[Home]History of Science fiction/Talk

HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences

Revision 14 . . December 13, 2001 12:07 pm by Cayzle [continuing debate on Clement and other matters]
Revision 13 . . October 2, 2001 9:48 am by (logged).9.128.xxx [how many examples are too many?]
  

Difference (from prior major revision) (no other diffs)

Changed: 36c36,46
As far as the specific examples go, if people think Hal Clement deserves a mention as a particularly apt example here, well and good. Could somebody who knows about him please add an entry? I'm curious now :) --Robert Merkel
As far as the specific examples go, if people think Hal Clement deserves a mention as a particularly apt example here, well and good. Could somebody who knows about him please add an entry? I'm curious now :) --Robert Merkel


I'm not sure I like the generalization that "Character development is commonly secondary to explorations of astronomical or physics phenomena" since it seems slightly derogatory, and since there are lots of examples of Hard SF in which character development is not secondary (I'm thinking Larry Niven and John Varley). That said, if we accept the "derogatory" definition, Clement is particularly apt in that his prose is wooden and his characters two-dimensional, IMNSHO!

However, Clement certainly is an important part of the tradition. As it says on his page, he was named an SFWA Grand Master. I say he deserves to stay.

By the way, I would extend the definition beyond physics and astronomy to include biology at least (thinking about John Varley again).

And should there be a link to the Cyber Punk tradition? In my opinion, a modern subset of Hard SF.

-- Cayzle

HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences
Search: