What do you think?
Rate this book
The Craft of Science Fiction: A Symposium on Writing Science Fiction and Science Fantasy
Fourteen noted authors contribute essays on the technical aspects, purposes, constructs, and scientific and imaginative elements of science-fiction writing
321 pages, Hardcover
First published August 1, 1976
4 people are currently reading
73 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
June 11, 2021
This is an interesting book containing essays on the craft of writing science fiction by some very successful practitioners in the field including Jerry Pournelle, Larry Niven, James Gunn, Poul Anderson, Frederik Pohl, Frank Herbert, Alan E. Nourse, Norman Spinrad, John Brunner, Hal Clement, Jack Williamson, Katherine MacLean, Harlan Ellison, and Theodore Sturgeon, as well as editor Reginald Bretnor himself. Much of marketing and technical advice is no longer applicable, of course (the book was published in 1976), but is still of interest on many levels. It shows what some of the writers were trying to accomplish in their own writings, and how they chose to get the results they did. It also demonstrates how much the field (and the world!) has changed in the past half century; note that of the authors included, MacLean is the only one who's not a white male. It's interesting to compare it to some of the many other how-to-sf books, such as L. Sprague de Camp's from a quarter century earlier. Some of the essays have a little bit of a dogmatic or pretentious air, but that's part of the appeal.
July 3, 2009
While a few of the articles in this book are very interesting for me as an aspiring science fiction writer, the majority of them are uninspired and uninspiring. The writers of these essays may be good science fiction writers, but their essays are overwrought and tend to be long winded without saying anything at all. In the end I didn't even read all of the essays, selecting only the ones that sounded interesting, or were written by authors I had read.
January 14, 2015
A pretty good collection of essays on, as the title says, writing science fiction and science fantasy. This is sort of a companion volume to Science Fiction Today and Tomorrow - A Discursive Symposium, also edited by Reginald Bretnor. A number of the leading authors in the field at the time of publication, 1976, have contributed chapters on a comprehensive range of topics. They cover both the art and the profession of writing in these genres, and a lot of what they say applies to writing in general.
There were a few pieces that haven't aged well, but most of the content is timeless. As a writer who's published some reference-type nonfiction but is still in the aspiring category as a novelist, and as a fan of SF and fantasy who's been reading both genres for about 40 years now, this is the kind of book I like to keep handy and refer to often when I'm working on a fiction project.
There were a few pieces that haven't aged well, but most of the content is timeless. As a writer who's published some reference-type nonfiction but is still in the aspiring category as a novelist, and as a fan of SF and fantasy who's been reading both genres for about 40 years now, this is the kind of book I like to keep handy and refer to often when I'm working on a fiction project.
April 10, 2025
An excellent book, featuring essays by some of the best science fiction writers then working their field. The outlook is decidedly old-school, closer to Heinlein than Ballard or even Dick, and yet it’s that throwback quality that lends the book its charm. These are men (mostly men) who labored in the SF ghetto after the Golden Age yet before the New Wave, who—even when credentialed and with genuine scientific accomplishments—were side-eyed by the mainstream.
Advice ranges from granular-sized bits on worldbuilding to the “language” of science fiction, that is to say the actual choice of words. No genre (except for maybe the sui generis “encyclopedic” postmodernism of a Foster Wallace or Pynchon) allows one so much freedom in minting their own new coinages, or repurposing existing words for new uses. Jack Williamson gave us “terraforming,” and a door never “irised” open or closed before one of Robert Heinlein’s intrepid Hardy Boys-esque narrators stepped their way through a ship.
I would have liked to see more entries by persons of uterus—Tiptree or Le Guinn—for instance. This isn’t so much a beef about equity or trying to win some grace on the cheap as a male feminist. It’s simply that a hell of a lot of good SF writers of that time were in fact of the XX chromosomal persuasion. Alas, the lone contribution by a female was Katherine MacLean’s helpful and insightful entry on imagining nonhuman intelligences. The then-nascent and very interdisciplinary science of exobiology is still struggling to crawl (forget walk) and her work is in some ways a foundational one in the sweepstakes. That is to say, it holds up remarkably well at this remove of fifty years, give or take, which is an eternity in the speculative field.
