Influential sci-fi

[J-Sun]

So has anyone encountered BACH before?

Nope. Like you, "I think of Bradbury as separate from the Big Three and never combined all four initials." It's cute that it works out that way but, as different as Asimov, Heinlein, and Clarke are, they fit much better together than Bradbury. It seems to have made occasional appearances for awhile without really catching on. Hopefully it'll stay that way. (I don't really see what use the grouping serves so it shouldn't catch on.)

I found this amusing since I do not particularly like PKD and am astounded by the growth of his reputation and number of movies derived from his work.

I like some aspects of PKD and dislike others but, like you, I'm astounded at the position he's attained. Using the method from the Phlogiston piece, I'm not surprised to find that ACH dominate PKD. (I actually have barely more PKD than Clarke (mostly because Clarke's complete stories are in one huge volume and PKD's are in five) but the Clarke I have is more solid.)

Basically, there is the fan SF trinity of Asimov, Heinlein, and Clarke and then there's the academic SF trinity of Dick, Le Guin, and Bradbury. The latter three write mostly poetic fantasy which academics can grapple with on philosophical levels without much concern for actual science or facts whereas ACH wrote actual SF which few literary academics are equipped to deal with. (And I say this as a fan of some Dick, early Le Guin, and a tiny bit of Bradbury. I'm not implying anything negative about them but about many academics.)

 

[Tom Hering]

In the 1950s and '60s, Ray Bradbury most certainly was a fan favorite - among readers of the leading hard SF magazine!

1952 – Reader Survey Astounding Science Fiction

1. Adventures in Space and Time – Healy and McComas editors
2. Slan – A. E. Van Vogt
3. Seven Famous Novels – H. G. Wells
4. The Man Who Sold the Moon – Robert A. Heinlein
5. Who Goes There? – John W. Campbell
6. The Best of Science Fiction – Groff Conklin editor
7. The Martian Chronicles – Ray Bradbury
8. The Green Hills of Earth – Robert A. Heinlein
9. The Science Fiction Omnibus – Bleiler and Dikty editors
10. The Illustrated Man – Ray Bradbury

1956 – Reader Survey Astounding Science Fiction

• Adventures in Space and Time – Healy and McComas editors (51)
• City – Clifford Simak (50)
• The Martian Chronicles – Ray Bradbury (48)
• More than Human – Theodore Sturgeon (48)
• Slan – A. E. Van Vogt (44)
• The Man Who Sold the Moon – Robert A. Heinlein (40)
• The Demolished Man – Alfred Bester (39)
• Astounding Science Fiction Anthology – John W. Campbell editor (37)
• Childhood’s End – Arthur C. Clarke (35)
• 1984 – George Orwell (35)
• The World of Null A – A. E. Van Vogt (35)

1966 – Reader Survey Analog Science Fiction & Fact

1. The Foundation Trilogy – Isaac Asimov (67.4%)
2. Seven Famous Novels – H. G. Wells (59.4%)
3. Slan – A. E. Van Vogt (50.5%)
4. The Rest of the Robots – Isaac Asimov (45.7%)
5. The Demolished Man – Alfred Bester (44.2%)
6. Childhood’s End – Arthur C. Clarke (42.2%)
7. The City and the Stars – Arthur C. Clarke (40.6%)
8. The Martian Chronicles – Ray Bradbury (38.9%)
9. City – Clifford Simak (38.6%)
10. A Canticle for Leibowitz – Walter M. Miller, Jr. (38.1%)

Amazing that Heinlein is completely absent from the '60s list - in the magazine that made him famous!

 

[hitmouse]

I am a bit surprised not to see Stranger in a Strange Land in that late 1960s list. It would be interesting to see the top 20 or 30. Less surprised to see the 2 Heinlein future history compilations from the 1952 survey disappear: those are great collections of short stories but a bit dated by the late 60s.

