HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: krogers@javelin.sim.es.com (K. Rogers)
Subject: Tad's warning about assumptions disclaimer
Reply-To: krogers@javelin.sim.es.com
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:57:01 GMT

I've been reading some epic fantasy series over again for the last
couple months.  I'm currently on Tad Williams' Memory, Sorrow and
Thorn (or whatever order the three words come in).  The beginning of
The beginning of Dragonbone Chair has a blurb from the author about
avoiding assumptions while reading the work.  I vaguely remember that
disclaimer the first time I read the two books currently out.
However, in retrospect, I don't recall making any assumption pitfalls
with the series to date.

I don't consider myself to be a very astute or sophisticated SF reader
but I think I would have caught at least a few assumption slips on my
part but never found any the first time and have yet to find any the
second time through.  Am I just dense or is the final book going to be
the the one to turn us on our heads making the bad guys good (or at
least morally neutral) good guys bad and get me killed at the next
zebra crossing [apologies to Doug Adams]?  What is that disclaimer
there for?
-- 
Keith Rogers
krogers@javelin.sim.es.com
From: mjb@doc.ic.ac.uk (Matthew Jude Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Piers Anthony
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:26:52 GMT
	<1992Sep14.162252.6707@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>
	<192i6fINN808@agate.berkeley.edu> <1992Sep15.105517.1@pearl.tufts.edu>
Organization: Department of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
NNTP-Posting-Host: oak7.doc.ic.ac.uk
In-reply-to: mweinste@pearl.tufts.edu's message of 15 Sep 92 15:55:17 GMT


>In article <1992Sep15.105517.1@pearl.tufts.edu> mweinste@pearl.tufts.edu writes:
>> If we're to get anywhere in this argument, we'd best have a definition of
>> "good" and "bad" writing.

>> I'll offer four: [trimmed by mjb]

>> (1) Good writing is writing with good characters, plot, prose, etc.
>> (2) Good writing is writing that a lot of people like.
>> (3) Good writing is writing that I like.
>> (4) Good writing is writing that's read by intelligent, tasteful,
>> literate folks like me; bad writing is writing that's read by
>> swinish, callow, dimwit geeks like you.
>> this, I suspect, is the definition
>> most people use.

>No, this is not the definition that most people use.  It's the definition that
>people who have very large egos and very narrow scopes of thinking use. 
>Certainly from a standpoint of science-fiction, the only accurate definition is
>number three, with each person adapting to him/herself.  If I like it, it's
>good.  If you don't like it, it's bad.  Because of this, I cannot criticize
>your taste, and you cannot criticize mine -- we're both right, not both wrong.

Ah, but you have to understand the definition of 'most people' being
used here. As I understood it, this referred to 'most USENET flamers';
these being the individuals with the 'very large egos and very narrow
scopes of thinking' that you mention.

Besides, #1, #2 are boring. #3 is quite accurate, but it doesn't go
far enough for a good flame. #4, though, while borrowing all the good
points of #3, thankfully lacks the implied notion that all opinions
are equal, and therefore is sufficient basis for a good flamewar.
After all, the point of flaming is to prove that you're right and he's
wrong; belief in #4 supplies the necessary conviction, but offers no
proof, which makes for great entertainment.

-Matt

-- 
| Matthew J. Brown  | Dept. of Computing | If God intended for us to go to   |
| mjb@doc.ic.ac.uk  | Imperial College,  | lectures He wouldn't have created |
| mjb02@cc.ic.ac.uk | 180 Queen's Gate   | double-sided photocopiers.        |
| Morven on Lambda  | LONDON SW7 2AZ     |          -IC RagMag 1991/92       |
From: mweinste@pearl.tufts.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Note from introducer of Anthony strain
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:32:28 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

Since I, as a new user ignorant to the hate of Piers Anthony, started this
entire thread of conversation, I will now explain my opinions on everything
that has been discussed so far.  Here goes...

1) Yes, I like Piers Anthony.  I don't like everything he's ever written, nor
do I think he is the penultimate sci-fi writer.  I was simply curious about
whether or not anyone else on the Net enjoyed some of his books.

