Hacker News Reader

I would concur with this. Wolfe and Le Guin, to me, both write sci-fi/fantasy as literature while also closely using themes that most would consider "genre fiction".

Agreed with Le Guin, I love the Earthsea books, which are more than simple fantasy and have a beautiful spiritual and philosophical quality.

Agree with both, but in the case of Le Guin I clearly prefer the Hainish Cycle, with classics as The Left Hand of Darkness, The Disposesed or The Word for World is Forest

The left-hand of darkness was strange, but somehow spiritually uplifting in a way I have trouble expressing.

Going to buy LHOD now, thank you very much.

Not a problem. The author is a good writer. Not overly verbose or too terse.

I had to read two of her short stories in jr high. One was "those who walk away from omelas" and the other was "the power of a name". Those probably aren't the full titles, but should be close enough and should be available online.

I would also _highly_ recommend The Dispossessed from her same universe. I personally preferred it, but both are really great "sci-fi tackles seriously complicated real life topics" reads.

Have you read Lathe of Heaven? I don't love all of the Hainish Cycle books (they're all good, just not peak Le Guin good), but that book I would consider in my top 5 books of all time easily.

Oh, didn't know about it. Thanks!

That makes sense. I didn't like Dostoyevsky, Hemingway, or Wolfe.

ah! I thought the exact same thing. The story is original, the characters interesting but it was just a pretty hard series of books to get through for me.

I do not think your taste is critical if you enjoy Game of Thrones prose. Gene Wolfe's is far above. GoT is average fantasy prose and nowhere near literary fiction quality.

Story and character is more important for me than prose. I need to care about what is happening to want to read on and I found the book of the new sun wanting in that regard. I found it a struggle to read - similar to the storm light series (which I found even worse with paper thin characters and terrible plotting). Just my personal opinion.

I read just the first book in the "Book of the New Sun" and found it quite boring.

And my books are quite similar to yours with few exceptions:

- Martian Chronicles - interesting concept but eventually it goes into some ecological + anarchist sci-fi which I'm not a fun of

- Earthsea - good, but it is mostly for teens, young adults (I read it as a teen and loved it, reread it years later and it was so so)

- Dune - the whole series, each book is unique in its own way

- Kurt Vonnegut - never read anything by that author

- Hemingway - I read just The Old Man and the Sea (or actually was forced in school to read it) - and this was a short novel about basically nothing, boring as it can be

And books I really liked that are not on your list:

- Cixin Liu - Three Body Problem and the rest in the series - I loved it, never read anything like it

- Anything by Naomi Novik (so just two books right now)

- Vernon - A Deepness in the Sky and A Fire Upon the Deep

- N.K. Jemis - Stone Sky and the other two in the series

- Ann Leckie - Ancillary Justice (but only this, the other book was worse)

- (Almost) Anything by Philip K. Dick

That's from my recent reads (so few last years).

>Hemingway - I read just The Old Man and the Sea (or actually was forced in school to read it) - and this was a short novel about basically nothing, boring as it can be

I'm not sure why schools tend to fixate on that particular work. Hemingway may not be to your taste anyway but I much prefer A Farewell to Arms, A Moveable Feast, many of his short stories, etc.

The final book even concludes with the narrator/protagonist suggesting the reader re-read the books to grasp their true meaning. IMO, two reads minimum are necessary.

There's an essay in Castle of Days where Gene Wolfe wrote about his writing process. He would rewrite the manuscript for his books from scratch multiple times so that he could incorporate what he wrote later into the beginning of the book. I think he would end up completely rewriting the book up to 4 times. That's why there's so much to get out of them on a reread.

And that sounds crazily presumptuous, but when I finished my exact thought was "I have to read that again."

Haven't read Gene Wolfe (yet), but I can strongly recommend 'Hyperion Cantos' by Dan Simmons.

I love that series. It's fantastic.

I think the series sort of dragged on after the first one. But I read it a long time ago, maybe I should try again.

Somehow this book elicits both claims of "greatest hall of famer ever written" from people like me, or "meh it was good but I couldn't get through all 4 books" from others.

Counter opinion: Hyperion books are recommended every time some of my favorite authors are mentioned (like Gene Wolfe and Peter Watts), but I found them very mediocre. Not as bad as Vernor Vinge books that are also always mentioned in similar contexts, but still quite meh.

Agreed, they do not hold a candle to Wolfe's prose. Though, many genre readers seem completely oblivious to prose quality and read purely for story. In the case of Hyperion everything is b-movie quality.

