Calm down, snowflakehttps://twitter.com/MaryRobinette/status/1035868391465209858 …
-
-
I laughed hard at this, sorry. What books do you consider GOOD if your taste is this bad, out of curiosity.
-
A Canticle for Leibowitz (Hugo 1961) Man in the High Castle (1963) Dune (1966) Moon is a Harsh Mistress (1967) Ringworld (1971) Forever War (1976) ...basically, every Hugo award winner up to 2000 or 2010 or so.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
And why traditional SF publishing is dying a slow death. It’s moribund. It’s like reading stuff assembled by committee. And a very insular committe at that. ZZZZZZZZZZ
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
No it's not.
End of conversation
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
My current prob w/ the Hugo (and much of SF publishing houses) isn’t that there’s nothing good there. There is. It’s that the award used to be a pretty good indicator of quality, and now it *might* be that or it might be crappy writing/plotting with a moral that makes them squee.
End of conversation
-
-
-
I liked Three Body Problem. My favorite part is I was able to have a really interesting conversation with a Chinese friend about it. Haven't read Ancillary Justice or Jemisin, but I agree that Redshirts didn't deserve the honor.
-
Also: I actually agree with New SF people that classic sci fi often had stilted characters/relationships. That's why I don't like Scalzi--his characters always talk and think like 2018 fandom-Internet people.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.