Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
I think the biggest mistake the author of the article makes is to suggest that a look through the 100 best fantasy books is indicative of what was written. It's not. It's only indicative of what became popular; it doesn't tell us what was available. If there is offence to be had, it is to realise that the audience still prefers the books that author of the article finds offensive.
|
The list in question was compiled by NPR, a pretty PC outfit to start with.
But, yes, in SF&F and fantasy most list of historical "best" titles will lean towards the memorable (for a variety of reasons) and thus towards popularity rather than literary or political merit.
As to LUCIFER'S HAMMER, if you look at the structure of the narrative, it really isn't a hard SF title or even Space Opera. It is more representative of bestseller thriller/soapers of the day than the SF of the times. Think of it as Niven & Pournelle trolling for social readers.
Still a fun read but like many bestsellers it was dated within two years.