How do you measure "prose quality"?

I read books for the story (well, aren't books stories?) if it is written poorly - I don't enjoy it. And for me Gene Wolfe is written poorly the world is interesting but the story there was not entertaining at all for me and I read just the first book.

(BTW. I'm probably the only one but I just couldn't bear the constant mentions that some females face was shaped like heart).

Hyperion has interesting story and keeps you on your toes (just the first book).

There’s more than one way to tell the same story. Word choice can colour the reader’s perception subtly. Rhythm and pacing matter. Use of poetic devices and subtext make some tellings of stories much richer than others.

Some writing simply makes you go “Wow, what an amazing sentence” even if the plot is gibberish.

It is not measurable, unless you count adverbs and adjectives or things of that nature, but it can be critiqued.

George Orwell on prose: https://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_poli....

Also, see Elements of Style.

A good story can be "written poorly," that's where prose quality comes into play. When you say written poorly it seems you are referring to narrative and structure--as you deemed it not entertaining--not prose.

> Though, many genre readers seem completely oblivious to prose quality and read purely for story.

I find that I would read different books differently - some books I would read for the writing style or prose, and others purely for the story. I will literally skip 'prose-y?' sections to not waste time and get back to the story.

Though I gotta say, I found both the writing style and story great in Hyperion. One of the few books I actually went back and re-read sections of, while going through the first time.

Article about a specific sci-fi author: Every HN user just mentioning their favorite sci-fi book or author does not add any value. Especially when they say nothing interesting about named book and have not read the author in question.

Helpful comment, possibly adding value: In a comment I mentioned another author and why he is interesting. I have a reference for comparison because I have read Wolfe.

Same goes for any other topic.

Wow Thanks Mister!

Haven't read Wolfe, but this thread makes me very curious. Another out-of-context reference: How does Malazan Book of the Fallen (though in high fantasy, by Steven Erikson) compare in terms of prose, complexity, being like literature, originality, etc.?

Yeah, I've seen Malazan Book of the Fallen mentioned several times in similar discussions but I generally don't commit to reading 5+ books fantasy series unless they quality is attested by multiple people with tastes similar to mine (and after GoT and The Kingkiller Chronicle fiascos I would only start reading them _after_ series is concluded and author managed to come up with coherent ending). So, can anyone who enjoys reading "boring" stuff like The Book of the New Sun (or, as another example, The Silmarillion) express their opinion on Erikson's books?

I'm no expert on prose/literature, but I really enjoyed Malazan Book of the Fallen for the story/adventure side of it. It has an enormous universe, many story lines, lots of good characters, etc.

Sci-fi thread drinking game: take a shot every time someone recommends Hyperion regardless of context.

I use Arch Linux.

Coincidentally, so do I. Btw.

Strange that you feel the need to recommend a book by an author totally unrelated to this thread when you have not even read Wolfe. You have no reference as to what someone who likes Wolfe might enjoy.

How is a well-known science fiction author unrelated to a thread about science fiction where multiple other authors are mentioned? What's strange is your need to critique other people's commenting style.

For the record, I was looking for comparisons between the two from people who have read both. Hopefully that makes it a little less strange for you.

I enjoyed Book of the New Sun but I’d say it’s quite a bit darker than most of the rest of the books you’ve named. Torture is a very central theme.

I think you missed the real theme, which is death and resurrection, a recurring pattern throughout the book.

While Severian is groomed to be a torturer, for most of the book his job (and Severian repeatedly emphasizes that it's just a job) is that of executioner, and he later holds the position of lictor for around a month. While Severian often recounts the procedures practiced in the guild tower, it's not really torture that he is concerned about.

The themes of death and resurrection, however, are central to the plot, together with the water motif as a symbol of cleansing, from the moment Severian nearly drowns in the river (and is rescued by an undine) to the destruction of Urth.

Thanks for the recommendation. The foundation trilogy stands among the best for me but if you say Wolfe isnt beneath Asimov, that is high praise.

I also found the book of the new sun dull. I don't agree it's a good book at all. Hyperion written in 1989 is a much better book and arguably more sophisticated. But hey it's just an opinion.

I've heard Gene wolf is a good writer but after trying the book of the new sun I'm not tempted further. It probably comes down to personal taste.

A fantasy book with good prose and better story than 'the book of the new sun' is 'the name of the wind'.

I have only one upvote to give ...