I just finished reading Arthur C. Clarke's Rendezvous with Rama earlier today. It's a very well-written book, but it wasn't for me. Instead, it reflects trends I've repeatedly come across in Golden Age science fiction, and I'm considering just stepping away from that entire era for good. Could someone please correct me on this if I'm wrong? I just want to make sure I understand what that genre offers.
- Preoccupation with pure ideas; ignoring reader needs. There's nothing wrong with a good idea/problem story, where the plot is about figuring out what something is or where the problem lies. But it becomes difficult when that's literally the entire story, to the exclusion of characters, places, emotional connection, or anything else. When the problem at hand becomes the sole measurement for interest in the book, I've got to be honest–I don't have a lot of reason to invest emotionally. No more so than if it were tax forms or a math problem. And I get it–a lot of brainy people like working through math problems or pure philosophical theoreticals. But I like it if those things are presented in tandem with rich prose, worthy dramas, and compelling characters. Most Golden Age science fiction I've found lacks any of that.
- Essay writing instead of fiction writing. A year or two ago, I worked my way through Isaac Asimov's Foundation series. The initial concepts of psychohistory and imperial decay were really interesting, but as the books went on, it became increasingly clear that Asimov was less interesting in telling a story and more focused on writing treatises about human perception, ethical quandaries, and the nature of humanity. But I kept waiting for the story to pick up again… and it didn't. Instead his protagonists just drifted around from episode to episode where they found someone to speak his dissertations for him. And it was so boring. Now, I'm a student of literature, and I've read some boring books in my time. But this isn't The Scarlet Letter or Moby-Dick or some stuffy remote Victorian novel; this was space opera writ large. I'm glad it established the field, but it feels drastically underwhelming compared to more modern novels.
- Casual sexism throughout. I realize this stuff was written back in the fifties, sixties, and seventies, so it's a different era–but there's this recurring trend I've noticed in a lot of these books of these crusty old men "having their way" with the female ambassador, or the on-ship doctor, or whoever else happens to cross their path. Women are generally undervalued and, when highlighted, it's more often for their ability to be companions to men, instead of for their more important virtues and contributions. Is it just that time period? It's pretty cringey to encounter this stuff over and over again. I prefer fiction that treats all of its characters with dignity.
That's just what I've noticed. Does anyone here have examples to the contrary? I'd love to hear about them. As a reader, I don't like writing off an entire genre or subgenre, but if that's really all this stuff is, I'd rather just shelve it and read something more compelling elsewhere.
by sc_merrell