Am I the Only SciFi Aficionado Who Does Not Like Asimov's Work?

[roo_ster]

I wonder about the above, because he is on every short list of great scifi writers.

I never could warm up to his scifi books, despite reading a few.  They left me cold and felt...provincial.

All his work also seemed deterministic.

[AJ Dual]

You're not alone.

If you enjoy it, it's the same enjoyment of reading a history book, or a documentary spelling out the broad sweeps and ideas of his imagined future history.

Asimov is best read early on in a sci-fi fan's reading career.

If you read something that's absolutely visual or action packed first, like some Gibson or Stephenson Cyberpunk, you'll never understand why Asimov was one of the grand masters.

[Jim147]

Asimov makes a good reference for a lot of other writers.

I only read all of one of his books. I couldn't even tell you which one. But I have half a bookcase full of Norton. She is one of the grand masters of scifi.

jim

[Sergeant Bob]

You are both all alone in your literary preferences.

I certainly enjoyed his work. I reckon you two are a fair piece younger than I, as the last time I read Asimov, the word "Cyberpunk" had not been invented.

All his work also seemed deterministic.

That is how Hari Seldon rolls.

[AJ Dual]

You are both all alone in your literary preferences.

I certainly enjoyed his work. I reckon you two are a fair piece younger than I, as the last time I read Asimov, the word "Cyberpunk" had not been invented.

That is how Hari Seldon rolls.

I started before Cyberpunk as well. (If you don't count John Brunner "Shockwave Rider") And I like Asimov fine. However he's not a great author in terms of character development. He's a "big idea" guy, and that's where the appeal is. (Much like Arthur C. Clarke)

The one possible exception to that would be Elijah Bailey, the New York (underground mega)City police detective who is in some of the robot novels.

[MicroBalrog]

All his work also seemed deterministic.

If by "seemed" you mean in the same way that the Soviet Union seemed socialist.

[roo_ster]

My first scifi reading was in the early 1980s.  The very first scifi I recall reading as a kid were the Tom Swift books.

You are both all alone in your literary preferences.

I certainly enjoyed his work. I reckon you two are a fair piece younger than I, as the last time I read Asimov, the word "Cyberpunk" had not been invented.

That is how Hari Seldon rolls.

Thing is, I quite enjoy some of his contemporaries.  When I was a poor student, I raided used book stores for paperbacks printed WAY back, because the price was 1/2 the cover price.  I could get several old scifi books for a buck.

The two biggest contemporaries I'd say were Heinlein and Clarke, both of whose work I treasure.  

I also like the pulpier stuff from the 20s & 30s.

You're not alone.

If you enjoy it, it's the same enjoyment of reading a history book, or a documentary spelling out the broad sweeps and ideas of his imagined future history.

Asimov is best read early on in a sci-fi fan's reading career.

If you read something that's absolutely visual or action packed first, like some Gibson or Stephenson Cyberpunk, you'll never understand why Asimov was one of the grand masters.

I think Herbert, another contemporary, did more believable future scenarios that were anchored in human nature, interactions, and human constructs (economies, etc.).

[roo_ster]

If by "seemed" you mean in the same way that the Soviet Union seemed socialist.

Heh.

I'm not fond of deterministic models, be they in literature or modeling & simulation. 

[Perd Hapley]

All I've read of Asimov is the original Foundation trilogy.  It left a bad, authoritarian taste.

http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=16046.msg295647#msg295647


I think I probably started with Andre Norton, back in the eighties.  Then some Bradbury and Clarke in the next two decades, and Heinlein more recently.  I'm actually more fond of short stories, though.

[RevDisk]

Eh, I liked his work.  He's obviously no Heinlein, but he's pretty good.

[Strings]

I've never been able to get into Asimov. Can't put a finger on why, just know he wasn't able to grab me.

Of course, the first set of books I read (after the Lord of the Rings) was the complete Conan...

[lee n. field]

I wonder about the above, because he is on every short list of great scifi writers.

I never could warm up to his scifi books, despite reading a few.  They left me cold and felt...provincial.

All his work also seemed deterministic.

I don't care for him either. 

(Nor, for different reasons, the second of the triumvirate of Golden Age Greats, Arthur C. Clarke.

