The Realism of Our Times: Kim Stanley Robinson on how science fiction works(publicbooks.org)
publicbooks.org
The Realism of Our Times: Kim Stanley Robinson on how science fiction works
https://www.publicbooks.org/the-realism-of-our-times-kim-stanley-robinson-on-how-science-fiction-works/
87 comments
On O'Brien, I found that I could just relax into the nautical terminology and allow myself to not understand every word: just enjoy the texture. And after a couple of books you'll find you've picked most of it up. After a dozen books you can recognize the names of 20 different sails, and explain when they are used. I realize that doesn't sound like obvious fun, but it's embedded in great stories of adventure and friendship. I've read the whole sequence twice and it's one of the most enjoyable reads of my life.
What a coincidence. I've just finished David Brin's Existence (2012). The edition I have has a few pages of 2312 at the end as a form of 'if you liked this, you might like…' advertising. I guess I should look into this book.
Do you have A Sea of Words, the lexicon for reading O'Brian's novels? I highly recommend having it by your side while you read. It helps a lot.
Thanks for the tip, I didn't know that existed. I'll be following that up post-haste.
One terminology that particularly struck me was what's now referred to as a "cut splice"[0]. The use that particular word was jarring, in that it's not the type of novel to have cursing scattered through it. The reason for its usage is historical accuracy.
[0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope_splicing
One terminology that particularly struck me was what's now referred to as a "cut splice"[0]. The use that particular word was jarring, in that it's not the type of novel to have cursing scattered through it. The reason for its usage is historical accuracy.
[0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope_splicing
Really loved the Mars trilogy when I was a teenager. The clunky character development and invented politics haven't aged super well, but the stories are still interesting. I also enjoyed The Memory of Whiteness and The Years of Rice and Salt.
More recently I tried reading Aurora (2015), but the book is a downer and a slog. Not recommended. Didn't finish it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_(novel)
More recently I tried reading Aurora (2015), but the book is a downer and a slog. Not recommended. Didn't finish it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_(novel)
Currently reading Ministry for the Future, which in some ways is a very optimistic book, but is still quite grim. Also, I'm thinking perhaps next time I'm tempted to read a book with climate change as the subject, I'll wait until winter to do it, rather than in the summer when the described scenes are a bit too easy to imagine by simply stepping outside.
Read the mars trilogy and Rice and Salt as well. I like his optimism in humans' ability to actually make radical political change. I suppose this is what I mean by his being both optimistic and grim -- severe outcomes aren't avoided in his books, but in the end societies do change before the absolute worst comes to pass. A "hard optimism" I suppose, which I find valuable.
Read the mars trilogy and Rice and Salt as well. I like his optimism in humans' ability to actually make radical political change. I suppose this is what I mean by his being both optimistic and grim -- severe outcomes aren't avoided in his books, but in the end societies do change before the absolute worst comes to pass. A "hard optimism" I suppose, which I find valuable.
I like Kim Stanley Robinson and Ministry for the Future has some interesting ideas but it reads a bit like a white paper disguised as a novel.
I'm having trouble with Ministry for the Future. It seems like it might be more of a manifesto than a novel. I've been pushing on...it seems like the plot might come together but I'm not positive yet and I'm considering giving up.
It's my first KSR book. I wish I'd started with the Mars trilogy as previously planned.
It's my first KSR book. I wish I'd started with the Mars trilogy as previously planned.
No shame putting down a book you're having a hard time getting into. That's something it took me longer than it should have to realize. There's a lot of books out there, and if one's not working out, no one's keeping score on how many you finish. I'd recommend following your gut and trying the Mars books first. If it turns out you like KSR, maybe you might find yourself coming back to Ministry, and in a different frame of mind. Or you might find you actually don't care for KSR even after trying Mars, and then you can move on to other books without worrying you're missing something.
Human history is filled with change, it's the only constant.
Unfortunately we don't see that when we're in the centre of the storm.
Unfortunately we don't see that when we're in the centre of the storm.
