NPR Science Fiction and Fantasy titles vote

[Yminale]

I don't think that holds up since Big Brother isn't a dead hero of the cause, but an omnipresent leader (whether real or purely propagandistic) who exists in the here and now.

Part of the deification of Lenin was that he was embalmed to almost a life like degree to create an eternal leader of the revolution.

Plus there was a cult of personality cultivated for Stalin,

True but it wasn't that successful and Stalin preferred brutality and oppression. Big Brother was much more subtler. Even Orwell knew that Stalin was so hated that as soon as he died that they tear down anything to do with him.

The use of a propagandistic cult of personality is a typical feature in totalitarian regimes. Big Brother broadly reflects that, with some particular similarities to the Stalinist regime.

But that's actually a myth. 1984 is not a critique of Stalinist Russia but of totalitarian regimes that existed everywhere. People don't seem to realize how much internal surveillance and propaganda was used in Britian especially during WWII. As of early as the 1970's British authorities were still torturing prisoners and the BBC is still cited for the promotion of government propaganda ( I don't have to mention CCTV network they have). Orwell saw this because he was in the middle of it because he worked in the BBC and was a target of surveillance.

Orwell himself stated he saw Britain gradually becoming like 1984 and not necessarily through a communist take over. When you get down to it, Orwell was probably criticizing the Labor party more than communism.

 

[Yminale]

Point being that while Orwell's nightmare scenario was one of crushingly effective totalitarianism, a failed dictatorship leaves almost as much human suffering in its wake.

You're missing my point that neither scenario is possible. Americans hate government and they are armed. No politician is competent to change both circumstance. If America fails, it's simply because Americans don't care (which would shock even Orwell).

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

But that's actually a myth. 1984 is not a critique of Stalinist Russia but of totalitarian regimes that existed everywhere.

It's a critique of totalitarian regimes everywhere, including Stalinist Russia, as well as being a warning of where the western democracies could end up.

 

[Yminale]

It's a critique of totalitarian regimes everywhere, including Stalinist Russia, as well as being a warning of where the western democracies could end up.

Exactly

Though I always hear 1984 is a critique or based on Stalinist Russia, that's difficult to believe since Stalinist Russia was a closed society and very little was known about it. It wasn't until the 70's that the full extent of Stalin purges were known.

More than likely it's based on wartime and post-war Britain. The puritanical views of sex were definitely from British culture and the whole "We are at war with Eurasia..." was probably a dig on Winston Churchill's plan to rearm Germany and start a new war with the Soviet Union

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

^^^
The full extent of Stalin's atrocities only became clear later, but there was enough information available at the time for a solid critique.

The "we are at war with Eurasia, we have always been at war with Eurasia" theme could also have been influenced by the shift from nonagression pact to warfare between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

 

[Kegg]

^
But also the sudden reversal of hostility towards Nazi Germany during that brief period between the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and the invasion of 1941. The Nazis went from being implacable enemies to ideological friends and back again.

True but it wasn't that successful and Stalin preferred brutality and oppression.

No, it wasn't successful after Stalin's death. Stalin - and often the pair of Lenin and Stalin - were huge in Stalinist iconography. I've still seen friezes in some hotels in St. Petersbourg or the underground (nicest damn underground I've ever been in, oddly enough) showing the benevolent of Comrade Stalin, Father of the Nation.

It's not an either-or, either. Of course Stalin was big into oppression. He also had a cult of personality. His cult just isn't posthumous like Lenin or Mao.

But that's actually a myth. 1984 is not a critique of Stalinist Russia but of totalitarian regimes that existed everywhere.

It's generic totalitarianism but mostly inspired by the contemporary Soviet Union. That the principles of totalitarian government are applicable elsewhere is obvious simply by virtue of the fact that in the novel the codified official ideology is no variant of fascism or communism, but 'Ingsoc' - English Socialism reduced to a Comintern-esque abbreviation.

