This was fantastic! I hope you will be able to do more of these types of discussions. I loved the back and forth between you. Entertaining and Educating. ^^
I have been going through all your past videos that are completely crushing my tbr, but I wanted to comment on how fabulous this discussion was (even at five months late). I hope you guys do continue on and do more of these.
This was so much fun!!! You two are so well read in classic SciFi that I feel like a sponged up a bit of education and insight. Just listening to you chat about influences and themes made me realize how pervasive some of those ideas were in my childhood, how some have persisted while others fallen away. I'm excited to follow this series as we go through the Hugos 👍👍
This has been one of my favorite Sci-Fi books since I was a teenager. What is called "science fiction" today is mostly 'space opera' or fantasy. REAL Science Fiction takes 'known' science - including psychology and the other 'soft sciences' and then asks 'What if? What are the implications?' The negative view of this book shows total ignorance of this and of psychology in general as it was understood in the 50's and 60's. Very disappointing
This was great! I'm never going to read this book, but it's interesting to hear about the circumstances surrounding the first Hugos and the sort of haphazard way they were done at first. Helps me understand why The Lord of the Rings books didn't win.
What an awesome discussion! You guys know so much about SFF history and brought so much context to talking about the book. Sush and I really enjoyed it. Sush is reading Astounding by Alec Nevala-Lee right now and is getting a ton out of it. Also, your discussion of what counts as bias and preconception reminded me of the scene in Restaurant at the End of the Universe where they go visit the master of the universe (the guy who takes nothing for granted, not even how to use a pencil with paper), so we had to pause the video while I went to find that scene and read it out loud to Sush. ^_^ We seriously can't wait to see more of these videos discussing the Hugo award winners!
It’s just kind of there. It inspires neither awe nor wonder nor strong disdain. It doesn’t really inspire much reaction from the reader at all. It’s a forgettable pulp tale from the early 1950s, no more, no less.
Oh the the irony… "’It's like an amateur play, where the actors are doing and saying completely unnatural things; where a bad director is shoving the cast into completely false situations.’”p9
This was fantastic! I hope you will be able to do more of these types of discussions. I loved the back and forth between you. Entertaining and Educating. ^^
I have been going through all your past videos that are completely crushing my tbr, but I wanted to comment on how fabulous this discussion was (even at five months late). I hope you guys do continue on and do more of these.
Thank you! More are indeed planned.
This was so much fun!!! You two are so well read in classic SciFi that I feel like a sponged up a bit of education and insight. Just listening to you chat about influences and themes made me realize how pervasive some of those ideas were in my childhood, how some have persisted while others fallen away.
I'm excited to follow this series as we go through the Hugos 👍👍
This discussion was fantastic! I love learning the history of things and what influences that has in fiction.
This has been one of my favorite Sci-Fi books since I was a teenager. What is called "science fiction" today is mostly 'space opera' or fantasy. REAL Science Fiction takes 'known' science - including psychology and the other 'soft sciences' and then asks 'What if? What are the implications?' The negative view of this book shows total ignorance of this and of psychology in general as it was understood in the 50's and 60's. Very disappointing
Are you honestly suggesting that the field of psychology "as it was understood in the 50's and 60's" was best exemplified by Dianetics?
This was great! I'm never going to read this book, but it's interesting to hear about the circumstances surrounding the first Hugos and the sort of haphazard way they were done at first. Helps me understand why The Lord of the Rings books didn't win.
What an awesome discussion! You guys know so much about SFF history and brought so much context to talking about the book. Sush and I really enjoyed it. Sush is reading Astounding by Alec Nevala-Lee right now and is getting a ton out of it. Also, your discussion of what counts as bias and preconception reminded me of the scene in Restaurant at the End of the Universe where they go visit the master of the universe (the guy who takes nothing for granted, not even how to use a pencil with paper), so we had to pause the video while I went to find that scene and read it out loud to Sush. ^_^ We seriously can't wait to see more of these videos discussing the Hugo award winners!
this was a really fun review to listen to! i think this series where you review classic hugo winners is a FAB idea.
Such a fun listen! Looking forward to your next Hugo read.
I’m doing the Hugo read throughs with audiobooks. Is it amusingly bad (like old bad movies?) or is it a drag to read through it?
It’s just kind of there. It inspires neither awe nor wonder nor strong disdain. It doesn’t really inspire much reaction from the reader at all. It’s a forgettable pulp tale from the early 1950s, no more, no less.
Ah alright, that doesn’t sound so bad. Not like Manos hands of fate, bad.
Oh the the irony… "’It's like an amateur play, where the actors are doing and saying completely unnatural things; where a bad director is shoving the cast into completely false situations.’”p9
FREE YOUR MIND AND YOU ARSE WILL FOLLOW :-) (George Clinton Funkadelic)
Scott I have money. I'll trade it for book 4.
Loved this!
That was awesome!