NP

[rich]

after reading R.A. Lafferty, most mainstream sci-fi to me became
pretty inane and laughable. Lafferty was a practicing Catholic,
ex-alcoholic who resided mostly in Oklahoma, who sympathized with the
Choctaw among other things

do yrself a favor, read the short story collection, Nine Hundred
Grandmothers. guarantee you'll read a couple of those stories and
think, what the fuck was that? (and laugh smiling)

http://www.amazon.com/Nine-Hundred-Grandmothers-R-Lafferty/dp/1880448971

Science Fiction has long been babbling about cosmic destructions and
the ending of either physical or civilized worlds, but it has all been
displaced babble. SF has been carrying on about near-future or
far-future destructions and its mind-set will not allow it to realize
that the destruction of our world has already happened in the quite
recent past, that today is "The Day After The World Ended". ... I am
speaking literally about a real happening, the end of the world in
which we lived till fairly recent years. The destruction or
unstructuring of that world, which is still sometimes referred to as
"Western Civilization" or "Modern Civilization", happened suddenly,
some time in the half century between 1912 and 1962. That world, which
was "The World" for a few centuries, is gone. Though it ended quite
recently, the amnesia concerning its ending is general. Several
historiographers have given the opinion that these amnesias are
features common to all "ends of worlds". Nobody now remembers our late
world very clearly, and nobody will ever remember it clearly in the
natural order of things. It can't be recollected because recollection
is one of the things it took with it when it went...

he Day After the World Ended, notes for a speech at DeepSouthCon'79,
New Orleans (21 July 1979), published in It's Down the Slippery Cellar
Stairs (1995)



On 9/18/09, tbeshear <tbeshear at insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> Yes. At the time I thought that if the genre disappeared after the trilogy's
> publication, nothing important would be lost. The Mars Trilogy is a summing
> up of a certain type of mainline SF, crosspollinated with KSR's utopian
> interests.
> (I'm glad the genre continued, of course. Writers KSR references --
> especially Ian McDonald*, who is one of the best prose stylists the genre
> ever produced and one of the best writers in the UK, period -- are doing
> important work.) KSR is using a bit of hyperbole, but he's right. The Booker
> is far too interested in the historical novel; it's telling that the UK's
> literary establishment is so focused on its past.
> I don't mean to slight Pynchon by that -- I know he characterizes himself as
> a historical novelist. He puts it to very modern (or postmodern) uses.
>
> *I recommend his "River of Gods" and "Brasyl" as examples of writing about
> non-Western cultures without resorting to historical novel forms.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Otto" <ottosell at googlemail.com>
> To: "Mark Kohut" <markekohut at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "pynchon -l" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 11:05 AM
> Subject: NP
>
>
>> Has anybody read Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars-Trilogy?
>>
>> 2009/9/18 Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>:
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/sep/18/science-fiction-booker-prize
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>