I came across Memory of Whiteness while taking my college music theory classes. It's very fantastical but I loved how he connected various compositional techniques with physical processes. It's a very underrated book.
I actually really enjoyed Aurora and have been through it three times. It is a bit of a downer, sure. It felt quite fresh to me though, as I took it as a 'coming of age' story, but for the ship's AI.
Mars Trilogy changed how I look at the world, nation states and the future. Love KSR!
> Mars Trilogy changed how I look at the world, nation states and the future.
In what way? (if that's practical/possible to answer)
In what way? (if that's practical/possible to answer)
He proposes a novel way of thinking about the economy,ecology,and political governance nicely bundled in a meta epic about terraforming Mars.
For me while reading it was the first time I thought "hey nations are purely social/political constructs and not set into stone at all". Sounds trivial but that book changed my perspective on that matter.
I suppose that the cultural background (Old World here) might play a role here - I can imagine an American thinking "of course you can just get rid of the people exploiting your kind, we did that before already".
I suppose that the cultural background (Old World here) might play a role here - I can imagine an American thinking "of course you can just get rid of the people exploiting your kind, we did that before already".
He introduced me to the idea of worker cooperatives (businesses/organizations owned and run by the workers themselves) and I wish I could like in a world where they were more normal.
Can ye recommend any novels / authors that are as hard sci-fi as KSR or Arthur C Clarke?
* Seveneves (I haven't read much else from Neal Stephenson, but I've heard good things)
* Children of Time / Children of Ruin (both really good)
* Remembrance of Earth's Past (even the fan fiction one is good)
* A lot of stuff from Alastair Reynolds (House of Suns being my favorite)
* Classics like Tau Zero, The Forever War etc.
* A Deepness in the Sky / A Fire Upon the Deep
Although not all of these are strictly considered hard scifi, I guess.
Btw, I love it when somebody asks this question every now and then on HN. Lots of stuff for one's (ever growing) reading list.
* Children of Time / Children of Ruin (both really good)
* Remembrance of Earth's Past (even the fan fiction one is good)
* A lot of stuff from Alastair Reynolds (House of Suns being my favorite)
* Classics like Tau Zero, The Forever War etc.
* A Deepness in the Sky / A Fire Upon the Deep
Although not all of these are strictly considered hard scifi, I guess.
Btw, I love it when somebody asks this question every now and then on HN. Lots of stuff for one's (ever growing) reading list.
Neal Stephenson's earlier work has "more soul" - Snow Crash / Diamond Age actually has characters you care about and like, his later novels get increasingly more abstract, though even better in the technical sense. I think the only character I remember from Seveneves is the cannibal leader, that's it.
"A Deepness in the Sky" was REALLY good. The Forever War was good for the concept.
In short, yours looks like a great list I will come back to, thank you.
However, I do strongly dislike Remembrance of Earth's Past / The Three Body Problem - it's vastly overrated in my opinion and the characters make no sense. The best part of it was the intro to the first book which gave an interesting glimpse at history.
"A Deepness in the Sky" was REALLY good. The Forever War was good for the concept.
In short, yours looks like a great list I will come back to, thank you.
However, I do strongly dislike Remembrance of Earth's Past / The Three Body Problem - it's vastly overrated in my opinion and the characters make no sense. The best part of it was the intro to the first book which gave an interesting glimpse at history.
I really couldn't get into Snow Crash and I didn't finish Diamond Age but I love everything from Cryptonomicon forward.
Jack Shaftoe is one of my favourite fictional characters!
Jack Shaftoe is one of my favourite fictional characters!
I can totally relate, except Snow Crash stayed on my stack for both its popularity and its brevity. The fourth time I took a stab at the first chapter I was in a much lighter mood, broke through the jarring entry to an AnCap society with an unemployed hacker working as a pizza delivery driver for the mafia, and this time I found myself simply laughing at the absurdity of it. Then I was hooked. One or two passages (the library research scene?) drag out a bit. Overall: highly recommended, mostly for the sense of humor.
I know what you are talking about, despite being on the opposite end of that spectrum. Snow Crash / Diamond Age are cyberpunk/post-cyberpunk ala Gibson and completely different from Stephenson's other books.
I couldn't even get through Cryptonomicon, and Jack Shaftoe did not strike me as a believable genius, nor his story. Anathem kind of strafed the line - it had SOME character development, and SOME action, but was mainly world-building / intellectual exploration. Stephenson's other books fall too far on that spectrum for me.
I couldn't even get through Cryptonomicon, and Jack Shaftoe did not strike me as a believable genius, nor his story. Anathem kind of strafed the line - it had SOME character development, and SOME action, but was mainly world-building / intellectual exploration. Stephenson's other books fall too far on that spectrum for me.
Are you by any chance referring to "Bobby" Shaftoe the WW2 Marine Raider or his ancestor King of the Vagabonds, L'Emmerdeur, Half-Cocked Jack, Quicksilver, Ali Zaybak, Sword of Divine Fire, Jack the Coiner...
This gentleman, by whatever named you call him, is perhaps my favorite Stephenson character. I hated him after the first book... it felt too difficult to related to his decisions and mistakes, but loved him by the end.
I can't remember a single character from Anathem, but its world and some of the scenes are burned into my connectome.
Remembrance of Earth’s past had some of the weakest protagonists in a book I’ve read. It also has this weird thing where characters plan for things and that just … happens. It was strange seeing book arching plans go without a hitch.
But I think it was incredibly interesting for me to see the Asian perspective on the west. I’ve read it more as an allegory of the different peoples of the world, shown from a perspective totally different than my own.
I do think though that you have to be a bit of a hard sci-fi fan to finish it, but the science-y ideas are very interesting. I think it changed how I view the vast cosmos, at least a little bit.
But I think it was incredibly interesting for me to see the Asian perspective on the west. I’ve read it more as an allegory of the different peoples of the world, shown from a perspective totally different than my own.
I do think though that you have to be a bit of a hard sci-fi fan to finish it, but the science-y ideas are very interesting. I think it changed how I view the vast cosmos, at least a little bit.
I agree, re The Three Body Problem. It's a fun story, but not hard sci-fi in the way Stephenson etc are. I also enjoyed the dive into mid-century communist China - it was a jarring, immersive journey into living-memory history I hadn't learned about before.
I think Diamond Age was my favorite overall Stephenson story in terms of both story and neat scifi concepts, but all of them were enjoyable. I agree on Seveneves chars all being forgettable. Dodge (The most recent one) had perhaps the dullest start, but I really liked the Dodge, Corvis, and Daisy characters.
I think Diamond Age was my favorite overall Stephenson story in terms of both story and neat scifi concepts, but all of them were enjoyable. I agree on Seveneves chars all being forgettable. Dodge (The most recent one) had perhaps the dullest start, but I really liked the Dodge, Corvis, and Daisy characters.
+1 for Seveneves. I found it so engrossing that just thinking about it now I can picture the shapes of that chain in zero-G, and the unexpectedly long-lasting hellscape consequences of the very early reveal. The CB radio...
eh, 1st 1/2 great. 2nd half ... really falls apart
To be honest I think I really like “long jumps in time”. It’s like the author builds up a world that you understand and care about, and then it becomes a backdrop of this new world, which adds another layer of complexity. There are parallels to notice and explore, “how things might turn out” tales, etc.
The one other author I’ve seen pull it off was Brandon Sanderson in his Mistborn trilogy, though he does it 2 times (once for each book) where the previous one becomes “the legends” for the next one, with all the misunderstandings that this usually entails.
The one other author I’ve seen pull it off was Brandon Sanderson in his Mistborn trilogy, though he does it 2 times (once for each book) where the previous one becomes “the legends” for the next one, with all the misunderstandings that this usually entails.
Yeah, they're really 2 different books.
