[worry]

Ribald, on 13 December 2015 - 09:45 AM, said:

Robert Jordan's Eye of the World has 209,000 ratings on Goodreads... and if we compare that to Game of Thrones at over 1,000,000 it suddenly looks under-read.

Not criminally so, because it's (at best) 1/5 as good as AGOT.

[Ribald]

Now that is a damning indictment of Willful Child and Crimson Guard

[worry]

I'm not sure it is, because pat qualifies his requirements with "inexplicably". I would consider it explicable why both of these books have a low # of ratings independent of quality.

That said, I don't really read much SFF so that's why I'm mostly staying out of this debate.

[Ribald]

OK... so if the metric is inexplicably under-rated books we need to establish a base line... an average if you will.

Comparing things to an outlier like Game of Thrones does not give you any average or sense of what the average is meant to be.

Providing a range of books, well known, popular and potentially read by the various parties allows people to ascertain whether or not the metric of number of ratings on Goodreads accurately reflects how popular the book is.

Given that books released before 2005 are going to be significantly less well represented in general than books after goodreads became popular and easily accessible is clearly going to be a factor. Authors who were popular but finished series before Goodreads became popular is going to be a factor.

It is hard to tell if Sarantine is criminally under-read if a significant number of fantasy novels that are well known, well read, well liked etc. have fewer than 20,000 ratings on goodreads.

That doesn't mean that Sarantine shouldn't be on Pat's list, but the evidence for that shouldn't be comparing it to GoT, LotR, EotW or any of the other massive blockbuster books, because it is an insane and inaccurate comparison.

Kay is a great author and a really nice guy. His books are fabulously well written. Everyone should read his books if they like poetic fantasy.

On the other hand, avoid Paul Kearney's trilogy... actually read the first one and skip the following two because they are exactly the same thing over again... or read the original story about the legion as it is a lot better.

[worry]

Accuracy is irrelevant, and sanity is an unfair bar.

[Ribald]

My major disagreement with Pat's list is that it is a little light on the female authors who are generally criminally under-read and under-represented in fantasy and science fiction lists.

Nalo Hopkinson, Octavia Butler, Kelly Link, Lois McMaster Bujold, CJ Cherryh, hell, even Ursula LeGuin is criminally under-read.

[pat5150]

Guys,

As far as popularity is concerned, keep in mind that Martin's A Game of Thrones has sold more than all of GGK's books combined. Unfortunately, outside of Canada Kay is not really well-known. . .

Patrick

[Aptorian]

Ribald, on 13 December 2015 - 10:19 AM, said:

My major disagreement with Pat's list is that it is a little light on the female authors who are generally criminally under-read and under-represented in fantasy and science fiction lists.

Nalo Hopkinson, Octavia Butler, Kelly Link, Lois McMaster Bujold, CJ Cherryh, hell, even Ursula LeGuin is criminally under-read.

Are you arguing that book readers are sexist? Or do you just want to put more women on the list to fill the politically correct American quotas?

It's Pats list. Not a what minority deserves a mention list. The man reads hundreds of books a year, I am sure he is qualified to pick and choose.

This post has been edited by Apt: 13 December 2015 - 11:41 AM

[Ribald]

Apt, on 13 December 2015 - 11:40 AM, said:

Ribald, on 13 December 2015 - 10:19 AM, said:

My major disagreement with Pat's list is that it is a little light on the female authors who are generally criminally under-read and under-represented in fantasy and science fiction lists.

Nalo Hopkinson, Octavia Butler, Kelly Link, Lois McMaster Bujold, CJ Cherryh, hell, even Ursula LeGuin is criminally under-read.

Are you arguing that book readers are sexist? Or do you just want to put more women on the list to fill the politically correct American quotas?

It's Pats list. Not a what minority deserves a mention list. The man reads hundreds of books a year, I am sure he is qualified to pick and choose.

I am not arguing those points at all. Pat's list is his list. But he has books on it that I don't think are as neglected as books by other authors.

And Pat asked if we had any thoughts on which authors and books we think are unfairly neglected, and I replied that I thought that Hopkinson, Butler, Link, Bujold, Cherryh and LeGuin were criminally neglected.

Pat is under no obligation whatsoever to change his list to conform to my desires, but he did ask for our opinion on it.

[Aptorian]

Okay, fair point. But are these female authors "criminally under-read or under-represented" because they are female, because their publishers dropped the ball or are their works just not as good/innovative/otherwise interesting?

As far as I have read, much like other nerd cultures, there's just not as many women active in Sci-fi circles, which in turn will mean less "great" female authors will emerge compared to men. Making female authors works drown in male authors works.

That's statistically fair I'd argue since your gender should not be an important characteristic of your work. Unless you are wrinting for a specific sub-genre.

This post has been edited by Apt: 13 December 2015 - 12:25 PM

[Ribald]

Hopkinson writes brilliant post-colonial SF. I came across her work when I was studying my masters in SF literature, where I also came across Cherryh's space opera stories that have some of the most interesting aliens that I had seen in space opera.

LeGuin has written some brilliant and influential SF but just doesn't seem to be read much any more outside of academic study even though her eco-critical sf is fantastic as well as her portrayals of gender and otherness. Butler is so well respected that a bust of her was suggested as a replacement for the world fantasy award (which I am glad they are not doing), but it is not often that you come across someone that you can chat to about her books so I think her work is under-read.

McMaster Bujold has won four Hugos (I think, at least I am fairly sure) but clearly you hadn't heard of her work because you thought I was suggesting her to fill some politically correct quota. And Link writes some brilliant slipstream and magic realist stuff that I believe could do with a wider audience.

