View Single Post
Old 09-18-2012, 11:52 AM   #11
holymadness
Guru
holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.holymadness ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
holymadness's Avatar
 
Posts: 719
Karma: 2084955
Join Date: Dec 2010
Device: iPhone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyberman tM View Post
How so?
He is not a very strong manipulator of language. His plots are simplistic, as he prefers imagining the contours of alternate universes to creating interesting and intricate storylines. He created no memorable characters in his lifetime.

If we compare him to his contemporaries—Raymond Chandler, Tennessee Williams, William Faulkner, George Orwell, Albert Camus, Arthur Miller, Evelyn Waugh, Ernest Hemingway, John Steinbeck—there is really no question that he was a minor, minor figure in letters at the time. Had he not popularized science fiction along with Clarke and Heinlein, I think he would be forgotten today.

He has the merit of being a visionary, but not a particularly good writer.
Quote:
Why should it?
I don't think it should. Some others in the thread are saying that because 1950s sci-fi movies/pulp fiction were cheesy, Asimov somehow has the right to be just as cheesy.

Sci-fi should be held to the same standard as all literature.
holymadness is offline   Reply With Quote