BUT, I enjoyed the 2nd half as well. The 1st book is already obsolete technologically in some ways (launch technology has progressed a lot in the last 5 years)[0], although very interesting. Which is one reason I like the 2nd part in that it extrapolates from the sociocultural/technological developments of the first book to see what the ultimate consequences could be.
The book is also a sharp commentary on the destructiveness of social media...
[0]side note: the speed of progress that SpaceX is achieving with Starship in Boca Chica is comparable to a pace you'd want in the first book... They're going so fast in Boca Chica, as if the Moon fell apart and they only have a couple years left before the Hard Rain to make humanity a multiplanetary species...
BUT, I enjoyed the 2nd half as well. The 1st book is already obsolete technologically in some ways (launch technology has progressed a lot in the last 5 years)[0], although very interesting. Which is one reason I like the 2nd part in that it extrapolates from the sociocultural/technological developments of the first book to see what the ultimate consequences could be.
The book is also a sharp commentary on the destructiveness of social media...
[0]side note: the speed of progress that SpaceX is achieving with Starship in Boca Chica is comparable to a pace you'd want in the first book... They're going so fast in Boca Chica, as if the Moon fell apart and they only have a couple years left before the Hard Rain to make humanity a multiplanetary species...
Also, the author has an inexplicable obsession with chains moving in free space. (Okay, I get it, it's cool physics, but how is it any more practical than using a mega-catapult as an airport?)
Agreed, the first half was semi-realistic hard science fiction, the second half felt more like fantasy almost. It wasn't bad, but such a huge shift from the first half.
Strong agree. Luckily you can just stop reading at the end of part 1 and it’s still a very satisfying book.
I hated Seveneves. The first part was grim and unremitting and almost everyone died. It left me feeling kind of depressed, and unwilling to put up with what seemed to be a self-indulgent second part. Plus the premise was so unlikely and the ending felt unsatisfactory. I should have known: Stephenson doesn't really do endings.
The "Stephenson doesn't do endings" meme again. Sigh. Yes, the novel ends and it's obvious that the characters' lives keep going. Lots of authors do that. Real life often doesn't have endings or clear resolutions.
I wasn't aware that it was a meme. My comment was based on my own observations from reading a number of his books.
> Yes, the novel ends and it's obvious that the characters' lives keep going. Lots of authors do that. Real life often doesn't have endings or clear resolutions.
The characters lives do end with the end of the book (unless there's a sequel). You can certainly imagine how their lives might proceed, but a satisfactory ending doesn't preclude that either. Drawing together the elements of a story, completing the arcs, creating some kind of resolution: these are part of the storytellers craft.
With Seveneves I thought he just ran out of steam. It felt like leaving a film ten minutes before the end and stumbling out into the daylight. Pretty dissatisfying at the end of a long book.
> Yes, the novel ends and it's obvious that the characters' lives keep going. Lots of authors do that. Real life often doesn't have endings or clear resolutions.
The characters lives do end with the end of the book (unless there's a sequel). You can certainly imagine how their lives might proceed, but a satisfactory ending doesn't preclude that either. Drawing together the elements of a story, completing the arcs, creating some kind of resolution: these are part of the storytellers craft.
With Seveneves I thought he just ran out of steam. It felt like leaving a film ten minutes before the end and stumbling out into the daylight. Pretty dissatisfying at the end of a long book.
Peter Watts has a good biology background so his books are pretty accurate when it comes to sci-fi advances with biology. Definitely better than most authors who usually focus more on physics/engineering.
I liked “Blindsight” and “The Freeze-Frame Revolution”
I would also appreciate any recommendations for hard sci-fi authors with a biology focus, I’m sure there are many more I don’t know.
I liked “Blindsight” and “The Freeze-Frame Revolution”
I would also appreciate any recommendations for hard sci-fi authors with a biology focus, I’m sure there are many more I don’t know.
Blindsight was great, Echopraxia not as good, but I still enjoyed it. I'll be searching out "The Freeze-Frame Revolution" for sure, thanks.
