A definitive (?) list of classic SF

[Fried Egg]

I found this allegedly definitive list of classic SF on line here.

The Classics of Science Fiction list, compiled by James Wallace Harris and Anthony Bernardo, is an attempt to create a definitive list of the best Science Fiction books. Harris and Bernardo collected 28 different recommended and "best of" lists by noted fans, critics and writers and then cross-tabulated the lists to see which books showed up with the most frequency. The result is a ranked list of 193 books, each having seven or more citations.

Below are the top 50 but the list goes up to 193 (see the full list on the link above). It's quite an interesting list, particularly when you get to some of the more obscure stuff later on.

[b]Rank	Year	Title				Author[/b]
1	1953	Demolished Man, The		Bester, Alfred
2	1953	More Than Human			Sturgeon, Theodore
3	1965	Dune				Herbert, Frank
4	1951	Foundation Trilogy, The		Asimov, Isaac
5	1960	Canticle for Leibowitz, A	Miller, Walter M.
6	1968	Stand on Zanzibar		Brunner, John
7	1969	Left Hand of Darkness, The	Le Guin, Ursula K.
8	1895	Time Machine, The		Wells, H. G.
9	1898	War of the Worlds, The		Wells, H. G.
10	1953	Childhood's End			Clarke, Arthur C.
11	1950	Martian Chronicles, The		Bradbury, Ray
12	1953	Space Merchants, The		Pohl & Kornbluth
13	1957	Stars My Destination, The	Bester, Alfred
14	1970	Ringworld			Niven, Larry
15	1974	Dispossesed, The		Le Guin, Ursula K.
16	1949	1984				Orwell, George
17	1952	City				Simak, Clifford
18	1954	Mission of Gravity		Clement, Hal
19	1962	Man in the High Castle, The	Dick, Philip K.
20	1932	Brave New World			Huxley, Aldous
21	1956	City and the Stars, The		Clarke, Arthur C.
22	1961	Stranger in a Strange Land	Heinlein, Robert A.
23	1971	To Your Scattered Bodies Go	Farmer, Philip Jose
24	1973	Rendezvous with Rama		Clarke, Arthur C.
25	1975	Forever War, The		Haldeman, Joe
26	1977	Gateway				Pohl, Frederik
27	1930	Last and First Men		Stapledon, Olaf
28	1948	World of Null-A, The		Van Vogt, A. E.
29	1953	Fahrenheit 451			Bradbury, Ray
30	1958	Case of Conscience, A		Blish, James
31	1962	Hothouse			Aldiss, Brian
32	1966	Moon is a Harsh Mistress, The	Heinlein, Robert A.
33	1966	Flowers for Algernon		Keyes, Daniel
34	1972	Dying Inside			Silverberg, Robert
35	1937	Star Maker			Stapledon, Olaf
36	1946	Slan				Van Vogt, A. E.
37	1949	Humanoids, The			Williamson, Jack
38	1962	Clockwork Orange, A		Burgess, Anthony
39	1963	Way Station			Simak, Clifford
40	1968	Camp Concentration		Disch, Thomas
41	1980	Timescape			Benford, Gregory
42	1818	Frankenstein			Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft
43	1949	Earth Abides			Stewart, George R.
44	1967	Lord of Light			Zelazny, Roger
45	1980	Book of the New Sun, The	Wolfe, Gene
46	1917	Princess of Mars, A		Burroughs, Edgar Rice
47	1924	We				Zamiatin, Yevgeny
48	1968	Do Androids Dream of Electri...	Dick, Philip K.
49	1970	Solaris				Lem, Stanislaw
50	1981	Downbelow Station		Cherryh, C. J.

 

[iansales]

Bit of an odd list. Seeing Foundation so high is not unexpected, although I think the books are rubbish. But The Demolished Man better than The Stars My Destination? Inconceivable.

On reflection, it's a very traditional list - lots of those books have been on "best of" lists for more than half a century and most sf fans* are so mired in nostalgia they wouldn't dream of dislodging them, even if they no longer read them...

(* not to be confused with sf readers, of course...)

