The GMG SF/Fantasy/Horror Club

Started by Dr. Dread, August 04, 2009, 10:18:46 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Karl Henning

Dadgummit, I haven't read Poul Anderson in a coon's age.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Fëanor

Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 05, 2016, 06:42:55 AM
+2 on the Broken Sword.

Vance is one of the better writers, so imagine you will enjoy it (if nothing else for that). Old school, baby! :)

+3 for the Broken Sword, (Poul Anderson), though it's been over 40 years since I read it.

Back then I wrote a letter to Mr. Anderson and received a reply.  Amongst other things I asked about a sequel;  he replied that he was considering it but that it wasn't a high priority.  Many years after that he wrote War of the Gods which he described as something of a sequel, but was really more retelling of Norse mythology than fantasy.

I read a couple of Jack Vance's books too.  The one I recall was The Dying Earth.  It seems Gene Wolfe attributed some inspiration from that book for his own tetralogy, The Book of the New Sun -- one of the very greatest Sci Fi novels, IMHO.



MN Dave

Quote from: Fëanor on February 05, 2016, 10:36:56 AM
+3 for the Broken Sword, (Poul Anderson), though it's been over 40 years since I read it.

Back then I wrote a letter to Mr. Anderson and received a reply.  Amongst other things I asked about a sequel;  he replied that he was considering it but that it wasn't a high priority.  Many years after that he wrote War of the Gods which he described as something of a sequel, but was really more retelling of Norse mythology than fantasy.

I read a couple of Jack Vance's books too.  The one I recall was The Dying Earth.  It seems Gene Wolfe attributed some inspiration from that book for his own tetralogy, The Book of the New Sun -- one of the very greatest Sci Fi novels, IMHO.

LOVE this post and nearly all the books mentioned (especially New Sun--essential). Now I want to read War of the Gods!! Thank you.
"The effect of music is so very much more powerful and penetrating than is that of the other arts, for these others speak only of the shadow, but music of the essence." — Arthur Schopenhauer

Jo498

I read the 4 volumes of "Book of the New Sun" earlier this year. This is fascinating stuff but I am not sure I am really convinced in the end. A bit too much of everything and the "solution" is too strange for my taste. But definitely a major piece of SF/Fantasy.

I also read the other two volumes of Vance's Lyoness as well as his "Dying Earth" collection. Book 2 of Lyonesse (The Green Pearl) is somewhat of a disappointment overall (after a very good fairy-tale like beginning), book 3 (Madouc) is much better but does not reach the first. Partly, it is almost like a farce to the tragedy of the first book. Vance's health was failing (although he apparently recovered because he wrote a few books afterwards and lived to the age of 96) and the ending is far too rushed, so the quality suffers. I'd rate Lyonesse 10/10, Green Pearl 6/10 and Madouc 8/10. If Vance had kept the level of the first book, this would probably be my favorite fantasy together with LotR.

The Dying Earth is all over the place. The original volume of shorter stories is a mixed bag but very atmospheric and overall good. Of the two Cugel books the second offers a more coherent narrative, often wickedly funny but the episodes are all somewhat similar in style. I'd rate them around 7-8/10. The last one "Rhialto the marvellous" is much weaker, often quite silly although Vance's imagination and humor can still be amazing, but at most 5/10.
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

MN Dave

Quote from: Jo498 on December 09, 2016, 11:25:23 AM
The original volume of shorter stories is a mixed bag but very atmospheric and overall good.

Love this.
"The effect of music is so very much more powerful and penetrating than is that of the other arts, for these others speak only of the shadow, but music of the essence." — Arthur Schopenhauer

Fëanor

Quote from: Jo498 on December 09, 2016, 11:25:23 AM
I read the 4 volumes of "Book of the New Sun" {by Gene Wolfe} earlier this year. This is fascinating stuff but I am not sure I am really convinced in the end. A bit too much of everything and the "solution" is too strange for my taste. But definitely a major piece of SF/Fantasy.