Hard sci-fi / biology crossover: https://www.gregegan.net/TERANESIA/TERANESIA.html
Hard sci-fi / biology crossover: https://www.gregegan.net/TERANESIA/TERANESIA.html
Ken MacLeod has a zoology degree - which is presumably where names like "The Stone Canal" came from...
I like most of his novels, particularly "Learning the World" - which I guess is a reverse first contact novel.
I like most of his novels, particularly "Learning the World" - which I guess is a reverse first contact novel.
I really enjoyed Blindsight, I'll have to check out your other suggestion. Thanks!
Apart from the great suggestions (Vernor Vinge fan for sure) I think one would I would recommend would be the "Remembrance of Earth's Past" (a.k.a three body problem). It presented plausible hard sci-fi bits, while the human aspect was incredibly weird, especially from a western perspective. Definitely opened my eyes to a lot of how Chinese people probably feel about their place in the world and their legacy.
But the scope of the series is just breathtaking, I don't think I've read anything that spanned as much in space or time, and made it believable too, highly recommended.
But the scope of the series is just breathtaking, I don't think I've read anything that spanned as much in space or time, and made it believable too, highly recommended.
Hard sci fi is hard to define for me personally. But, Children of Time by Adrian Czajkowski is worth a look, and maybe Saturn Run by Ctein and John Sanford.
Just out of curiosity where are you located?
Here in the UK his name is spelled “Adrian Tchaikovsky”, as well as his account on Twitter (@aptshadow), where aside from writing novels he’s insanely productive creating digital artwork (often including insect characters).
Here in the UK his name is spelled “Adrian Tchaikovsky”, as well as his account on Twitter (@aptshadow), where aside from writing novels he’s insanely productive creating digital artwork (often including insect characters).
Accelerando by Charles Stross, The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson, Diaspora by Greg Egan, Distraction by Bruce Sterling
Sorry, but Accelerando is horrible. I recommend Singularity Sky, the weird one, not watered down for the mainstream. The characters are flat, but the weirdness on route, is captured much better.
I have a soft spot for Accelerando because it was my first encounter with the exo-cortex (or perhaps more accurately called cybernetics) concept, aka computers as an external brain. Also it was my first encounter with the concept of smart contracts, laws & corporations run purely as code.
I just read Diaspora, and find it far from hard sci-fi.
The Wikipedia page says “Egan invents several new theories of physics”, and that to me is not hard sci-fi.
The Wikipedia page says “Egan invents several new theories of physics”, and that to me is not hard sci-fi.
I think the best hard sci-fi can include cutting edge theories or even ideas that the author themselves are proposing, based on a reasonable understanding of the existing science.
At the time many of Greg Egan's early books from the 90s/00s were written, there were a lot more competing ideas or theories in quantum mechanics compared to now. In his books he basically explores some of those ideas, and pushes the boundaries.
The best sci-fi to me inspire future scientists or engineers to explore novel approaches.
At the time many of Greg Egan's early books from the 90s/00s were written, there were a lot more competing ideas or theories in quantum mechanics compared to now. In his books he basically explores some of those ideas, and pushes the boundaries.
The best sci-fi to me inspire future scientists or engineers to explore novel approaches.
Quarantine by Greg Egan:
https://www.gregegan.net/QUARANTINE/Quarantine.html
Upon re-reading your question, I don't think this recommendation exactly fits, but, damn, it's a good book anyway and Neal Stephenson doesn't do things by halves: Interface by Neal Stephenson (under a pseudonym and in conjunction with another author also using a pseudonym). This book only becomes more relevant with each presidential campaign: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_(novel)
Upon re-reading your question, I don't think this recommendation exactly fits, but, damn, it's a good book anyway and Neal Stephenson doesn't do things by halves: Interface by Neal Stephenson (under a pseudonym and in conjunction with another author also using a pseudonym). This book only becomes more relevant with each presidential campaign: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_(novel)
Greg Egan in general is a solid recommendation for diamond-hard sci-fi; I actually think Quarantine is one of the weakest in this respect, though it's a fantastic book. Who else would think to write a series of books (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Egan#Orthogonal_trilogy) about what would happen if you flipped a sign in the Lorentzian metric?