 

[Fried Egg]

Bit of an odd list. Seeing Foundation so high is not unexpected, although I think the books are rubbish. But The Demolished Man better than The Stars My Destination? Inconceivable.

It doesn't mean that it's better, only that it was cited on more critic's lists (of those used to compile this list).

 

[iansales]

Sort of implies it's considered better tho, given that more people picked it for their lists.

 

[Connavar]

Another popularity list and Demolished Man cant possibly have better critics response than The Stars My Destination. They have must used the few critics that rated it before.

Do Andriods Dream Electric Sheep ? Is there for PKD or Bladerunner ? Hardly the most criticly rated PKD novel.

I like that top 50 have some more obscure classics like Jack Williamson novel,Sturgeon but those are mostly the most popular older sf novels the ones you see often in library shelfs etc

 

[Ian Whates]

An interesting list. I remember a site (about 15 years ago?) that did something similar, but based entirely on Awards won and appearances on recognised 'authoritative' lists such as David Pringle's top 100.

Looking at this one, the first I haven't read (quite oddly) is #42, Burgess' Clockwork Orange, which I must get around ro reading sometime. No, I tell a lie, I've never read Stapledon's Last and First Men, though I have it in the collection.

Ah, I've found the old list I was referring to:
The 162 Classics of Science Fiction (1996)

 

[J-Sun]

First, a couple of caveats: I haven't read

[B]Rank  Year    Title                     Author[/B]
27    1930    Last and First Men        Stapledon, Olaf
31    1962    Hothouse                  Aldiss, Brian
35    1937    Star Maker                Stapledon, Olaf
40    1968    Camp Concentration        Disch, Thomas
43    1949    Earth Abides              Stewart, George R.
45    1980    Book of the New Sun, The  Wolfe, Gene
47    1924    We                        Zamiatin, Yevgeny
49    1970    Solaris                   Lem, Stanislaw

unless The Book of the New Sun is a series title and Claw of the Conciliator or whatever was the first book in it (and, if so, it's no classic, IMO). And I have We and the Stapledon - just haven't gotten to them. And I'm almost positive I actually have read Last and First Men but so long ago I've completely forgotten it. It's possible I read Hothouse, too, but I think I just read one of the stories it was expanded from or combined with or whatever,

Also, as a list of SF books, the list is terrible and indefensible due to a ridiculous poverty of collections.

With that out of the way, such a list is doomed to failure. It would be quite a feat to get many people to agree on so few books that are supposed to be esteemed so highly. Given that, as a list of novels with some collections accidentally included, this isn't a bad shot, IMO. Of the ones that I've read, I think the following are overrated:

[B]Rank  Year    Title                     Author[/B]
5     1960    Canticle for Leibowitz, A Miller, Walter M.
6     1968    Stand on Zanzibar         Brunner, John
14    1970    Ringworld                 Niven, Larry
17    1952    City                      Simak, Clifford
30    1958    Case of Conscience, A     Blish, James
33    1966    Flowers for Algernon      Keyes, Daniel
41    1980    Timescape                 Benford, Gregory

but all are reasonable inclusions. The only one that especially bothers me is the Keyes, because I think the short form is a required inclusion on any definitive list of short fiction and constantly reinforcing the novel version obscures the much better story.

As far as the other 143 (wonder why they didn't just make it a Top 200?) there may be a slow curve where I've read a few less and, of those that are on there, I may think a few more are overrated (including a handful I outright despise), but it's still not bad, for the most part. And, on the other hand, several books of 51-193 desperately need to be in 1-50.

An interesting list. I remember a site (about 15 years ago?) that did something similar, but based entirely on Awards won and appearances on recognised 'authoritative' lists such as David Pringle's top 100.

Looking at this one, the first I haven't read (quite oddly) is #42, Burgess' Clockwork Orange, which I must get around ro reading sometime. No, I tell a lie, I've never read Stapledon's Last and First Men, though I have it in the collection.

Ah, I've found the old list I was referring to:
The 162 Classics of Science Fiction (1996)

I think those are actually the "same" lists, just Fried Egg's is updated and has a new collaborator. At least, they're very similar. I like the more detailed breakdown in the older list, though.