Just like Animal Farm is a generic revolutionary parable, but although its names evoke the example of the French Revolution, the Russian is more on Orwell's mind.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Point being that while Orwell's nightmare scenario was one of crushingly effective totalitarianism, a failed dictatorship leaves almost as much human suffering in its wake.

You're missing my point that neither scenario is possible.

Really?

 

[stj]

Skipping over the nonsense defending 1984 (and the few remarks that weren't, too,) the list suffers from the usual input from young people who only know the new stuff, or a handful of officially approved books fed to them by school reading lists. That's to be expected to a certain degree but really even a young person should be able to distinguish the movie and the novel. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is not Blade Runner.

Personally I find mixing the SF and fantasy rather undiscerning.

1. The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy, by J.R.R. Tolkien
If you insist on fantasy, at least this is a good one.
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, by Douglas Adams
Not my first thought, but humor is underrated. This is an example of how these little games with the lists can be rewarding.

3. Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card
Every fifteen year old's favorite SF novel. Pity I wasn't fifteen when I tried to read it.

4. The Dune Chronicles, by Frank Herbert
Chronicles, chronicles? WTF? Just Dune, please.
5. A Song Of Ice And Fire Series, by George R. R. Martin
See what I mean about distinguishing the movie and the book?

6. 1984, by George Orwell
Who says high school English teachers have no influence?

7. Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury
I would put it on the list but I'm not ashamed to admit I was influenced by my high school education.

8. The Foundation Trilogy, by Isaac Asimov
Justifiably high

9. Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley
Not just on the reading lists but still relevant.

10. American Gods, by Neil Gaiman
There was a brilliant short story about Pan (by Lester Del Rey) that made this novel unreadably familiar and bloated.

11. The Princess Bride, by William Goldman
Again, humor is underrated. If you must have fantasy, an instructive choice.

12. The Wheel Of Time Series, by Robert Jordan
Is this even finished? How would anyone know yet?

13. Animal Farm, by George Orwell
No one was foolish enough to rush to the defense of this one, but an attack on the Russian Revolution that covers up the Great War is abominably dishonest.

14. Neuromancer, by William Gibson
15. Watchmen, by Alan Moore
16. I, Robot, by Isaac Asimov
17. Stranger In A Strange Land, by Robert Heinlein
Could this novel be good for anything but opening the eyes of painfully naive adolescents in repressive societies?

18. The Kingkiller Chronicles, by Patrick Rothfuss
Who?
19. Slaughterhouse-Five, by Kurt Vonnegut
20. Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley
Again with the movies. Very few people really like the novel, they can't be bothered with the eighteenth century style.

22. Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, by Philip K. Dick
Another movie tie-in.
23. The Handmaid's Tale, by Margaret Atwood
24. The Dark Tower Series, by Stephen King
Are they serious?

25. 2001: A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke
Yet another movie tie-in.

26. The Stand, by Stephen King
27. Snow Crash, by Neal Stephenson
Is this the one that starts with people alive today living long enough to start imitating the Victorians? I've always found Neal Stephenson tough to plow through.

28. The Martian Chronicles, by Ray Bradbury
29. Cat's Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut
30. The Sandman Series, by Neil Gaiman

31. A Clockwork Orange, by Anthony Burgess
32. Starship Troopers, by Robert Heinlein
32. Watership Down, by Richard Adams
33. Dragonflight, by Anne McCaffrey
Ugh.

34. The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, by Robert Heinlein
35. A Canticle For Leibowitz, by Walter M. Miller
Underrated

36. The Time Machine, by H.G. Wells
37. 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea, by Jules Verne
Yet another movie tie-in, or lots of James Mason fans.

38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys
Yet another movie tie-in. Nobody much read the novel, everybody loved the short story, as they should have.