The lone dog woofing up the works is Harlan Ellison’s entry on writing “teleplays” for TV. It’s not that his advice has become dated, which it has (considering the fecundity of the TV medium contrasted against the relative poverty of Hollywood now.) It’s that Ellison is, well...Ellison. There’s always been an egotistical and grating quality to the man, an over-performative flexing of muscle and humblebragging. He’s a bit like the science fictional equivalent of the motormouthed shyster Maurie in “Goodfellas.”
I’d never wish Maurie’s fate on anyone—even Maurie—but still, after a few pages I found myself feeling like Joe Pesci, thinking “This guy never shut the f up.” The only person who could probably out-blowhard Ellison would be Jello Biafra.
I wonder if they ever met?
No matter, the collection is redeemed in the end by a solid essay from Frederik Pohl. Much like the actor Willem Dafoe, he offers seemingly strange and self-destructive advice by encouraging writers to fail, sometimes at least. It’s not only okay to fail—no one must see your failures but you—but it proves you’re still willing to experiment.
There are worse things than having one’s reach exceed their grasp, especially for a science fiction writer.
Highest recommendation, for those who want to get into the field—are already trapped in it by circumstance or constitution—or for those who simply want to know more about it.
Advice ranges from granular-sized bits on worldbuilding to the “language” of science fiction, that is to say the actual choice of words. No genre (except for maybe the sui generis “encyclopedic” postmodernism of a Foster Wallace or Pynchon) allows one so much freedom in minting their own new coinages, or repurposing existing words for new uses. Jack Williamson gave us “terraforming,” and a door never “irised” open or closed before one of Robert Heinlein’s intrepid Hardy Boys-esque narrators stepped their way through a ship.
I would have liked to see more entries by persons of uterus—Tiptree or Le Guinn—for instance. This isn’t so much a beef about equity or trying to win some grace on the cheap as a male feminist. It’s simply that a hell of a lot of good SF writers of that time were in fact of the XX chromosomal persuasion. Alas, the lone contribution by a female was Katherine MacLean’s helpful and insightful entry on imagining nonhuman intelligences. The then-nascent and very interdisciplinary science of exobiology is still struggling to crawl (forget walk) and her work is in some ways a foundational one in the sweepstakes. That is to say, it holds up remarkably well at this remove of fifty years, give or take, which is an eternity in the speculative field.
The lone dog woofing up the works is Harlan Ellison’s entry on writing “teleplays” for TV. It’s not that his advice has become dated, which it has (considering the fecundity of the TV medium contrasted against the relative poverty of Hollywood now.) It’s that Ellison is, well...Ellison. There’s always been an egotistical and grating quality to the man, an over-performative flexing of muscle and humblebragging. He’s a bit like the science fictional equivalent of the motormouthed shyster Maurie in “Goodfellas.”
I’d never wish Maurie’s fate on anyone—even Maurie—but still, after a few pages I found myself feeling like Joe Pesci, thinking “This guy never shut the f up.” The only person who could probably out-blowhard Ellison would be Jello Biafra.
I wonder if they ever met?
No matter, the collection is redeemed in the end by a solid essay from Frederik Pohl. Much like the actor Willem Dafoe, he offers seemingly strange and self-destructive advice by encouraging writers to fail, sometimes at least. It’s not only okay to fail—no one must see your failures but you—but it proves you’re still willing to experiment.
There are worse things than having one’s reach exceed their grasp, especially for a science fiction writer.
Highest recommendation, for those who want to get into the field—are already trapped in it by circumstance or constitution—or for those who simply want to know more about it.
July 11, 2024
This book is long out of print, and could not be found in my local used book stores. Ordered a decent copy off Amazon, which came quickly and is in better shape than I expected.