We should have a thread where Cronners make lists and someone tabulates them into an sffchronicles definitive classic list.

 

[J-Sun]

Just noticed more lists from that same site (if 162 and 193 aren't enough, this is 366):

A book a day in a leap year.

and other lists.

 

[gully_foyle]

Cool, I've read 38 of them and shall now keep an eye out for the rest.

But, at the end of the day it is just another list.

 

[Fried Egg]

I think those are actually the "same" lists, just Fried Egg's is updated and has a new collaborator. At least, they're very similar.

Indeed, they are an updated version fo the same list. Here is a relevent except from the methodological essay of the list compiler:

Using the lists I "assembled" the Classics of Science Fiction list by selecting books that were on a minimum number of refering lists. The original Classics of Science Fiction list produced 69 titles (3 or more out of 9 references), the newer 1996 list produced 162 books (3 or more out of 13 references). If I had made a list of books with two citations each, it would have produced a list with hundreds of titles--too many. At the time, 69 was a decent size list to consider. The 162 titles on the 1996 list, are really too many, but it was the only way to get books like Frankenstein and 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea onto the Classics of Science Fiction list. It also help add a few newer books like Hyperion and Neuromancer.

With Anthony Bernardo's additional references growing the total to 28, and using the cutoff of 7 or more references out of 28, the list has grown to 184 titles. This is a very long list, but I've decided to keep it. Otherwise I'd lose books like The Dying Earth and The Skylark of Space, both with 7 references. They are books which I think are important and I think deserve to be on the list.

So, this also explains why the list was cut off where it was. Not by choosing a specific number of titles, but by choosing a minumum number of citations.

We should have a thread where Cronners make lists and someone tabulates them into an sffchronicles definitive classic list.

I think something like this was attempted some time in the past? I'm not quite sure how it was concluded though...

 

[iansales]

... unless The Book of the New Sun is a series title and Claw of the Conciliator or whatever was the first book in it (and, if so, it's no classic, IMO).

The book of the New Sun comprises The Shadow of the Torturer, The Claw of the Conciliator, The Sword ofthe Lictor, and The Citadel of the Autarch. There's also a later volume, The Urth of the New Sun. I'm not surprised you weren't impressed if you started with the second book... It's more like a single book chopped into four than an actual series.

 

[woodsman]

I think something like this was attempted some time in the past? I'm not quite sure how it was concluded though...

There was, not long after I joined I believe. The problem being more recent books tended to gain more focus. Also just because I haven't read We doesn't mean it's not a giant of the genre but it obviously wouldn't get my vote.

To the list itself, I would agree that both Dick's on the list are over-rated (not bad, just I prefer other's of his works).

There's no Vonnegut (bit of fan ).

I prefered Downwards to Earth over Dying Inside.

I love Flowers for Algernon, although having not read the short story the previous comments may indeed be fair.

 

[jojajihisc]

Another popularity list and Demolished Man cant possibly have better critics response than The Stars My Destination. They have must used the few critics that rated it before.

Why not? Like you say it's a popularity contest and the former was more popular with this group. Who cares?

A lot of books on there I'm not familiar with. I'd rather they stick to novels as well instead of some of the anthologies that are mixed in because no one person can take credit for writing the stories.

 

[Elflock]