2) I do not read exclusively Anthony.  I've read Tolkein, Adams, Brooks,
Aspirin, Zelazny, and others.  This is not to mention the fact that I read many
other genres, which is a characteristic many of you seem to be lacking.  I read
mysteries, literature, standard fiction, dramas, etc.  If I want deep, complex,
intellectual reading, I can easily turn to Socrates, Nietzsche, Agatha
Christie, or others.  When I read sci-fi/fantasy novels, it is purely for
escapism and relaxation.

3) Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and is free to share it with
everyone.  However, I do not believe in insulting, criticizing, or otherwise
putting down other people's opinions.  I am totally open to people's criticism
of Anthony or anyone else, provided it is addressed in an intelligent, mature
manner.  Anyone wishing to have a more detailed conversation about a specific
topic can E-mail me at "mweinste@pearl.tufts.edu"

4) Generalities are a dangerous trap to fall into.  To say that all of an
author's books are junk is unfair, unless you've read every one of his books. 
More specifically, even if the Xanth books after the first couple are weak,
that does not mean that all of his new work is garbage.  The last two
Incarnations books, about Satan and about God, were excellent.  Virtual Mode
was terrific... it was complex, surprising, and enjoyable.  Please don't make
blanket statements unless you have the knowledge to back them up.

5) The only true definition of a good science fiction book is whether the
reader enjoys it.  There is no book in the world that everyone thinks is good. 
Therefore, please express your opinions AS OPINIONS, not as facts.

6) I have no intention of moving my conversation to alt.fan.piers-anthony. 
Even if my node did receive this group, I would have no desire to converse with
people who are all of the same opinion.  I am glad that this entire argument
started because I now have a much better idea of what people like, how people
think, etc. on this net.  In addition, many names have been introduced to me in
the world of sci-fi, and I just might try a couple of them out.  In fact, if
you have any suggestions for what you consider excellent sci-fi, or better yet,
fantasy, leave me some E-mail (mweinste@pearl.tufts.edu).  Thanks.

Thank you for reading this message and understanding the source of this entire
strain of conversation.

===========> Max Weinstein (mweinste@pearl.tufts.edu)
             Tufts University -- Medford, Massachusetts, USA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.bio
From: ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Aaron Wigley [Wigs])
Subject: Re: Are the Moties us?
Organization: Monash University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 01:10:56 GMT

Aaron Wigley [Wigs] (ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au) wrote:
: The experiments are still continuing, and I don't know when a result
: is pending, but if people like, I could ask the researcher to contribute
: to this thread :-)

Okay, people have Emailed me, asking about the experiment, here's what
I did (WARNING - THERE ARE MAJOR SPOILERS BELOW REGARDING ANYONE WHO MAY
YET DO THIS EXPERIMENT AT MONASH UNIVERSITY. IF YOU HAVE NOT ASSISTED IN 
THE EXPERIMENT, THINK TWICE BEFORE CONTINUING!):



  






	The session went for an hour, and included me sitting in a darkened
  soundproof room, watching 28 slides of guns. Every now and then a loud 
  gunshot would ring out. I was wearing sensors to measure heart rate, and
  skin resistivity (ie. sweat) on my hand. 
	When this finished, the researcher came in, and I went through a
  series of relaxation techniques. I was then asked to picture various 
  scenes involving guns, and indicate if I was nervous etc. or not.

The Wigs of Oz, who is not phobic of guns, nor snakes,
but is anxious when someone points a gun at him :-)
Aaron Wigley 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: ericg@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Eric Chris Garrison)
Subject: Re: RIP Fritz Leiber
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 19:21:38 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.042428.18330@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> lnh@physics.arizona.edu writes:
>
>   Fritz Leiber
>Requiescat in pace

He's dead?  Oh no!  He was one of my all-time favorite authors.
Not just for the Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser books (which are
excellent, told like the master storyteller he is), but for his
short stories, full of ghosts, spiders, snakes, girls and
much weird- and wonderful-ness.

Now Asimov, Heinlein and Leiber are gone.  Who will be next of
the old greats to go?  Clarke?

I'm going to miss these guys.

