The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum

After having a lively discussion about favourite sci-fi movies, it's only natural to discuss about favourite sci-fi books...

My allt-time favourite sci-fi book(s) have to be Isaac Asimov's original three Foundatio-novels. I first read them when I was ~10 years old, and they left a permanent impression on me, and I've read them a dozen times since (both translated and in english).

Arthur C. Clarke's 2001, 2010 and 2061 are also great.
When talking about contemporary sci-fi, Dan Simmons with his Hyperion-saga is one of my favourites, and  Alastair Reynolds especially hits a nerve with his 'hard sci-fi' novels.

Mentoning 'hard' sci-fi, one must not forget Hal Clemens & Mission of gravity...

DUNE.

Starship Troopers...  This book has some really screwed up ideas that strangely do make a lot of sense.

My favorite sci-fi novels are Dune (the first one), Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, Ender's Game, Neuromancer, and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (entire series). ;D

Dune chapters 1, 3 and 4, Heorot, The God Makers. And a few others whose titles I forgot.

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a definite favourite of mine, as is the 2001 series and some of Lovecraft's screwier stories. I also really like the Dune series and enjoyed Ian Banks' "Consider Phlebas". But one of the very best sci-fi books I've ever read is a strange tale called "Ker Shus", written by Norwegian author Tor Aage Bringsvaerd. If any of you should come across an English translation of this little gem, you shouldn't hesitate to read it.


EDIT: Damn, I forgot to mention two other favourites. 1984 and Brave New World. Different books, but similar in outlook. And very well written.


EDIT²: Although considered non-scifi by purists, some portions of the Bible (especially those with "fiery wagons" and the like) make for pretty compelling reading, and very science fiction.

1984 and brave new world are good...so is WE(they are all grouped together).

While on the subject, how about Fahrenheit 451? Great book, and the 1960s movie adaptation wasn't bad, either.


EDIT: Damn! And damn again! How could I not mention HG Wells' War of the Worlds? Or Jules Verne's classics Journey to the Centre of the Earth and Twenty Thousand Leagues under the sea.

all good books, but I was underwhelmed by the movie.

"some portions of the Bible (especially those with "fiery wagons" and the like) make for pretty compelling reading, and very science fiction."

Yea, you really have to wonder what kinda toys they were playing with back then, if it's not all fabricated. I'm curious about the last part of genesis, where there is placed that turreted flaming sword. I want one of those!

Star Control: Interbellum!!!!!!11

Seriously though, probably Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and Hitchhiker's Guide. Good stuff.

2001, 2010, 2061, 3001. all thoes by arthur c clarke. good stuff.

dark tower series by stephen king. more sci fi fantasy than stricly sci fi.

It's not entirely unlikely that they based these fantastic stories on the possibly much older Indian vedic texts. Here are mentioned wondrous things as Viman (possibly space crafts), Diyastra (missiles) and Brahamastra (nuclear weapons). All very interesting stuff, to read how Arjun goes about his business with a war in the heavens against the Kauravs and so on. Really quite fantastic stuff. Possibly the very first science fiction ever made. And if it's like the Indians claim, that it isn't fiction but history books, then I think I'll go into a series of fits.

I've read Asimov, Clarke, a little Simak and a few other. I can't put my finger on any specific story I liked, but I kind of enjoyed the shorter stories more.
There's another writer, who's name I can't remember. I only read 2 or 3 books of his, but he got repetitive with the alternative reality stuff. Simak kinda was repetitive too, I think most his books revolved around economical principles.

I didn't like Farenheit 451 that much, but 1984 and Brave new world left an impression on me.

The Bible has a bunch of stuff in Hesekiel. With a little good will, it may seem like he's describing helicopters, with crystal cockpits, landing wheels, rotating... stuff.

Like someone said though, The indians were much more to the point with their description of the Vimanas & weaponry. Very detailed with descriptions of the effects of radioactive fallout etc.

"2001, 2010, 2061, 3001. all thoes by arthur c clarke. good stuff."

2001 and 2010 have been made into movies, while 3001 is coming out in the future. Is 2061 more boring than the rest or something? Why did it get left out.


"It's not entirely unlikely that they based these fantastic stories on the possibly much older Indian vedic texts. Here are mentioned wondrous things as Viman (possibly space crafts), Diyastra (missiles) and Brahamastra (nuclear weapons). All very interesting stuff, to read how Arjun goes about his business with a war in the heavens against the Kauravs and so on. Really quite fantastic stuff. Possibly the very first science fiction ever made. And if it's like the Indians claim, that it isn't fiction but history books, then I think I'll go into a series of fits."

Yeah, I think there might be something in indian legion too. The question is, which culture would have had all these crazy devices, the "Indo-Aryans" or whoever lived in India before their arrival? Even though I think these texts are in Sanskrit, I find it hard to believe that some georgian barbarians or whatever, possessed a civilization old enough and advanced enough to create such technology.

As for the biblical stuff, I thought that had more stories taken from egypt, than india (they are both places with a very mysterious history).

Aliens, obviously.

(this is a conversational reply, not a proposal for the book from the movie, if there is one)

" I didn't like Farenheit 451 that much, but 1984 and Brave new world left an impression on me. "FORD, why doesn't anyone like we?

I liked We. But it's not as well read as the others, for whatever reason.

Of the endings of the lot, from a storytelling perspective, I thought We had the best. It was crushing, but it didn't rub it in so much as 1984 and it wasn't a false-sounding happy end like Fahrenheit 451; and Brave New World's end was so avoidable it was almost like Eugene Onegin.

