Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 pretre wrote:
Never heard of the Roddenberry or LeGuin?

Umm scifi nerd card revoked.

You should name them and the three Masters without fail.

LeGuin? No, I haven't heard of him/her. Roddenberry is quite easy, and I do think I know who those three masters you're talking about are but I've always heard them called the "Big Three" or the "Three Pillars."

Three Masters or Three Grandmasters are also common terms depending on who you hang around. Every nerd or nerdette should read Asimov, Heinlein and Clarke. No exceptions.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Ahem.
Everything is a ripoff of something else.
You cant find an original idea anymore.

The truth the Hot Sauce speaks.

And yeah. Actually thought this was gonna be some kind of Andy Chambers tribute not another Blizzard vs Games Workshop thread.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Three Masters or Three Grandmasters are also common terms depending on who you hang around. Every nerd or nerdette should read Asimov, Heinlein and Clarke. No exceptions.

Are Terry Pratchett, Neil Gaiman, and George R.R Martin worthy substitutes?
Oh, and Frank Herbert and Phillip K Dick.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Three Masters or Three Grandmasters are also common terms depending on who you hang around. Every nerd or nerdette should read Asimov, Heinlein and Clarke. No exceptions.

Are Terry Pratchett, Neil Gaiman, and George R.R Martin worthy substitutes?
Oh, and Frank Herbert and Phillip K Dick.

No. That's like asking if Rick Riordan is a substitute for C.S. Lewis. Rick is good but C.S. Lewis is classic.

And George R.R. Martin is a fantasy writer isn't he

 LordofHats wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Three Masters or Three Grandmasters are also common terms depending on who you hang around. Every nerd or nerdette should read Asimov, Heinlein and Clarke. No exceptions.

Are Terry Pratchett, Neil Gaiman, and George R.R Martin worthy substitutes?
Oh, and Frank Herbert and Phillip K Dick.

No. That's like asking if Rick Riordan is a substitute for C.S. Lewis. Rick is good but C.S. Lewis is classic.

And George R.R. Martin is a fantasy writer isn't he

Yes, but he didn't specify what type of nerd
And Frank Herbert and Phillip K. Dick aren't classics ?

Oh I see, the "Big Three" predates Frank Herbert. That makes sense.

They are. But in scifi there is a very special appreciation for the Big Three as the great innovators of the genre during its golden age. Heinlein, Arthur C. Clarke, and Issac Assimov were literary masters, and there is no substitute.

That said you don't have to like them. I can personally say I never much liked reading Clarke's work. *ducks into cover before being lynched*

I actually liked chewing through Clarke's 2001 cycle, but by the goddess was it a dry read in places. Doesn't it stop it being an excellent piece of work and very technically competent but bloody hera that got long in places. Very similar to Kubrick's film adaption actually.

Heinlein was more my speed and Starship Troopers remains my personal favorite novel. I even had chapters from the boot camp portion smuggled to me while I was in boot camp.

Asimov is where I go for a look at the future, all three had incredible foresight and vision and a critical eye for humankind as it was during a very turbulent time for our species, great social and scientific change was the backdrop to a massive conflict fought primarily with money and glaring more then anything else.

The other authors CthulusSpy listed are all excellent as well...

Hmmm it brings up a thought though, who would be the three pillars of the fantasy genre?

Tolkien obviously, his novels literally changed fantasy forever... I think an argument for Anne McCaffrey... hmmm Terry Pratchett maybe? I seem to recall him being young enough to be influenced by the first two though...

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think fantasy ever really had the "watershed" moment science fiction experienced in the early 20th century.

The only pillar for modern fantasy imo is Tolkien. The man didn't only write the greatest piece of fantasy literature of the 20th century, he even proposed the value of the genre, articulated its attributes, and argued for it to be taken seriously by a literary community that saw it as childish and having no artistic value.

If we were to consider the 'Pillars' of the Fantasy genre it's probably Tolkien and C.S. Lewis but mostly Tolkien.

If Andy Chambers is still breathing why are we taking a retrospective look at him?

 AustonT wrote:
If Andy Chambers is still breathing why are we taking a retrospective look at him?

You never know when he might just drop dead from a heart attack. Or a ninja clown attack.

Asimov, Heinlein, Clarke, in that order. I'd also add another member of the Futurians, Frederik Pohl, but that might be out of personal fetish. I just loved "Gateway" and "The space merchants" too much

LordofHats wrote:If we were to consider the 'Pillars' of the Fantasy genre it's probably Tolkien and C.S. Lewis but mostly Tolkien.

I'm tempted to include Michael Moorcock, Jack Vance and Anne McCaffrey, too, as KalashnikovMarine suggests, but I feel that my pick of late 60s-to-mid-70s authors downplays Tolkien's influence in the genre.

