LoA's 50s SF Novels

[J-Sun]

Forthcoming from The Library of America
Classic SF Novels Get Futuristic Enhancements From Library of America

The contents of the two volumes, chosen by Gary K. Wolfe, who I know as a Locus reviewer guy:

Frederik Pohl & C. M. Kornbluth, The Space Merchants
Theodore Sturgeon, More Than Human
Leigh Brackett, The Long Tomorrow
Richard Matheson, The Shrinking Man
Robert Heinlein, Double Star
Alfred Bester, The Stars My Destination
James Blish, A Case of Conscience
Algis Budrys, Who?
Fritz Leiber, The Big Time

This is restricted to Americans, so no Childhood's End by Clarke, say, and is restricted to the 50s, so What Mad Universe by Brown, say, just misses the cutoff though it feels like a 50s novel. I've read all but the Matheson and the Brackett (about the only one of hers I haven't read, as it doesn't sound interesting to me). I dislike the Blish, but wouldn't bother to try to argue it off the list since nearly everyone but me likes it. The rest are all excellent.

Some notable omissions, though:

Anderson's Brain Wave.
Asimov - either The Caves of Steel or The End of Eternity.
The recently deceased Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451.
Clement's Mission of Gravity.

Even if I removed the Brackett, Matheson, and Blish, I'd still have one that wouldn't fit, but it should be a 5x5 pair of volumes, anyway. And the Brackett and Matheson may well be great.

The Sturgeon is atypical for the list in that it's a fixup rather than a novel. Might argue for The Dreaming Jewels there (or even The Cosmic Rape, though it's practically a novella), though MTH is a major book, whatever the specific type. But that underlines the problem that the LoA is focusing too much on novels, with no Dick stories, no 50s SF stories, and only a handful of Vonnegut stories in the various relatively recent volumes I know of.

Also, I'd like to see something from the van Vogt strain - PKD's already represented by two volumes in the LoA all by himself but not by any of his 50s novels, so a case could be made for something like Solar Lottery but, since Dick is so represented, maybe Harness' The Paradox Men instead. Or maybe van Vogt's own The House that Stood Still or The Mind Cage (though an overly strict interpretation would call van Vogt Canadian). But I'll admit that, in sheer "is it among the best/most important" these would easily lose out to the above. But in terms of balance of representation of the zeitgeist, I'd like to see something like them.

Still, in sum, an excellent pair of volumes, IMO. IYO?

 

[Foxbat]

I think it's a good collection. And, for the record, The Shrinking Man would get my vote as the best of the bunch.

 

[WmPreston]

I think 451 isn't on there because, unlike the others, it's been in continuous publication. And maybe Simon and Schuster doesn't want to share, even with a not-for-profit like LoA.

I've only read, from that list, the Matheson and the Bester. Matheson is solid as usual (from that time period); the Bester is all over the place, utterly losing track of the character it begins with and treating its female characters terribly. But maybe LoA chose it for its "experimental" approach.

You do have to wonder how the elements of permissions and projected sales and the interest in featuring less familiar works contended with each other to lead to the final decisions. I'd be interested to hear about those discussions.

 

[Randy M.]

I bet Fahrenheit 451 isn't on there because they expect a full volume of Bradbury sometime in the future. I think there's less chance of that being true for Asimov, but it's not impossible.

I'm scratching my head over the Heinlein. I haven't read it, but it's not the first '50s title that comes to mind. The rest are all titles that most readers would think of, if not immediately, then not long after, except possibly The Big Time, which I've always thought had a more underground reputation than the others. Actually, it's inclusion almost disappoints me, not because it doesn't belong, but because it may indicate no immediate plan for a Leiber volume. Really, if they put Lovecraft in LOA, Leiber would be another likely inclusion.


Randy M.

 

[Connavar]

I bet Fahrenheit 451 isn't on there because they expect a full volume of Bradbury sometime in the future. I think there's less chance of that being true for Asimov, but it's not impossible.

