iansales said:
I wasn't seriously suggesting it either. But I do find it dismaying when people are forever recommending old (classic) science fiction, and ignoring the more recent stuff.
But it makes perfect sense, as one is better able to assess something’s overall quality and long-term merit through the clear lens of hindsight. No doubt a great many so-called “modern classics” won’t be considered such just two, three, four and five decades down the road.
Also take into consideration that while fantasy literature and storytelling has been with us as long as stories have been told, “modern” fantasy – which is for the most part what we’re seeing on that list – is relatively younger than science fiction. It is only in the last decade going through the kind of growth cycle science fiction experienced decades ago. By the time Tolkien and his peers came around and pointed the way for modern fantasy, science fiction had already had its founding fathers, its pulp era, its push into a degree of mainstream recognition (through movies and comics), and its artistic growth (through 60s authors like Philip K. Dick, among others). Modern fantasy is still right in the middle of that cycle, with new landmarks being created right now as we speak. Meanwhile, science fiction went through that cycle decades ago, hence its landmark works are from decades ago. Plenty of good new stuff out there, but little that has changed the face of science fiction or put itself forward as something ready to stand the test of time.
Personally, I’m of the opinion that Martin’s story is too recent to be considered for a “Hall Of Fame” type thing, despite being a big fan of the series. There simply hasn’t been enough time to assess its worth in the grand scheme of things.
('Course, in all fairness, the first post in the HoF thread specifies "favorite," so, sure, anything goes in that respect. That makes it a top 10 to me, not a Hall Of Fame, but that's a semantics quibble more than anything. Favorites lists are cool.)