Alastair Reynolds, especially his Revelation Space trilogy are great hard sci Fi novels. He's a former astrophysicist so he knows the hard limits.
I find most of his works to be good musings on humanity with a bit of alien horror.
I find most of his works to be good musings on humanity with a bit of alien horror.
I'm surprised to not see "Pushing Ice" advanced as the leading Reynolds recommendation.
I think his other works are good, but in my view Pushing Ice is an usually good stand alone work.
I think his other works are good, but in my view Pushing Ice is an usually good stand alone work.
The Martian by Andy Weir, if you haven't seen the movie yet. If you have, he's had another similar novel out recently, Hail Mary.
Andy Weir also published Artemis in between The Martian and Project Hail Mary.
Depends what you mean by 'hard'.
Anything by Greg Egan is probably going to be the hardest sci-fi you've ever read. Dude wrote a book where he considered the ramifications of a universe built on a positive-definite Riemannian metric, and another one where the universe has 2 time dimensions.
Robert L. Forward's Dragon's Egg explores what life might look like if it evolved on a neutron star.
Adrian Tchaikovsky's Children of Time and Children of Ruin explore the evolution of other earth species if they were given a kick towards sapience.
Vernor Vinge's A Fire Upon the Deep is half space adventure (not very hard) and half an exploration of a lifeform which only achieves sapience in small groups. A Deepness in the Sky is generally harder and explores a lot of things, including the power of focused human attention, the difficulty of galactic scale civilization, and alien life evolved in a star system where the star periodically dims.
Steven Baxter and Clarke collaborated on The Light of Other Days, which explores the technical and sociological consequences of a device which allows you to see the past.
With a broad interpretation of 'hard' I can highly recommend Ursula Le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness and The Dispossessed, which have soft science but hard humanity.
Similarly The Long Earth series, a collaboration between Pratchett and Baxter, where it seems Baxter handles the sociological and technological consequences of the science while Pratchett handles the characters and philosophy.
Asimov's I, Robot is an exploration of what happens when you try to constrain intelligence with rules.
Asimov's Foundation Trilogy gets a lot of hype, but it isn't very hard and I also found it utterly mediocre. Instead I recommend The God's Themselves, which is so good it's like Asimov was channeling a much better writer to get his ideas down. It explores the limited interaction of our universe with one that has slightly different physical properties.
Also perhaps stretching the definition of 'hard', but I want to recommend it because it's relatively unknown, is Leonard Richardson's Constellation Games, in which an incredibly advanced multi-species anarchic alien civilization makes first contact with humanity, and the protagonist really just wants to play their video games. It's actually harder sci-fi than it sounds.
Anything by Greg Egan is probably going to be the hardest sci-fi you've ever read. Dude wrote a book where he considered the ramifications of a universe built on a positive-definite Riemannian metric, and another one where the universe has 2 time dimensions.
Robert L. Forward's Dragon's Egg explores what life might look like if it evolved on a neutron star.
Adrian Tchaikovsky's Children of Time and Children of Ruin explore the evolution of other earth species if they were given a kick towards sapience.
Vernor Vinge's A Fire Upon the Deep is half space adventure (not very hard) and half an exploration of a lifeform which only achieves sapience in small groups. A Deepness in the Sky is generally harder and explores a lot of things, including the power of focused human attention, the difficulty of galactic scale civilization, and alien life evolved in a star system where the star periodically dims.
Steven Baxter and Clarke collaborated on The Light of Other Days, which explores the technical and sociological consequences of a device which allows you to see the past.
With a broad interpretation of 'hard' I can highly recommend Ursula Le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness and The Dispossessed, which have soft science but hard humanity.
Similarly The Long Earth series, a collaboration between Pratchett and Baxter, where it seems Baxter handles the sociological and technological consequences of the science while Pratchett handles the characters and philosophy.