I'm scratching my head over the Heinlein. I haven't read it, but it's not the first '50s title that comes to mind. The rest are all titles that most readers would think of, if not immediately, then not long after, except possibly The Big Time, which I've always thought had a more underground reputation than the others. Actually, it's inclusion almost disappoints me, not because it doesn't belong, but because it may indicate no immediate plan for a Leiber volume. Really, if they put Lovecraft in LOA, Leiber would be another likely inclusion.


Randy M.

Its pretty simple to me its a minor but still known Heinlein and they choosed it because its not published as often and as easy to find as his bigger 50s books like Starship Troopers. Like SF Masterworks series by Gollancz has several minor,weak PKD just because they are not as popular reprinting wise by other publishers. They want to sell the book with Heinlein name, not compete with other publishers with his famous juvies,50s books.

No matter the authors its good to see they respect the SF greats of America of those days. Just like Hammett,Chandler,Jim Thompson and co have become library of america books. SF books getting more mainstream classic rep is good.

 

[Connavar]

I think 451 isn't on there because, unlike the others, it's been in continuous publication. And maybe Simon and Schuster doesn't want to share, even with a not-for-profit like LoA.

I've only read, from that list, the Matheson and the Bester. Matheson is solid as usual (from that time period); the Bester is all over the place, utterly losing track of the character it begins with and treating its female characters terribly. But maybe LoA chose it for its "experimental" approach.

You do have to wonder how the elements of permissions and projected sales and the interest in featuring less familiar works contended with each other to lead to the final decisions. I'd be interested to hear about those discussions.

The Stars My Destination is one of the most acclaimed SF books there is and Shrinking Man is far from being as much classic Matheson as I Am Legend. Shrinking Man is bad choice, Matheson can do much better imo.

Treating the female characters bad as a weakness would make all pre 1980s SF terrible,weak books.....

 

[WmPreston]

The Stars My Destination is one of the most acclaimed SF books there is and Shrinking Man is far from being as much classic Matheson as I Am Legend. Shrinking Man is bad choice, Matheson can do much better imo.

Treating the female characters bad as a weakness would make all pre 1980s SF terrible,weak books.....

I Am Legend is terrific, I agree, but with three movie adaptations and a pretty recent reprinting, I guess they weren't keen on giving it the LoA treatment.

Is there another solid Matheson novel?

And, yeah, poor treatment of female characters is pretty common, but The Stars My Destination turned into a rape fantasy at a certain point, going beyond the standard poor treatment.

 

[Fried Egg]

Just a quick few random responses.

To the suggestion that Sturgeon's "More than Human" shouldn't be in the list because it's a "Fix up". Ludicrous. Who cares if it was adapted from a short story or an array of short stories? At the end of the day, it should be judged on it's own merits and "More than Human" would not only be a good candidate for best SF novel of the 50's, but of all time.

As to the omission of Hal Clement's "Mission of Gravity"...that was a good call in my opinion. A terribly written book. I agree that they could have included some Van Vogt though.

Regarding Alfred Bester's "The Star's my Destination"; that had to go in there. An undeniable classic. And I don't think the rape scene was gratuitous in the slightest. It was entirely necessary for the purposes of the plot and to show the full evolution of the main character.

 

[Connavar]

I Am Legend is terrific, I agree, but with three movie adaptations and a pretty recent reprinting, I guess they weren't keen on giving it the LoA treatment.

Is there another solid Matheson novel?

And, yeah, poor treatment of female characters is pretty common, but The Stars My Destination turned into a rape fantasy at a certain point, going beyond the standard poor treatment.

Somewhere in Time is one of the best time travel,love stories there is imo. It has won World Fantasy award and is pretty known of his books that isnt SF. Richard Matheson is more than those two novels you mention. He has many quality SF,weird short stories. Great western writer too.

 

[Fried Egg]

Matheson's "Hell House" I thought was very good too.