39. The War Of The Worlds, by H.G. Wells
This should have been at #6, vastly more relevant to today's world.

40. The Chronicles Of Amber, by Roger Zelazny
Wrong. The Lord of Light!

41. The Belgariad, by David Eddings
42. The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley
43. The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson
44. Ringworld, by Larry Niven
45. The Left Hand Of Darkness, by Ursula K. LeGuin
This comes in behind crappy fantasy series? A shame!

46. The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien
You read this from affection for LOTR. It isn't good.

47. The Once And Future King, by T.H. White
Way underrated for a fantasy.

48. Neverwhere, by Neil Gaiman
Did anyone besides me read the novel? The TV series is good, though.

49. Childhood's End, by Arthur C. Clarke
Okay, but I'd have gone with The City and The Stars.

50. Contact, by Carl Sagan
51. The Hyperion Cantos, by Dan Simmons
52. Stardust, by Neil Gaiman
53. Cryptonomicon, by Neal Stephenson
54. World War Z, by Max Brooks
55. The Last Unicorn, by Peter S. Beagle
56. The Forever War, by Joe Haldeman
57. Small Gods, by Terry Pratchett
58. The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant, The Unbeliever, by Stephen R. Donaldson
59. The Vorkosigan Saga, by Lois McMaster Bujold
I'd have picked Ethan of Athos if I was picking Bujold.

60. Going Postal, by Terry Pratchett
61. The Mote In God's Eye, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle
62. The Sword Of Truth, by Terry Goodkind
63. The Road, by Cormac McCarthy
Is this really any good?

64. Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell, by Susanna Clarke
The fourth fantasy that deserves to be on this list, regardless of type.

65. I Am Legend, by Richard Matheson
66. The Riftwar Saga, by Raymond E. Feist
67. The Shannara Trilogy, by Terry Brooks
68. The Conan The Barbarian Series, by R.E. Howard
69. The Farseer Trilogy, by Robin Hobb
70. The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger
71. The Way Of Kings, by Brandon Sanderson
72. A Journey To The Center Of The Earth, by Jules Verne
Do people really read these novels, or just watch the movies, then take the test?

73. The Legend Of Drizzt Series, by R.A. Salvatore
74. Old Man's War, by John Scalzi
75. The Diamond Age, by Neil Stephenson
76. Rendezvous With Rama, by Arthur C. Clarke
77. The Kushiel's Legacy Series, by Jacqueline Carey
78. The Dispossessed, by Ursula K. LeGuin
This far down the list? Scandalous!

79. Something Wicked This Way Comes, by Ray Bradbury
80. Wicked, by Gregory Maguire
81. The Malazan Book Of The Fallen Series, by Steven Erikson
82. The Eyre Affair, by Jasper Fforde
83. The Culture Series, by Iain M. Banks
84. The Crystal Cave, by Mary Stewart
85. Anathem, by Neal Stephenson
The only one of his I'd put on (aka, the one I could read.)

86. The Codex Alera Series, by Jim Butcher
87. The Book Of The New Sun, by Gene Wolfe
88. The Thrawn Trilogy, by Timothy Zahn
I'm not a literary person with refined tastes: I have read this one. And I still wouldn't put it on this list.

89. The Outlander Series, by Diana Gabaldan
90. The Elric Saga, by Michael Moorcock
Moorcock's reputation is baffling. Behold the Man was the only good thing he ever did, but Behold the Man was good enough to make this list.

91. The Illustrated Man, by Ray Bradbury
92. Sunshine, by Robin McKinley
93. A Fire Upon The Deep, by Vernor Vinge
94. The Caves Of Steel, by Isaac Asimov
95. The Mars Trilogy, by Kim Stanley Robinson
96. Lucifer's Hammer, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle
97. Doomsday Book, by Connie Willis
98. Perdido Street Station, by China Mieville
99. The Xanth Series, by Piers Anthony
100. The Space Trilogy, by C.S. Lewis
Everybody likes making fun of H.G. Wells, no? Feh.

