SFcrowsnest chat > Discuss books

Are there any SFF authors you truly hate?

<< < (4/4)

Geoff the head Uncle:
Hello Vinx

I agree with you. If you read a disappointing book, then you're less likely to read any more by the same author.

For that reason I'm not a fan of Michael Moorcock. Back in the 60s, he wrote a trilogy that plagarised Edgar Rice Burroughs Mars books. I upset some of his fans about this back in the early 80s but he agreed with me that he had to make some money for his New Worlds mag but it took the wind from their sails. Even so, its one thing to take a scenario someone else used but not to do things your own way is asking for trouble.

Other authors who've plagarised tend not to sell again but this blemish in Moorcock's career seems to have been glossed over. My own contension is if an author has done it once then they're likely to do it again.

 The problem with William Gibson's cyberpunk novels that always struck me was how could he think anyone who was stoned on drugs could write computer programmes.


just about anything from Baen books-Weber, Kratman, Ringo-all so badly written. Just hack work.


--- Quote from: shunt12 on March 28, 2010, 03:46:44 AM ---Bribery works best, R.J.

Just send him a nice box set of StarGate Universe at Xmas time, and you'll soon find that your review books consist of the latest William Gibson and Al Reynolds novels!



--- End quote ---



I suppose my own issues with lazy, formulaic TV spin-offs would belong in another thread.  ;)

I don't really find I have any writers I *hate* (horribly strong word, unless we were talking about writing other than fiction), but I have to say, I have a bit of a problem with new books that either cover old ground in ways that have been done to death (vampire romances), or simply stick to the same formulaic structure because it's popular and it sells (teen paranormal whatsits, vampire romance, paranormal bodice rippers masquerading as horror).

Geoff the head Uncle:
Hello JL

  The problem with tie-in books are that they they are there to be money-spinners than canon so the writers can do what they want within reason. George Lucas in an interview a couple years ago didn't think they were cannon for his franchise.  Only one of the Babylon 5 books was deemed canon by the great maker. Let's not even go Trek.


The one that sticks in my mind is Michael Moorcock having read the Golden Barge. I thought it was absolute drivel with no real ending. My friends agreed with my assessment but generally added a few swear words.

For years the book was given as a present between my friends. It had to be cunningly disguised or hidden inside something else. I'm not sure what happend to it in the end as I've not seen it for years.

I'm starting to feel nervouse now as its my birthday soon  ::)



[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version