I appreciate that. I'm doing my best to be thorough, but with only 100 slots, I'm sure not everyone will like all my choices! However, I do intend to make videos about "alternates" or about ones I left out but could easily have included...or something like that.
I grew up in the 90’s and “older” science fiction really is the best. I still hunt down “obscure” books in used shops. Kids today have no idea what they’re missing
@@erinjean2695 I am putting together a collection of lesser known midlist sci-fi from the 20th Century and may initiate a new playlist to review them. But I am also psyched about the newer stuff; for example, I recently read the first Expanse novel and really liked it. I will make a video about the series once I finish it.
Interesting list Was hoping to see more of the early SciFy like The Lensman Series by E.E. Smith or Cities in Flight by James Blish in your list. I think I might be showing my age.
Interesting comments. I read SIASL in junior high, about 1973, and liked it.....mostly. It had lots of interesting ideas and a compelling main character. It certainly was a product of its time. It tapped into the hippie culture quite directly. For that reason, I don't think it has much staying power. I doubt many people pick it up today, or even think about it. At the time, I was annoyed at Heinlein for his sexist attitude and his pejorative remarks in the book about gay people. On the latter, I did not see how it advanced the narrative. It just seemed like a cheap shot, and reflective of the attitudes of the time. So, whereas you say that Heinlein wanted to "examine pre-existing notions and unexplained assumptions (that others have) about the world", well he should have started with his own. Contrast Heinlein's inherent biases with the writings of Kurt Vonnegut. Vonnegut was writing at about the same time to about the same audience. I've read almost all of Vonnegut's works, and can't remember him ever making a cheap shot against gay people. So, somehow Vonnegut was able to "examine pre-existing notions" of the culture, while Heinlein was not. But, the culture changes, so likely in 50 years, we'll find some problematical stuff in Vonnegut, too. I'd be interested in your comments about Vonnegut. Only some of his works are truly SciFi (The Sirens of Titan, some of Cat's Cradle).
I admit, I don't remember the digs at gay people, but the sexism is readily apparent in what I've recently re-read by him, but also by others. For this particular series of videos, though, I am trying to stick to what I think makes each book relevant for being representative of 20th Century sci-fi. I will be putting at least one Vonnegut book on the list, too! I've read Sirens of Titan, but not Cat's Cradle, yet.
There are no pejorative remarks in the book about gay people that I can recall. There is only one scene where it's even referenced. Can you quote the passages you are referring to?
Sorry for the late reply; just saw your message. I'd have to skim through the book to find it. I remember one scene where the Stranger's appearance was being judged as too effeminate by his handlers, and that he was attracting the attention of gay men in a sexual way. So, they asked the Stranger to alter his appearance to appear more masculine so that he didn't attract "that element". This is a memory from about 50 years ago, so may be a bit inaccurate, but the main gist is true. I was a closeted gay teenager at the time, and I remember being furious at Heinlein's matter-of-fact put down. Heinlein certainly had no problem with expressive heterosexuality in the book. @@freedone.
@@andyiswonderful Heinlein was born in 1907. Stranger came out in 1961. Why would you expect anyone born over 100 years ago to somehow match or reflect your version of reality or sexual orientation? The book is a masterpiece. It also has flaws. We don't have stereo video fish tanks or flying cars or the Lyle drive. So what? Here is what seems to have offended you: “Jill... had explained homosexuality, after Mike had read about it and failed to grok--and had given him rules for avoiding passes; she knew that Mike, pretty as he was, would attract such. He had followed her advice and had made his face more masculine, instead of the androgynous beauty he had had. But Jill was not sure that Mike would refuse a pass, say, from Duke--fortunately Mike's male water brothers were decidedly masculine, just as his others were very female women. Jill suspected that Mike would grok a 'wrongness' in the poor in-betweeners anyhow--they would never be offered water.” Getting upset over this is like watching the movie Blade and being offended that Wesley Snipes is a black vampire or watching a John Waters film and getting upset about his middle class stereotypes or Divine eating dog poop... They are artistic expressions. Should I be offended that Ripley, a woman, defeats the monster in Alien because I think only a man could be that brave??? That would be silly.... Well look, you got your gay utopia. Gays can get married and divorced now. Gays have their own Pride month where they can parade almost in the nude. They can adopt kids.... The whole point of Stranger in a Strange land was to question things. He did a great job but it was not meant to be perfect. Everybody is so offended these days... Should Jews hate Frank Herbert because of his portrayal of Jewish characters in the later Dune book? In For Us, The Living, he creates a future world where they removed all the laws legislating morality. I can't remember if that includes gay marriage, but I would assume so. He was very much in favor of letting other people do whatever they want as long as they weren't hurting themselves or others. He was a Libertarian.
Thanks for looking at the full history of Sci Fi rather than recent reviewers who seem to think nothing was written before 1990 if we're lucky.