All those atrocious fantasy series, but no Mervyn Peake (Titus Groan/Gormenghast?)

 

[Thestral]

Skipping over the nonsense defending 1984 (and the few remarks that weren't, too,)

AKA: "I give up!"

10. American Gods, by Neil Gaiman
There was a brilliant short story about Pan (by Lester Del Rey) that made this novel unreadably familiar and bloated.

20. Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley
Again with the movies. Very few people really like the novel, they can't be bothered with the eighteenth century style.

25. 2001: A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke
Yet another movie tie-in.

37. 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea, by Jules Verne
Yet another movie tie-in, or lots of James Mason fans.

38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys
Yet another movie tie-in. Nobody much read the novel, everybody loved the short story, as they should have.

Got anything to back that up?

48. Neverwhere, by Neil Gaiman
Did anyone besides me read the novel? The TV series is good, though.

Yes. It's brilliant, of course.

 

[Kegg]

38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys
Yet another movie tie-in.

There's a movie?

Honestly, had no idea.

I'm not sure all of those books have their importance because 'there's a movie' (I've been told Slaughterhouse Five has a movie too, for example). It's unquestionably true of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, of course. One would expect Ubik or The Man in the High Castle or The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch but none of them were made into a motion picture.

20,000 Leagues, for example - that was a book which, like Journey to the Center of the Earth and basically all Verne I've read, I read in primary school. Wasn't aware there were movies of either at the time, quite frankly.

All those atrocious fantasy series, but no Mervyn Peake (Titus Groan/Gormenghast?)

Frankenstein does appear to be the only Gothic work on the list - er, that I recognize anyhow. I assume they may have intentionally avoided Gothic works just as they apparently intentionally avoided children's books (despite the similarly inexplicable addition of Watership Down).

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

There's a movie?

Honestly, had no idea.

The movie version is called Charly. It was released in 1968 and Cliff Robertson won Best Actor for it at the Academy Awards.

Frankenstein does appear to be the only Gothic work on the list - er, that I recognize anyhow. I assume they may have intentionally avoided Gothic works just as they apparently intentionally avoided children's books (despite the similarly inexplicable addition of Watership Down).

The Gormenghast Trilogy was on the prelim list that people could vote for. It jumped out at me as probably the biggest omission from the Top 100.

 

[Goliath]

38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys
Yet another movie tie-in.

There's a movie?

Honestly, had no idea.

I knew there was a movie, but I've never seen it.

I've never read the novel, either, but I have read the original short story--it was anthologized in The Science Fiction Hall of Fame, and it was superb.

 

[Kegg]

The Gormenghast Trilogy was on the prelim list that people could vote for. It jumped out at me as probably the biggest omission from the Top 100.

So Frankenstein and Gormenghast, but no Dracula?

Or - barring Dracula for the sake of argument here - none of the other classic grim castle Gothic fantasies? Hm. I can undrestand drawing the line, genre-wise, I'm just not sure I understand where they drew it.

 

[Harvey]

I wouldn't be surprised if more people had read Flowers for Algernon in its original form (I read it as a short story in high school), but I would be surprised if people voted for it because of the movie. Despite winning an Academy Award, Charly seems to have fallen out of popularity. Today it's a pretty obscure sf movie (I've heard about it, but not seen it).

 

[Thestral]

I knew there was a movie, but I've never seen it.

I've never read the novel, either, but I have read the original short story--it was anthologized in The Science Fiction Hall of Fame, and it was superb.

I've read the novel, but not the short story, and I thought it was excellent.

 

[Greg Cox]

38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys
Yet another movie tie-in.

There's a movie?

Honestly, had no idea.

I'm not sure all of those books have their importance because 'there's a movie' (I've been told Slaughterhouse Five has a movie too, for example). It's unquestionably true of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, of course. One would expect Ubik or The Man in the High Castle or The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch but none of them were made into a motion picture.