Asimov's I, Robot is an exploration of what happens when you try to constrain intelligence with rules.
Asimov's Foundation Trilogy gets a lot of hype, but it isn't very hard and I also found it utterly mediocre. Instead I recommend The God's Themselves, which is so good it's like Asimov was channeling a much better writer to get his ideas down. It explores the limited interaction of our universe with one that has slightly different physical properties.
Also perhaps stretching the definition of 'hard', but I want to recommend it because it's relatively unknown, is Leonard Richardson's Constellation Games, in which an incredibly advanced multi-species anarchic alien civilization makes first contact with humanity, and the protagonist really just wants to play their video games. It's actually harder sci-fi than it sounds.
I enjoyed Permutation City by Greg Egan and the Zones of Thought books by Vernor Vinge.
Vernor Vinge is so good, shame he dropped it in Rainbows End.
I think Rainbows End is excellent. However, I was disappointed with The Children of the Sky.
It had an interesting take on industrialization with a hivemind though. Manchester capitalism is not really bad if you are borg, after all its just a hand assigned to boredom.
Rainbows End explored a society which went full AR, but in my opinion most of the shots if fired missed the target.
Rainbows End explored a society which went full AR, but in my opinion most of the shots if fired missed the target.
Even so, I would love recommendations that take full AR as seriously.
Some works of Stanisław Lem should fall into that category - such as my favourite "His Master's Voice".
Many good suggestions here - I definitely recommend to check out Vernor Vinge. I've heard a lot of praise for The Expanse series (James S. A. Corey / pen name for Daniel Abraham and Ty Franck) - but I've only seen the TV series, not read the books.
I would kind of consider the stand alone books Black Man/Thirteen, Thin Air (two books, same universe) and the Altered Carbon trilogy by Richard Morgan "hard" sci-fi to an extent - and be aware that the TV series, while entertaining, butchered much of the political content in the books.
If you like the "Takeshi Kovacs / Altered Carbon" trilogy, you'll almost definitely like the "Greg Mandel / Event Horizon" trilogy by Peter F. Hamilton.
And they're not bible sized tomes like some of PFH's later space operas (some of which I own, but am too intimidated by their size to have considered starting the journey).
And they're not bible sized tomes like some of PFH's later space operas (some of which I own, but am too intimidated by their size to have considered starting the journey).
True, I was considering mentioning Hamilton, but it's been so long since I read those books - so wasn't quite sure if I'd call them hard sci-fi or not :)
Larry Niven. His older stuff: Ringworld. and all his short-story collections, especially Neutron Star.
He also did a scifi take on magic, in The Magic Goes Away.
I see Vinor Vinge's AFUTD and ADITS as the closest thing to Niven.
He also did a scifi take on magic, in The Magic Goes Away.
I see Vinor Vinge's AFUTD and ADITS as the closest thing to Niven.
Beyond what other people list here:
- Hugh Howey. His Silo series is worth a read. He published it in some episodic form. However, I'd recommend just getting the whole thing. Beacon 23 is a bit shorter and also nice.
- Ramez Naam. His nexus series is a decent series. Not the best written but I enjoyed it.
- James S.A. Corey, the expanse series. Makes you appreciate the tv series more.
- Authors others already mentioned: Neal Stephenson & Peter Watts.
Other authors that go more in the direction of space opera: Iam M. Banks, Ernest Cline, John Scalzi, Ann Lecky, Richard K. Morgan (Altered Carbon).
- Hugh Howey. His Silo series is worth a read. He published it in some episodic form. However, I'd recommend just getting the whole thing. Beacon 23 is a bit shorter and also nice.
- Ramez Naam. His nexus series is a decent series. Not the best written but I enjoyed it.
- James S.A. Corey, the expanse series. Makes you appreciate the tv series more.
- Authors others already mentioned: Neal Stephenson & Peter Watts.
