Um.... what.... aka, this is the dumbest thing I've ever read

I went to hear Hugh Howey speak when he was on tour, promoting the Wool trilogy. He talked about his time writing in a bookshop, and confirmed something I’ve wondered about for years.

The main sellers for his bookshop and any general bookshop he’s ever heard of are the genres: SF, mysteries, fantasy. Once it would have been romance also, but that market has moved on-line a lot.

But, of course, those aren’t the books that get the prestige space at the front of the shop. There always buried at the back in the stacks. Instead the main tables are for the lit fic.

Some people will argue that this arrangement exposes the lit fic to book lovers, who are forced to pass it on the way to the stacks to get the books they actually want.

But Howey was in charge of ordering books for the shop he worked at, and he noticed: he had to fight to order greater numbers of the genre books, even when they were clearly strong sellers. Furthermore, the publishers’ own sales people were never that interested in talking about the genre books. They wanted to make sure the latest lit fic offerings would sell enough to… well, to say they were selling.

So you’ve got producers and distributors openly sabotaging their best-selling items… and then crying no-one reads anymore.

8 Likes

So, a gay guy is grand Marshall of the straight parade?

13 Likes

I’m about to have a seizure trying to imagine what Milo Yiannopoulos could possibly be “proud” of

9 Likes

Hey, there are people who get off the toilet and experience pride for what they’ve deposited there.

By that standard, Milo has plenty to be proud of.

6 Likes

Then you have people like Margaret Atwood who claim they don’t write science fiction (at least when Handmaid’s Tale first came out).

7 Likes

I think that might be partly because we don’t have a better term for near-future tales possible with present-day technology.

Even hard science fiction is generally considered to describe the effects of a technology that doesn’t yet exist; the “hard” qualifier just means the science describing that technology is possible.

It’s been many years, but I don’t remember any technology in A Handmaid’s Tale (or
at least, any that were necessary to the plot) that didn’t already exist at the time.

6 Likes

Yes, but he’s a self-hating gay guy, so that makes it OK.

:roll_eyes:

9 Likes

But that only works if “straight pride” means “hating g…” oh I get it now.

11 Likes

Or Axe body spray…

7 Likes

Funny enough…




15 Likes

A chart to see if it’s science fiction or not

11 Likes

Good on Axe! Though they did miss the chance to use the “Bye Felica” meme.

8 Likes

That flow chart seems like it’s designed to offend.

10 Likes

I like this so much I almost want to start using Axe.

8 Likes

But how? It has Jeff Goldblum in it (even though his name is spelled wrong).

8 Likes

hard science fiction (the only sort worth reading) takes physics seriously.

6 Likes

Okay, now who is designing to offend?

I hardly think that the inclusion of an FTL drive or ansible makes a work “not worth reading.”

8 Likes

Heretic!

7 Likes

Future and alternate history stories were staples of science fiction magazines and books in the 20th century so I guess that’s where the label comes from (by the standards of sf fans/writers/editors anyway), regardless of the presence of future tech. I haven’t read “The Man In The High Castle” in decades, but I don’t recall much in the way of such in that story. Similarly, did “If This Goes On” by Heinlein have any future tech that was really important to the story?

7 Likes

Didn’t Arthur Clarke say you’re allowed one unbelievable thing per story? Even 2001 had a stargate. And the Monoliths were Von Neumann machines, which may be theoretically possible, but recall that they supposedly extended into higher dimensions.

12 Likes