100 Must-Read Science Fiction Novels: Bloomsbury Good Reading Guides

First of all, with a book like this it hardly matters if the editors get it 100% correct. In fact, I think they get it wrong, a lot. What matters is whether or not they make a persuasive case for their understanding of the field, whether they introduce you to new titles, whether you add new books to your reading list, whether you love to argue with them about their list. In this case the book succeeds splendidly. I have a list of SF books that I want to read and I added a slew of new titles. Some I had heard about but hadn't considered reading, some were new to me, some were books by authors I already knew but had only considered reading other books. There are some huge gaps, but spotting the gaps is often half the fun. No Octavia Butler? None at all! How is that possible? And there are some strange options. H. G. Wells's THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU instead of THE TIME MACHINE? A. E. Van Vogt's THE VOYAGE OF THE SPACE BEAGLE instead of the far better THE WORLD OF NULL-A or SLAN? Brian Aldiss's HOTHOUSE instead of the Helliconia books or NON-STOP? Two different J. G. Ballard novels instead of his short stories? Where is Cheryhh's CYTEEN? No Poul Anderson? No -- and here is a huge one -- James L. Tiptree Jr.? I mean, seriously, Tiptree belongs on the shortest list of great writers of short stories in the genre. She is also the person who lent her name (well, her fake name) to the name of the major award given to SF dealing with gender issues. I have no trouble with Stephen R. Delaney's NOVA, but what about DHALGREN, TRITON, and STARS IN MY POCKET LIKE GRAINS OF SAND. There are also a lot major novels by serious writers that are omitted, like Margaret Atwood's THE HANDMAID'S TALE and Marge Piercy's WOMAN ON THE EDGE OF TIME. And why make it about novels? Why not books instead? As Christopher Priest points out in the foreword, until the fifties SF novels were actually relatively rare. And even after the fifties much of the best work continued to be short stories. But see, none of this matter. The value of a book like this is the way it makes you argue with it. Books like this that are dumb you just dismiss. By the way, I loved the foreword. Christopher Priest's biases are almost exactly like my own. I agree with him that we should just omit Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein from such lists. They are bad writers. They have poor prose styles and cardboardish and superficial characters. And I agree with him that many writers like E. E. "Doc" Smith truly do belong in museums (although I disagree with him on Jack Williamson -- I still find enjoyment in THE HUMANOIDS). Priest's complaint is with the explicit rejection of good writing by SF through the fifties. SF was supposed to be about "the big idea." A story or a novel was supposed to focus on a neat idea and ignore things like character development. Mainstream readers might find this difficult to conceive or assume that I'm exaggerating, but I'm not. Many, many SF fa

Is science fiction in decline? It is seemingly popular, but from a cinematic standpoint, most of it is only borderline SF, using the lasers, spaceships and aliens common to the genre while ignoring the truly speculative nature that makes science fiction unique. In the literary world, science fiction is getting more and more crowded out by its lightweight cousin, fantasy (which has its own problems). Like the ancient Roman Empire, the seeming strength of the genre hides the cracks that threaten to diminish it. But even if there was never another good science fiction novel published, it's comforting to know there's plenty of good, older material to choose from. 100 Must-Read Science Fiction Novels doesn't necessarily choose the best - either in terms of books or authors - but does provide a list of what the authors figure are the essential works in the field. This is, of course, a subjective list, but some of the ones you'd figure on being on such a list can be found: Frankenstein, The Foundation Trilogy, Neuromancer, The Time Machine, War of the Worlds and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Sometimes, it is not the true classics that are picked, however: under Robert Heinlein, we get Orphans in the Sky and Starship Troopers, but Stranger in a Strange Land and the Moon is a Harsh Mistress may have been better choices (in my opinion). Many big authors, both past and present, are not featured, including John Varley, Keith Laumer, Clifford Simak, Marion Zimmer Bradley, Robert Sawyer, and Alastair Reynolds. Other, more obscure authors have been chosen instead, such as Angela Carter or Ward Moore. UK authors are probably overrepresented (then again, the authors are British). As said before, this is subjective, and you'll agree with some choices and disagree with others. What's more important, however, is that the writing is decent and informative and it gives you a chance to explore the wonderful universe of science fiction.

This book, 100 must-read sci-fi novels, is a concise and too-the-point reference on classic and contemporary sci-fi. It reviews the most popular novels to come our way and gives it's opinion on each choice without giving away too much of the plot or story-line. They start with the earliest and most classic novels, also giving what other readers have felt about them over the years. Instead of including every great novel from any particular sci-fi novelsit, the book decides to include only one or two of his/her best works. They review each book with flair and honesty, and explain why the peice is considered a quality one. It wisely explains what made the particular novel so popular to the sci-fi community. Also, at the end of each review it gives alternates written by that same author and gives examples of other pieces that are simliar in idea, style and genre. All in all, it is an easy read that gets to the point in helping the beginner or the pro sci-fi reader become aware and identify which books would fit best on their library shelves.

This book is a huge help to SF novice readers who are otherwise well read. Mr Andrews' introduction is wise and whip smart and links the reviewed books to their historical and literary contexts as well their cultural cousins in music and film. I've been encouraged to explore books I would not have known about,or known where to start with, many thanks for that. I cannot comment on how Sf purists recieve this book but I strongly recommend it to the general reader.