to
match the expectations of their audience.
Oh, sure, it goes way back. Mack Reynolds wrote gothic novels as
"Maxine Reynolds" and Frank Belknap Long wrote them as "Lyda Belknap
Long".

However, in this case we have photos of most of the perpetrators with
the notable exception of Bella Forrest, whose prolificity has been much
discussed, e.g. at
https://forum.malazanempire.com/topic/32702-mysterious-bella-forrest/
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-02 21:34:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already
covered.
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
I'm under the impression that the romance and paranormal romance genres
flip the gender biases: Male authors often use female nom-de-plumes to
match the expectations of their audience.
Just as it was assumed that the only people who read SFF were
(adolescent, or at least young) men, so it seems now to be
assumed that the only people who read romance (in its current
definition) are women. I don't know if that assumption is true
or not.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2019-01-03 22:01:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Just as it was assumed that the only people who read SFF were
(adolescent, or at least young) men, so it seems now to be
assumed that the only people who read romance (in its current
definition) are women. I don't know if that assumption is true
or not.
I have read a fair number of romances lately. Granted they are of
the reverse harem or Paranormal/fantasy sort. I find some of the
quite enjoyable if they aren't "too romancy". It can be hard to
say objectively exactly what the continuum is, but I can generally
tell when I've gone too far in that direction fairly quickly.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Lynn McGuire
2019-01-03 23:04:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Just as it was assumed that the only people who read SFF were
(adolescent, or at least young) men, so it seems now to be
assumed that the only people who read romance (in its current
definition) are women. I don't know if that assumption is true
or not.
I have read a fair number of romances lately. Granted they are of
the reverse harem or Paranormal/fantasy sort. I find some of the
quite enjoyable if they aren't "too romancy". It can be hard to
say objectively exactly what the continuum is, but I can generally
tell when I've gone too far in that direction fairly quickly.
There seems to be strong intersection between Paranormal Romance and
Urban Fantasy in the last couple of decades. So much that I cannot tell
them apart other than the book covers.

Lynn
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-04 00:43:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Just as it was assumed that the only people who read SFF were
(adolescent, or at least young) men, so it seems now to be
assumed that the only people who read romance (in its current
definition) are women. I don't know if that assumption is true
or not.
I have read a fair number of romances lately. Granted they are of
the reverse harem or Paranormal/fantasy sort. I find some of the
quite enjoyable if they aren't "too romancy". It can be hard to
say objectively exactly what the continuum is, but I can generally
tell when I've gone too far in that direction fairly quickly.
I read a lot of Harlequin romances back in the sixties ... for
one thing, they were short. I think I was trying to figure out
the formula (and they were rather further in the direction of
formulaic than, say, Homer) to see if I could write one. The
answer turned out to be No.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Moriarty
2019-01-04 01:52:56 UTC
Permalink
On Friday, January 4, 2019 at 12:00:02 PM UTC+11, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

<snip>
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
I have read a fair number of romances lately. Granted they are of
the reverse harem or Paranormal/fantasy sort. I find some of the
quite enjoyable if they aren't "too romancy". It can be hard to
say objectively exactly what the continuum is, but I can generally
tell when I've gone too far in that direction fairly quickly.
I read a lot of Harlequin romances back in the sixties ... for
one thing, they were short. I think I was trying to figure out
the formula (and they were rather further in the direction of
formulaic than, say, Homer) to see if I could write one. The
answer turned out to be No.
I recall a conversation with someone who was hard up for cash one day and decided to write romance novels for a quick buck. After all, how hard can it be? Get a chintzy pseudonym, stick to a formula and it would almost write itself. Turns out she couldn't either.

