Willow: Something evil-crashed to earth in this. Then it broke out and slithered away to do badness. Giles: Well, in all fairness, we don't really know about the "slithered" part. Anya: No, no, I'm sure it frisked about like a fluffy lamb.

'Never Leave Me'


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.


Sydney Carton - Jun 24, 2004 2:26:51 pm PDT #743 of 10001
Actually, I've feeling a wee bit peckish...

I had a lot of people push "Prey" at me. It actually ended up being rather weak. Obviously didn't do his homework on how fruitless most genetic algorithms are....

In any case, can't say I've read much else of his stuff.


Ginger - Jun 24, 2004 2:37:26 pm PDT #744 of 10001
"It didn't taste good. It tasted soooo horrible. It tasted like....a vodka martini." - Matilda

Almost every time a character speaks, Crichton puts the word "said" after the dialogue.

There are things I dislike about Crichton, but that's not one of them. I like said. It recedes into the background. With words such as "remarked," I get distracted and starting thinking, "Was that really a remark, exactly?" The context should tell you, rather than the said synonym.


tommyrot - Jun 24, 2004 2:39:07 pm PDT #745 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

Yeah, but people should at least reply....


§ ita § - Jun 24, 2004 2:47:34 pm PDT #746 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Said's not background for me. It's present by its absence of detail. If that exchange had had half as many saids, even if they weren't replaced by anything, my internal pattern-counter wouldn't tick over, and it wouldn't be so staccato to me. And just distractingly staccato, not rhythmically, or mood-enhancingly.


Cranberry - Jun 24, 2004 2:55:35 pm PDT #747 of 10001
I was fine when existence had no meaning. Meaninglessness in a universe that has no meaning -- that I get. But meaninglessness in a universe with meaning? What does that mean?

A couple of those lines were questions, and therefore should have had "asked" after them instead of "said." And would it really hurt the man to throw in a "replied" every now and then?


Gus - Jun 24, 2004 2:56:42 pm PDT #748 of 10001
Bag the crypto. Say what is on your mind.

See, the conversation was about science-fiction writers, and then someone brought up Crichton, which is just ... wrong.

I hereby perform indignities upon Prey, which was composed entirely of fey-yu.


§ ita § - Jun 24, 2004 2:58:34 pm PDT #749 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Hey, now. He writes fictional science all the time.


Gus - Jun 24, 2004 3:04:37 pm PDT #750 of 10001
Bag the crypto. Say what is on your mind.

Hey, now. He writes fictional science all the time.

Bwah!

However, there is a segment of society that thinks that "medically trained" has something to do with "scientifically correct", so books premised on my-marijuana-huffing-assistant-looked-it-up-on-the-innerweb research is just bad.

Bad Crichton. No biscuit!


Consuela - Jun 24, 2004 3:16:10 pm PDT #751 of 10001
We are Buffistas. This isn't our first apocalypse. -- Pix

Crichton is a poor excuse for a writer, much less an SF writer. I enjoyed Jurassic Park, mostly because it felt like a screenplay. But I also read Sphere and Congo, and they were absolute crap. No scientific plausibility to speak of.

And Andromeda Strain had almost no story, IIRC.

Hard SF writers don't necessarily sacrifice character, but the story is often driven by some scientific issue. Niven is a good example: the Ringworld stories, "Neutron Star", etc. Hal Clement is probably my favorite hard sf writer: Mission of Gravity involved a rescue mission on a planet where the gravity was about 4gs, and the residents all looked like caterpillars. It was way cool.

Vernor Vinge is a hard SF writer, and Jack McKinney. Sarah Zettel. I tend to think of CJ Cherryh as a hard SF writer in that her science is usually social science, and that's what drives the story more than pure character. If that makes any sense.


§ ita § - Jun 24, 2004 3:23:27 pm PDT #752 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Do you think that applies for the bulk of Cherryh's SF? I thought Cyteen very hard, just a soft science. Ish. But the Faded Sun and the Company Wars ones not particularly hard.

I forgot Vernor Vinge! He did my favourite aliens, a lovely concept -> character deal.