The Sword and Laser discussion
What does everyone want to read in May?
date
newest »
newest »
So no one wants to read The Man in the High Castle? We've never done a Philip K. Dick book before.
I just finished reading "The Wool Omnibus" and I thought it was great, but then I like post-apoccalyptic stories -- so I picked up the sequel "The Shift Omnibus". If "Wool" ends up being a club pick, I might finally get to join in on some of the discussions (I usually miss out because I don't want to read spoilers till I've finished the book and it's too hard to figure out which threads don't have spoilers).
Wool Omnibus is on my "Want to Read" shelf, so I'm up for that. I haven't read a lot of dystopian or post-apocalyptic science fiction yet.But I still think Great North Road by Peter F. Hamilton would be a great pic, especially since he was just interviewed on S&L a short while ago. The title is one of his few one-offs and he hasn't been a chosen author on the list yet.
I'm interested in reading either The Man In The High Castle or Stand On Zanzibar, Matthew. I've got both of those books on my shelf of "to-read" books, and I've heard good things about both.As an aside, I find it interesting that books that are controversial due to their politics are shunned, but if they're controversial due to the amount of violence they contain then they're okay.
Bryan wrote: "As an aside, I find it interesting that books that are controversial due to their politics are shunned, but if they're controversial due to the amount of violence they contain then they're okay. "Very good point. Violence, and sex too seem to be fair game. Interesting. Probably because human society is far more divided along political lines than they are on violence.
I would submit that most people agree that killing is generally bad, so when we read it in a book we take it in the context of the story as witnessing something unpleasant. We don't take it personally because the depiction of violence is not (usually) aimed at someone's personal belief system. Whereas the depiction of someone's political ideology as evil or abhorrent or stupid, etc. is taken much more personally by the reader. As a result, the Goodreads discussions in favor or against such depictions could be much more volatile. I don't think most of us want to go there in this forum. I know I sure don't, but that's just me.
However, that being said, the reverse would likely be better. We should probably be much more offended by depictions of violence and far more tolerant of and less concerned about political views, right?
Good observation Bryan.
To answer a previous question, I wouldn't be mad if I picked the wrong one. I'd probably want to read the incorrect one eventually. I could probably read both if the announcement came early enough
Walter wrote: "I'd like to see Wool Omnibus as a club pick, either as a stand-alone or as an alternate when the regular BotM is a classic like the current pick, which many folks have already read. The publishing paradigm is shifting, if not changing outright, and it would be nice to see this acknowledged by a group as large and influential as S&L...."Exactly why S&L should get out in front of the trend and pick Wool. Hugh Howey is the future of writing.
Iain M. Banks gets my vote. Wool sounds interesting and I enjoy Peter F. Hamilton but I think celebrating Iain's future where cancer is long gone and death is a choice would remind us all one of the reasons we read scifi - to give us a vision of what could be.
The calls for 'Wool Omnibus' get me worried, since that seems to be 5 books, and that's a lot! Surely just the first book? Well, my vote is still for Iain M. Banks, but still... :Pedit:
Actually, I can't really understand how the books are labelled. I can find 'Wool trilogy' and 'Shift trilogy' and then various 'first shift' or 'second shift' books. Totally confused!
Wool started life as a short story. That became Wool 1 and then there were 4 subsequent parts of novella length I suppose, released individually. They were then released collectively as "Wool Omnibus" is Wool 1-5 and it's ~160,000 words long which is slightly less than Downbelow Station for example.The Shift books are prequels as I understand it (though I've not read them) though I've noticed some people referring to them as Wool 6,7 etc.
I've read Wool and it's ok but I'm not sure I'd want to re-read it.
Paul wrote: "Omnibus" is Wool 1-5 and it's ~160,000 words long which is slightly less than Downbelow Station for example."Except I can't actually find the mentioned 'omnibus' to buy anywhere (I'm in the uk, just to clarify). I can find Wool (Wool trilogy 1) and Shift (Wool trilogy 2). I know that the omnibus is supposed to be 5 books because wikipedia told me so, so I'm not sure what this 'trilogy' business is all about. I'm unclear if Wool (Wool trilogy 1) is the Wool omnibus, the first 3 of the Wool books, or the 1st of three Wool books, Shift being the second, and the other three being goodness knows where. I can only guess that there are different names for the books, or collections, in the UK and US, though why this happens is beyond me, because it just causes confusion.
Edit:
Okay, this was annoying me too much (I did say I hate such things in the 'pet hates' thread) so I decided to download the free sample of Wool (Wool trilogy 1) and the contents page lists 5 parts, which I assume are the 5 books collected in the omnibus, so I guess Wool Omnibus equals Wool (Wool trilogy 1). Wow, not confusing at all! :P
I vote no for this book, because it has managed to annoy me before I've even read a word of it, and I'm in a spiteful mood, so there! :P
Ah, looks like the "Wool trilogy" is something different again. Wool - as I bought it - is a single book in 5 parts. It appears that the "Wool trilogy" is actually "Wool" (that 5-part novel), "Shift" and "Dust". Looks like "Shift" is a 3-parter ("First Shift: Legacy", "Second Shift: Order" & "Third Shift: Pact") and "Dust" hasn't been released yet.
