Comments on: [GUEST POST] Carrie Cuinn on 5 Golden Age Science Fiction Universes I’d Never Want To Live In

By: Gary D

Gary D — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 07:28:27 +0000

What about the other typos?

By: Paul Kieniewicz

Paul Kieniewicz — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:58:50 +0000

Thank you Carrie. I’d add to your list most SF worlds that have since been created. Heinelin’s PK Dick’s, Ian M Banks and so on. Perhaps my near future vision of Scotland falls into the same pattern. I hope not. Dystopias are always easier to write about than Utopias, because they embody more opportunity for conflict. Try to write about a world in which people live harmonious lives. It’s damn difficult to keep it interesting; to engage with the characters. Aldous Huxley tried it in “Island” and ended up with a plodding, somewhat tedious novel. I contend that fine literature about worlds we’d like to live in can be written, but require a lot more talent.

By: Jamie

Jamie — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:58:02 +0000

Ah, yes, it makes much more sense as “novel.”

By: Paul Weimer

Paul Weimer — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:27:39 +0000

I don’t recall reading the essay. If you have a link, I’d love to read it.

And really, I’ve said it before and again. Someone like Subterranean Press or the NESFA folks need to collect those novels of De Camp’s and re-release the lot of them.

The “characters don’t see the awfulness” is a neat trick. Takes a good writer (like Huxley) to do it well.

By: Carrie Cuinn

Carrie Cuinn — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:13:45 +0000

Thank you John!

By: John DeNardo

John DeNardo — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:08:07 +0000

I’ve updated the post to say “this novel”

By: Carrie Cuinn

Carrie Cuinn — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:05:05 +0000

I think we carried on because the novels do talk about hope and overcoming obstacles and courage in the face of unbeatable odds. There are good things in each of these novels, which is probably why they’re classics

I guess the moral here is to be the hero of your story, because you wouldn’t want to be anyone else.

By: Carrie Cuinn

Carrie Cuinn — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:03:02 +0000

What works for one person doesn’t always work for another As a woman, I’m not as interested in living on de Camp’s spruced-up Barsoom as perhaps a man might be. ROGUE QUEEN falls, chronologically, at the end of the stories he wrote in that universe, and by then Krishna’s changed some. Have you read his essay on it?

I do think that one way authors point out just how awful a society is (when we can see its dystopian/flawed) is to have the citizens not see the problem. That sort of makes us stand up and say, “Hey, wait, don’t you see what’s going on?” Then we can identify with the one hero who sees the flaws and tries to change the world.

By: Michaele Jordan

Michaele Jordan — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:53:57 +0000

You can’t help wondering why we carried on after reading this stuff!

By: Carrie Cuinn

Carrie Cuinn — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:52:15 +0000

Jamie – that’s a typo. It’s not meant to be “novels” as these mini reviews don’t cover whole series, but just a single book. This one novel, the original version of FOUNDATION (in which case, as you pointed out, the statement is correct). Sorry for the confusion.

By: Jamie

Jamie — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:20:40 +0000

Just wanted to point out that “Also, there are no women in his novels, outside of one who’s mentioned as an example of an advantageous marriage for power. No one in any position of power or even anyone with an abundance of education, is a woman” is not a completely accurate statement.

If you are referring to the first five stories, or so, you are absolutely correct about the women. However, beginning with “The Mule” (published in FOUNDATION AND EMPIRE), the main character and hero of that novella is, in fact, Bayta, wife of Toran, who unknowingly befriends the Mule and in the end, ultimately, defeats his plans to find the Second Foundation. She is not the well-rounded female character you would find in stories today, but then Asimov’s excuse at the time was that he had no experience with women. She is, however, intelligent and makes use of her intelligence to solve the mystery of the Mule.

In “…And Now You Don’t,” the final story of the original FOUNDATION series, Arcadia Darell is the hero of the story and is an even better developed female character than Bayta was.

These stories were both part of the original FOUNDATION series, published between 1942 and 1950. In his return to the FOUNDATION stories in the 1980s, Asimov included much stronger female characters (he now had more experience), two of which were Dors Venable and Wanda Seldon, Hari’s granddaughter.

I’m not arguing that any of these women are the well-rounded characters we see today, but your statement makes it sound like there are no women of significance or importance anywhere in the stories, and these two lead characters demonstrate otherwise, I think.

By: Paul Weimer

Paul Weimer — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:38:22 +0000

The funny thing about #1 is that I was discussing BNW over at Night Shade Books in regards to Dystopias.

It’s a dystopia by our lights, sure, but the citizens and inhabitants of the World State really think they are in a utopia. And that makes it even more horrible…

As far as Rogue Queen, since its set in the same universe as Planet Krishna, I’d have to disagree with you. I’d love to visit the latter…