Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
The problem is that the world changes and the theme get stale. As a writer you have to look beyond the generational theme that made you successful. It doesn't matter whether you are talking about the Space Opera (E.E.Smith), The Campbell explosion of the 1940s (Asimov and Heinlein), the juveniles of the 1950s (Heinlein Mark II, Nourse, and others), the "new wave" of the 1960s (Moorcock, Eliison, et. al.), The feminism and modern liberalism of the (mid) 60s throught 70s, or the cyberpunk wave of the 1980s....
Read them all. The writers that succeeded over long time are the ones who changed their themes with the times.
|
Or worked their themes in ways that transcend the times and touch other eras.
It takes a bit of effort to work your way through a century of the genre's evolution to be able to put authors and stories in a broader context. I've been at it for pretty much my entire life. (Give or take five years.) Not ready to judge the 21st century writers but the 20th century crew I feel confident I understand where they fit.
Sturgeon I agree has legs and likely will be treated kindly by history, not just for his place in history but because of the timelessness of his stories. Poul Anderson and Gordon Dickson are two others I think are woefully underated. But then, it took a couple centuries for Jane Austen to become Jane Austen. By contrast, many of her lionized contemporaries are barely remembered.