20,000 Leagues, for example - that was a book which, like Journey to the Center of the Earth and basically all Verne I've read, I read in primary school. Wasn't aware there were movies of either at the time, quite frankly.

All those atrocious fantasy series, but no Mervyn Peake (Titus Groan/Gormenghast?)

Frankenstein does appear to be the only Gothic work on the list - er, that I recognize anyhow. I assume they may have intentionally avoided Gothic works just as they apparently intentionally avoided children's books (despite the similarly inexplicable addition of Watership Down).

Despite being about bunnies, Watership Down has never been classified as a kid's book. Libraries and bookstores generally shelve it in the Adult section.

As for Dracula, I guess they're drawing a distinction between fantasy and horror. Frankenstein qualifies as science fiction because it's about science, not the supernatural.

And, yeah, I think the movie version of Flowers for Algernon has largely fallen into obscurity. I doubt if it had much influence on the voting . . . unlike, say, Blade Runner.

 

[Owain Taggart]

I'm pleased to see Neal Stephenson in the list many times, however I'd place Cryptonomicon above Snow Crash. Snow Crash is what made him famous though, so I guess that's what most people are familiar with.

 

[Kegg]

Despite being about bunnies, Watership Down has never been classified as a kid's book.

Libraries and bookstores generally shelve it in the Adult section.

Never seen one which did myself. I picked it up from the same kid's section I perused voraciously at that age.

But for the sake of argument here's some Wikipedia quotes:

The Economist heralded the initial publication of Watership Down with, "If there is no place for “Watership Down” in children’s bookshops, then children’s literature is dead." [...]Watership Down won [...] the Guardian Children's Fiction Prize in 1973. [...] The book won the 1977 California Young Reader Medal.

The book is not just a classic of children's literature (and sort of a big deal), it's extremely influential. Like I said, I followed reading Watership Down by reading a half-billion Watership Down knockoffs - a whole variety of children's books about animals suffering and dying through migratory treks. One of them was about wolves, I stopped reading it at one point because the wolf with my name was killed. I disgress...

As for Dracula, I guess they're drawing a distinction between fantasy and horror. Frankenstein qualifies as science fiction because it's about science, not the supernatural.

Yes, but Gormenghast? What criterion does Gormenghast meet that, let's say, The Castle of Otranto does not?

 

[Greg Cox]

Despite being about bunnies, Watership Down has never been classified as a kid's book.

Libraries and bookstores generally shelve it in the Adult section.

Never seen one which did myself. I picked it up from the same kid's section I perused voraciously at that age.

But for the sake of argument here's some Wikipedia quotes:

The Economist heralded the initial publication of Watership Down with, "If there is no place for “Watership Down” in children’s bookshops, then children’s literature is dead." [...]Watership Down won [...] the Guardian Children's Fiction Prize in 1973. [...] The book won the 1977 California Young Reader Medal.

The book is not just a classic of children's literature (and sort of a big deal), it's extremely influential. Like I said, I followed reading Watership Down by reading a half-billion Watership Down knockoffs - a whole variety of children's books about animals suffering and dying through migratory treks. One of them was about wolves, I stopped reading it at one point because the wolf with my name was killed. I disgress...

As for Dracula, I guess they're drawing a distinction between fantasy and horror. Frankenstein qualifies as science fiction because it's about science, not the supernatural.

Yes, but Gormenghast? What criterion does Gormenghast meet that, let's say, The Castle of Otranto does not?

Because Gormenghast takes place in an imaginary fantasy kingdom, and Dracula and The Castle of Otranto supposedly take place in the "real" world?

It's a blurry line, I agree. But I'm guessing they wanted to draw some sort of line between horror and fantasy.

And that's interesting about Watership Down. I've always seen in shelved on the adult racks, but I guess I've never looked for it in the kids' section as well.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Kegg's location is Ireland. That might account for the difference. I know that in every bookstore I've worked at it was in Adult Fiction, not SF or Childrens.