>randomly come across this>"writers writer", apparently, admired by GRRM, Gene Wolf, simmons, etc>one of the few scifi books i've ever liked>casually tosses out one of the most interesting premises in fiction i've encountered in a long time >never actually acknowledges the fact that its taking place on a tidally locked planet, just expects reader to intuit this in the 80's, which maybe an handful of astrophysicists would have known about>just ends halfway through the storywtf.weird book.
>>25411143Vance rules. He's written a ton of pulp, and generally prefers shorter fiction. Even his longer stuff is usually a fixup novel.Give his Dying Earth series a shot, it's some great science fantasy that launched an entire genre almost all on its own and was one of the biggest influences for D&D; it's where "Vancian" magic systems came from.
>>25411277That’s my problem with Vance and other recommended scifi books. I want to read an actual novel. Not a collection of short stories, fix-novels as they call it. Felt like I fell for a marketing scheme.
>>25411321I agree, it's irritating, and some authors (Vance included) are really bad at hiding it.It was just how things were back then. You had to pay the bills and novels weren't were the money was (yet), so you wrote for magazines. If you were lucky a publisher would let you turn those into a novel.The trend mostly stops after the 70s in terms of scifi. Give LeGuin, M. John Harrison, Stanisław Lem, or Kim Stanley Robinson a shot.
>>25411321
>>25411321Filtered. Short fiction is better than novels.
>>25411383I’m reading it.
>>25411358>those recommendationsAre you trying to kill interest in the genre? Lem is the only author in that list that has any good sci-fi books and Solaris is the only one anyone bothers talking about. Le Guin has Earthsea but everything else by her sucks.
>>25411277>launched an entire genre almost all on its own William Hope Hodgson and Clark Ashton Smith did it first. Vance just came up with a title for the subgenre.
>>25411383Lyonesse is good but it's not scifi.>>25411422Earthsea is LeGuin's weakest works, which is fine because it's for actual children. She's foundational and her scfi works are excellent.M. John Harrison is Vance-like but far more literary. KSR is the transition point from the new wavers to more modern (to us) scifi.Perhaps Rid Rising is more your speed?>>25411434The Night Land and Zothique are something special, but if you're looking to "get into" scifi (like OP seems to be) then I wouldn't start with them. You start with Vance then work backwards to them and then forwards to Viriconium and Long Sun if you like Dying Earth stuff.
>>25411434launching doesnt mean inventing
>>25411462>She's foundationalYou've either barely know anything about the sci-fi cannon or are deeply disingenuous.
>>25411462>Lyonesse is good but it's not scifi.Then try the Demon Princes.
>>25411143>just ends halfway through the storySounds awful
>>25411321Try his Lyonesse trilogy, they feel more like novelsmost /sff/ stuff from 1920-1970 is from self-educated nerds who were writing for the pulps, they didn't really know how to write a good novel
>>25411143Pardon my ignorance but what does a "tidally locked planet" mean?
>>25413760One side is always in the sun and the other side stays in perpetual darkness.
>one of the few scifi books i've ever likedWhat a fucking faggot
Best jack vance books, bros?
>>25411321sf writers are canonical scientists unable to intuit human emotion so you suffer bad characterization for cool premise. just read hg wells
>>25411143IDK wtf vance was on while writing, But I want it.I dont know how he did it, but he made every little detail in the dying earth seem infinitely intricate, but also infinitely mundane for the people living there.
>>25413801
>No longer in publication Fuck (You), OP.
>>25413812REKT
