Why Do Some Classic Sci-Fi Stories Fail to Engage Modern Readers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fan
Click For Summary
Many readers express disappointment with classic science fiction novels, citing struggles to engage with "Dune," "Foundation," and "The Left Hand of Darkness." Common critiques include slow pacing, excessive exposition, and lack of character development, leading to feelings of betrayal after high expectations. Some participants reflect on their changing perceptions of these works over time, noting that nostalgia can influence enjoyment. Others mention their preference for different authors or series, such as Zelazny or Baum, and express skepticism about the current state of science fiction. Overall, the discussion highlights the subjective nature of literary appreciation and the impact of personal growth on reading experiences.
  • #31
DaveC426913 said:
I was just browsing the Beloved stories from when you were much younger thread and began thinking about the beloved stories that aren't beloved by me.

I could not make it past the first few chapters of Dune, no matter how many times I tried. I literally kept falling asleep.

Halfway into Foundation, still wondering when the backstory exposition would be done and it would move on to the actual story, I realized, this is the story, and it's not going to spontaneously sprout characters and a plot.

And now, in my third crushing betrayal, I could not finish The Left Hand of Darkness. Virtually the entire story seems to be comprised of pre-meal political chit chat in residence after residence.

I think that it's not just science fiction. If you look at any list of the top 100 novels of all time, you're likely to see some titles that you just didn't like.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I thought "The Left Hand of Darkness" was pretty slow, too. But to me "The Lathe of Heaven" is just stunning.
 
  • #33
DaveC426913 said:
Halfway into Foundation, still wondering when the backstory exposition would be done and it would move on to the actual story, I realized, this is the story, and it's not going to spontaneously sprout characters and a plot.
I read the original Foundation trilogy during senior year of high school in an English class (mandatory) with an option of Science Fiction. It was either that or the classic literature course. I was not in fiction at all, since I had a preference for reading history if it wasn't STEM. I read Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, and I think the Martian Chronicles, and Heinlein's Glory Road.

I read the Foundation trilogy out of order, starting with Foundation and Empire, then Foundation, and finally Second Foundation. I enjoyed it, and I was amused by the use of 'nucleics', since I had taken an introductory course in nuclear engineering and electrical engineering. Ultimately, I became a nuclear engineer. I read the rest of the series only about 20 years or so ago.

I enjoyed Glory Road, probably because one of the characters (Star) reminded me of a girl I met during the summer between 11th and 12th grades who matched the description of Star.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glory_Road
 
  • Like
Likes DennisN
  • #34
I also couldn't finish the first Foundation book. The concept was very interesting, but nothing hooked me, so I faded from it. I loved the first few Dune books. The hyper awareness and granular dissection of the moment is not for everyone, but at least at the time of my reading, I was all in.

Ender's Game, Snow Crash and Neuromancer are books I want to reread soon.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #35
DaveC426913 said:
I did.
It was ... a book I read.
That reminds me of a Rimmer line when he is about to leave the red dwarf crew to take his chances with another ship.
His opening line to his colleagues

'I've come to regard you as... people who I met.'

I didn't finish Foundation. I did finish Red Dwarf.
I like to read sword and sorcery and occasionally watch sci fi.
 
  • #36
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #37
Astronuc said:
One of my favorite books or series, depending on how one buys it, is The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Noel Adams, 1978.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker's_Guide_to_the_Galaxy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Adams

Adams also wrote Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency (1987) and The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul (1988), and co-wrote The Meaning of Liff (1983), The Deeper Meaning of Liff (1990), and Last Chance to See (1990).
HGTTG One of my favourite books as a kid, I read it and bought all the rest.
I made sure my son read them too.

Not a huge sci fan in terms of reading but the below was interesting. Stark but interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killing_Star

All the sci fi tech in the book (cloning ,nano bots, weapons etc) is summarized at the end as a separate summary.

This is what is in the book and this is where the science is currently.

It would be interesting to read it again now and see how much of the sci fi is close to science fact.
 
  • #38
DaveC426913 said:
I was just browsing the Beloved stories from when you were much younger thread and began thinking about the beloved stories that aren't beloved by me.

I could not make it past the first few chapters of Dune, no matter how many times I tried. I literally kept falling asleep.

Halfway into Foundation, still wondering when the backstory exposition would be done and it would move on to the actual story, I realized, this is the story, and it's not going to spontaneously sprout characters and a plot.

And now, in my third crushing betrayal, I could not finish The Left Hand of Darkness. Virtually the entire story seems to be comprised of pre-meal political chit chat in residence after residence.
Although I like the books you don't like, your post is well-written and witty, so it gets my upvote.
 
  • #39
Janus said:
I'll have to disagree. There is a difference between stories just given an SF setting, and those where the SF idea is essential to the plot.
A lot of Sf in mass media fits the first model. The basic story could still be told in a completely different setting.

The second model is different.
Let's use the example of teleportation. The first model just uses it as a means to get characters from place to place quickly. The second model might look at what effect this type of technology would have on society.

If you could step into a booth, dial up a location and get there instantly, would cities become antiquated? ( Cities developed sprawling suburbs because the car made it easier to commute. Would teleportation cause them to disperse completely?)
What happens if you could leave a room of crowded people, jump into a teleport booth, transport yourself halfway around the world, shoot someone, teleport back, and then walk back into the room, all in the time it would taken you to use the restroom? Just saying you were at a party at the time would not be enough to establish an alibi.

Now these aren't my ideas, but just a couple of the issues that Larry Niven addressed when he considered the idea.
You've got some good story ideas in this post.