Space Opera Fans discussion

In some cases in mainstream literature, you can get as much pleasure from reading intelligent and well-written criticism of a book as you get from reading the book itself, and reading a book review by a critic you know and trust can be a great guide to whether or not you will like a book.

So, for Sci-fi generally, and for Space Opera specifically, are there any critics that you rate highly? My guess would be that most of them will be writing mainly on line, so any links would be welcome - but so would any books of criticism or articles in publications.

I don't know of anyone actually considered a "critic", but I often rely on recommendations of other sci-fi authors that I respect.

Nathan Lowell in his newsletter usually makes at least one recommendation, which are often independent, self-published works, since that is his community.

I also recently joined BlueSky (bsky.app), a Facebook like social network. Martha Wells posts on there often and frequently recommends the work of other authors. Also John Scalzi posts often, but doesn't do as many recommendations.

Another author I follow, mostly on Facebook, is David Brin. In his blog, he frequently makes recommendations of other authors.

Like Betsy I pay attention when a sci-fi author I read mentions liking a book. I also go by what other readers whose likes are similar to mine say. Since I no longer work in bookstore or lead book discussions at library I don't care what critics think of a book.

I agree about watching out for recommendations from other sci-fi authors, a number of whom are also essayists.

I'm going to try a book that combines a couple of interests, and where one of the editors is an author I particularly like - Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction which is edited by China Mieville and Mark Bould, and was recommended by Kim Stanley Robinson.

...and I'll definitely have a look at David Brin's website and blog - thanks for mentioning that, Betsy.

Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction looks GREAT, too bad it's not available :(

Cheng wrote: "Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction looks GREAT, too bad it's not available :("

Hi Cheng, probably because Pluto Press are a UK publisher, the paperback is still available in UK from either the publisher or from Amazon UK. Pluto used to have a US distributor - Marston Books - but I think they went bust recently. Pity, because as you say, it looks great.

>grumbles about how easy it is to publish ebooks<

Cheng wrote: ">grumbles about how easy it is to publish ebooks<"

I agree Cheng - you might want to consider buying an e-book I just purchased two minutes ago; Archaeologies of the Future: The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Fictions by Fredric Jameson. I bought it on Verso UK for £5 - I'm sure you'll be able to buy the ebook on Verso US.

Two review comments from the site -

"Archaeologies of the Future is certainly among the most stunning studies of science fiction ever produced ... a vast treasure trove of a book, crammed with brilliant apercus ... Jameson is one of the world’s most eminent cultural theorists, but he is also a peerless literary critic in the classical sense of the term.
Terry Eagleton, London Review of Books

Jameson’s skill in connecting diverse materials and theories, the suggestiveness of many of his insights and his passionate conviction make this an exciting book.
Times Literary Supplement"

It cost me US$16.00 - about £12.25 I believe. Looking forward to this, thanks for the rec! I haven't read any Frederick Jameson in a long time. He just died a little while ago :(

It will be interesting to compare notes Cheng, although goodness knows when - Jameson is never a fast read!

Yes, it was sad to hear of his death recently - all the major literary and/or left wing publications carried obituaries.

L J wrote: "Like Betsy I pay attention when a sci-fi author I read mentions liking a book."

I’ve found that’s fraught. So often I’ve seen a blurb from an author on a book cover only to find them also mentioned in the acknowledgements. It’s nice that colleagues are supporting each other, but it doesn’t boost the recommendation cred.

The exception is when they praise a book that’s older than they are.

Authors often ask other authors to blurb them, so it makes sense that they often recommend colleagues. But I agree that as a reader you have to take those endorsements with a grain of salt.

I don't go by cover blurbs as they can be due to contractual obligations.

I pay attention when author mentions another's book in newsletter, blog, etc. though I find that liking author's work is no guarantee I'll like what they like to read.

L J wrote: "I don't go by cover blurbs as they can be due to contractual obligations.

I pay attention when author mentions another's book in newsletter, blog, etc. though I find that liking author's work is n..."

Same.

I'm just starting Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould and China Miéville. I'm hoping to finish by the time we start our November BOTM choice. (Especially if that choice is Aurora, as Red Planets has a number of mentions of Robinson (although not of that specific book).

So far in Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction, I've read the chapters on "Rough Guide to a Lonely Planet, from Nemo to Neo"; "The Anamorphic Estrangements of Science Fiction"; "Art as 'The Basic Technique of Life': Utopian Art and Art in Utopia in 'The Disposed" and "Blue Mars"", and I'm now on "Marxism, Cinema and some Dialectics of Science Fiction and Film Noir".

Its definitely been thought-provoking, but not a fast read!

I'm still pushing on with Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction, and it continues to be fascinating, but requiring time and attention.

I'm still hopeful (probably optimistically) of finishing it before the end of October.

