Comments for
"Three Writers Three"

1 Rob Vagle (mail) (web)
12:28 pm, aug 19, 2004 EDT
Great list, Mike. I have Joyce's The Tooth Fairy on my shelf in which I need to read.
2 Mike (mail) (web)
12:42 pm, aug 19, 2004 EDT
Which authors would you choose, Rob? I'm curious.
3 Lee Capps (web)
7:13 pm, aug 19, 2004 EDT
I haven't thought about this as deeply as you obviously have, and yet, in the grand tradition of know-nothings everywhere, I have an answer!

Ed McBain/Evan Hunter, Jack Vance, and Robert Sheckley. I'm particularly interested in writers who have steady, quality production, and these guys fit the bill. McBain/Hunter is particularly interesting because he's sort of had his cake and eaten it too: writing literate pulp and pulpy literary fiction.

I'm about half way through giving Nabokov and Faulkner this same treatment (two examples that might contradict your assertion that great writers aren't asses), and it's a lot of fun. You get to read things (like, say, _Glory_ or _The Wild Palms_) that most people don't read but which are really good.

Anyway, great idea, and great list, Mike.
4 Mike (mail) (web)
9:44 pm, aug 19, 2004 EDT
Lee -- cool list! I've not read any of McBain or Vance, but I've heard very good things about Vance and his world-building in particular. I did Sheckley's short stories, the ones I've read.

And that Faulkner guy ain't half bad. Long sentences, though. ;)
5 Rob Vagle (mail) (web)
12:37 am, aug 20, 2004 EDT
Let's see. I'd pick Charles de Lint. Mainly because he has written a lot and he's been doing this for years. He also has a large audiance.

I'd also pick Tim Powers. He doesn't have as many books, but his novels are rich. Plus, he has a great career and audiance built out of fewer books.

Then there's Robert Charles Wilson even though he's more hard science-fiction than de Lint and Powers. I discovered Wilson not long after he started publishing novels. He was coming out with a book every year until the mid-nineties when he went quiet. Then four years later came Darwina and he's back to a book every year or two and getting on award ballots.

I should really take this excercise to heart and do it. Sounds interesting now that I have my authors picked.
6 Mike (mail) (web)
2:41 pm, aug 20, 2004 EDT
Interesting choices, Rob. I probably would've chosen de Lint myself a year or two ago. I kind of got tired of his stuff, though I plan on reading his Onion Girl soon, and then taking a break from his stuff. It got a bit too same-y for me.

I've not read Wilson, but heard good stuff about him. Enjoy the reading!
7 Mike Van Wie
7:55 pm, aug 21, 2004 EDT
Interesting! I'd never heard this approach before, but at the least, it can't hurt to read a bunch of good books and think about what makes them work. I'm going to try Connie Willis. John Lethem might be another one, especially if you like the idea of drifting toward mainstream. Maybe Sean Stewart, too, or else Iain Banks.
8 Mike (mail) (web)
1:03 pm, aug 25, 2004 EDT
Hey Mike VW -- I like your choices as well. I've not read any of Willis' novels, but her short stories are entertaining. I've got two Sean Stewart novels I'm looking forward to reading one day, and Lethem is always good. Never read Mr. Banks.

So many authors, so little time.

I'm about halfway through Graham Joyce's first novel Dreamside, and liking it a lot. And learning a lot.
9 SarahP (mail) (web)
2:19 pm, aug 25, 2004 EDT
I'd choose Martha Wells 'cos she writes really slowly and maybe C.J. Cherryh because she seems to have a lot of different projects going at once and publishes a lot (some of it crap).

(hi Mike!)

Powered by JournalScape © 2001-2010 JournalScape.com. All rights reserved.
All content rights reserved by the author.
custsupport@journalscape.com