Am I the only one sick of singularity writers? Its been explored since at least the 1990s and its just... boring. No wonder weirdo dystopian sci-fi/fantasy and "sci-lit" is so popular now. This ground has been retread so many times, I'm not sure where it can go or who is truly enjoying it. Heck, Accelerando is practically a parody of singularity writing fads and its ten years old!
I think this is how people felt in the 50s and 60s when "monster/alien of the week" type potboilers ruled sci-fi until a new generation of writers like Bester, Dick, Lem, Roddenberry, and others started to break away from selling trends that had a roadmap to nowhere and started taking chances with original concepts, engaging stories and characters, character development, moral ambiguity, relationship stories, etc.
Maybe its just me, but my god, is "hard" or "not soft/fantasy" sci-fi hard to read nowadays. There's very little soul or characterization or creative breakthroughs. Its like we all decided a near futurish singularity/robots/space-ships scenario is all we can handle. That said, I really did enjoy Stephenson's Anathem. I think we're going to look back at this period and wonder why we didn't demand more from sci-fi. Somewhat ironically, the best sci-fi writing I've been seeing in the last decade is in video games and not in novels, film, or short-stories. I guess that industry, at least in parts, still has an appetite for chance-taking and a young-ish fanbase that appreciates such things. I'd rather, say, play Mass Effect or Bioshock Infinite than read what's popular today or play Alien: Isolation than watch Prometheus.
Perhaps I'm too critical, but when I ask for recommendations I get the same 20 or so novels, all of which way beyond their fresh date. /r/printsf just seems like a bunch of old guys recommending Dune over and over, or the same six or seven old Stross, Watts, or Banks novels.
I think this is how people felt in the 50s and 60s when "monster/alien of the week" type potboilers ruled sci-fi until a new generation of writers like Bester, Dick, Lem, Roddenberry, and others started to break away from selling trends that had a roadmap to nowhere and started taking chances with original concepts, engaging stories and characters, character development, moral ambiguity, relationship stories, etc.
Maybe its just me, but my god, is "hard" or "not soft/fantasy" sci-fi hard to read nowadays. There's very little soul or characterization or creative breakthroughs. Its like we all decided a near futurish singularity/robots/space-ships scenario is all we can handle. That said, I really did enjoy Stephenson's Anathem. I think we're going to look back at this period and wonder why we didn't demand more from sci-fi. Somewhat ironically, the best sci-fi writing I've been seeing in the last decade is in video games and not in novels, film, or short-stories. I guess that industry, at least in parts, still has an appetite for chance-taking and a young-ish fanbase that appreciates such things. I'd rather, say, play Mass Effect or Bioshock Infinite than read what's popular today or play Alien: Isolation than watch Prometheus.
Perhaps I'm too critical, but when I ask for recommendations I get the same 20 or so novels, all of which way beyond their fresh date. /r/printsf just seems like a bunch of old guys recommending Dune over and over, or the same six or seven old Stross, Watts, or Banks novels.