It's been a while since I've read any Heinlein.  I wonder how he'll hold up.)

[Devonai]

I haven't read more of a single author than Heinlein, with Stephenson a close second.  Perhaps these styles have colored my tastes, but I've never picked up an Asimov novel that grabbed me past the first couple chapters.

[zahc]

I feel like I'm kind of burnt out on Scifi/Fantasy, or fiction in general. It used to be that the only fiction I found interesting were scifi/fantasy/horror; now I'm just bored.

The only Asimov I will read is the short stories. I guess the Big Ideas aren't big enough to take up all those pages, but his short stories work much better. Same with Clark, except Childhood's End is ok. I enjoy Larry Niven short stories for the same reason--brevity. Many Heinlein books are very good, but many are also corrupted by his horny-old-man-phase. Ender's game was good because it was short, and it taught me never to read SciFi sequals if you thought the first book was good. Neuromancer is unbelievably good, but Neal Stephenson's only (very) good book was Snow Crash, and that in a Tarantinoesque, snack-food way. The other Stephenson books have been letdowns. I ritually burned Michael Z. Williamson book that I had. I'm not sure that anyone is writing modern Scifi that is decent and I'm out of ideas for old SciFi to explore. Any suggestions as to further reading would be appreciated.

Oh, and I thought Dune (the original Dune) was probably one of the best books I've ever read. I enjoyed it immensely, so I will never read the sequals.

[Devonai]

The Cat Who Walks Through Walls was my least favorite Heinlein novel because of A: The previously stated horny-old-man phase, and B:  Shameless navel-gazing and self-cheerleading by the author.

[lee n. field]

The Cat Who Walks Through Walls was my least favorite Heinlein novel because of A: The previously stated horny-old-man phase, and B:  Shameless navel-gazing and self-cheerleading by the author.

It's a hilarious comedy, right up to the point where the magic door in the wall opens.

The last Asimov novel I read was Nemesis.  I thought, well, I ought to try him again.  It was a struggle to get through.

[P5 Guy]

My favorite is Larry Niven and the books he and Jerry Pournell (sp?) did together.
I'm still a big fan of the Know Space series. A Gift From Earth is the only one I couldn't reread. The Ringworld Engineers LN got a bit carried away with himself but still a fine read.
For pure action the Beowulf and Integral Trees were real page turners for me.

[RoadKingLarry]

With around 500 published works Asimov is hard to pin down. I like most of his robot stories and I enjoyed the Foundation series.
Of course for me Heinlein is the master. With Spider Robinson doing a fair job of expanding on his egacy and style.
Never could get wrapped around Bradbury or Clarke either
Piers Anthony's Xanth stories are enjoyable light reading.
Niven is probably a close second to Heinlein.

[sanglant]

no Terry Pratchett!?!?!

[Perd Hapley]

no popcorn? 

[Viking]

no Terry Pratchett!?!?!

Pratchett writes fantasy. Damn good fantasy at that .

[sanglant]

mostly fantasy.


had to much popcorn, have to floss before having more.

[MechAg94]

Oh, and I thought Dune (the original Dune) was probably one of the best books I've ever read. I enjoyed it immensely, so I will never read the sequals.

I tend to agree that Dune was a really good book.  The book actually made sense and was readable.  None of the movies quite reached it.

I read the Asimov Foundation series and some of the I Robot stories, but not much more.  I think if you dial the clock back about 20 or 30 years and ask that quesiton, he would be one of the top ten.  However, all his books were more a thinking man's hero rather than an action hero.  I still think some of the Harry Seldon magic math was kind of nuts.  What I found interesting was how he tried to bring computers into the picture in that last Foundation book.

I find the technology and culture gaps interesting for Asimov as well as Heinlein.  For Asimov it was mostly tech, but some of Heinlein's stories make it obvious he based his futures on 50's and 60's culture as he viewed it. 

Does anyone have a good source for Andre Norton books?  I've read a few that I thought were pretty good, but most are out of print as far as I can tell. 

[Perd Hapley]

I've got a Norton book around here somewhere, Witchworld I believe.  Want it?

[Sergeant Bob]

I think I may have just recently donated a couple Norton books (along with four boxes of other SciFi books) to the Hospitality Houseâ„¢ of Kalamazoo, Mi.