Also, it would be interesting to see the original questions on the surveys: there are a number of anthologies which are rather short term, and I note that the Astounding list has an Astounding anthology. I dont think these top 10s can be counted as definitive anything much.

 

[J-Sun]

In the 1950s and '60s, Ray Bradbury most certainly was a fan favorite - among readers of the leading hard SF magazine!
[...]
Amazing that Heinlein is completely absent from the '60s list - in the magazine that made him famous!

I could say that Bradbury's presence on the list makes him no more a fan favorite than Heinlein's absence makes him not a fan favorite but that wasn't what I meant. What I was saying was that most non-academic SF fans wouldn't tend to think of the four as a unit and would recognize that Bradbury wrote a less science-based "science fiction." Yes, his works show up on that list but, in an author poll, I doubt he'd rate so highly. Heinlein isn't on there likely because the fans would have all wanted everything he wrote on there and they lost the competition with themselves.

Also, it would be interesting to see the original questions on the surveys: there are a number of anthologies which are rather short term, and I note that the Astounding list has an Astounding anthology. I dont think these top 10s can be counted as definitive anything much.

It is just a magazine poll and I don't think the '66 poll means a lot but, as of 1952, especially, and 1956, virtually everyone was still reading Astounding and, since we're talking about classics, certainly Astounding defined the bulk of those. The Healy/McComas and Campbell anthologies, especially, were 95-100% drawn from Astounding and the only reason those anthologies might not be as popular as they once were is that 90-95% of the stories have been anthologized in everybody else's anthologies for decades. And Astounding readers weren't so parochial that there weren't a couple of classic English novels and some Galaxy examples (as well as Miller's F&SF, if I recall) though, even there, all the authors except Bradbury had published in Astounding with some work or another.

TL;DR: There weren't Hugos or many critics or many other magazines of high caliber in the 40s and few Hugos and not many more critics (though many more zines, some of high caliber) in the 50s so Astounding reader polls are pretty definitive for that period.

 

[Tom Hering]

I dont think these top 10s can be counted as definitive anything much.

They're snapshots showing us what fans in the '50s and '60s thought were the best SF books. To my knowledge, there isn't another source - besides the Hugos - for determining that objectively. It's important information for anyone reading historically. (I don't just want to know what people today think are the best SF books of the '50s and '60s, but also what readers of the time thought were the best.)

As for Stranger In A Strange Land, I suspect that by 1966, it's impact on the SF subculture had faded somewhat, and it had become more popular with readers outside the subculture - especially college students. One of the few crossovers to the mainstream during those years, along with Bradbury's works. (Asimov's multitudinous non-fiction probably attracted mainstream readers to his SF, and Kubrick's 2001 would make Clarke well known. Dune would cross over when the environmental movement gained steam in the '70s. Interestingly, Dune and The Foundation Trilogy are the only genre works that appear in the Wikipedia list of all-time bestselling books. [By "genre" I mean those works and authors tied to the SF magazines, which were the main drivers of literary SF in the '50s and '60s.])

 

[BAYLOR]

Limbo by Bernard Wolfe written in 1952 this is a dystopian post apocalyptic novel . A scientist living on an island during the war and for years after is performing grotesque surgeries on the population and one day decides to see how the world has fared in the aftermath of the war . He finds a civilization where all of the men have removde their arm and legs ad replaces them with cybernetic prosthetics that in theory will not allow the user to commit acts of violence against ay person. If the user attempts violence, the limb or limbs involved become easy to detach thus preventing violence. None of the women have the prosthetics. So what the scientist does is go on a quest to find out how this society came about .

 

[dask]

Got this one somewhere. Going to rummage around and try to find it. Sounds worth the effort.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Heinlein’s Future History: Coming True Before Our Eyes

Heinlein’s Future History: Coming True Before Our Eyes

Talk about grumbles from the grave.

One thing that astounded me was what Heinlein wrote about what would become of the automobile industry by the year 2000 in his 1956 book, The Door Into Summer.

 

[BAYLOR]

Slan by A E Van Vogt