Multaniette Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 Hopefully it'd be a pleasant surprise, since I haven't seen much mention of it here or on the other sites that I frequent. Some interesting themes in those manuscript volumes that would make for some excellent essays on the evolution of Tolkien's thought. There are a fair few here who have read the books, IIRC. I got burnt out on their discussion ages ago though (I blame the myraid Tolkien forums for that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naz Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 There are a fair few here who have read the books, IIRC. I got burnt out on their discussion ages ago though (I blame the myraid Tolkien forums for that). Agreed. I'm a proud owner and reader of HoME as well, but as Mult said... most of the issues that RBPL rebutted have been argued to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted August 7, 2007 Author Share Posted August 7, 2007 I've got them all as well. It's an extremely important bit of scholarship, what Christopher Tolkien did. While I'm thinking of it, how many of you getting the two-volume HoME-style edition for The Hobbit manuscripts? I think it's out in the UK or will be soon, while I know it'll be released in the US in September. And I'm not denying there are some here that have bought/read all 12 volumes, I'm just guessing based on relative lack of availability these days that it's not going to be a common find in the average fantasy fan's collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stego Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 I'd argue that VanderMeer probably would have found a niche writing his fictions that are based on Borges, Calvino, and others in many of the same markets that supported Peake, MacDonald, Dunsany, Clark Ashton Smith, Cordwainer Smith, and so many others over the years. Kelly Link would find those markets. China Mieville would. Danielewski would. Jeff Ford would. VanderMeer just isn't good enough for any publisher to take a flyer on without the popularity of fantasy caused by Tolkien (And Rowling!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stego Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Target-seeking munitions are mentioned, but by the sounds of it it involves image recognition (Rico mentions letting a bomb 'see' its target at the peak of one bounce and then letting it fly on the second; no mentions are made of his illuminating the target with anything), not illuminating a target with IR. Also, again, WWII seems to have been a testing ground for remotely-guided munitions. Image recognition *is* how missiles are guided, without getting into too much detail. Whether it be IR imaging or laser designation/range finding. And we certainly don't illuminate anything with IR anymore. It was a bad, bad idea. Like lighting a big strobe light on your gun and saying "shoot me!" ETA: Ran, I'm sort of surprised you mention WW2, bleeding edge technology, and then say Heinlein had nothing to do with it. You are aware of what he actually did in the Navy during that war, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted August 7, 2007 Author Share Posted August 7, 2007 Kelly Link would find those markets. China Mieville would. Danielewski would. Jeff Ford would. VanderMeer just isn't good enough for any publisher to take a flyer on without the popularity of fantasy caused by Tolkien (And Rowling!). I disagree and I'll just leave at that, as I think it's more a matter of personal tastes than anything else at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Stego, IR illumination is certainly a bad idea, but if Heinlein envisioned any sort of light-a-target-and-guide-a-munition system (which I'm not sure he did), that's what he was imagining. As to image recognition, I don't think Heinlein was actually the first to come up with that, either. I am aware that he worked for Navy research. He did not work on these particular areas, however, as his specialty was aeronautical engineering. In any case, what I'll give him credit for is thinking of a new military landscape that is closer to the modern day warfare than what many of his contemporary SF authors envisioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Every day of my life in the military I worked with or brushed up against the fruits of Robert Heinlein's mind. Clarke's entire output is nothing to that. An exaggeration. ACC was the guy who proposed geostationary satellites, which revolutionised communications and weather prediction, amongst many other applications (including military and intelligence). ACC also played a role in the testing of more sophisticated radar systems early in WW2 which helped in the Battle of Britain. His work was also a factor in the development of the GCA (ground-controlled approach) radar system which played a key role in the Berlin Airlift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoN Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 What's with all the Ellison hate in the comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 What's with all the Ellison hate in the comments? His reputation as something of an egomaniac? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 I think some of it is on-point, in the sense that some of what he wrote is dated. But I think that's a fate that a lot of very good authors run the risk of. Most of the great writers out there have "minor" works, some of which were not considered minor contemporaneously but have dwindled with age. That said, Ellison's one of the great short fiction SF writers, whatever his personal faults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Well, his personal attitude is a problem, but at least he has (or had) some talent (unlike Hubbard and Tairy, who were similarly objectionable). His conduct over the whole Last Dangerous Visions thing was a bit dubious as well (generally it's polite to publish your anthology before half of the contributing authors have dropped dead of old age). But I wouldn't call him overrated. I don't think there's many SF short story writers who have made the impact he has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Godsgrace Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 Well, as was mentioned in M. John Harrison discussion, being a good writer and being a nice guy are totally independent issues. Some good authors are assholes, and some nice guys are terrible writers. Live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stego Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 Well, as was mentioned in M. John Harrison discussion, being a good writer and being a nice guy are totally independent issues. Some good authors are assholes, and some nice guys are terrible writers. Live with it. And M. John Harrison is both a pretentious prick and a shit author. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 And M. John Harrison is both a pretentious prick and a shit author. QFT. I hadn't fully appreciated that the Lit Forum is a duller place without the Stego around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 Found this interesting link via Locus Online. It seems a bit too much for me, but then again, I got bored with A Stranger in a Strange Land almost 5 years ago and never returned to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
werewolfv2 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Asimov: Heinlein: Never tried it, although the descriptions of Stranger in a Strange Land and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (the 2 I've been recommended) have given me a bad impression of his ideas. Moon was the one book by Heinlen that I enjoyed at all. It wasnt the best book Ive ever read but since then Ive tgried several other books by him and I dont recall finishing even one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beniowa Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I tried reading Stranger in a Strange Land a few years ago. Only got about 50 pages before stopping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eponine Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I can't believe there are people who think that Heinlein was good at characterization. His female characters make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stego Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I can't believe there are people who think that Heinlein was good at characterization. His female characters make me sick. I can't believe their are people who say things like this. You obviously haven't read Pokayne of Mars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.