Who are the masters of Scifi/Fantasy prose?

[Kyle Loechner]

Hey all,

I've seen a number of comments lately criticizing some popular authors (Abercrombie, Rothfuss, Martin, Gemmell, and Sanderson) for less-than-stellar prose. I'm surprised by all of these examples, so I ask:

Who in the field is considered to be exceptional then?

[Sci-2]

For fantasy Bakker, Mieville, Valente, and Holly Phillips come to mind. If you're willing to accept comics, I'd say Alan Moore on his good days.

[Serious Callers Only]

Jack Vance

[Datepalm]

I quite like Martin's prose, actually. He's rarely poetic, true, but when he is it works, and he can always evoke what he wants to - and he always has flow, structure, dialogue, etc, nailed down perfect.

I'm actually not a huge fan of Valente's prose, tbh. It's beautiful, sure, but kind of tiring. Not my thing. I secretly want to read something from her stripped of that, for once, just because I honestly find her more interesting as a storyteller than a proseist.

I really like Arthur C. Clarke's prose. :dunno:

[Joe Abercrombie]

In my experience, Sturgeon's Law most definitely applies to discussions about prose.

[Sci-2]

Wait...

Abercrombie, Rothfuss, Martin

This needs more explanation.

[kcf]

So Joe, is this discussion in the 90%? Or does it remain to be scene? The lack of clarity in your prose leaves things rather ambiguous (or was that the point.....I'm pretty sure this discussion is crap)

[David Selig]

Mervyn Peake is the best for my money. He had a painter's eye and an incredible gift for descriptions and creating a mood.

Others who come to mind are Le Guin, Patricia McKillip, Cat Valente, M. John Harrison, Stanislaw Lem, Gene Wolfe.

[Procrastimancer]

Michael Cisco.

Erin Morgenstern, Ekaterina Sedia, Jeff VanderMeer, J.M. McDermott, Adam McOmber, Cat Valente.

[Sci-2]

I quite like Martin's prose, actually. He's rarely poetic, true, but when he is it works, and he can always evoke what he wants to - and he always has flow, structure, dialogue, etc, nailed down perfect.

I'm actually not a huge fan of Valente's prose, tbh. It's beautiful, sure, but kind of tiring. Not my thing. I secretly want to read something from her stripped of that, for once, just because I honestly find her more interesting as a storyteller than a proseist.

I really like Arthur C. Clarke's prose. :dunno:

I think this post raises some good points - what is the prose seeking to accomplish? Martin and Valente are two ends of a spectrum to me. I can read Martin for hours once he's caught me. Valente's denser works are incredibly enjoyable, but I agree with one reviewer who likened some of her to thick pudding. Delicious but better in small portions.

Is it better to have a steady, enjoyable flow Rothfuss and Joe A manage, or to try and capture a more Tolkienesque sensibility [like Bakker does]?

Which leads to the question, which SFF authors have the greatest range, able to vary their voice depending on the work[?] Alan Moore is one of the few I can think of off the top of my head. Holly Phillips is another possibility.

eta:

Michael Cisco.

Erin Morgenstern, Ekaterina Sedia, Jeff VanderMeer, J.M. McDermott, Adam McOmber, Cat Valente.

Gods yes. And put Vandermeer down as someone who can vary his voice.

[Sheep the Evicted]

Jack Vance

I would go with this also. Bakker and Mievelle are definitely good, but they just cant compete.

[kcf]

It's always a bit subjective when determining who the best is at prose. A few that at I think are really good (there are others of course, but this is a good start):

Gene Wolfe

Patricia McKillip

Charles de Lint

Michael Moorcock

Michael Swanwick

Jeff VanderMeer

Margo Lanagan

John M. Ford

Jonathan Carroll

Felix Gilman

Another big issue is consistency. There are some authors who at times have wonderful prose, but they aren't consistent enough with it to be mentioned with the best (Steven Erikson comes to mind first). Elizabeth Bear also comes to mind, though with her new series it might just be best to go ahead and add her to the list above.

[Sheep the Evicted]

Which leads to the question, which SFF authors have the greatest range, able to vary their voice depending on the work[?] Alan Moore is one of the few I can think of off the top of my head. Holly Phillips is another possibility.

Ah now see Vance doesn't vary his voice AT ALL and yet it is so ridiculously eloquent that I just don't care.

[Hereward]

Another vote for Vance, though I agree with Sheep.

[David Selig]

Which leads to the question, which SFF authors have the greatest range, able to vary their voice depending on the work[?] Alan Moore is one of the few I can think of off the top of my head. Holly Phillips is another possibility.

Stanislaw Lem. He is extremely funny, playful and indulging in word plays, neologisms, elaborate metaphors, etc, in his satirical works (Star Diaries, Cyberiad, etc), yet in his more serious and hard sci/fi works his style is way more straightforward and disciplined. Then in his metafiction works he adapts another voice altogether, and all of those are spot on and perfectly fitted for his goals.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Another vote for Vance, though I agree with Sheep.

Same

[MisterOJ]

For some reason, an author who is dubbed as a "master of prose" seems like the literary equivalent of being a popular hipster band.

[SpaceChampion]

Stephen R Donaldson varies his prose quite a bit. Contrast his Gap cycle with his Convenant series.

Guy Gavriel Kay is beautiful prose.

[Serious Callers Only]

"Charles de Lint"

Lol no.

[Joe Abercrombie]

So Joe, is this discussion in the 90%? Or does it remain to be scene? The lack of clarity in your prose leaves things rather ambiguous (or was that the point.....I'm pretty sure this discussion is crap)

It remains to be scene (sic). But mostly people are just saying whose prose they like, which is hard to disagree with. It's when they start explaining what good prose is that I usually rub my temples and shake my head and say stuff like, "these goddamn kids need to get off my prose-lawn."