-Moriarty
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-04 02:22:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
I have read a fair number of romances lately. Granted they are of
the reverse harem or Paranormal/fantasy sort. I find some of the
quite enjoyable if they aren't "too romancy". It can be hard to
say objectively exactly what the continuum is, but I can generally
tell when I've gone too far in that direction fairly quickly.
I read a lot of Harlequin romances back in the sixties ... for
one thing, they were short. I think I was trying to figure out
the formula (and they were rather further in the direction of
formulaic than, say, Homer) to see if I could write one. The
answer turned out to be No.
I recall a conversation with someone who was hard up for cash one day
and decided to write romance novels for a quick buck. After all, how
hard can it be? Get a chintzy pseudonym, stick to a formula and it would
almost write itself. Turns out she couldn't either.
Yeah. Like almost every other genre, you have to read it, and
love it, to write it.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-02 17:08:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ahasuerus
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
It varies depending on the genre and the methodology. Checking Amazon's
"most popular authors" lists, I see that of the 10 most popular fantasy
authors 4 are men and 6 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Fantasy/books/16190/)
On the science fiction side, 7 are men and 3 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Science-Fiction/books/16272/)
In paranormal romance, 0 are men and 10 are women
(https://www.amazon.com/author-rank/Paranormal/books/13356/)
All these statistics are reminding me of a quote that I saved to
Post by Ahasuerus
Only fantasy is mass-market. Everything else is cult-fiction.
[Reflective pause.] That includes mainstream.
-- a commissioning editor of a major publishing house,
quoted by T. A. Shippey, 2000
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Default User
2019-01-02 18:13:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
Are you under the impression that public libraries don't stock much in
the way of current books?


Brian
Robert Carnegie
2019-01-02 21:19:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Default User
Post by Robert Carnegie
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
Are you under the impression that public libraries don't stock much in
the way of current books?
You mean since their top authors are all dead?
(But surely they have /some/ who are alive.)

Times are hard. But hey! It's a good time to be
Mary Shelley! Except, widowed, dead, /and/ out of
copyright.
David Johnston
2019-01-03 03:26:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
That's a list of books you're most likely to find in any random library.
Whether library patrons are actually reading them has no bearing.
Those books are there because they're acknowledged classics, seminal
works of the genre.
Peter Trei
2019-01-03 14:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Default User
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
I'm going to amuse myself by wondering if anyone would have commented
that 15 of 17 are male authors.
Clearly an agenda.
I was just going to post about this when I saw that it was already covered.
88% is still better than 97%, but still unbalanced.
Well... one of the genre lists I found was of public
library books: eight by men, two by women, none by a
living author (if you see what I mean). So it goes.
<https://www.oclc.org/research/wtworldcat/topsciencefiction.html>
So as of 2015, that's what people [who don't pay for
books] were reading?
That's a list of books you're most likely to find in any random library.
Whether library patrons are actually reading them has no bearing.
Those books are there because they're acknowledged classics, seminal
works of the genre.
The books in the library are the ones *not* being read. The really popular
ones are all checked out, and on waiting lists.

pt
Default User
2019-01-03 18:33:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
That's a list of books you're most likely to find in any random
library. Whether library patrons are actually reading them has
no bearing. Those books are there because they're acknowledged
classics, seminal works of the genre.
The books in the library are the ones not being read. The really
popular ones are all checked out, and on waiting lists.
I sometimes take a look at the new books section of the library if I
happen to be in there. These days that's usually only if I'm there
picking up CDs or DVDs. I mostly get books from the e-media side of
things.

At one time I would be irritated if they only had a book in an
e-edition. Now I'm irritated if they only have paper.


Brian
Dorothy J Heydt
2019-01-01 20:47:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
"17 Best Galactic Empire Science Fiction Books" by Dan Livingston
https://best-sci-fi-books.com/17-best-galactic-empire-science-fiction-books/
I have read twelve out of the eighteen books in this awesome list !
Makes me wonder if I should read the remaining six books in the list.
The most awesome are "The Forever Hero", "Shards of Honor", "Ender's
Game", "Old Man's War", "Dune", and "Foundation".
Oh, by all means read the Foundation trilogy (Foundation,
Foundation and Empire, Second Foundation). Do NOT proceed from
there to the later Foundation/Empire/etcetera books. They try to
link every novel Asimov ever wrote into one huge compendium, and
they are dreadful I would suggest that Asimov had succumbed to the
Brain Eater by then ... except that after those he wrote "Gold."
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Loading...