I didn''t know of 'We'. The library here has a meagre selection of books (I live on the countryside). I tried to find something by Hal Clement or Stanley Weisbaum to no avail. They do have most mainstream books though, like Clarke, Asimov, but I've pretty much already loaned everything by those. 98% of all books I have read are sci-fi.

I enjoy hard science fiction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction#Hard_science_fiction), because of the information embedded. Soft SF can be nice too as long as it doesn't get too whimsical, or if the writer managed to encourage suspension of disbelief in a good way.

"I live on the countryside"

Ha, I thought I was the only one here.  :)

Arne:
I'd strongly recommend Alastair Reynolds' novels, like 'Chasm city', 'Revelation space' amongst others. If your library doesn't have them, I bet you could find 'em in any reasonable book store for relatively cheap in paperback.

If you want to find We, it's by Yevgeny Zamyatin (his first name may have been transformed to the English version, "Eugene").

it has.the ending caught me off guard(I didn't think it would be happy I just didn't see it coming)

Wow, I didn't know a movie was being made of 3001. Although it's been a while since I read the series, I remember having the impression that 3001 was the poorest of the series. I have no idea why they're skipping 2061. Could be someone's pet peeve.



Hard to determine how many stories are taken from where. All I know is that nothing comes from nothing, and all new stories are likely based on older ones. The great flood of the Bible seems to be based on stories from Mesopotamia. Where those stories came from is anyone's guess.



I wasn't familiar with We either, guess I'll have to check it out.



Sounds like you have a passion.

"Wow, I didn't know a movie was being made of 3001."

Here is a site that gives a pretty clear picture of what's coming out, a long ways into the future:

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/release.html


"The great flood of the Bible seems to be based on stories from Mesopotamia."

Yea, it's very boring, actually. Some guy and his family get swept out into the gulf in their small livestock float. It takes them a while to get back. The End.


"Where those stories came from is anyone's guess."

They came from the aliens, of course.

Um. This doesn't seem to be based on the Clarke book at all. Synopsis from IMDb:
"Private Joe Bowers, the definition of "average American", is selected by the Pentagon to be the guinea pig for a top-secret hibernation program, set 1,000 years in the future. He discovers a society so incredibly dumbed-down that he's easily the most intelligent person alive."

Also, it's written, directed and produced by Mike Judge, previously at the helm of movies like Office Space and Beavis and Butthead do America. Fun as that may be, I think it's safe to say that the movie will probably focus more on comedy than on the science fiction element.

EDIT: By using IMDb's nifty "If you like this title, we also recommend..." option, and it came up with this gem: "Seksmisja" (English title; Sexmission), Polish science-fiction comedy from 1983, plot as follows: "Two men volunteer for a cryogenics experiment, expecting to be revived in a couple of years. Instead, they are revived several years in the future, in a world with only women which is run by the League of Women's Lib. This movie has a lot of nudity." Sounds amazing.



With a plot outline like that, you could easily make any worthwhile story look boring.



Ah. Of course. Ouch, my vonDänikenrhoids are flaring up again.

On the subject of Clarke movies, has anyone heard more about the Rendezvous with Rama movie?  I heard rumors a couple years back but it still isn't on IMDB.

How about checking out this page? The slides look promising.
http://www.rendezvouswithrama.com/

David Fincher is directing, apparently.


EDIT: Looks like Rama is in Development Hell at the moment.
http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?obj_id=35147&aff_id=0&this_cat=Development+Heck


EDIT2: "There's also a nice homage that fans of the original Star Trek TV series would enjoy: the three probes used to map and explore Rama are named after a certain captain and his first officer and chief medical officer!" (From a Coming Attractions feature of February 2002, http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/directorscut/020218.html)

Wasn't 3001 largely built on quoting the prevous books, with a bit of the main charcter walking around the peaceful Utopia of the future? It's the only SO book I ever bought, and it did feel a tad like wasted money afterwards.

I would dearly like to see that Polish film though, it sounds like quality entertainment.

Seing as this is a book thread, I've a question for those of you that have read the DUNE series. have any of you read the nwe "prequels" that have been released? The ones written by the originalauthors son? Ifso, how did you feel they compared to the original series? I've only leafed through one of them myself, and I thought it just didn't feel the same. Do they get "better" later on, or is it just mostly the same all the way through?

Perhaps not as much quoting as retreading old ground.

I was thinking on how I was going to formulate my answer to this, when I came across a review of the book on Amazon that hit the mark for me: "Between the time I read 2061, and 3001, I was excited to see how Clarke would sum everything up. Unfortunatly Clarke did a poor job in 3001. The first half of the book was simply about the technology of 3001. The part of the book, that was advertised, was that the Monoliths would be explained. They were explained very quickly. There was very little suspence, like in the 2001, and 2010. It was a real let down."

Could you give us a spoiler, and tell us how those monoliths get explained?

It's been so long and the book was so unmemorable...I think they were produced by some ancient civilization that sent them out to seek out potential intelligent life in the galaxy and ensure that it makes the leap to intelligence.  Something like that.

That review is dead on btw.  It blows my mind that anyone would consider making a movie out of it.

I would have, but it's been years since I read the book, and I've loaned my copy to a friend of mine so I can't look it up. You could, however, hop over to the page on 3001 over at Amazon, there are 288 user reviews of it (!); a lot of them discuss the plot in some detail.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0345315227/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/104-3918503-0957509?%5Fencoding=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort%5Fby=-SubmissionDate&n=507846


EDIT:

As I mentioned above, nobody is making a movie out of Clarke's book. A movie is merely coming, which happens to have the tentative title 3001; otherwise it has no connection with the book *at all*.

It sucks that humanity never meets the creators of those gene therapy hershey bars. The one mystery that drove the whole thing never becomes anything. Zzzz