Who Do You Think Are The Most Neglected and Forgotten Writers?

[BAYLOR]

Writers that were celebrated and or popular but faded away in their own lifetime and after they died. And why do you suppose they fell into neglect and obscurity? What factors made them become so unmemorable ? This topic covers all the genres.

 

[Bick]

Interesting question, BAYLOR. Some fell out of favor, doubtless, because they wrote fashionably, but not all that well. For others, the reason is more of a mystery perhaps. I'll leave lists of long forgotten golden age writers to others more knowledgeable, but from my youth, a writer I very much enjoyed but who you rarely hear mentioned much these days (I can't recall any mention on these boards for instance), is Julian May. She was very popular in the '80's for her Saga of the Exiles, probably the series I loved the most after LOTR, but she seems to have slipped from the SFF consciousness. I'm not sure why, but it may be that her follow up novels were less good. I think part of the problem for authors is that, even if they still have the ability, often times publishers' tastes change, and writers find it hard to sell their work anymore. I recall reading a comment from Alan Dean Foster, that he has completed 4 novels for which he cannot find a publisher.

 

[Bick]

Incidentally (and sorry for double post), here's an exercise: I have a few original 1950's Astounding and Galaxy magazines. Here is a list of some authors to be found in those magazines as a sampling of what was popular in the '50's, many of them now (more or less) forgotten, except by geeks like us on these boards:

Jim Harmon, Bertram Chandler, Randall Garrett, Christopher Anvil, J.T. McIntosh, Theodore Thomas

...all these published a good deal in the big magazines of the time. These writers predominantly wrote short fiction, and that has never sold very well as collections or anthologies (compared to the magazines they came from). So once the golden age of SF magazines finished (end 1950's?) coinciding with an increasing market for books and novels, they rather got forgotten.

 

[J-Sun]

There's actually an award for this: the Cordwainer Smith Rediscovery Award. Of the recipients (hard to say "winners") I think Kuttner & Moore are definitely the most neglected, considering degree of neglect in proportion to degree of talent. I'm also a big fan of Brackett, Brown, MacLean, and Weinbaum and wouldn't count out some others.

But really, all kinds of people are unfairly neglected, especially older authors, but not only them. If you figure that she briefly won a handful of awards and if you read stuff like Points of Departure, it's kind of amazing that Pat Murphy's career seems to have stalled (allowing for the occasional story which still wins the occasional award). I think, of people associated with cyberpunk (especially as he pre-dated it all and was an actual punk), John Shirley. (Relative to Gibson, I've always felt Sterling was much better and more important overall and so was unfairly neglected in proportion to that.)

That Algis Budrys isn't regularly mentioned in the same breath as all the other greats is a crime. Carol Emshwiller seems to be getting more recognition now that she's in her 90s but, still... That Norman Spinrad hasn't yet been made an SFWA Grand Master is a crime. Probably C.M. Kornbluth is not as well remembered as he should be, despite probably still being famous in a "here's a great story" sense. James H. Schmitz is a lot of fun and should probably be bigger than he is.

And, as I said, in addition to Kuttner/Moore, there are all the Golden Age greats - even Asimov and Heinlein are probably not read like they should be.

As far as why, for some it's just a case of length of time and breadth of the field - not everybody can be read by everybody and some people start to fade, not through any special fault of their own or of those in the present, but just due to a semi-random process of elimination. But a big part of it is that some of these neglected folks excelled at short fiction and the publishers (and/or readers) are more gigantic-novel centered. And then John Shirley and Norman Spinrad are just too extreme and un-accommodating to appeal to everybody. Carol Emshwiller is too weird and literary (it's a miracle I appreciate her as much as I do). Budrys is too understated and psychological, perhaps. I have no idea why Kornbluth, Kuttner, Moore, Murphy, and Schmitz are, though - unless the story thing for the first four and, to an extent, Schmitz. Not that they didn't write great novels, but those were probably a lesser part of most of their output. Well, and Schmitz could be seen as dated - his gender roles were quite advanced and psi stuff is still done today but there is a kind of "kinder, simpler" vibe to him that is probably at odds with today's more psychologically distressed stuff.

