I don't think of Bradbury as Hard SF generally, because he wrote a lot of character-centric stories. He does have some stories of ideas, which revolve around some scientific concept or other, but I think of the Hard SF writers as being much more rule-driven, than people-driven.
Raise your hand if 'ew.'
Buffy ,'Same Time, Same Place'
The Minearverse 3: The Network Is a Harsh Mistress
[NAFDA] "There will be an occasional happy, so that it might be crushed under the boot of the writer." From Zorro to Angel (including Wonderfalls and The Inside), this is where Buffistas come to anoint themselves in the bloodbath.
JohnSweden - Jun 24, 2004 1:02:27 pm PDT #730 of 10001
I can't even.
Daisy Jane - Jun 24, 2004 1:02:59 pm PDT #731 of 10001
"This bar smells like kerosene and stripper tears."
Hmm. But what if there's lots of ideas and technology and stuff, but not at the expense of the characters? -Still thinking TMC right now.
§ ita § - Jun 24, 2004 1:04:13 pm PDT #732 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I think they can all be present in a story, but when I feel the ideas and tech are exalted, I feel it's hard SF. The rest is just SF.
Daisy Jane - Jun 24, 2004 1:05:59 pm PDT #733 of 10001
"This bar smells like kerosene and stripper tears."
What's Michael Chriton?
JohnSweden - Jun 24, 2004 1:07:13 pm PDT #734 of 10001
I can't even.
Agreed. My take on Martian Chronicles is that it isn't Hard SF. Too squishy, and I mean that as someone who doesn't have much taste for the science over character stuff, and who enjoyed the Martian Chronicles.
§ ita § - Jun 24, 2004 1:07:24 pm PDT #735 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
What's Michael Chriton?
Crap.
t /kneejerk
I haven't read him, so I don't actually know.
Matt the Bruins fan - Jun 24, 2004 1:08:12 pm PDT #736 of 10001
"I remember when they eventually introduced that drug kingpin who murdered people and smuggled drugs inside snakes and I was like 'Finally. A normal person.'” —RahvinDragand
That's probably fair, or at least the actual science is somewhat based on actual principles and has an important part in the story. As opposed to Bradbury-style SF, which goes about as far as using "rockets" and everything else is character/atmosphere.
JohnSweden - Jun 24, 2004 1:09:17 pm PDT #737 of 10001
I can't even.
I don't really think of Crichton as an SF writer, more of a pot-boiler writer who occasionally uses SF themes. I gather his science is also occasionally more than a little dubious, which the Hard SF folks would seriously frown on.
SailAweigh - Jun 24, 2004 1:11:40 pm PDT #738 of 10001
Nana korobi, ya oki. (Fall down seven times, stand up eight.) ~Yuzuru Hanyu/Japanese proverb
For hard SF, two names that come to my mind without even having to think are Larry Niven and Poul Anderson. They liked to play around with hard-core scientific theory and build entire universes around them. I absolutely adored Anderson in high school.
Daisy Jane - Jun 24, 2004 1:14:57 pm PDT #739 of 10001
"This bar smells like kerosene and stripper tears."
Huh. I guess I've never done "hard" SF then.