Obviously these things are a bit pointless I suppose,but that's a good way to compile a list. I'm not surprised at 90% of the list...it's the same old 'hard sci fi' stuff that the 'critics' (whoever they are) and editors etc always choose..there are a few things there I really liked,but most of that list is not at all my 'cup of tea'. For instance,it's good to see Leigh Brackett there,but 'The Long Tomorrow'? Why do they always say that is her 'best' work? It even says that in huge letters on the front cover of that copy there....I totally disagree! It's her least imaginative work and most boring IMHO...so,you know? What makes it her 'best'? Is it because it's more like every other boring sci-fi author than all her other work? 'Behold The Man',by Moorcock...they always say that's his 'best' work...why? It's very funny and clever,but why do they always single that one story out as if there was just no question about it? I would pick lots of other Moorcock as his best myself,maybe if I really had to choose,'The Dancers at The End of Time'. They have the 'Best of Henry Kuttner' there...now,to my mind,Henry Kuttner was basically a hack...simple as that...he was a professional writer who tried to turn his hand to everyone else's style (Merritt,Howard,Burroughs,you name it,Henry did it)...and it always came out second (or third) best IMHO...at least 'The Best of CL Moore' also made the list,that makes up for including Henry somewhat.
But I am a bit surprised and mightily impressed to see two titles of S Fowler Wright there!
Oh,and to the people who were talking about reading,'Last And First Men'...good luck with that!! (you'll need it)

 

[Connavar]

Why not? Like you say it's a popularity contest and the former was more popular with this group. Who cares?

A lot of books on there I'm not familiar with. I'd rather they stick to novels as well instead of some of the anthologies that are mixed in because no one person can take credit for writing the stories.

I dont really care because its a pretty safe list of known or classic sff.

I dont trust even the most prestigious sff award to choose what sff i read let alone some list like this that just wrote down every known,rated older sff.

I didnt known Dying Earth was realesed in 2000 its newer than Gene Wolfe series hehe

 

[Fried Egg]

I dont really care because its a pretty safe list of known or classic sff.

Well, it's going to be a pretty safe list of known SF because it aggregates the results of lots of other lists.

Who is going to find it useful? Well, I think this sort of list is going to be of most use to an SF newbie interested in finding and reading the classics of the field. Any other single list, will innevitably carry some bias and limitations and by aggregating many lists in this way, you should eliminate (or at least minimise) these to give a more well rounded, broad consensus of the field.

Who isn't going to find it useful? Seasoned SF fans looking for more obscure and forgotten classics that they haven't yet encountered or heard of.

That said, when one digs down past the top fifty, there are plenty of more obscure and less well known classics that may suprise all but the most well read SF fans. I've certainly found a lot if interesting books/authors nearer the bottom of the list.

Thus, I think this list has something for everybody.

 

[Connavar]

Well, it's going to be a pretty safe list of known SF because it aggregates the results of lots of other lists.

Who is going to find it useful? Well, I think this sort of list is going to be of most use to an SF newbie interested in finding and reading the classics of the field. Any other single list, will innevitably carry some bias and limitations and by aggregating many lists in this way, you should eliminate (or at least minimise) these to give a more well rounded, broad consensus of the field.

Who isn't going to find it useful? Seasoned SF fans looking for more obscure and forgotten classics that they haven't yet encountered or heard of.

That said, when one digs down past the top fifty, there are plenty of more obscure and less well known classics that may suprise all but the most well read SF fans. I've certainly found a lot if interesting books/authors nearer the bottom of the list.

Thus, I think this list has something for everybody.

You are right its not for us but more for newbies.
The first 50-100 is pretty useless for readers like us, its more less known classics down than the list.

There isnt a single author i didnt know in that list. We or Solaris is the most obscure it gets so really its not so less known novels from where i am as a SFF reader. Those two novels are big in europe too.

I have not read that much SFF to be that seasoned reader,the list is just too mainstream sf genre.

 

[Fried Egg]

You must be far more well read in SF than me then. Scanning through the full list, there are plenty of authors I've never heard of (or don't recall having heard of):

S. Fowler Wright, Edgar Pangborn, Alexei Panshin, Barry N. Malzberg, J.D. Beresford, Norman Spinrad, Karel Capek, Nevil Shute, Vonda N. McIntyre, Stanley G. Weinbaum, Russell Hoban, Connie Willis, Ray Cummings, E.V. Odle, Sir George Tomkyns Chesney, Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Samuel Butler, Percy Greg, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Andre Maurois, John Gloag, Norman Spinrad and Marge Piercy.

I don't regard myself as an SF newbie but do you really call all the above mainstream SF? I obviously have a lot to learn...

