Re: [ReacTor] "Bad Books", and the Readers That Love Them

On 15 Apr 2024 14:21:37 -0000, jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll)
wrote:

"Bad Books", and the Readers That Love Them
>
Inexplicably not titled "Why I Own Most of Hal Clement's Novels."
>
https://reactormag.com/bad-books-and-the-readers-that-love-them/

A great column!

Why do I think this column is great? Clearly it's a bad column; it
advocates wrongthink!

Ah, but it scratches my itch! It defends the right to exist of genre
fiction in general, and golden age pulp SF in particular! In
*addition* to the lesser-quality, much derided, 'bad' science fiction
of today which dares to offend the sensibilities of this more advanced
time by attempting to cater to the same audiences as consumed pulp
science fiction in days of yore.

Despite the much higher price of newsprint these days, as well as the
availability of the Internet, video games, and other distractions,
which are the cause of print fiction being almost wholly conquered by
those left-wing Arts graduates who insist on three-dimensional
characters and all the rest of the ingredients of real literature.

I remember, ages ago, reading a magazine article from a "Sunday
Supplement" (actually came with the Saturday edition, as here in
Canada our newspapers were influenced by old blue laws) titled "A Tree
Grows in Brazil", I think, about how a super-fast growing tree variety
developed to grow in Brazil was going to put the Canadian forestry
industry out of business.

Since the high cost of newsprint has contributed to the decline of
pulp genre fiction including pulp SF, this has given me a
science-fiction story idea. A science fiction fan who wishes to bring
back the good old days decides to go into silvicultural research.

Hilarity, or at least something on the order of kudzu, ensues.

John Savard