John wrote: "Its definitely been thought-provoking, but not a fast read!"

Yes, definitely. It's pretty challenging.

I've finished Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction, a challenging but rewarding experience. I'd rate it as 4 stars. I'm glad I read it; it's definitely motivated me to read some more literary criticism, and I've just ordered a couple more books on that. These are more general as opposed to specifically SF-related, but if there are any points that I think may be of interest to this group, I'll post them on this thread.

For anyone considering "Red Planets", this is a list of the chapters -
Rough Guide to a Lonely Planet, from Nemo to Neo.
The Anamorphic Estrangements of Science Fiction.
Art as 'The Basic Technique of Life': Utopian Art and Art in Utopia in 'The Disposed" and "Blue Mars.
Marxism, Cinema and some Dialectics of Science Fiction and Film Noir.
Spectacle, Technology and Colonialism in SF Cinema: The case of Wim Wenders' 'Until the End of the World'.
The Singularity is here.
Species and Species-Being: Alienate Subjectivity and the Commodification of Animals.
Ken MacLeod's Permanent Revolution: Utopian Possible Worlds , History and the Augenblick in the 'Fall Revolution' quartet.
'Madonna in moon rocket with breeches': Weimar SF Film Criticism during the Stabilisation Period.
The Urban Question in New Wave SF.
Towards a Revolutionary Science Fiction: Althusser's Critique of Historicity.
Utopia and Science Fiction Revisited.
Cognition as Ideology: A Dialectic of SF Theory.

I was delighted also to see that China Mieville, co-editor and contributor to Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction, is one of the 1000 writers and authors now boycotting Israeli cultural institutions.

John wrote: "I was delighted also to see that China Mieville, co-editor and contributor to Red Planets: Marxism and Science Fiction, is one of the 1000 writers and authors now boycotting Israeli ..."

You might search internet for Red Scare and Science Fiction. It was a popular dissertation and critical essay topic so there should be more available online.

Thanks L J, I'll have a search on that at some point. I've got a few books re Literary Criticism lined up, with some of them relating to SF. And I suspect that most of them will be slow reads.

I've just started what looks like an interesting book of essays on SF - Scotland as Science Fiction by Caroline McCracken-Flesher. The initial attraction was that it contains a couple of contributions that relate to Iain Banks.

One of the points that Scotland as Science Fiction makes is that SF remains primarily an Anglo-American genre, where "so far we have seen only the science fiction futures of the nations that think they are empires. We must wait to see whether the nations that think they are nations will imagine different futures".

At the same time, they note that in recent science fiction by women, there is a turn away from violence and technology, through political and feminist issues.

What do you feel about these statements - are they accurate and what are the implications for Space Opera - where violence and technology are probably most closely aligned?

John wrote: "One of the points that Scotland as Science Fiction makes is that SF remains primarily an Anglo-American genre, where "so far we have seen only the science fiction futures of the nations that think they are empires. We must wait to see whether the nations that think they are nations will imagine different futures"."

I suppose that since I'm in the US, I live in a nation that thinks it's an empire, and the fact that so much Science Fiction is US centric may play a role in that perception. With that in mind, I have to wonder how citizens of nations that think they are nations feel about the longstanding utopian vision of establishing a one world government. There was a time when I might have been on board with that suggestion, but I'm convinced now that it would be a terrible idea. Too much control in too few hands.

"At the same time, they note that in recent science fiction by women, there is a turn away from violence and technology, through political and feminist issues."

"What do you feel about these statements - are they accurate and what are the implications for Space Opera - where violence and technology are probably most closely aligned?"

Regarding the two paragraphs above, I see the book in question was published in 2011, so it's important to keep that time frame in mind. This was before much of the explosion in self publishing, and it's possible that the gatekeepers/publishing houses had biases against violence and technology. Certainly at that time, The Hunger Games was a smash hit, although one could argue whether it was perceived as Science Fiction by most fans. But when it comes to Space Opera, at least in recent years, the ladies seem to be pushing back a little on the notion that they're shying away from violence and technology. You can't read far into Lindsay Buroker's Star Nomad before encountering a little of both. Ancillary Justice seems to fit the bill as well, and the essence of violence and technology are cleverly combined in the word Murderbot. Perhaps dark imaginings were being suppressed for too long, and female authors are now making up for lost time.

Linn wrote: "but I'm convinced now that it would be a terrible idea. Too much control in too few hands.."

I tend to agree, especially at the moment when so many countries - west and east - are led by those with a hankering for dictatorship.

Linn wrote: "This was before much of the explosion in self publishing, "

That's a very interesting point Linn. I think the essay's comment was largely focussed on Scottish female SF authors who aren't writing from an "imperial/colonising empire" background - and who are instead part of a nation seeking to disengage from a disintegrating empire. But you're right to flag up the point about self-publishing, which has a number of impacts.