J-Sun
Just a quick comment on some of your selections...
[Aldiss - Helliconia something (forget which I read) ]
Although I think this trilogy is an outstanding piece of work, they are slow going and very long so I can see why some might not like them.
Yep - I'm almost positive I read only one of them and my recollection was that I was very bored - overcome by the slow-going-ness. I recall it being a vigorous exercise in world building (and society building, too, I guess) but it was almost a tour de force and lacked something core to me - though I could well have just missed it or, if it was the second one I read, maybe that's just a no-no. I want to say it was Winter. Whichever that was.
[Blish - A Case of Conscience ]
I've seen quite a few people who didn't like this. It is definitely a divisive "classic" but for me the ambiguity of the ending was just dynamite (pun not intended) and really made this for me (although it wasn't immediately obvious that it could be interpreted in different ways).
I can't remember the specifics of this. I just have a negative recollection.
[Brunner - Stand on Zanzibar ]
I'm reading this now and while it's still early stages, I can see why some might not get into it. The narative is extremely fragmented, especially at the beginning, with too many disperate and seemingly unconnected excerpts that just confuse the reader. It's starting to come together a bit now but I can imagine many readers being put off and giving up before getting this far.
Yep - a big cluttered mess, IMO/IIRC. There actually was a storyline in there that was pretty straightforward and coherent but (again, IIRC) it wasn't even actually the main point and was lost in the clippings, charts, whatever. Also, I don't recall liking any of the characters or anything - it was a pretty didactic novel. This is one that could almost go in the 'I should like because I say so' category - it's a near-future social extrapolation that could go alongside much of my Spinrad and Sterling but just didn't work for me.
-- Edit: forgot to mention that I of course hope you enjoy it, though, or at least get something constructive out of not enjoying it.
And also, to note that, in my list of dislikes, I actually finished everything on the list (because I was a compulsive finisher and still generally am) except possibly
Doomsday Book (can't recall) and
Dhalgren -
that is one there was
no way I was going to finish.
[ Card - any and every thing, especially Ender's Game ]
Just curious but do you think this has anything to do with your understanding of Card the man (and his opinions)?
The fact that I've continued to dislike it so much for so long and tell people so (rather than just letting it fade as a trivial 'different strokes') is probably fueled by Card the man but I disliked the book before I knew any of that. I wasn't initally really sure why (and I'm still not positive) but there was a devastating critique of it by Norman Spinrad that rang true for me: basically, Card demonstrates in
Ender's Game a complete contempt for his target audience of young science fiction geeks and pushes their buttons in vulgar and disturbing ways in constructing their wish-fulfillment. I think that may be true and I think I knew I was being conned and reacted negatively, while it seems to have worked for most people. You could argue authors like van Vogt did similar things (and, indeed, almost all authors do) but I always get a sense of sharedness and authenticity from van Vogt.
[Simak - City (this is probably okay, but I don't like it as 'much' as I 'should') ]
I very much agree with you here. For me, it just seemed very badly done but so many people seem to sing it's praises.
Yep - I didn't dislike it enough that I won't give it another try to see if I can better understand why they do but I'd sure rather re-read
Way Station.
[Wolfe - any and every thing ]
Having read some of his books, I can see how the opacity and obscurity of the meaning behind his narratives would put a lot of people off. Fortunately for me though I find his prose pleasurable enough to read that I enjoy the process enough even when I don't always understand everything that is going on.
Pretty much so - it's not just the opacity, but the sense that it's a literal veil - I can't be interested in any of the foreground because it's nothing but symbol and metaphor - the stories are nothing but indirection. (I'm sure I'm exaggerating but that's how it generally feels to me.)
A recent book that I have read that I think qualifies for this topic is "The Hobbit" by Tolkien. It was okay, just a bit dull and uninteresting. I guess I just don't like Tolkien that much.
I read
The Hobbit in one of the best junior high English classes ever, so I probably liked this more than I otherwise would - it was such a joy to just not be reading the usual stuff they make you read in school. I even read through
LOTR after it. But I'm not a big fan, either. But, then, I'm not a big fantasy person in the first place. I've never managed to re-read any of it, so I'm basically with you there.
