The Apolyton Science Fiction Book Club: May Nominations

[Carolus Rex]

BTW, great choice for April! A classic...

Carolus

[Wraith]

--"when voting, other than your book vote only for books you haven't read yet."

That is what I've done.

The problem with going with the really big name titles is that they're the ones that have already been discussed endlessly online. It's just not quite as interesting as going over something you haven't read before, you know?

So far I've read all but three books on the list, and one of those I haven't read because I haven't liked any of the author's other work. One or two of the ones I have don't really seem like there'd be much discussion about them.

Come to that, Ender's Game isn't exactly the book most requiring literary analysis. Card makes a point of mentioning it in his introduction. Oh well.

Wraith
"Nothing, not even pleasure, can bind two humans as close as a long-enduring vendetta, for it forces upon each a constant awareness of the strengths and vulnerabilities of each other, and commits them to a common purpose which colors all other activities."
-- Hakur ("In Conquest Born")

[JohnT]

Well, this is a new group and one thing I've noticed is when a new group is formed, the easily recognizable "classics" are always chosen among the first films. For example, when the movie group started, three of our first 5 films were "Citizen Kane", "The Godfather", and "Casablanca." Great movies, but c'mon! But lately we've done "lesser" films, such as "Election" and Disneys "Beauty and the Beast."

Point is, we will get the "classics" out of our system and move on to other things in time.

Like you, except for the first book (which I selected) I have not voted for books that I've previously read, and I think a couple of people are doing the same as well.

Perhaps one month I can make it so that we can only nominate authors who've been published novelists less than, say, 5 years. How's that sound?

[Static Universe]

Originally posted by JohnT

Point is, we will get the "classics" out of our system and move on to other things in time.

Like you, except for the first book (which I selected) I have not voted for books that I've previously read, and I think a couple of people are doing the same as well.

Perhaps one month I can make it so that we can only nominate authors who've been published novelists less than, say, 5 years. How's that sound?

I've read over a third of the nominations on this list, and they're all great books, as I'm sure the others are as well, so it's difficult to choose. I find the selections a little too diverse.

Perhaps the person whose nomination wins can establish a "theme" for the next round of nominations, such as "unsung masterpieces", "really hard sci-fi", or "best short story collections".

Then everybody picks a work that they feel best exemplifies this theme. To add some variety, the "theme" establisher can also pick who gets to decide the "theme" next time, say the second place finisher, last place, or whatever.

If this suggestion is too confusing, let me know, and I'll add a few more rules.

[JohnT]

'Perhaps the person whose nomination wins can establish a "theme" for the next round of nominations, such as "unsung masterpieces", "really hard sci-fi", or "best short story collections". '

That's not a bad idea. Any discussion?

[randomturn]

WHAT? No Roger Zelazney? I nominate the original 5 volume Amber Chronicles, Lord of Light, and Roadmarks.

I would also add James Hogan's Code of the Lifemaker --one of the great treatises on skepticism ever written and a damn good story on its own right.

[JohnT]

You are NOT nominating 7 books! Re-read the OP and reconsider.

[randomturn]

Amber Chronicles is basically one book. I mean, each one is like 86 pages long, and they don't make much sense individually. So that's my nominee. the other books are my nominees for the upcoming months. I'm just listing them now. or I retract them for the timebeing if that's better...

[Static Universe]

Originally posted by randomturn
Amber Chronicles is basically one book. I mean, each one is like 86 pages long, and they don't make much sense individually.

There is a collected edition, perhaps you can nominate that.

Although it is like 1000 pages.

[JohnT]

Yeah, I won't remember for the upcoming months... you think I'm keeping a list here?

So, "Amber Chronicles" it is.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Static23


There is a collected edition, perhaps you can nominate that.

Although it is like 1000 pages.

And $16 if you buy it new on Amazon!

Is it even sci-fi?

[Wraith]

--"Point is, we will get the "classics" out of our system and move on to other things in time. "

Yeah, but I'm an American. You can't expect me to be paitent, now, can you?

--"That's not a bad idea. Any discussion?"

Sounds like a good idea. At the least it'll keep the same books from popping up every time.
Still, I can't wait to see the flame wars over what qualifies as fitting a particular sub-genre...

--"Is it even sci-fi?"

No, they aren't. They're fantasy, and there isn't really any technological factor involved (that is, not even science fantasy). I do like Zelazny, but these books don't really qaulify for the group.

Wraith
"The more complex the language, the greater its capacity to influence the thoughts of men."
-- Harkur ("In Conquest Born")

[St Leo]

Lord of Light is a valid nomination though. Let's just pretend that's precisely what was nominated.

[randomturn]

I dunno, I'd have to say Amber is more sf than fantasy since it is fundamentally metaphysical and not fantastical. It anticipated chaos theory and complexity theory and alludes strongly to the scientific/philosophical debate on human free will versus determinism. It takes place in a quantum-mechanical infinite-universes multiverse. So while it may not be technological, it is deeply grounded in science theory. So I stick with this nomination: the original 5 volume set of the Amber Chronicles (and it's well short of 1000 pages).

[JohnT]

Please, link to a current edition of the 5-volume set. I can only find the 10-book set on Amazon.

Danke