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.

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

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!

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.

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.

Niven is a good example: ... Hal Clement(,) ... Mission of Gravity(,) ...Vernor Vinge ... Jack McKinney ... Sarah Zettel (!!) ...CJ Cherryh ...

Back off, geeks! This one is mine!

(eta; CjC: Not particularly hard science, but consistent, in her plebotinum. She definately works from a hard, thorough understanding of historical trends.)

Obviously didn't do his homework on how fruitless most genetic algorithms are....

I wonder what the thoughts are on Moon, where the plot relies on mining drinkable water in ice form under the crust.

I wonder what the thoughts are on Moon, where the plot relies on mining drinkable water in ice form under the crust.

There's this:

[link]

Jack McKinney

Do you mean Jack McDevitt?

Vernor Vinge, the late Anderson, Larry Niven all hard science fiction writers who also do good charterizations and society. Many others too. But Anderson was at least much a fantasy writer as an SF writer. And the others were of a later generations who learned you could not get away with making your (non-sentient) rocket the main character. Of his generation, I think Heinlein was the only "hard" SF writer who did a decent job of characterization, universe building and society building. I should have said "of his generation" and hereby do.