Makes sense once you realise that Howey is continuing the practice of writing individual novellas, releasing them as first as ebooks and then collected as single volume novels.
Wool is good. It's not the ZOMG BEST NOVEL EVAR and frankly, the hype's getting a little tiring. Yes, it's nice to see an SF novel become a phenomenon esp in the self-publishing end of things. But, frankly, it's a well-written post apocalyptic story that reuses a lot of tropes familiar to anyone who's well read in the genre (no, the idea of an insular society living in fear of what's outside and examining those dynamics isn't original). End of the world stories are a mini-trend and honestly, if it weren't for that I'm not sure the book would be so popular. I find it stunning that any serious SF book club hasn't read Banks who is easily one of the most important writers in the genre in the late 20th/early 21st century. I'd vote for Banks anytime, but especially now it seems appropriate. Player of Games is probably the best intro to the Culture novels since the first is rather... odd.
I think Player of Games is a good choice for a Banks novel.
Show notes for the just released podcast has Wool being the pick for May w/ V having a recommendation for Ghost Planet which is the April VF pick.
OH well, I'll be skipping May. Wool didn't capture me when I read the first book and I'm not into the whole post-apocalyptic thing in any event. I understand the impetus for Wool, but it feels like the choices oscillate between bandwagoning (Wool, Hobbit, Cloud Atlas, OMW) and doing old books that T&V loved back when but haven't read recently. There are some exceptions... 1Q84 etc, but I'd honestly like to see some background reasoning behind choices. It feels random as it is now.
I'm new to the group so I only know about the last 5 books in the group, but what about one from Ray Bradbury? (Unless you have visited him lately)Of course most of his stuff are short story collections, so I'm not sure the qualifies. Or Robert Heinlein is always fun and I haven't read quite enough of Mr. Heinlein's work.
Didn't Terry Pratchett write a Sci Fi series?
Anyway those are my scattered Mommie thoughts on what to read in May.
I look forward to reading the next book,whatever it may be, I always find them interesting.
Erin wrote: "I'm new to the group so I only know about the last 5 books in the group, but what about one from Ray Bradbury? Wow, sorry for the typos.
Jeff wrote: "Show notes for the just released podcast has Wool being the pick for May"Ruth wrote: "I vote no for this book, because it has managed to annoy me before I've even read a word of it, and I'm in a spiteful mood, so there! :P "
I guess I will just have to get over my all consuming bitterness and spite. Oh, well, I do like the sound of the novel. Quite excited for this one actually. Maybe I need to look up the meaning of 'all consuming'. :P
Btw, since I know there are folk on the forum who have read this book; audible or kindle? I'm kind of leaning towards kindle version, since I really feel like reading something on there, but I do have a spare credit on audible.
StarShipSofa has and interview and short story by Hugh Howey here - episode 284.
I listened to it driving to work. Looking forward to Wool Omnibus now, but I think we should still read a Iain M Banks book at some point this year. Although the majority of the books are set in the Culture they are very loosely coupled. Anything would be good and comprehensible.
Shameless plug->StarShipSofa is great, check it out if you haven't already done so.
I listened to it driving to work. Looking forward to Wool Omnibus now, but I think we should still read a Iain M Banks book at some point this year. Although the majority of the books are set in the Culture they are very loosely coupled. Anything would be good and comprehensible.
Shameless plug->StarShipSofa is great, check it out if you haven't already done so.
Awesome! I have this already and look forward to reading it.
It'll be an interesting discussion considering his recent douchy blog post that he's since removed. But like Neil Gaiman says, I'm okay reading books by unlikable people if the work stands up on it's own. Don't really want to see or hear from him in an interview, though.
Rick wrote: "OH well, I'll be skipping May. Wool didn't capture me when I read the first book and I'm not into the whole post-apocalyptic thing in any event. I understand the impetus for Wool, but it feels li..."
It's their book club. I think they can pretty much do whatever they want. It's worked so far in terms of awesomeness, so I see no reason for them to change (or explain their reasoning to us peons).
library_jim wrote: "Rick wrote: "OH well, I'll be skipping May. Wool didn't capture me when I read the first book and I'm not into the whole post-apocalyptic thing in any event. I understand the impetus for Wool, bu..."
It's obviously their club. However I resent the idea that the people *who make up the club* are peons. That's insulting and, frankly, silly. I like both T&V insofar as I know them through the podcast but the idea that we're peons to them is ridiculous.
Where, precisely, is the harm in laying out how they choose things? Right now, there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to it and, frankly, the last year's worth of choices have been pretty hit and miss. They haven't been BAD books, but about half feel bandwagony (Cloud Atlas and The Hobbit being done for the movie tie-in, OMW and Wool feel driven by the relative few people who post here with Wool riding a definite cycle of hype and a large chunk of the rest being so-called classics.