I also disagreed with Pat including Paul Kearney because I didn't like either books 2 or 3 of the Macht series. but because I had already said that I didn't include it with that list.

Given that I have been reading Kay for years it never occurred to me that he was under-read but that may be because we all assume that those authors we consider staples of the genre are the same as other people's staples of the genre.

And I didn't think that Martin's Dreamsongs stuff was that good primarily because some of it is hit and miss and there are better short story collections and anthologies out there that I like a lot better.

[worry]

Women aren't a minority, so when you find a subculture in which they are underrepresented and the best aren't championed, your first question should always be "What kind of sick disgusting monsters populate this subculture such that women are excluded and/or reluctant to be part of it?"

[Gredfallan Ale]

Ribald, on 13 December 2015 - 09:10 AM, said:

Personally I don't think the number of ratings on Goodreads is a particularly good metric of anything other than current popularity.

But isn't that exactly what this thread is discussing? Novels that deserve more attention?

Such a question implies that a book can be rated amongst at least two dimensions, "popularity" (the level of attention it currently receives) and something like "quality" or "worthiness of attention" (a measure more or less independent of current popularity). The current Goodreads measurement is taken as a measurement of the former, popularity, and then we make a subjective "worthiness" call to estimate how high we feel that popularity actually should be.

Now, Martin's ASoIaF might be judged to be hyped, that is, receiving more "popularity" than warranted by your subjective judgement of "quality", we can still use it as a hallmark figure of "incredibly popular" or "being mainstream hit" and judge that a certain book has a similar level of "quality", but currently a much lower level of "popularity" and should therefore, relative to ASoIaF, deserve to receive more attention.

I, for one, think that there are a few books out there that have enough "quality" to become mainstream hits like ASoIaF. However, those books would not only rate high on "quality", but also on something like "accessibility".

Now, if we drop the "mainstream" popularity bit and just focus on books that should receive more attention of speculative fiction fans, then we should probably use others books as comparison. Both comparisons are worthwhile in my opinion, though.

This post has been edited by Gredfallan Ale: 13 December 2015 - 09:27 PM

[Baco Xtath]

I don't hear the names Felix Gilman, Nick Harkaway, K.J. Parker, Ian Tregillis, Robert Jackson Bennett, R.S. Belcher, Paul McAuley, Lauren Buekes, or Rachel Bach enough. However, I only frequent this site and sometimes westeros and none of my friends read so I'm a really poor authority on this subject. Hell, I think every person I named has won an award. Disregard me, unless I'm partially correct, in which case, please regard the pertinent parts that pertain to the palaver.

[worry]

Credibility is overrated, but I assure you Ribald and I do not bicker. Our discussion may not have borne fruit, but even a fruitless endeavor can be valuable if you're an omnivore.

[Andorion]

Baco Xtath, on 13 December 2015 - 09:57 PM, said:

I don't hear the names Felix Gilman, Nick Harkaway, K.J. Parker, Ian Tregillis, Robert Jackson Bennett, R.S. Belcher, Paul McAuley, Lauren Buekes, or Rachel Bach enough. However, I only frequent this site and sometimes westeros and none of my friends read so I'm a really poor authority on this subject. Hell, I think every person I named has won an award. Disregard me, unless I'm partially correct, in which case, please regard the pertinent parts that pertain to the palaver.

Nope I agree. With the exception of Robert Jackson Bennett being praised for City of Stairs, I don;t think the other authors here get mentioned a lot. I read the fantasy sub on reddit regularly and I rarely see them.

[amphibian]

Apt, on 13 December 2015 - 12:24 PM, said:

Okay, fair point. But are these female authors "criminally under-read or under-represented" because they are female, because their publishers dropped the ball or are their works just not as good/innovative/otherwise interesting?

As far as I have read, much like other nerd cultures, there's just not as many women active in Sci-fi circles, which in turn will mean less "great" female authors will emerge compared to men. Making female authors works drown in male authors works.

That's statistically fair I'd argue since your gender should not be an important characteristic of your work. Unless you are wrinting for a specific sub-genre.

The women Ribald mentioned are very, very good writers. I have not read Link though. They should (and kinda do) stand at the top and higher ends of most lists of SFF authors people compile.

As to why they're not that popular, I have a few opinions and thoughts. Some of this lower level of popularity clearly has to do with the "good old boys club" that shaped (and still shapes) publishing/awards/reviewing/marketing. I think some of it has to do with several of these specific writers choosing to tackle very difficult subject material for their best books (higher numbers of complex technical concepts involved, not a ton of kinetic action, characters written to be more cerebrally interesting rather than immediately liked at a gut level). They do it extraordinarily well, but these books are not going to get gobbled up by the masses like Harry Potter or Hunger Games.

Think about Independence Day vs. Ex Machina.

[pat5150]

Ah crap, I totally forgot to include Tregillis' Milkweed books on the list. One of the best speculative fiction series of the last couple of years, no question!

Patrick

[End of Disc One]

My favorite fantasy author who gets a shit amount of ratings on Goodreads is Mark Charon Newton. I especially love the first 2 books of his Legends of the Red Sun series, yet all of his books except his "debut" have less than 500 ratings. His latest book that came out last year (which I haven't read yet) has 53 fucking ratings. Crazy for a guy who used to get a fair amount of attention on the SFF blogs.

If it wasn't for a Hotlist giveaway a while back I never would have bothered with it either, so thanks Pat!

This post has been edited by End of Disc One: 16 December 2015 - 08:11 PM

[pat5150]

We aim to please!

Patrick