geek novels?

[firecat]

From serenejournal via supergee, someone's idea of the top 20 geek novels. I've bolded the ones I've read. I've removed the percentages and numbers 'cos I don't know what they mean.

I'm willing to listen to arguments why I should read the ones I haven't read.

1. The HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy -- Douglas Adams
Read, listened to the bbc radio show, watched some of the bbc tv show, played the adventure game, glanced at the graphic novel yesterday, haven't seen the movie yet, and will totally hold off on the stew. The radio show is the definitive version. It's brilliant.

2. Nineteen Eighty-Four -- George Orwell
3. Brave New World -- Aldous Huxley
I don't know why either of those is a "geek novel".

4. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? -- Philip Dick
Not yet, but I just bought a copy a couple of weeks ago. Incidentally, I've tried mightily to like Blade Runner but I just don't.

5. Neuromancer -- William Gibson
Liked the writing style, thought the plot was really derivative.

6. Dune -- Frank Herbert
Why is this a "geek novel"?

7. I, Robot -- Isaac Asimov

8. Foundation -- Isaac Asimov
Didn't like it as a teenager - my take on it was "Okaaay, so mankind inhabits thousands of galaxies many millennia from now - and acts just like 1950s Americans. Riiiiight." I still think that's true, and annoying, but I overlooked it the second time around and liked what else there was to like about the book.

9. The Colour of Magic -- Terry Pratchett
I just don't much like Terry Pratchett. He's funny, but I guess to me the funny overshadows what other cleverness there is to the plots and ideas. I'm willing to give him another try one of these days, because I've heard there is worthwhile plot and idea to be found.

10. Microserfs -- Douglas Coupland
Never heard of it.

11. Snow Crash -- Neal Stephenson

12. Watchmen -- Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons
Why is this a "geek novel"?

13. Cryptonomicon -- Neal Stephenson

14. Consider Phlebas -- Iain M Banks
Never heard of it.

????15. Stranger in a Strange Land -- Robert Heinlein
Although I THINK I read this, I can't remember a damn thing about it. So I probably didn't read it and just glanced at my father's copy. I don't know why it's considered a "geek novel".

16. The Man in the High Castle -- Philip K Dick
I don't see why this is a "geek novel" either.

17. American Gods -- Neil Gaiman
Or this.

18. The Diamond Age -- Neal Stephenson
Loved it!

19. The Illuminatus! Trilogy -- Robert Shea & Robert Anton Wilson

20. Trouble with Lichen - John Wyndham
Never heard of it.

Comments

[opalmirror.livejournal.com]

????15. Stranger in a Strange Land -- Robert Heinlein
Although I THINK I read this, I can't remember a damn thing about it. So I probably didn't read it and just glanced at my father's copy. I don't know why it's considered a "geek novel".

Surely you jest! You really should read this. Yes one must hack and chop through the dripping sexism, unbridled libertarianism and heavyhanded metaphor that characterize Heinlin. However, his counterculture ideals were fresh and imaginatively expressed when he wrote this book. It's a cranky, sarcastic, and playful social and political commentary and it sets forth a model for legal group marriage, moneyless community exchange, and makes a case for the inherent goodness of pleasure. The Church of All Worlds - arguably the first legally founded pagan church in America - founded by Otter Zell (now Oberon Zell-Ravenhart) and Morninglory Zell - was a direct adaptation of concepts set forth this book. A very close friend of mine also adopted a family view with his partners based on a lot of concepts from this book, and it's still a stable home for them many, many years later - although not for everybody. I don't think I could stand Heinlein personally but I do appreciate and enjoy thinking about the concepts he set forth in novel form. "Geek" in my definition - no - but radical and imaginative and brainy - yes.

[firecat]

Yeah, I know much of that and I've even gone to CAW events. But I'm never opening another Heinlein book again, except perhaps Grumbles from the Grave. I've been exhorted by many people and tried several times, and I just. cannot. stomach. him.

[opalmirror.livejournal.com]

I understand then. It sounds like how I feel about Anne Rice, who just drips with silken sculptured unadulterated bullshit and I am left gagging after a page and seeking less painful activities, like being hung by my toes.

[firecat]

Heh. I like the porn, and I liked The Vampire Lestat, but then I stopped reading her because she refused to allow editors to touch her work and well, she needed them.

[rmjwell.livejournal.com]

For me reading Heinlein is like waching Ernie Kovacs; it is important to put him in the context of his times to see that what he was doing was revolutionary for science fiction.

What is it about his writing that grates on you so?

[firecat]

I hope you will excuse the crankiness. It isn't really directed at you. I'm just having a lousy day.

I don't like Ernie Kovacs either.

I have, in fact, heard of the concept of reading something or watching something while keeping its cultural context in mind. I even apply it when I read and watch things. But there are still works I can't stand even when considering them in context.

Furthermore, the cultural context of the times Heinlein wrote didn't prevent a number of other people from writing revolutionary-for-science-fiction books that I enjoyed reading a lot more. (I listed a number of such contemporary-to-Heinlein writers in a recent thread on alt.poly on this topic.)

Finally, I'm not saying that Heinlein had no influence on SF or that he had no talent for anything at all. He was good at some things, and if people like his writings, that doesn't mean I think less of them.

As for what it is that grates me, it's hard to be specific. You've no doubt heard a million times that his writings are sexist and morally heavy-handed. That's part of it. Another part is that he doesn't do character development very well, and character development is often important to me. OTOH, there are other writers I like who don't do character development well, either.

It comes down to this probably: There are a number of writers I just can't enjoy because something about their authorial personality (which may or may not have something to do with their personality in other walks of life) gets inserted in the books they write, and I don't like their personality. Stephen Brust is an example. When I tried to read his books, I felt like every once in a while he popped his head up and said "Look, here I am! Aren't I so clever?" It bugged me. But The Player of Games had something like that going on too, and it didn't bug me. So I think it ultimately comes down to personality.

Finally, I've long held that much fiction is wish-fulfillment fantasy of one sort or another given a modicum of respectability and set to a storyline. Some people's fantasies I can relate to, and others are turn-offs or outright squicky. Heinlein's fantasies about women are squicky, IMHO.

[epi-lj.livejournal.com]

Honestly, I've tried to read Stranger in a Strange Land about a dozen times and probably reduced the mass of my teeth by about 20% through accumulated irate gritting without ever having survived past the fifteenth or twentieth page.

[opalmirror.livejournal.com]

/me hands epi_lj a set of dentures. There there. When it hurts, stop!