Books By C. LItka

Books By C. LItka

Sunday, November 18, 2018

Not Science Fiction



I’ve recently come to accept that I’m not really a card carrying fan of science fiction, nor a true science fiction writer. This realization has evolved as I’ve read more about science fiction and its history and it came to a head recently after reading Astounding: John W Campbell, Isaac Asimov, Robert A Heinlein, L Robert Hubbard, and the Golden age of Science Fiction by Alec Nevala-Lee.

However, to begin at the beginning, for the last year or so I have been a regular reader of these web sites:


These web sites feature articles and reviews about new science fiction, and discussions about what science fiction is. From their blurbs and reviews I’ve found few, if any, new books to spark my interest. This may be as it should be. Science fiction should constantly evolve with the times. It has, but I haven't. Of course there are readers my age who still enjoy new science fiction; people who have evolved with it. But it seems that  I’ve been drifting away from it for more than 40 years.

They also run series that revisit books from my prime science fiction years in the 1960’s. Often, when I read these reviews, I'm left wondering what it was that I loved about them. And, with a few exceptions, when I try rereading books from that era – I still have all of them – I can’t see past their deficiencies to recapture the magic. I no longer have the necessary youthful imagination. It seems that I’ve grown up.

One key thing I have learned is that I missed the heart of science fiction. I never read sf magazines and passed on short story collections. Short stories are simply not my cup of tea. I like stories about people, not visions, concepts, or gadgets wrapped in a veneer of a story. Plus, even if a short story features characters, the length is too short to do them justice. Still, it is said that the short story is science fiction's true medium with ideas and concepts its defining feature, neither of which I care about.

So, all in all, it seems that a surprising amount of science fiction never has appeal to me. Indeed, while writing this blog post I looked up three “100 best science fiction books” lists. I knew I read only a handful of short stories, but how about novels? On two of the lists I read 16 of the 100 and on one, just 6. Clearly I have not been doing my homework.

And finally, we come back around to Astounding, et al. This book tells the story of the pulp magazine Astounding under the editorship of John W Campbell, and his three most important writers, by telling each of their life stories. It shows them to have been very strange and flawed men. Writers may often be strange, but what is so sad about these men, for me, was their delusions of greatness. They were just pulp writers churning out stories mostly for teenage boys. But they saw themselves as something far grander; visionary giants who were leading the world into a bright future with their grand visions and the strange theories. It makes for an interesting, but rather sad, story. I'd be embarrassed to call the Campbell's Astounding era the “Golden Age” of science fiction.

So, all in all, I think that in my old age, I will retire my lifelong goal of writing science fiction. I will continue to write the type of stories I like. I suppose, like it or not, they will still be considered science fiction, if only because all of them will continue to be set in imaginary worlds. I won’t kick about it, but in my heart, I’m not writing science fiction anymore. I’m writing old fashioned adventure romances that are set in imaginary locales only because that allows me to do whatever I like with them, without having to fit them into real history and real locales. They will be set in imaginary places that I know all about and are all mine.



4 comments:

  1. Hi

    I was interested in your comments over on James website about writing and publishing. I am a life long SF fan that has lots of books and reads both old and new works. I also love the SF short story which I understand from your post that you are not fond of. I am reading the Astounding book and it is a depressing read. These were really flawed individuals with immense egos. I still read some of their works, some are unreadable for me today but I understand your misgivings about what they represent in the field. What I would love to know is what books you still remember fondly. I just found your site a few minutes ago so excuse me if you have already answered this question, but I am quite interested in people's experiences in reading SF.

    I have really enjoyed the posts I have read and am looking forward to reading some more so you will probably find further comments.

    Happy Reading
    Guy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Guy,
      First off, please forgive me for taking so long to reply to your post. I have very view comments, and I seem to remember that I'd get an email alert when someone posted something. Obviously, I was wrong. I do make it a point to reply to all posts.
      As to you question -- the books that had the greatest impact on me were all the Edgar Rice Burroughs books. At the time I got into SF in the early 1960's Ace was reissuing all of them, save the John Carter ones and Tarzan, which I wasn't a fan of. It is his format of a stranger making his way in a strange land, with a princess to save thrown in. Starman Jones was my favorite Heinlein YA book, Ben Bova's Star Conquerors was another favorite. A Bertram Chandler was another favorite writer -- and one who I can still read today, unlike most of the books from that era. I read all the Andre Norton books up to Witch World, and by the 70's I was drifting away from SF (to a degree -- never completely away) I think in general, I like adventure, space ships/space opera. What I didn't like,and still don't, was the more idea-orientated SF -- the stuff with the abstract art covers. I still have all those 500 or so old SF books from my youth, and from buying spurts every now and again.

      Anyway, I hope that sort of answers your question. Always glad to correspond cmlitka@gmail, if you have more questions.

      Thanks for taking the time to comment. Sorry I missed it for so long.
      Chuck

      Delete
  2. Hi Thank for replying. My wife and I have been discussing your post especially the passage,

    And finally, we come back around to Astounding, et al. This book tells the story of the pulp magazine Astounding under the editorship of John W Campbell, and his three most important writers, by telling each of their life stories. It shows them to have been very strange and flawed men. Writers may often be strange, but what is so sad about these men, for me, was their delusions of greatness. They were just pulp writers churning out stories mostly for teenage boys. But they saw themselves as something far grander; visionary giants who were leading the world into a bright future with their grand visions and the strange theories. It makes for an interesting, but rather sad, story.

    You have captured an idea my wife and I have not seen articulated so clearly before and I would love to quote it was part of a post on my blog. I would of course attribute it to you with a link to your post.

    My site is http://ajaggedorbit.blogspot.com/

    http://ajaggedorbit.blogspot.com/2019/01/visions-of-tomorrow-alec-nevada-lee.html

    and I have several posts on the Astounding book.

    If this is okay, please leave a comment here, on my site or I can be reached at guytrott@shaw.ca

    Thanks, I am really enjoying your site.
    Guy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for visiting the blog again. And of course you can use the passage. I have already been enjoying your blog as well.

      I have a feeling that history is mostly made by unpleasant people, and it seems that these fellows had issues that they were attempting to address – in a weird and over the top way. Plus, most everyone’s life has warts, which, if you focus on them can color one’s perception of their whole life. That may have been the case in this book. So I can cut them a little slack. What is surprising, to me, is the esteem that they and that magazine are (or where) held in. I have read some of their work from this period that was reprinted in the 50’s & 60’s. I know that all of Heinlein’s work was collected in books. I read them, but beyond remembering that they were never my favorite stories, and I don’t remember a single story from them. (But then, I don’t remember many stories.) Of course my opinion is purely subjective. Nevertheless I have a feeling their reputation is largely based on the fond memories of the writers, editors, and greatest fans of SF in the 50’s & 60’s, tinted with the golden glow of their youth.

      Delete