You can handle yourself well in sci-fi without ever reading "20.000 leagues under the sea" or "The time machine" after all. Can't say the same about fantasy and Tolkien.

Oh, and @Testify, give Iain M. Banks a try. Start with "Consider Phlebas", "The use of weapons" or "The player of games". Will not regret it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AustonT wrote:
If Andy Chambers is still breathing why are we taking a retrospective look at him?

There's not much to discuss about the OP, really...

 Agent_Tremolo wrote:
I'm tempted to include Michael Moorcock, Jack Vance and Anne McCaffrey, too, as KalashnikovMarine suggests, but I feel that my pick of late 60s-to-mid-70s authors downplays Tolkien's influence in the genre.

You can handle yourself well in sci-fi without ever reading "20.000 leagues under the sea" or "The time machine" after all. Can't say the same about fantasy and Tolkien.

Yeah that's my thought. Just try to understand the origins of most high fantasy without understanding Tolkien. I dare someone to do it

How about Lord Dunsany and E.R. Eddison along with Tolkien?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
But yeah I mean Space Marines are the big trope from 40k and are actually a trope originator for much of the modern concept, they themselves are straight from Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers.

Are you joking? Other than the concepts of power armor and drop pods (which Heinlein originated), SM bear almost no resemblance to anything in ST. Obviously those are very important elements, but in terms of story, theme, and philosophy, there's no similarity at all.

And let's not forget that the only reason the "Starship Troopers" movie bears the title is because some studio exec found out the licensing was available...

The working title before that was "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine".

 Kanluwen wrote:


The working title before that was "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine".

You know, that really speaks to the quality of the final product

It is also fun to note that, per the DVD's commentary...

Paul Verhoeven did not even finish reading the book. He read like two chapters and give up.

 Mannahnin wrote:
How about Lord Dunsany and E.R. Eddison along with Tolkien?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
But yeah I mean Space Marines are the big trope from 40k and are actually a trope originator for much of the modern concept, they themselves are straight from Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers.

Are you joking? Other than the concepts of power armor and drop pods (which Heinlein originated), SM bear almost no resemblance to anything in ST. Obviously those are very important elements, but in terms of story, theme, and philosophy, there's no similarity at all.

Bolded part is exactly what I was talking about, the concept of "Space Marines" as they are used in 40k and through out the rest originated in the form we know it now in Starship Troopers, especially with the concepts of power armor and "drop" troopers. The Federation of ST is a whole political spectrum away from the Imperium of man and the list really goes on. The 40k concept of the Space Marine as inspired by ST is what originated MORE in the same vein, building on the concept in the name of grimdark/gothicness. Genetically modified super soldiers, pauldrons you can pick up Dish network with, etc.

I can talk ST and Heinlein all day but we were poking at tropes, not story, theme, etc.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It is also fun to note that, per the DVD's commentary...

Paul Verhoeven did not even finish reading the book. He read like two chapters and give up.

That's because Verhoeven is a complete Donkey Cave and wanted to make his anti war movie, not make a Starship Troopers movie.

Personally other then title and some names the two aren't related by any common sense of the term.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
That's because Verhoeven is a complete Donkey Cave and wanted to make his anti war movie, not make a Starship Troopers movie.

Personally other then title and some names the two aren't related by any common sense of the term.

I don't see how that makes him an donkey-cave, if he wants to tell his own story that's fine although it seems odd that he would use the name "Starship Troopers" when he doesn't care much for the original story anyways.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
How about Lord Dunsany and E.R. Eddison along with Tolkien?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
But yeah I mean Space Marines are the big trope from 40k and are actually a trope originator for much of the modern concept, they themselves are straight from Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers.

Are you joking? Other than the concepts of power armor and drop pods (which Heinlein originated), SM bear almost no resemblance to anything in ST. Obviously those are very important elements, but in terms of story, theme, and philosophy, there's no similarity at all.

Bolded part is exactly what I was talking about, the concept of "Space Marines" as they are used in 40k and through out the rest originated in the form we know it now in Starship Troopers, especially with the concepts of power armor and "drop" troopers. The Federation of ST is a whole political spectrum away from the Imperium of man and the list really goes on. The 40k concept of the Space Marine as inspired by ST is what originated MORE in the same vein, building on the concept in the name of grimdark/gothicness. Genetically modified super soldiers, pauldrons you can pick up Dish network with, etc.

I can talk ST and Heinlein all day but we were poking at tropes, not story, theme, etc.

But then why are you talking about Space Marines as being "straight from Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers"?
Why cherrypick the Drop Pods/Powered Armor bit?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
That's because Verhoeven is a complete Donkey Cave and wanted to make his anti war movie, not make a Starship Troopers movie.