And as I typed all this up, I became increasingly sure that this topic has been raised before somewhere, but I'm still not positive.

[Edit - and I see that Bick beat me to the "short fiction" observation. ]

 

[AnyaKimlin]

For me Robert Neill - his stories involve a certain amount of witchcraft and magic.

They are warm tales that are written in a style that is a little old fashioned but I do not know why he has become more forgotten. Mist Over Pendle his most famous book has recently been released.

 

[Randy M.]

J-Sun,

The Cordwainer Smith awards list is pretty good and too true. Among those listed is Edgar Pangborn. I should reread his novels, but just a couple of years ago I reread his story collection, Good Neighbors and Other Strangers; even the slight stories were charming and the story I'd liked least in my previous readings I came to appreciate more this time around.

As J-Sun and Bick have noted, there are some writers who are more adept at the short story than at longer forms, and they are the ones most at risk of being lost. Smaller presses help, but unfortunately small presses usually have to sell at a higher price, keeping the books out of the hands of younger readers, but then the younger readers probably wouldn't buy them because they are short stories ... a vicious cycle.

Anyway, I agree that Fred Brown and C. M. Kornbluth may be in danger of being forgotten; fortunately NESFA put out solid volumes of their work.

I'd nominate John Sladek, although I think he was reissued in the Gollanz Masterpiece series. Except for the Fahfrd and Grey Mouser stories, Fritz Leiber's work isn't all that easy to find anymore. Some of his s.f. pops up -- The Big Time was included in a Library of America volume of 1950s s.f. I think -- unfortunately Midnight House folded before it could complete its series of collections of his horror/weird fantasy, a real pity because they were doing a nice job.

Clark Ashton Smith seems perpetually on the cusp of oblivion. Also on the cusp of being discovered by a broader audience than ever. Hard to say which way it'll go, but that Penguin put out a collection is an encouraging sign.


Randy M.

 

[tinkerdan]

I was drawn to her Exiles and her Milieu series but Trillium did not interest me and I dropped out at that point. She's around 83 now and last published possibly in 2006.

Interesting question, BAYLOR. Some fell out of favor, doubtless, because they wrote fashionably, but not all that well. For others, the reason is more of a mystery perhaps. I'll leave lists of long forgotten golden age writers to others more knowledgeable, but from my youth, a writer I very much enjoyed but who you rarely hear mentioned much these days (I can't recall any mention on these boards for instance), is Julian May. She was very popular in the '80's for her Saga of the Exiles, probably the series I loved the most after LOTR, but she seems to have slipped from the SFF consciousness. I'm not sure why, but it may be that her follow up novels were less good. I think part of the problem for authors is that, even if they still have the ability, often times publishers' tastes change, and writers find it hard to sell their work anymore. I recall reading a comment from Alan Dean Foster, that he has completed 4 novels for which he cannot find a publisher.

I enjoyed the work of Alexei Panshin and his Anthony Villiers series but really saw nothing much more from him. I don't think he had many friends in publishing.

 

[BAYLOR]

Clifford Simak
Kenneth Bulmer
Bernard Wolfe
Stanton Coblentz

 

[J-Sun]

Clifford Simak

That's a particularly good one - not sure why I didn't cite him. But I'm wondering why he is neglected (rural, pastoral stuff is passe?). This is one of the first Grand Masters, author of the famous, classic, award-winning Way Station and the huge, famous (if maybe critically overrated) City and a guy who was publishing and winning awards right through the 80s along with Asimov, Clarke, and Heinlein (though, granted, perhaps without as much commercial success even then, but ACH set high best-selling bars for that). And he really does seem to have disappeared from the shelves, new and used[1] and may not be talked about so much, either. Have any opinions on why that happened?

