- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What is your favorite sci-fi author?
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:04 pm to Kentucker
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:04 pm to Kentucker
I love Asimov. I don't want to come across as being too critical. I've probably read more by him than anyone else.
My biggest critique of him is that his stories tend to be very formulaic. Most of his stories tend to follow the format of your standard mystery. He's much more of an ideas guy than he is an innovative storyteller. He had very interesting ideas about the possible ways that humanity could develop, and how technology and environment could shape this development and culture. The scene is much more important than the stories for Asimov.
Also, yes, accurate and plausible science was very important to him. He was a scientist himself after all. One thing that I found interesting is that I have somewhat later prints (still decades old at this point) of some of his early novels where he actually wrote apologies in the forwards of the books for science that he thought was plausible at the time of original writing, but was later proven to be unlikely or just flat out wrong. He would say something to the effect of hoping that they could still be enjoyed for what they are.
One that I specifically remember was that the danger of radiation was far worse than he earlier thought. Another was that he had a planet with a high oxygen content atmosphere with little vegetation, and apparently it was later thought that atmospheric oxygen was unlikely to develop without plant life.
My biggest critique of him is that his stories tend to be very formulaic. Most of his stories tend to follow the format of your standard mystery. He's much more of an ideas guy than he is an innovative storyteller. He had very interesting ideas about the possible ways that humanity could develop, and how technology and environment could shape this development and culture. The scene is much more important than the stories for Asimov.
Also, yes, accurate and plausible science was very important to him. He was a scientist himself after all. One thing that I found interesting is that I have somewhat later prints (still decades old at this point) of some of his early novels where he actually wrote apologies in the forwards of the books for science that he thought was plausible at the time of original writing, but was later proven to be unlikely or just flat out wrong. He would say something to the effect of hoping that they could still be enjoyed for what they are.
One that I specifically remember was that the danger of radiation was far worse than he earlier thought. Another was that he had a planet with a high oxygen content atmosphere with little vegetation, and apparently it was later thought that atmospheric oxygen was unlikely to develop without plant life.
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:10 pm to Peazey
Intereting post and good to know. He sounds like he writes what I would enjoy. I’m not sure why but I like hard sci-fi to the point that it’s like you described Asimov. No fantasy, not even a drop. Most of the books I’ve read don’t quite meet that but they try. The Martian was the last book I read that really fits the bill.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News