I appreciate that. I'm doing my best to be thorough, but with only 100 slots, I'm sure not everyone will like all my choices! However, I do intend to make videos about "alternates" or about ones I left out but could easily have included...or something like that.
I grew up in the 90’s and “older” science fiction really is the best. I still hunt down “obscure” books in used shops. Kids today have no idea what they’re missing
@@erinjean2695 I am putting together a collection of lesser known midlist sci-fi from the 20th Century and may initiate a new playlist to review them. But I am also psyched about the newer stuff; for example, I recently read the first Expanse novel and really liked it. I will make a video about the series once I finish it.
I just started this 😊
First time reading it? Would love to know what you think!
Interesting list Was hoping to see more of the early SciFy like The Lensman Series by E.E. Smith or Cities in Flight by James Blish in your list. I think I might be showing my age.
Oh, there will be more books from the first half of the 20th Century included for sure. Don't worry!
Cities in Flight!!
Interesting comments. I read SIASL in junior high, about 1973, and liked it.....mostly. It had lots of interesting ideas and a compelling main character. It certainly was a product of its time. It tapped into the hippie culture quite directly. For that reason, I don't think it has much staying power. I doubt many people pick it up today, or even think about it.
At the time, I was annoyed at Heinlein for his sexist attitude and his pejorative remarks in the book about gay people. On the latter, I did not see how it advanced the narrative. It just seemed like a cheap shot, and reflective of the attitudes of the time. So, whereas you say that Heinlein wanted to "examine pre-existing notions and unexplained assumptions (that others have) about the world", well he should have started with his own.
Contrast Heinlein's inherent biases with the writings of Kurt Vonnegut. Vonnegut was writing at about the same time to about the same audience. I've read almost all of Vonnegut's works, and can't remember him ever making a cheap shot against gay people. So, somehow Vonnegut was able to "examine pre-existing notions" of the culture, while Heinlein was not.
But, the culture changes, so likely in 50 years, we'll find some problematical stuff in Vonnegut, too.
I'd be interested in your comments about Vonnegut. Only some of his works are truly SciFi (The Sirens of Titan, some of Cat's Cradle).
I admit, I don't remember the digs at gay people, but the sexism is readily apparent in what I've recently re-read by him, but also by others. For this particular series of videos, though, I am trying to stick to what I think makes each book relevant for being representative of 20th Century sci-fi. I will be putting at least one Vonnegut book on the list, too! I've read Sirens of Titan, but not Cat's Cradle, yet.
There are no pejorative remarks in the book about gay people that I can recall. There is only one scene where it's even referenced.
Can you quote the passages you are referring to?
@@freedone. When I re-read it, I'll keep a look out for that (I realize you're not asking me, but I figured I'd reply anyway).
Sorry for the late reply; just saw your message. I'd have to skim through the book to find it. I remember one scene where the Stranger's appearance was being judged as too effeminate by his handlers, and that he was attracting the attention of gay men in a sexual way. So, they asked the Stranger to alter his appearance to appear more masculine so that he didn't attract "that element".
This is a memory from about 50 years ago, so may be a bit inaccurate, but the main gist is true. I was a closeted gay teenager at the time, and I remember being furious at Heinlein's matter-of-fact put down. Heinlein certainly had no problem with expressive heterosexuality in the book. @@freedone.
@@andyiswonderful Heinlein was born in 1907. Stranger came out in 1961. Why would you expect anyone born over 100 years ago to somehow match or reflect your version of reality or sexual orientation? The book is a masterpiece. It also has flaws.
We don't have stereo video fish tanks or flying cars or the Lyle drive. So what?
Here is what seems to have offended you:
“Jill... had explained homosexuality, after Mike had read about it and failed to grok--and had given him rules for avoiding passes; she knew that Mike, pretty as he was, would attract such. He had followed her advice and had made his face more masculine, instead of the androgynous beauty he had had. But Jill was not sure that Mike would refuse a pass, say, from Duke--fortunately Mike's male water brothers were decidedly masculine, just as his others were very female women. Jill suspected that Mike would grok a 'wrongness' in the poor in-betweeners anyhow--they would never be offered water.”
Getting upset over this is like watching the movie Blade and being offended that Wesley Snipes is a black vampire or watching a John Waters film and getting upset about his middle class stereotypes or Divine eating dog poop... They are artistic expressions. Should I be offended that Ripley, a woman, defeats the monster in Alien because I think only a man could be that brave??? That would be silly....
Well look, you got your gay utopia. Gays can get married and divorced now. Gays have their own Pride month where they can parade almost in the nude. They can adopt kids.... The whole point of Stranger in a Strange land was to question things. He did a great job but it was not meant to be perfect. Everybody is so offended these days... Should Jews hate Frank Herbert because of his portrayal of Jewish characters in the later Dune book?
In For Us, The Living, he creates a future world where they removed all the laws legislating morality. I can't remember if that includes gay marriage, but I would assume so. He was very much in favor of letting other people do whatever they want as long as they weren't hurting themselves or others. He was a Libertarian.