 

[WmPreston]

Richard Matheson is more than those two novels you mention. He has many quality SF,weird short stories. Great western writer too.

I've read heaps of his short fiction, starting more than 30 years ago with the paperback collections they published at the time. I do highly recommend that. There's also a new multi-volume attempt to publish all of his short fiction, and I have Vol. 1. It's put together in a somewhat amateurish fashion, but the stories are a blast, even if you've read them before, and it's interesting to watch his development as a writer.

 

[Randy M.]

Matheson's "Hell House" I thought was very good too.

Seconded. I don't know how true this is, but I read years ago that he was dissatisfied with Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House and decided to write his own version of a scientific exploration of a haunted house so, for me anyway, Hell House reads as a sort of dime-store version of Jackson's novel, but it sure is fun. The movie of it, The Legend of Hell House is also very entertaining.


Randy M.

 

[J-Sun]

I think it's a good collection. And, for the record, The Shrinking Man would get my vote as the best of the bunch.

Serendipity. I went to the used bookstore yesterday and there it was - nice shape, one buck. I should be able to squeeze it in this month or next.

I think 451 isn't on there because, unlike the others, it's been in continuous publication. And maybe Simon and Schuster doesn't want to share, even with a not-for-profit like LoA.

I don't know about continuous publication for the rest but a few of those have stayed in print fairly well. But it may have had something to do with it. Probably more likely a rights issue, like your second suggestion. But that's okay - I don't know how many poetry/drama books I have that say they represent works "exclusive of Shakespeare" (and sometimes Spenser and/or Milton) because it's assumed everyone already has all that, and it's true that Bradbury and that work don't really need a special edition to remind people of them. "Classic novels of the 50s (exclusive of Bradbury)."

I bet Fahrenheit 451 isn't on there because they expect a full volume of Bradbury sometime in the future. I think there's less chance of that being true for Asimov, but it's not impossible.

That's another idea. Could be.

I'm scratching my head over the Heinlein. I haven't read it, but it's not the first '50s title that comes to mind. The rest are all titles that most readers would think of, if not immediately, then not long after, except possibly The Big Time, which I've always thought had a more underground reputation than the others. Actually, it's inclusion almost disappoints me, not because it doesn't belong, but because it may indicate no immediate plan for a Leiber volume. Really, if they put Lovecraft in LOA, Leiber would be another likely inclusion.

Actually, if you exclude Heinlein's 50s short fiction and juveniles, all you have left is The Puppet Masters, A Door into Summer, and Double Star. While the other two are both excellent, Double Star would definitely get my nod.

As far as Leiber, The Big Time won a Hugo so it wasn't all that underground. I'm not sure how well known it is today, though. I know it, so assume everyone does.

To the suggestion that Sturgeon's "More than Human" shouldn't be in the list because it's a "Fix up". Ludicrous. Who cares if it was adapted from a short story or an array of short stories? At the end of the day, it should be judged on it's own merits and "More than Human" would not only be a good candidate for best SF novel of the 50's, but of all time.

I didn't suggest that. I said it was "atypical", offered another excellent Sturgeon work as a "purer" example of a novel, and said MTH was "a major book, whatever the specific type". But, regarding the specific type, I'm wrong anyway - it feels so much like three stories (because it basically is) that I forget that only the one was actually previously published and apparently not much changed as its "part of the novel". So, technically, it's an "expanded novella" rather than a fixup, anyway, and not that different from A Case of Conscience, though those two are still the only exceptions to things conceived as novels from start to finish.

As I say, I wasn't arguing for its exclusion but the reason such things matter is that it's billed as "novels" so that's what readers should expect and, for the purposes of this discussion, if fixups and even collections are on the table, it means many more books could be proposed as possible selections. Incidentally, it's great to read the Matheson discussion and I'd like to see more suggestions of possible selections. Other than just drawing attention to what seems to be a remarkably well-chosen set of books, this was kind of intended to prompt nominations of other great 50s works.