Personally other then title and some names the two aren't related by any common sense of the term.

I don't see how that makes him an donkey-cave, if he wants to tell his own story that's fine although it seems odd that he would use the name "Starship Troopers" when he doesn't care much for the original story anyways.

Because who's going to see "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine"?

H.P lovecraft deserves a mention for his contributions to early psychological horror and dark fantasy, I think.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:
And let's not forget that the only reason the "Starship Troopers" movie bears the title is because some studio exec found out the licensing was available...

The working title before that was "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine".

Was there a plan involved, and was it in outer space?

Probably not.

But the movie was worthy of Ed Woods, now wasn't it?

I wouldn't associate him with the same genre as Tolkein though. Weird fantasy is fantasy but its kind of in its own category because it deals with very specialized themes that have only recently come into the modern fantasy genre. He is important for the Weird Fantasy though and definitely the Tolkien of his craft.

 LordofHats wrote:
I wouldn't associate him with the same genre as Tolkein though. Weird fantasy is fantasy but its kind of in its own category because it deals with very specialized themes that have only recently come into the modern fantasy genre. He is important for the Weird Fantasy though and definitely the Tolkien of his craft.

I haven't read any of his books but would HP fall under sci-fi as well?

Yes and no...

It depends on what you define as "science fiction".

I'd put him in that haphazard category of "occult fiction/interdimensional shenanigans".

 Kanluwen wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
How about Lord Dunsany and E.R. Eddison along with Tolkien?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
But yeah I mean Space Marines are the big trope from 40k and are actually a trope originator for much of the modern concept, they themselves are straight from Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers.

Are you joking? Other than the concepts of power armor and drop pods (which Heinlein originated), SM bear almost no resemblance to anything in ST. Obviously those are very important elements, but in terms of story, theme, and philosophy, there's no similarity at all.

Bolded part is exactly what I was talking about, the concept of "Space Marines" as they are used in 40k and through out the rest originated in the form we know it now in Starship Troopers, especially with the concepts of power armor and "drop" troopers. The Federation of ST is a whole political spectrum away from the Imperium of man and the list really goes on. The 40k concept of the Space Marine as inspired by ST is what originated MORE in the same vein, building on the concept in the name of grimdark/gothicness. Genetically modified super soldiers, pauldrons you can pick up Dish network with, etc.

I can talk ST and Heinlein all day but we were poking at tropes, not story, theme, etc.

But then why are you talking about Space Marines as being "straight from Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers"?
Why cherrypick the Drop Pods/Powered Armor bit?

I'm not saying Space Marines (40k faction) I'm saying Space Marines (overarching trope/concept) a primary example for which IS the 40k Space Marine


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
That's because Verhoeven is a complete Donkey Cave and wanted to make his anti war movie, not make a Starship Troopers movie.

Personally other then title and some names the two aren't related by any common sense of the term.

I don't see how that makes him an donkey-cave, if he wants to tell his own story that's fine although it seems odd that he would use the name "Starship Troopers" when he doesn't care much for the original story anyways.

Because who's going to see "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine"?

 Cheesecat wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I wouldn't associate him with the same genre as Tolkein though. Weird fantasy is fantasy but its kind of in its own category because it deals with very specialized themes that have only recently come into the modern fantasy genre. He is important for the Weird Fantasy though and definitely the Tolkien of his craft.

I haven't read any of his books but would HP fall under sci-fi as well?

Sort of...his works are about as hard Sci-Fi as Wh40k.
In fact, Wh40k actually takes a bit from the Cthulu Mythos.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I wouldn't associate him with the same genre as Tolkein though. Weird fantasy is fantasy but its kind of in its own category because it deals with very specialized themes that have only recently come into the modern fantasy genre. He is important for the Weird Fantasy though and definitely the Tolkien of his craft.

I haven't read any of his books but would HP fall under sci-fi as well?

Sort of...his works are about as hard Sci-Fi as Wh40k.
In fact, Wh40k actually takes a bit from the Cthulu Mythos.

Yeah was it the Necrons and/or Chaos, that had some HP inspiration?

 Cheesecat wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I wouldn't associate him with the same genre as Tolkein though. Weird fantasy is fantasy but its kind of in its own category because it deals with very specialized themes that have only recently come into the modern fantasy genre. He is important for the Weird Fantasy though and definitely the Tolkien of his craft.

I haven't read any of his books but would HP fall under sci-fi as well?

Sort of...his works are about as hard Sci-Fi as Wh40k.
In fact, Wh40k actually takes a bit from the Cthulu Mythos.

Yeah was it the Necrons and/or Chaos, that had some HP inspiration?

Both, actually. Though chaos takes a bit more, due to the presence of cults, mutation, madness, alternate dimensions...you get the idea.