Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemurion
Yeah, but the quantity isn't that great (and this is from a guy who's read all those books you mentioned. I have a copy of Armageddon 2419 on the coffee table behind me, and Skylark in a box behind it.  |
The market for SF was very limited in those days: 2-3 magazines and essentially zero books. In those early days the editors valued high concept "scientific" ideas and scenarios over story. A lot of the same writers putting out the "clunky" scientifiction pulps for Amazing were also doing much better in other genres.
SF has long been constrained by the gatekeepers' preconceptions and prejudices. Even the best of editors--Campbell, Boucher, etc--had biases and expectations that make modern readers roll their eyes. Things like "SF is for boys and they won't buy stories from girls" or the near universality of two-fisted east coast WASP protagonists.
I'd say it's a tribute to the writers that so many of their stories remain relevant after a century of social change, considering the editorial constraints they faced.
(One point that is virtually universal among indie authors is the matter of control. Over the decades their lack of control over the finished product has chaffed even more than the predatory contract terms; the contracts being universally bad, while the quality and quantity of gatekeeper support was essentially random luck.)