As to the omission of Hal Clement's "Mission of Gravity"...that was a good call in my opinion. A terribly written book.

Well, as I am with A Case of Conscience, so you are in a minority there, as its widely acknowledged as a hard SF masterpiece. Hard SF is a vital part of SF and it's not represented in these two volumes.

 

[Fried Egg]

Well, as I am with A Case of Conscience, so you are in a minority there, as its widely acknowledged as a hard SF masterpiece. Hard SF is a vital part of SF and it's not represented in these two volumes.

When one looks back at the classics of SF, they could be put into two broad categories, in my opinion.

1) Those that still stand up well today. They have stood the test of time and their appeal may be stronger than ever. Indeed, they may even have been unappreciated in their time.

2) Those that may have been ground breaking and important in their time but they don't stand up so well today. One might give them their due as important milestones in the genre but they have little to offer the modern reader.

I would say that "Mission of Gravity" most definitely falls into the second group. Hal Clement may have knew his stuff and had some interesting ideas that he explored in that book but he really couldn't write very well.

 

[J-Sun]

When one looks back at the classics of SF, they could be put into two broad categories, in my opinion.

1) Those that still stand up well today. They have stood the test of time and their appeal may be stronger than ever. Indeed, they may even have been unappreciated in their time.

2) Those that may have been ground breaking and important in their time but they don't stand up so well today. One might give them their due as important milestones in the genre but they have little to offer the modern reader.

I would say that "Mission of Gravity" most definitely falls into the second group. Hal Clement may have knew his stuff and had some interesting ideas that he explored in that book but he really couldn't write very well.

I'd agree with the categories, but it depends on who the "modern reader" is and what they want offered to them as to which books go where. I'm sure the Masterworks series is intended to sell good books and not just provide historical markers and it made that series. It was a Hugo nominee in 1955 and was renominated for a Retro Hugo in 2004. It was serialized in 1953, published in book form in 1954, and reprinted in 1958, 1962-63, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1978-80, 1984, 1987-89, 1995, 2000, 2002-03, and 2005. MoG, to me, is a cleanly written book of great ideas utilizing the honored journey/quest structure and accomplishes everything Clement set out to do. Basically, while it may not offer anything to anyone looking for great style or deep introverted characterization, it poses no obstacles to enjoyment for me and I suspect, while it certainly wouldn't appeal to everyone, it probably wouldn't trouble too many people, either. Some might love it, some might like it, some might not care for it - but I don't see it inspiring vigorous dislike in many. But obviously it posed such obstacles to you (and I'm sure you're not alone - just a minority, as I said) and we're unlikely to convince each other of anything.

 

[Fried Egg]

Anyway, here's my top ten SF novels, not restricted by nationality:

"Non-Stop" - Brian Aldiss - 1958
"The Midwich Cuckoos" - John Wyndham - 1957
"The Naked Sun" - Isaac Asimov - 1956
"The Death of Grass" - John Christopher - 1956
"I am Legend" - Richard Mattheson - 1954
"The Space Merchants" - Fredrich Pohl, C.M. Kornbluth - 1953
"More than Human" - Theodore Sturgeon - 1953
"Bring the Jubilee" - Ward Moore - 1953
"Fahrenheit 451" - Ray Bradbury - 1953
"The Voyage of the Space Beagle" - A. E. Van Vogt - 1950

 

[J-Sun]

Since I'm going to gush a bit, I should say I have no affiliation whatsoever with the Library of America. They've just created one of the best science fiction sites on the web by launching a companion for their omnibuses. Bios and booklists of the authors, essays on their work, interviews, radio plays, TV shows, complete stories, an exhaustive timeline, cover gallery, and more. (LoA announcement.) There are a few inaccuracies and, naturally, much opinion to disagree with, but lots and lots of thought-provoking stuff. Really nice; really impressive[1]. Hope lots of people visit and enjoy.