Eric

-- 
Eric Chris Garrison			      UCS Support Center
ericg@ucs.indiana.edu			      Indiana University
From: katie@physics.Berkeley.EDU (Katie Schwarz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Mercedes Lackey
Date: 12 Sep 1992 07:22:30 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.berkeley.edu

REBECCA@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (Rebecca Drayer) writes:
>I have a question about Ms. Lackey's work.  Has she written any other Diana
>Tregarde books besides Jinx High?  Also, is she planning to write any more
>in the future?

You only know Jinx High? That was the worst book I've ever
read! It couldn't settle down to a point of view, most of the characters
are unlikable, we see very little of Diana; in general it felt like the
author just dashed it off without thinking it through.

Fortunately, the other Diana Tregarde books are better: Children of
the Night (set in the early 70s) and Burning Water (set in the mid 80s, but
published first). I liked Children of the Night so much that as soon as I
read it I rushed to the bookstore looking for sequels. It gave me a
convincing feeling of terrible danger and brave dedication by the heroes.
Burning Water is okay; it's told mostly from the viewpoint of Mark Valdez,
Diana's cop friend (I think he's mentioned in Jinx High), who's an
interesting character too.

katie@physics.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: rsm58307@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ron)
Subject: Re: S.R. Donaldson
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 03:13:44 GMT

julie@MICA.GEOLOGY.UTORONTO.CA (Julie King) writes:

>I purchased Donaldson's new book with much joy, anticipating the wonderful
>more wonderful writing in the style of the Covanent series.  I thought
>it was *horrible* and was extremely dissapointed!  Violence, horror, more
>violence, and sex.  I really don't see this as a villian turned victum but
>rather a study of deranged human lust and abuse.  Any comments?
>JK

It gets better. Personally the first book went sort of slow but the
rest were right up to speed. (actually I'd skip the first book and read
it after reading the second if I could do it over again)

The thing about Donaldson is his imagery is strong and his ideas great.
He does ignore conventional taste/morals to get his point across, but
the point is that his main character thinks its all a dream and can do
whatever the fuck he wants.

	- ron
From: trevorl@spider.co.uk (Trevor Lyall)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: How do you know you're in an alternate reality (was Re: Asimov...)
Date: 11 Sep 92 14:13:03 GMT
Organization: Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, UK.

In article <1992Sep11.003440.19882@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> dave@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Schaumann) writes:
>In article <BERRY.92Sep8191420@athos.pei.com>, berry@athos (Berry Kercheval) writes:
>>(F&SF 'Fake Ad' Contest winner:  "For sale, complete works of Asimov
>>on microfiche; must sell, moving to smaller house")
>
>:-D
>
>
>The one that I remember implied that the (US) civil war had never really
>come to a conclusion, and that on-going fighting had basically prevented
>any further expansion west, which was thus still controlled by Native
>Americans.  The actual text made it sound like Israel/Palestine &c.
>
Funny I thought that the civil war was still on in the US, hmmm, mabye
that's just the impression I'm getting from the good 'ol BBC News lately!!

-Trev. (Bored so I thought I'd post something)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|		//-n-\\			Trevor Lyall.                          |
|       _____---=======---_____		      e-mail: trevorl@spider.co.uk     |
|   ====____\   /.. ..\   /____====               or  txl@dcs.ed.ac.uk         |
| //         ---\__O__/---         \\	                                       |
| \_\                             /_/                                          |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: morrow@fnalo.fnal.gov (An Elmo of Their Own)
Subject: Re: Glen Cook's next Black Company Book
Organization: Fay Vincent's Baseball Substitute
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:15:49 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalo.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <latn3_j.dani@netcom.com>, dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
> news@massey.ac.nz (USENET News System):
>>I just was looking at the first 2 of the Black Company Books, are they any 
>>good?
> 
> That's the wrong question with these books.  The relevant question isn't
> whether they're well written (they are) but whether they're to your taste.
> (Some readers find them overly violent, amoral, and dark.)  Read "The
> Black Company" and decide whether you want to read the rest.

