A lot of the difference IMHO has to do with whether the science and toys are driving the story or just providing a way to tell it.
Too right. I don't mind some of the former, but it has to be very good for me to enjoy it. That's a great comparison with Asimov and Clarke, but even Asimov managed to cough up a romance once (The End of Eternity). One of the things I liked about him as well was that he didn't fetishise the technology too much (*cough*Neal Stephenson*cough*) - I don't mind a bit of puzzle-solving detective work occasionally. Brain candy.
I like John Wyndham too. I've only read a little of Sheckley - I agree he has an interesting take on human nature... it's a little bit cynical for me to take in large doses. :-) Still, I prefer it to farm boys finding large phallic objects pieces of cutlery, which preferably light up, and using them to find their twoo selves and/or save the world.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-13 01:05 pm (UTC)Too right. I don't mind some of the former, but it has to be very good for me to enjoy it. That's a great comparison with Asimov and Clarke, but even Asimov managed to cough up a romance once (The End of Eternity). One of the things I liked about him as well was that he didn't fetishise the technology too much (*cough*Neal Stephenson*cough*) - I don't mind a bit of puzzle-solving detective work occasionally. Brain candy.
I like John Wyndham too. I've only read a little of Sheckley - I agree he has an interesting take on human nature... it's a little bit cynical for me to take in large doses. :-) Still, I prefer it to farm boys finding large
phallic objectspieces of cutlery, which preferably light up, and using them to find their twoo selves and/or save the world.