[1] Well, nice and impressive except that, unfortunately, the frontpage doesn't display right in my browser with my settings but turning off the stylesheet fixes that and the rest of the site is fine - it should all work for most people.

 

[J-Sun]

This thread was done more as a discussion and less as a poll and had few "voters" but I decided to tabulate the "results" as best I could, anyway. A Chron's 50s omnibus looks like it might contain the same as the LoA's except that Brackett and Blish might get replaced by Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 and an Asimov (and possibly a second Matheson as an extra tenth title).

Thanks to everyone who replied and I hope more people continue to do so. And there are also threads for 60s novels and 70s novels (and even 80s novels).

(In the listing below, titles are ordered by votes, indicated by the plain numbers, and sub-ordered by total votes for that author, indicated by the parenthetical numbers.)

Voter Abbreviations

FB  = Foxbat
FE  = Fried Egg
J   = J-Sun
LoA = Library of America

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3
LoA/J/FE     Frederik Pohl & C. M. Kornbluth - The Space Merchants (1953)
LoA/J/FE     Theodore Sturgeon - More Than Human (1953)

2
LoA/J        Robert Heinlein - Double Star (1956)
LoA/J        Alfred Bester - The Stars My Destination (1956)
LoA/J        Algis Budrys - Who? (1958)
LoA/J        Fritz Leiber - The Big Time (1958)
LoA/FB       Richard Matheson - The Shrinking Man (1956)
J/FE         Ray Bradbury - Fahrenheit 451 (1953)

1
(3)
FE           Richard Matheson - I Am Legend (1954)

(2)
J            Isaac Asimov - The Caves of Steel (1954)/The End of Eternity (1955)
FE           Isaac Asimov - The Naked Sun (1956)

(1)
LoA          Leigh Brackett - The Long Tomorrow (1955)
LoA          James Blish - A Case of Conscience (1958)
J            Poul Anderson - Brain Wave (1954)
J            Hal Clement - Mission of Gravity (1953)
FE           Brian Aldiss - Non-Stop (1958)
FE           John Wyndham - The Midwich Cuckoos (1957)
FE           John Christopher - The Death of Grass (1956)
FE           Ward Moore - Bring the Jubilee (1953)
FE           A.E. Van Vogt - The Voyage of the Space Beagle (1950)

 

[J-Sun]

This just won't go away. Came across a kind of amazing review of the set by Arthur D. Hlavaty. If I could write so well I might have written it myself - there are a couple of factual glitches such as Kornbluth dying after running to catch a train after shoveling snow (as I understand from Pohl and, I think, others) while the review has it as just shoveling the snow - but it's rare to read such an extended piece by someone you've never heard of and find it so completely compatible.

Also an interesting piece from the LoA itself on how they make their books. Bit of an advertisement, I guess, but still interesting and, even if I like paperbacks for price and handiness and familiarity, I do admire well-made things. I don't have an LoA book myself and wonder if anyone can confirm their quality.

 

[Connavar]

This just won't go away. Came across a kind of amazing review of the set by Arthur D. Hlavaty. If I could write so well I might have written it myself - there are a couple of factual glitches such as Kornbluth dying after running to catch a train after shoveling snow (as I understand from Pohl and, I think, others) while the review has it as just shoveling the snow - but it's rare to read such an extended piece by someone you've never heard of and find it so completely compatible.

Also an interesting piece from the LoA itself on how they make their books. Bit of an advertisement, I guess, but still interesting and, even if I like paperbacks for price and handiness and familiarity, I do admire well-made things. I don't have an LoA book myself and wonder if anyone can confirm their quality.

I admire their well made book and i have recently bought my first LoA book in Complete Novels by Hammett. Its the best Hardcover i have ever bought. Bit expensive but its worth supporting the quality, a group that puts important books for ever in print.

They will rob me blind but i look forward to getting their books by Philip K Dick,Poe,Jack London,the other Hammett, Washington Irving, The two American SF volumes.