 

[Connavar]

You must be far more well read in SF than me then. Scanning through the full list, there are plenty of authors I've never heard of (or don't recall having heard of):

S. Fowler Wright, Edgar Pangborn, Alexei Panshin, Barry N. Malzberg, J.D. Beresford, Norman Spinrad, Karel Capek, Nevil Shute, Vonda N. McIntyre, Stanley G. Weinbaum, Russell Hoban, Connie Willis, Ray Cummings, E.V. Odle, Sir George Tomkyns Chesney, Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Samuel Butler, Percy Greg, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Andre Maurois, John Gloag, Norman Spinrad and Marge Piercy.

I don't regard myself as an SF newbie but do you really call all the above mainstream SF? I obviously have a lot to learn...

Norman Spinrad is pretty rated name that you hear of from 60s and forward. Connie Willis is award winning, Alexei Panshin is too.
Vonda N. McIntyre,Barry N. Malzberg i know from anthlogies. Not names i have read but names i know about to enough to want to try.

The rest names you mention are obscure but they are also like 5% of the list who has 3-4 books each of every popular,known author. Heinlein,Bradbury,Wolfe,Ballard,Moorcock etc

 

[J-Sun]

I don't regard myself as an SF newbie but do you really call all the above mainstream SF?

Not all, but most. Maybe not

Never heard of 'em: Percy Greg, Andre Maurois, John Gloag
Either vague or no bells: , E.V. Odle, Sir George Tomkyns Chesney (pre-20th future war novelist?)
Vague bells: S. Fowler Wright, J.D. Beresford (the Brick Moon guy?), Charlotte Perkins Gilman

but definitely (unless otherwise noted, but not for obscurity):

Edgar Pangborn - famous for Davy and A Mirror for Observers (I don't recall but one or both are probably the one(s) on the list.
Alexei Panshin - won a Nebula for Rite of Passage (if I recall the title right) and wrote a famous critical work on Heinlein, IIRC.
Barry N. Malzberg - writer of zillions of words - collaborated with Resnick relatively recently, among others.
Norman Spinrad - one of the leading lights of the New Wave and, despite my distaste for much of the New Wave, one of my favorites. Bug Jack Barron was on the list, I think, and possibly The Iron Dream (and should be), but The Void Captain's Tale is also one of his best (and the not-entirely unrelated Riding the Torch and Child of Fortune are also good), and The Last Hurrah of the Golden Horde and No Direction Home are excellent collections. It's been ahile since I read it and its "FemLib" concerns are probably dated, but A World Between is a relatively early work (1979 or so) on electronic democracy.
Karel Capek - everyone knows Asimov so almost everyone knows Capek if for no other reason: Capek wrote a play about robots which Asimov frequently referred to (despite not liking it).
Nevil Shute - famous for nothing but On the Beach, AFAIK, but that's pretty famous. I think it was also a Major Motion Picture.
Vonda N. McIntyre - Hugo and Nebula award winning author of the vastly overrated Dreamsnake and very well known as a Star Trek novelist - I actually like her story "Aztecs", though, and picked up the expansion of it (Superluminal) though I haven't read it yet.
Stanley G. Weinbaum - one of the most famous writers of the 30s who didn't write space opera (the oddball alongside Campbell, Hamilton, and Smith, who very much did) - chosen to lead off Ballantine's superlative 'The Best of' series of the 70s.
Russell Hoban - fairly well known in mainstream circles, I think, or at least for what I think was one of the first things that prompted the need for a 'slipstream' term, with Riddley Walker. Not mainstream SF at all, though.
Connie Willis - really? She's won more Hugos and Nebulas than any other author. I remember "At the Rialto" as one of the funnier things I've read but can't stand her otherwise, but she's HUGE.
Ray Cummings - a good ol' pre-Amazing pulpster.
Edward Bulwer-Lytton - famous for the line "It was a dark and stormy night" but also many works not so widely laughed at.
Samuel Butler - pretty well known to pre-20th century utopian buffs.
Marge Piercy - well know in mainstream circles - no clue what she's doing on a classic of SF list - one of those dabblers who doesn't really write anything as awful as SF, like Atwood.