
Memorable SF Characters of the Essential Authors - pmoriarty
http://www.scifiwright.com/2012/03/memorable-sf-characters-of-the-essential-authors/
======
CurtMonash
I think this is a fair critique, if a bit hyperbolic.

One point overlooked is that the predominant form of science fiction was, for
some decades, short stories. Salvor Hardin was as richly imagined a character
as Bayta Darell, but he only appeared in short stories (or novellas); he was
the hero for about half of Foundation. The sequels were novels; the women were
accordingly more memorable; and by the way, I found grandaughter more
memorable than grandmother anyway.

Another point overlooked is the happy introduction of the vivid, lovable
rogue. Nicholas van Rijn is an excellent example, even if by profession he is
a tycoon. Lazarus Long is another; I found him a lot more vivid than the
article's author evidently did. Fafryd and the Grey Mouser are Exhibits 3A and
3B, although that's fantasy, and even Lord of the Rings had vivid characters,
so perhaps the criticism never applied to fantasy at all.

On the other hand -- as much as I adore Zelazny, his heroes are pretty much
all the same. They're jaded and cynical, witty in their cynicism, and usually
very altruistic even so. Usually they're quasi-immortal demigods too, with the
most important counterexample that part probably being the poet in A Rose For
Ecclesiastes.

Dune deserves a mention as being fairly early in the genre for having great
characterization. Also Ann McCaffrey's Pern books, but those are really
fantasies with a thin SF veneer.

Getting more modern yet, I agree that characterization is the norm rather than
the exception. My favorite is probably Miles Vorkosigan. I have no idea how
that series could win so many Hugos and Nebulas and still seem to be
relatively unknown.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
I've been reading Asimov's short stories recently, and not only are they
brilliantly imaginative, they also have unusually vivid characters.

They're not as developed as they would be in a novel, but they're certainly
_not_ emotionally flat. In fact they're colourful but economical - just a few
choice phrases and snatches of dialogue paint enough of a picture to bring
them to life, complete with complex, sometimes hidden or unexpected
motivations, and inner conflicts.

They may be of their time, but they're certainly not cardboard.

~~~
CurtMonash
Susan Calvin was certainly an interesting character, now that you mention it.
And so were both the partners in the Caves of Steel books. And when I
mentioned Salvor Hardin before, I could have mentioned Salvor Hardin as well.

I.e., I agree with you, both on the vividness of the characters and the
restrictions on characterization imposed by the short story format.

------
nickpsecurity
Haven't been up on SF works outside video games. Personally, I think they did
a good job with Shepard and Reaper plot on Mass Effect 1. Kind of integrated a
lot of themes into the ultimate villain and ability to artificially mitigate
the threat of biological evolution. Maybe it was a knock-off of someone but I
thought it was clever. Reapers remain my favorite, SF villains. :)

Need to get back into the genre at some point. Anyone got recommendations on
especially interesting or innovative works?

~~~
douche
I don't know if it is especially innovative, but I've gotten a lot of
enjoyment out of James A. Corey's Expanse novels lately. Hopefully the SyFy
channel doesn't butcher it when they put it on TV.

------
empthought
I know Vonnegut was reluctant to embrace the SF author moniker, but surely the
characters in Player Piano and Cat's Cradle merit a mention?

------
fsiefken
After all these centuries I still remember R. Daneel Olivaw, I wonder if I
ever meet him again.

------
GFK_of_xmaspast
This is an essay by John C. Wright who has written, among other things, regret
that he didn't physically assault Terry Pratchett: "I sat and listened to pure
evil being uttered in charming accents accentuated by droll witticism, and I
did not stand up, and I did not strike the old man who uttered them across the
mouth: and when he departed, everyone stood and gave him an ovation, even
though he had done nothing in his life aside from entertain their idle
afternoons." ([http://www.scifiwright.com/2011/10/the-watchtowers-of-
atlant...](http://www.scifiwright.com/2011/10/the-watchtowers-of-atlantis-
tremble/) )

~~~
prewett
You miss the context, though. The unnamed writer (presumably Prachett)
advocated suicide as something positive and talked an audience member into
suicide. All for the sake of feeling better (or, rather, not feeling). For
Wright, humans are made in the image of God, and to kill yourself as if you
were a horse with a broken leg is a travesty. To advocate doctors killing
people, even if they want to be killed, is to treat people in an amoral,
atheistic way that destroys civilization. And in the comments, Wright regrets
that he did not have the gall to stand up and do something about this evil.

It's a bit like, if you knew what would happen when Jar-Jar proposed giving
Palpatine dictatorial power, regretting not actually doing something instead
sitting while everyone else pulled civilization down around you.