You ought to read Urth of the New Sun, the sequel to the New Sun tetralogy.  It's good though perhaps not as good as the original set;  what it does do is explain most of the mysterious details of the original that aren't explained there.

I've heard the complaint that The Book of the New Sun is more fantasy than science fiction but the Urth of the New Sun provides "scientific", (i.e. fictional quasi-scientific), explanations that make the original sci-fi, not just fantasy.

MN Dave

Quote from: Fëanor on December 11, 2016, 11:34:11 AM
You ought to read Urth of the New Sun, the sequel to the New Sun tetralogy.  It's good though perhaps not as good as the original set;  what it does do is explain most of the mysterious details of the original that aren't explained there.

I've heard the complaint that The Book of the New Sun is more fantasy than science fiction but the Urth of the New Sun provides "scientific", (i.e. fictional quasi-scientific), explanations that make the original sci-fi, not just fantasy.

The term for these books is science fantasy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fantasy
"The effect of music is so very much more powerful and penetrating than is that of the other arts, for these others speak only of the shadow, but music of the essence." — Arthur Schopenhauer

Fëanor

Quote from: Dagon Dave on December 11, 2016, 11:45:29 AM
The term for these books {e.g. Book of the New Sun} is science fantasy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fantasy

Fair enough, although, IMO, most science fiction is basically fantastic aside from a few writers like Arthur C. Clarke.

Jo498

And even Clarke has a short story like "The 10 billion (or how many) names of God".
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

Brahmsian

After seeing a two Dario Argento films recently from his Three Mothers trilogy (Suspiria - 1977 and Inferno - 1980), can anyone recommend any other Argento films?  I find them captivating and riveting, even if some of the plot and action lines seem uneven at times, they are thoroughly entertaining, along with his use of colours and sound/music.

I guess I should watch the 3rd and final film of the Three Mothers trilogy (Mother of Tears - 2007).

I have seen a handful of Mario Bava films, and although I did enjoy them, they did not make as much of a visceral impact on me as these two Argento films.

Brahmsian

Quote from: OrchestralNut on November 04, 2021, 08:01:12 AM
After seeing a two Dario Argento films recently from his Three Mothers trilogy (Suspiria - 1977 and Inferno - 1980), can anyone recommend any other Argento films?  I find them captivating and riveting, even if some of the plot and action lines seem uneven at times, they are thoroughly entertaining, along with his use of colours and sound/music.

I guess I should watch the 3rd and final film of the Three Mothers trilogy (Mother of Tears - 2007).

I have seen a handful of Mario Bava films, and although I did enjoy them, they did not make as much of a visceral impact on me as these two Argento films.

I guess the only ones that might be interested in this would be Snyprrr and James.  And they're gone.  :'(

geralmar

"In Amundsen's Tent" (1928), John Martin Leahy:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AclZTlYOKpU&t=3s


My favorite non-Lovecraft Lovecraft short story.  Hard to believe John W. Campbell didn't read this before writing, "Who Goes There?".

Ganondorf

The best fantasy book of all time is without doubt Tolkien's The Silmarillion. Tolkien rightfully considered his Magnum opus even though he never technically finished it.

Fëanor

#853
Quote from: Ganondorf on November 05, 2021, 07:04:36 AM
The best fantasy book of all time is without doubt Tolkien's The Silmarillion. Tolkien rightfully considered his Magnum opus even though he never technically finished it.

Humm ... well I enjoyed the Silmarillion very much but by the time I read it I'd read LoTR and The Hobbit at least 2-3 times.  The tone of the Silmarillion is far more austere than LoTR's not to mention the chatty, kid-friendly tone of The Hobbit.

For the Tolkien lovers who cares, the Silmarillion sets the "historical" context for LoTR and The Hobbit;  for this purpose it's indispensable.  But of course, the latter are quite capable of standing alone.

These three books, (including the LoTR appendices), establish the LoTR "canon".  I've read some of the compilations of Tolkien's earlier works, (Unfinished Tales and History of Middle-Earth), which were no doubt inspiration and material for the canonical works.  However sometimes those stories contradict the canon, but it ought to be considered definitive, IMHO.