This book is a bit dated, so some of the suggestions don't work today. The authors in this book could not have seen the rise of Kindle, and the death of the short story market as they knew it. Otherwise some interesting views on publishing and writing. YMMV
Some have pointed out that almost all of the authors are white males. This is true, but not something that I took exception to.
This book is a bit dated, so some of the suggestions don't work today. The authors in this book could not have seen the rise of Kindle, and the death of the short story market as they knew it. Otherwise some interesting views on publishing and writing. YMMV
Some have pointed out that almost all of the authors are white males. This is true, but not something that I took exception to.
July 29, 2025
there is a fair amount to date this book including instructions on how to mail things in but there is much to appreciate as well.
April 15, 2016
Recommended to me by Neil Gaiman, mostly for the John Brunner essay, which is excellent and thought provoking. Some of the advice here feels a little dated; with no mention of the internet (for obvious reasons), and optimistic predictions about the longevity of the short story market, the practical advice for finding steady work and pay is no longer relevant.
But the book is interesting precisely because of the historical perspective it provides. These are writers speaking from a time when science fiction was still defending itself against the literary establishment, and implicit in this collection of essays is a full-throated defense of science fiction as a craft; it is fine rhetoric in defense of fine literature.
The craft of science fiction probably hasn't changed much in the last 40 years. Good advice about world-building and characterization and research are still more or less relevant, although the field has broadened considerably, and even Reginald Bretnor might not have anticipated the beautifully diverse, heterochrome creature science fiction has evolved into.
Also, Harlan Ellison's essay is just as cantankerous, bitter, and acerbic as I'd expect from that brilliant old loon. There's something reassuring about that.
Recommended to: Anyone who wants to read some fine essays on science fiction from a fine selection of authors speaking in defense of a burgeoning genre. SF fans and aspiring writers looking for some pointers, pep talk, and rudimentary theory on the craft. Anyone who wants to watch Harlan Ellison scream in all caps to his imaginary reader.
But the book is interesting precisely because of the historical perspective it provides. These are writers speaking from a time when science fiction was still defending itself against the literary establishment, and implicit in this collection of essays is a full-throated defense of science fiction as a craft; it is fine rhetoric in defense of fine literature.
The craft of science fiction probably hasn't changed much in the last 40 years. Good advice about world-building and characterization and research are still more or less relevant, although the field has broadened considerably, and even Reginald Bretnor might not have anticipated the beautifully diverse, heterochrome creature science fiction has evolved into.
Also, Harlan Ellison's essay is just as cantankerous, bitter, and acerbic as I'd expect from that brilliant old loon. There's something reassuring about that.
Recommended to: Anyone who wants to read some fine essays on science fiction from a fine selection of authors speaking in defense of a burgeoning genre. SF fans and aspiring writers looking for some pointers, pep talk, and rudimentary theory on the craft. Anyone who wants to watch Harlan Ellison scream in all caps to his imaginary reader.
August 8, 2017
This is the first time I read this kind of book, a collections of essays about science fiction and science fantasy writing. Most authors of these essays are leading science fiction or science fantasy author at that time. It is a really good read in general, encompassing a wide array of topics from world building in the genre, science fiction writing as a profession, and art of writing science fiction in general. Well, basically it encompassed a lot of things you need to know if you wanted to write your own science fiction.
Well since this is a collection of essays from 1976, some of the information might be outdated for internet era's standard. You might find the predictions for science fiction writing as profession depicted in some of the essays irrelevant. Some of the essays are also unable to convey its points and are quite dragging to read.
Some contents of the essays are timeless, especially about world building in science fiction or characterization. It is also a great collection of essays from historical perspective. I would still recommend this book for all science fiction readers or writers.
Well since this is a collection of essays from 1976, some of the information might be outdated for internet era's standard. You might find the predictions for science fiction writing as profession depicted in some of the essays irrelevant. Some of the essays are also unable to convey its points and are quite dragging to read.
Some contents of the essays are timeless, especially about world building in science fiction or characterization. It is also a great collection of essays from historical perspective. I would still recommend this book for all science fiction readers or writers.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews