Re: Highlights and Lowlights - August 2024

On 9/8/2024 10:27 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:

In article <vblm1h$28jfu$5@dont-email.me>,
Tony Nance  <tnusenet17@gmail.com> wrote:

On 9/7/24 9:22 AM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:

On 06/09/2024 16.29, Tony Nance wrote:

On 9/5/24 11:25 PM, Titus G wrote:

>

January 2014.
The Stainless Steel Rat    Harry Harrison        e 3
Futuristic super criminal. A bit over the top. Enjoyable pot boiler.
March 2014
The Stainless Steel Rat's Revenge Harry Harrison Not Finished.
A bit over the top. Too similar to its predecessor.
>
When I first read these last century from the library, I just loved
them. Are they a first reading for you?

>
They are, and I am greatly enjoying this one.
>
When I started reading this newsgroup in the mid-1990s, it didn't take
long for me to realize I had a pretty non-standard introduction to SF
- at least non-standard compared to almost everyone on the group at
the time. As two examples (of many), I've never read a Heinlein juvie,
nor a Norton, and when I tried to catch up in my 30s, they simply did
not work for me. At all.

>
Andre Norton is the first author that I ever sought out by name, at
the age of about eight. Unfortunately, I now find her work nearly
unreadable -- certainly a slog. So, I completely sympathize with
you there.

>
I did make it through the first few Witch World novels (whichever ones
made up an SFBC collection), but nothing really grabbed me there. I
don't remember if I read anything else by her.
>
>

>
However, I'm surprised that the Heinlein juvies were problematic
for you. In my experience, they work just as well in my second
childhood as they did in my first. RAH didn't write down to his
audience.
>
I just had a thought: was it the "father figure states the moral
of the story to the protagonist"?
>

>
That's almost surely a part of it. Authoritative lecturing (esp to
youngsters) has never gone over well with me. I also think in a way --
unique to Heinlein -- the way I initially read this newsgroup decreased
my chances of success with Heinlein. As you'd remember, he was very
extensively discussed here. I read pretty much everything that was
posted out of interest, not realizing it might spoil the reading. When I
went to read a few of his, every nitpick and critique seemed to catch my
eye.
>
Tony
>

>
I would say that "Witchworld" was the start of Norton's gear-change.
I believe I read the first one and didn't care for it at all, and rarely
clicked on her stuff after that.  For me the _The Zero Stone_/ _Uncharted Stars_
duology was peak Norton.
>
I loved most of the Heinlein juvies, but never really clicked on
_Time For The Stars_, _Between Planets_ or _Red Planet_, and I read
Podkayne too late.

  Agreed on 'Zero Stone' and 'Uncharted Stars'. I loved Norton when I was
a teenager - don't know what I'd think now.
 Norton was the first author to give me a real sensawunda in
contemplating Deep Time. Her 'Forrunners' gave me goosebumps.
 pt