Invaluable to LoTR aficionado is Robert Foster's Complete Guide to Middle-Earth (1978);  it is based exclusively on the three canonical works.

Roy Bland

IMHO was one of the sources for japanese series Mobil Suit Gundam

Jo498

Quote from: Fëanor on November 06, 2021, 08:34:49 AM
Humm ... well I enjoyed the Silmarillion very much but by the time I read it I'd read LoTR and The Hobbit at least 2-3 times.  The tone of the Silmarillion is far more austere than LoTR's not to mention the chatty, kid-friendly tone of The Hobbit.

For the Tolkien lovers who cares, the Silmarillion sets the "historical" context for LoTR and The Hobbit;  for this purpose it's indispensable.  But of course, the latter are quite capable of standing alone.

These three books, (including the LoTR appendices), establish the LoTR "canon".  I've read some of the compilations of Tolkien's earlier works, (Unfinished Tales and History of Middle-Earth), which were no doubt inspiration and material for the canonical works.  However sometimes those stories contradict the canon, but it ought to be considered definitive, IMHO.

Invaluable to LoTR aficionado is Robert Foster's Complete Guide to Middle-Earth (1978);  it is based exclusively on the three canonical works.

I think the Silmarillion has to be considered a fragment; the difference to the material in Unfinished tales and elsewhere is that it has been brought into a readable and somewhat rounded form. If Tolkien had managed to bring at least the two big epics, the tale or Beren and Luthien and Turin Turambar into a complete, final form (either in verse or prose), it might have been the equal to LotR. (It would still leave many parts brief and rudimentary, e.g the Fall of Gondolin)

I still think that the special depth of LotR is achieved because of all these tales in the background whereas the Creation and First Age stuff is a very well done made up myth, but basically a made up myth, mostly based on tropes from mythologies of the world, such as Kalevala, Northern sagas etc.
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

Fëanor

Quote from: Jo498 on November 07, 2021, 08:54:56 AM
I think the Silmarillion has to be considered a fragment; the difference to the material in Unfinished tales and elsewhere is that it has been brought into a readable and somewhat rounded form. If Tolkien had managed to bring at least the two big epics, the tale or Beren and Luthien and Turin Turambar into a complete, final form (either in verse or prose), it might have been the equal to LotR. (It would still leave many parts brief and rudimentary, e.g the Fall of Gondolin)

I still think that the special depth of LotR is achieved because of all these tales in the background whereas the Creation and First Age stuff is a very well done made up myth, but basically a made up myth, mostly based on tropes from mythologies of the world, such as Kalevala, Northern sagas etc.

Let's face it:  ultimately the popular success of the LotR depends as much on Tolkien's invention of the charming Hobbits as on the beautiful but contrived underlying mythology.

Pohjolas Daughter

I remember reading some years ago about his linguistics skills and knowledge.

PD
Pohjolas Daughter

Fëanor

#858
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 08, 2021, 12:30:38 PM
I remember reading some years ago about his linguistics skills and knowledge.

PD

Certainly Tolkien was capable of, and apparently loved, writing in a variety of linguistic styles:  from the early adolescent-catering Hobbit, to the down-to-earth style of the LotR, to the Romantic-era-poet style of some of the Unfinished Tales, to the austere style of the Silmarillion.

Pohjolas Daughter

Quote from: Fëanor on November 10, 2021, 10:04:28 AM
Certainly Tolkien was capable of, and apparently loved, writing in a variety of linguistic styles:  from the early adolescent-catering Hobbit, to the down-to-earth style of the LotR, to the Romantic-era-poet style of some of the Unfinished Tales, to the austere style of the Silmarillion.
Interesting!  My last comment was in terms of thinking of his curiosity and command of a number of languages and interest in etymology:  https://lithub.com/imaginary-history-how-tolkiens-fascination-with-languages-shaped-his-literary-legacy/

What a sharp mind and curiosity that he had about languages and amazed that he came up with his own and thinking of all of the work that went into that!  :)

PD
Pohjolas Daughter