	Normally, I sneer at anything remotely grim'n'gritty, but the Black
Company books are _good_.
	Violent?  They're not violent in the way that Bret Easton Ellis'
American Psycho was violent.  There is a lot of death (unsurprising,
considering the Company is a military unit), but it's mostly offscreen; the
books are not a gorefest.
	Amoral?  Not really.  The characters like to pretend they're hard
bastards, and some of them are, but the viewpoint characters have a soft core 
of morality, and actually dare to hope (which, I suppose, technically moves the
book out of "grim'n'gritty").
	Overall, technically well written, good adventure, characters with
depth.
	And for you hyperbolists, the books also have the most powerful, 
hardest to kill, evil wizards ever in my experience :-)
-- 
"You look back at your high school yearbook, and you see the Looks that were   
popular years ago, and you wonder how the human race managed to reproduce."    
--Dave Barry                                                                   
  
elmo (morrow@physics.rice.edu,morrow@fnal.fnal.gov)
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Carve the Sky, by Alexander Jablokov
Date: 15 Sep 92 14:52:51 GMT
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: gamiddle@math.uwaterloo.ca (Guy Middleton)

In article <BuFqu8.K4y@math.uwaterloo.ca>, gamiddle@math (Guy Middleton) writes:
>I just finished Carve the Sky, by Alexander Jablokov (who is he?  I've never
>heard of him before -- this is a first novel).

He's been writing great short stories for a few years, mostly in ASIMOV'S.
I think his first story there even got a whopping letter of appreciation
from Robert Silverberg.  And CARVE THE SKY got a very positive review from
Orson Scott Card.

>The book is the story of a quest for a missing piece of art, and research
>into the last days of the century's greatest sculptor.  Very well written,
>with convincing characters, believeble technology, and (to me, at least) a
>healthy respect for art and artists.  Well worth reading.

A prequel to the novel appeared in ASIMOV'S this past year.  And the current
issue (Nov 92) has his "Above Ancient Seas".  The blurb says his new novel,
A DEEPER SEA, has just been published by Morrow.

Speaking of the Nov '92 ASIMOV'S--it's the IA memorial issue.  The name has
been changed from ISAAC ASIMOV'S SCIENCE FICTION MAGAZINE to just ASIMOV'S
SCIENCE FICTION.  I've only just read the memorials--some of them are what
appeared in LOCUS, some are original.  Frederik Pohl mentioned that he has
co-authored OUR ANGRY EARTH with IA last year--what is that?
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig)
Subject: McCollum:  Sails of Tau Ceti
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 23:52:36 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

I've enjoyed most of Mike McCollum's books, but the last one --
Clouds of Saturn -- was weak, and the latest one -- Sails of Tau Ceti --
is even weaker.

It's the twenty-third century, and a huge sub-light alien ship
is arriving with the survivors of the (unexpected) Tau Ceti nova.
The aliens ask for asylum on Earth, and persuade one of the crew
members of the ship which first meets them to serve as their
advocate.  They persuade her to take the job by letting her in on
their deep dark secret.

But the book is a house of cards.  While one of the plot devices 
requires that the date be two and a half centuries in our future,
half a century would be more convincing in most respects.  Worse,
there is no convincing reason for the aliens to have taken on the
advocate they did, except to provide the author with a viewpoint
character, there is no convincing reason for her to keep their secret,
and it is implausible that the aliens would understand humans so
well except for they key blind spots.

The characterization is very shallow -- even that of the character
whose viewpoint we follow for 98% of the story -- precisely because
what the characters depends not on their characterization, but only
upon the whims of the author.  This book appears decades too late:
It's gadget fiction, except that the gadgets don't occupy much of the
book; it's puzzle fiction, except that it's inconceivable that the
key portions of the puzzle wouldn't have occurred to the analysts on
both sides; it's science fiction, except that neither the science nor
the fiction is very interesting.

-----
Dani Zweig
dani@netcom.com

   'T is with our judgements as our watches, none
   Go alike, yet each believes his own
		--Alexander Pope
From: datta@beirut.berkeley.edu (Ruchira Datta)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Melanie Rawn:  Next book?
Date: 8 Sep 1992 16:36:02 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.
NNTP-Posting-Host: beirut.berkeley.edu

In article <Bu39sE.6FE@news.udel.edu> jlredd@bach.udel.edu (Joshua Smith) writes:
>
>Yeah, I just read the 5 books that are out now.  I read them in about 3
>weeks total.  Talk about getting carried along in a story.  

I read the first 4 books in 1 week, and The Dragon Token the next week.

>So far I've
>really like what I've read.  Although the DragonPrince was very good, I
>think that I even like the 4 and 5th books better.  It is very unusual
>that authors go into such detail about characters, and I find it VERY
>refreshing.  I guess that I've gotten so used to Edding's relatively
>shalow characters (ouch, the flames), that Rawn's depth is very
>captivating.  

I agree completely.  By the way, I probably would never have seen these books
if it weren't for someone's recommendation (I forget whose now) on this
newsgroup.  Thanks a lot!

SPOILERS FOLLOW

Something always bothered me about The Dragon Prince.  I guess the transition
from a novel basically about two people (Sioned and Rohan, in the first
two-thirds or so of the book) to one about the entire world (the remainder
of that book, and all the rest of the books) was too abrupt for me.  In
particular, I really was jolted when the problems between Sioned and Rohan
after returning from Feruche, which were put on hold (though they were
certainly on both their minds) while they were dealing with Roelstra, just
vanished with only about two paragraphs of explanation at the time of their
coronation.  There were references to some incidents in some of the later
books (e.g., Rohan's being forced to acknowledge Pol in front of his
cheering citizens), but it certainly wasn't explored as deeply as I would
have expected from the first parts of the book.  I remember feeling, as I
read it, that she couldn't possibly have written it this way; someone must
have cut it because the book was too long.  (Not too long for me, though!)

-- Ruchira
From: GGREENBE@wiscssc.BITNET
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Social-economic transformation
Date: 16 Sep 92 01:28:00 GMT

I
Does anyone know of some good books on socio-economic transformation.  The
actual process (not necessarily by revolution).  This would be change from
one social/economic structure to another.  Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
Greg Greenberg
University of Wisconsin-Sociology
P.S. Stories that deal with this topic would also be welcome
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: steyn@cs.rochester.edu (Gavin Steyn)
Subject: Re: Piers Anthony
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 21:04:32 GMT

In article <hqyncn+@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt Bose "of Biscayzee") writes:
>
><Insert image here of Piers Anthony keeping the aforementioned authors in a
>small cage, so that it is not even humanly possible for them to write, thereby 
>preventing people from special ordering their work, or preventing people from
>going to a book shop where the solution to the problem of shelf space is 
>neatly solved by...MORE SHELF SPACE!!!><seems to me that person might need to
>change book shops, not disparage authors....>

Hell, why go to the trouble of going to a new bookstore, particularly if
there isn't one in town.  Open your own, right?  Get serious.  (And
obviously if the bookstore doesn't have enough shelf-space, the owner would
only be too glad to put in more for me.  Right).
  Special-ordering is possible, I agree.  And I use it for the books that
I know of (it's the only way to get a lot of them).  But there are a
bunch of books that just come and go without my knowledge, because they're
squeezed off the shelves too quickly.  (For example, _Soldiers of Paradise_,
one of the best sf novels of its years came and went ridiculously fast.
I could pretty easily have missed it.)
  I suppose I should special order a copy of every sf book that comes
out, so I can preview them all.  Why didn't I think of that before?

Gavin Steyn
steyn@cs.rochester.edu
"So he's had the lifelong ambition of reversing the polarity of the earth?"


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: rickk@emu.com (Rick Kleffel)
Subject: Re: Gormenghast
Keywords: Mervyn Peake, Fantasy
Organization: E-Mu Systems
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 13:40:41 GMT

In article <w2kn9z#.dani@netcom.com> dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones):
>>However, I was not able to finish the third book. Did anyone finish it, and
>>did it finish well? 
>The first two Gormenghast books were wonderful, but I also found the
>third book a disappointment.  

If I recall correctly, it was not completely finished.  TO me it seemed
more like a sketch for a much longer book.  I actually liked the journey to
the outside world -- from castles to cars without surprise.  Another poster
mentioned an imcomplete fourth book.  Any details out there?

Rick Kleffel