Other authors that go more in the direction of space opera: Iam M. Banks, Ernest Cline, John Scalzi, Ann Lecky, Richard K. Morgan (Altered Carbon).
Not the The Fifth Season by N. K. Jemisin - recommending it is when the Nebula awards became a joke.
Other than that, it used to be a trusted resource: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebula_Award_for_Best_Novel
Other than that, it used to be a trusted resource: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebula_Award_for_Best_Novel
In addition to the existing ones (I'll throw another vote towards any Neal Stephenson or Andy Weir novel):
Contact by Carl Sagan. It's a nice tale about a passionate SETI scientist, by an author known more commonly for nonfiction and TV.
Contact by Carl Sagan. It's a nice tale about a passionate SETI scientist, by an author known more commonly for nonfiction and TV.
I really like Dragon's Egg by Robert L Forward, and its sequel as well.
I didn’t know there was a sequel! How exciting.
Starquake. It's not as good as Dragon's Egg in my opinion, and seems much more focused on development of interesting characters. That's not a bad thing, mind you.
Flood; Ark; and Evolution from Stephen Baxter will always stay with me.
I strongly recommend Greg Bear. His first novel "Blood Music" is a unique take on an AI out of control, and he continues with a series independent of novels which all take place in a unified "future history". One of my favorite aspects of his future history is the combination of the bio-genetic, cosmetic surgery, and pop media artist industries to create transhumanist pop media artists, and spawning a transhumanist youth movement and a counter transhumanist political movement, with all the human chaos that would result wonderfully illustrated by his prose.
Definitely Greg Bear.
When I started reading grown-up SF decades ago it was with Bear, Bova, Niven, Pournelle, and the like. Back then Eon, Blood Music, and Ringworld (for example) were mind-blowingly vast concepts.
As an aside (and purely because it's probably my turn for some hefty downvotes) I'd definitely agree with the comment elsewhere in this thread about the Foundation books being overrated. Almost unreadably dull and feeling more like any concept of 'plot' is just a carrier for a couple of mediocre ideas.
When I started reading grown-up SF decades ago it was with Bear, Bova, Niven, Pournelle, and the like. Back then Eon, Blood Music, and Ringworld (for example) were mind-blowingly vast concepts.
As an aside (and purely because it's probably my turn for some hefty downvotes) I'd definitely agree with the comment elsewhere in this thread about the Foundation books being overrated. Almost unreadably dull and feeling more like any concept of 'plot' is just a carrier for a couple of mediocre ideas.
Agree on the Foundation criticism. From what I've seen of the Apple series based on it, it's gonna be a politically correct mess.
Baxter, the manifold trilogy.
I recently listened to KSR on Exponential View, Ministry of the Future has an intriguing premise and hope to read that soon.
Recently began a fiction kick after starting my full-time job for the first time, nice way to break screen-time instead of gaming. There's something nice about visualizing worlds instead of seeing worlds built by someone else.
Currently reading the first Dune book and love it. Reminds me of GOT on Mars.
Recently began a fiction kick after starting my full-time job for the first time, nice way to break screen-time instead of gaming. There's something nice about visualizing worlds instead of seeing worlds built by someone else.
Currently reading the first Dune book and love it. Reminds me of GOT on Mars.
Does he only read things written originally in English?
His 2312 brought me back to reading hard sci-fi after too long not really reading much fiction at all for a long time. The ideas presented in it reminded me of a sense of wonder at the scope of future possibilities that had previously been lost under an ever increasing pile of marital, parental, and financial responsibility.
The problem I have now is, he somehow seems to write 'em faster 'n' I can read 'em (the responsibility pile still exists and is as demanding as ever)
Anyway, thanks KSR.
(Mostly off topic, but I'm currently reading Patrick O'Brien's Master and Commander, the first in a series of 20 nautical-historic fiction novels, and it's incredibly tough going with O'Brien's detailed and accurate nautical terminology, of which I know nothing - I just loved the movie. A challenging read - and I've covered The Mars Trilogy and some lighter Pynchon).