What's getting short shrift are a lot of very good books of the last 10-20 years, a prime example being Iain Banks' books (but also things from Jeff Noon, Jeff Vandermeer, etc). The first book by a new author gets picked because of, frankly, the hype around it when the club's never read anything by Banks, one of the best SF genre authors of the last quarter century? Letting hype drive the selection might be a good marketing move but it makes selections less interesting to people who don't really care how many folks are in the group.
There are long Listopia lists for both SF and F that the group did a couple of years ago. We could do far worse than simply walking down those, perhaps asking people now to review and vote again.But, at the end of the day, it's all optional. Tom wants to read Wool. I don't, so I'll read other stuff. No real harm is being done by anyone.
PS: In case I'm not being clear I don't think T&V owe us an explanation of how books are chosen, nor am I pissed, leaving in a huff or anything like that. I'm curious, though, as to their thought process. After all, they now drive a club with over 15,000 members. A lot of midlist authors would have their year made by that many sales or even half that many. It would be interesting to hear the thought process behind choosing things.
PPS: Also, the idea that one can't criticize or that criticism of a choice is somehow a criticism of the person making the choice is very odd to me. Criticism, if done out of curiosity and a desire for improvement or knowledge, feels like something that's positive. Even vaguely equating it with some rebellion by peons is just foreign to my way of thinking about the world.
Rick wrote: "library_jim wrote: "Rick wrote: "OH well, I'll be skipping May. Wool didn't capture me when I read the first book and I'm not into the whole post-apocalyptic thing in any event. I understand the ..."
Rick, chill. Sorry to rile you. You are exactly right, I was being silly. I don't think they think we're peons at all. I was just saying it's they're club and they should keep running it however they like because it's obviously going well.
I also agree that the picks have been hit or miss, but I think that's true in every book club. I would much rather have seen a Ray Bradbury or Iain Banks book instead of flavor-of-the-moment Hugh Whatshisname being picked. But sometimes the best discussions come out of books that aren't the greatest.
I was in a club once that picked an Isabel Allende book and everyone loved it and had little to say. They read a second-tier T.C. Boyle later on and it was one of the best meetings ever because of the makeup of that group in relation to that book. I think it's just something about the organic way book clubs work.
And is my space bar not working or something? That last post looks weird...
Mod
Our last laser pick was a classic female author. Wool is a brand new and self-published author, something we haven't done before.
I approach the selections as opportunities to see what they're about. I'm going to read it not because I know I'll love it but precisely because I don't know. Rather than making a guess from the sidelines, I'm going to read it and have an informed opinion about it. That's what the club is all about.
Otherwise I'd just read things I know I'd love all the time and I wouldn't need a club really.
Anyway, that's my two cents.
Tom wrote: "I always try to vary the picks. In fact they *should* be hit or miss with a lot of people since we have such a big club and our purpose is to expose you to things you might not have read otherwise...."I'm in a face-to-face book club that started on the same principle, Tom. We all felt like we were in a reading rut and wanted to get new things to read. So now we do. There are only two rules in that book club. #1 It has to be in paperback. #2 It can't be an Oprah pick. Makes for a varied list every year.
When S&L does a book I've already read, I enjoy getting new perspectives on it. When it's new to me, I've been introduced to some amazing writers I wouldn't have gotten to on my own. So yeah, you guys are doing it right.
Thanks for everything.
Tom's right, the book club picks SHOULD be hit or miss. But the hits and misses will be different books for different people. That's kind of the whole point.Which ones I read is based more on availability than anything else. With a 100 or more unread physical books on hand, I'm trying REALLY HARD not to buy any more :)
Book 1 of Wool seems to be free on Kindle. So even though I'm personally burnt out on dystopian stories, I will give this one a shot. If I really like it then I might consider the omnibus.
Thanks, Tom. :) I too think it's a sign that you're doing it right because I don't love every pick (and in fact have Lem'd more than I'd like to admit). I like that sometimes you guys take suggestions/polls, sometimes make it dictatorial, and sometimes just choose what suits your whimsy. :)
At least Tom gave the readers a book they suggested.
And the DO kind of explain the reasoning of their picks in the podcasts. Just sayin.
I lemmed the last laser pick and didn't really enjoy April's sword. But like most folks here, I agree that T&V get to do what they want here. They share their book club with us, and we are along for as much of the ride as we want to be. If we choose to lem one of their choices, or skip it entirely, that's up to us.
Since there had been a lot of talk about reading it I figured I'd mention Barnes & Noble has the ebook version of The Man in the High Castle at 1.99; posted yesterday, don't know how long it lastshttp://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/man-i...
The Sword and Laser
Books mentioned in this topic
Wool Omnibus (other topics)Ghost Planet (other topics)
Feersum Endjinn (other topics)
Kindred (other topics)
The Divine Invasion (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Hugh Howey (other topics)Iain M. Banks (other topics)
Octavia E. Butler (other topics)
Philip K. Dick (other topics)
Peter F. Hamilton (other topics)
More...
Definitely on board with this. As someone who was listed as one of the 50 greatest British authors since 1945 by The Times in a 2008 article, he's someone we have correct having missed as a book choice to date.