_____

[1] I think one or two are in the SF Masterworks thing, though - ironic that he's probably printed more in the UK than the US.

 

[BAYLOR]

That's a particularly good one - not sure why I didn't cite him. But I'm wondering why he is neglected (rural, pastoral stuff is passe?). This is one of the first Grand Masters, author of the famous, classic, award-winning Way Station and the huge, famous (if maybe critically overrated) City and a guy who was publishing and winning awards right through the 80s along with Asimov, Clarke, and Heinlein (though, granted, perhaps without as much commercial success even then, but ACH set high best-selling bars for that). And he really does seem to have disappeared from the shelves, new and used[1] and may not be talked about so much, either. Have any opinions on why that happened?

_____

[1] I think one or two are in the SF Masterworks thing, though - ironic that he's probably printed more in the UK than the US.

Ive read Way Station, City , All Flesh Is Grass, Ring Around the Sun, Enchanted Pilgrimage Excellent stuff . Outside of Used book shops, I don't see any of his stuff on the shelves.

 

[paranoid marvin]

I think a lot of it is an age thing. I mean ,look at B&W films - most kids of today wouldn't even consider watching one, and so will miss out on cinematic classics in favour of inferior colour/3D movies. I would estimate that within 50 years the vast majority of classic B&W films will either have been remade or forgotten.

It's similar with books - kids aren't interested in Dracula, they're interested in books like Twilight. The only way that most of the younger generation will read some of the classics is if they are brought into the public eye by being re/made into movies or put in television; then they may pick up the book out of interest and discover how good it is.

And how many are interested in books that predict what the future will love like in 1980; maybe 20 years before they were even born?

And who could blame them? I like old sci-fi for nostalgic reasons; much of it was written about periods that WERE in the future when I read them but are now in the past. But I'm not sure what hook they would have to read books written for their parents/grandparent's generation ; there are plenty of books written for THEM.

Perhaps I'm being cynical and authors like Enid Blyton, Stevenson, Wells, Orwell and Asimov ARE being read by teenagers; maybe they ARE still watching B&W movies; I'd certainly like to think so. But somehow I doubt that they are.

 

[j d worthington]

Perhaps I'm being cynical and authors like Enid Blyton, Stevenson, Wells, Orwell and Asimov ARE being read by teenagers; maybe they ARE still watching B&W movies; I'd certainly like to think so. But somehow I doubt that they are.

I think it's a bit of that, but also other factors. I've tended to have a lot of jobs where I end up talking with a lot of teens and young people in their twenties, and I'd say that, while a fair percentage wouldn't be interested, more are than you might think... but they are seldom exposed to these things enough to be even aware of them save on a peripheral level. Once properly introduced to them, they often become quite enthusiastic about them.

You may have seen me tell this story before, but if not, you may find it of interest: Several years ago, I worked in a specialty sff/mystery bookshop and one day, while going over the inventory, I heard a group of customers -- all in their late teens or very early twenties -- pass by the room I was in, and one of them saying something about "she was called the 'IT' girl". My response was typical of what you are saying: surely they can't be talking about Clara Bow!!! Well, it turned out they were, and that they were all great fans of silent films, and were quite familiar with the work of the likes of Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, Harold Lloyd, Clara Bow, Douglas Fairbanks, Lon Chaney, Sr., Mary Pickford, and even Louise Brooks, etc. They were also very big into the older sff writers of the 30s up.

Nor is this all that uncommon in my experience. It may be that I live in a university town, but more often than not, even when they aren't familiar with the writers I mention, once they are aware, they frequently become very interested in them. Ditto the older films and music. I, for one, have found that a heartening trend....

As for the topic of the thread: Clifford Ball comes to mind, as does Neil R. Jones; John Collier isn't mentioned that often, and I'd say he was one of the masters of the short story, particularly with a satiric or biting edge. Eando Binder, despite their flaws, deserve to be remembered more than they are these days, as their stories were often thoroughly enjoyable, and at times rather well written. Matheson isn't mentioned nearly as much as he used to be, or as he deserves; nor is Charles Beaumont. I'd agree with Simak, but I think that Asimov and Heinlein are simply going through the sort of eclipse that is relatively common with "genre" writers who were extremely popular during their lifetime. Again, despite flaws, I think their work will be rediscovered -- in fact, I know it is to some degree already in that process now, though the trend is small as of yet -- and I think they'll remain important figures in the long run; particularly Heinlein. He polarizes people, but he had a very unique voice and vision; and one which attracts both adulation and vilification... but which seldom leaves a reader feeling neutral. Poul Anderson is already undergoing a decline, recently as he died... but again, I think at least a small portion of his work will continue to find a fairly steady audience. Theodore Sturgeon has also become rare in the main; whether he will recover or not, I'm not sure, though I'm hopeful he will -- he certainly deserves to.

Randy: On the subject of Smith -- part of this is that his work has seldom been available in truly popular editions; nor has a lot of critical attention been paid him... in the past. That's changing now, and with the reprinting by the University of Nebraska of several of the old Arkham House collections (and despite the rather snarky preface to some of these), as well as a growing critical reassessment of Smith, and Night Shade releasing the five-volume Collected Fantasies and Hippocampus putting out the complete poetry and translations... I think Smith is quite possibly about to break through in the same manner -- though perhaps not in as great a degree, at least for a while -- as his friend Lovecraft did. We'll see, but I have a suspicion that interest in his work is finally taking off....

 

[Extollager]

There was a brief time when one could get most or all of David Lindsay's imaginative fiction quite easily. (I didn't!) Now I don't suppose younger people know even A Voyage to Arcturus.

Does anyone under 40 know of Peter S. Beagle, E. R. Eddison, T. H. White, William Morris, Lord Dunsany?

I think there's a tradition of high fantasy (in which I would hesitate to place White) that may be largely forgotten except for people well into middle age. Those writers were prominent in the names that came to mind a generation ago when English-speaking people talked about modern fantasy.

Several of these affected an antique style that, I suspect, would encounter quite a bit of resistance now. Each felt that the high heroic romance was best served by a prose style evoking the distant past. My guess is that the writers turning out fantasy cycles now don't share that.

When people like J. D. and I were discovering fantasy, a great deal of it was reprints of books by authors already dead. Agreed, J. D.? Now, fantasy is a publishers' niche that is filled, I suppose, by Tolkien and Lewis, and for the rest by living authors, many of whom are still cranking out sequels of sequels. The situation differs strikingly from that of a generation ago. Someone else would have to make the call as to whether Pratchett, Eddings, and Jordan are better than Dunsany, Eddison, and Morris.

 

[Null_Zone]

Chris Bunch.

Ok his books could never be described as high art but he could write a cracking adventure (with decent small unit actions thanks to his military career) with lots of history injokes - such is the dragon airforce formed around a former flying circus - and actually put some thought into how magic might effect warfare being the giant fireballs and demons stuff so many authors go for.

 

[JunkMonkey]

I think a lot of it is an age thing. I mean ,look at B&W films - most kids of today wouldn't even consider watching one, and so will miss out on cinematic classics in favour of inferior colour/3D movies. I would estimate that within 50 years the vast majority of classic B&W films will either have been remade or forgotten.

It's similar with books - kids aren't interested in Dracula, they're interested in books like Twilight. The only way that most of the younger generation will read some of the classics is if they are brought into the public eye by being re/made into movies or put in television; then they may pick up the book out of interest and discover how good it is.

And how many are interested in books that predict what the future will love like in 1980; maybe 20 years before they were even born?

And who could blame them? I like old sci-fi for nostalgic reasons; much of it was written about periods that WERE in the future when I read them but are now in the past. But I'm not sure what hook they would have to read books written for their parents/grandparent's generation ; there are plenty of books written for THEM.

Perhaps I'm being cynical and authors like Enid Blyton, Stevenson, Wells, Orwell and Asimov ARE being read by teenagers; maybe they ARE still watching B&W movies; I'd certainly like to think so. But somehow I doubt that they are.

Just to reassure you that some are. My 12 year old loved Wells' War of the Worlds and last week, as her choice for our weekly family movie night, and totally unprompted, chose the Marx Bros'. Duck Soup. (My 5 year old and 10 year old who had never seen it before giggled like loonicans all the way through it.) Her previous movie night choices have included the 1933 King Kong and Godjira. The hook here is that, though I am her dad, I am old enough to be her grandfather and so we've skipped a generation. Daughter Number 2 is entranced by the Swallows and Amazons books.

She also prefers Peter Davidson Tom Baker era Doctor Who as it's "more real" than the modern stuff.

We do sitting down at meals and table manners too.

Kids will discover the good stuff. Yes it's easier for some if they have parents who have vast piles of books and shelves full of movies to easily share but they will discover it.

My nomination for most neglected and forgotten writers are A E van Vogt - and J P Martin whose Uncle books have been reprinted recently but really do need to be bought to kids' attention. (Neil Gaiman considers them as very significant in his own personal development as a reader and story teller.)

Re: A Voyage to Arcturus and Eddison. I think they are forgotten because they are bloody awful. Historically important maybe but dreadful writers.

 

[Randy M.]

Just to chime in again, my daughter (25 this year) was delighted by The Great Dictator and has watched other Chaplin movies since, also Bob Hope's Ghost Breakers and Abbott and Costello's A...&C... Meet Frankenstein.

While the Internet and all the electronic distractions have kept some young folk away, the ease of getting some of the older material has made it more accessible for those interested enough to sample it.

J.D.: I hope you're right about Smith. Like you I suspect he'll continue to have a smaller following than HPL or Howard, but there's enough in what I've read by him that I think there are more readers who'd find his work of interest if they could just find his work.


Randy M.

 

[Michael Colton]

I think the best example of forgotten authors are the ones I do not remember despite enjoying them in an anthology or magazine. There are many like this. I read a short story, enjoyed it, but never remember the author or forget to look them up and explore their wider range of work. I seems to me that is almost the definition of neglected or underrated.

 

[Extollager]

Re: A Voyage to Arcturus and Eddison. I think they are forgotten because they are bloody awful. Historically important maybe but dreadful writers.

That wasn't how they struck me, but I haven't read everything by either author.

 

[BAYLOR]

There was a brief time when one could get most or all of David Lindsay's imaginative fiction quite easily. (I didn't!) Now I don't suppose younger people know even A Voyage to Arcturus.

Does anyone under 40 know of Peter S. Beagle, E. R. Eddison, T. H. White, William Morris, Lord Dunsany?

I think there's a tradition of high fantasy (in which I would hesitate to place White) that may be largely forgotten except for people well into middle age. Those writers were prominent in the names that came to mind a generation ago when English-speaking people talked about modern fantasy.

Several of these affected an antique style that, I suspect, would encounter quite a bit of resistance now. Each felt that the high heroic romance was best served by a prose style evoking the distant past. My guess is that the writers turning out fantasy cycles now don't share that.

When people like J. D. and I were discovering fantasy, a great deal of it was reprints of books by authors already dead. Agreed, J. D.? Now, fantasy is a publishers' niche that is filled, I suppose, by Tolkien and Lewis, and for the rest by living authors, many of whom are still cranking out sequels of sequels. The situation differs strikingly from that of a generation ago. Someone else would have to make the call as to whether Pratchett, Eddings, and Jordan are better than Dunsany, Eddison, and Morris.

Robert Jordan couldn't hold a candle to any of those writers

 

[Extollager]

Robert Jordan couldn't hold a candle to any of those writers

Nor, I personally assume, would I find Eddings or Pratchett to hold my interest.