Message-ID: <2111@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Dec-84 01:34:41 EST
Article-I.D.: nsc.2111
Posted: Tue Dec 25 01:34:41 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Dec-84 01:52:25 EST
References: <2882@ucla-cs.ARPA> <240@looking.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuqui Q. Koala)
Organization: The Warlocks Cave
Lines: 32
Summary: 


 
>I can't say I agree with the review of Spider Robinson.  After
>reading Mindkiller, my impression was, "this guy writes just like
>Heinlein - only not as well."

Hmm... This may be an infinitely recursive discussion, but I need to
disagree with the disagreement about Spider. Spider IS a lot like RAH-- he
takes chances, he pushes himself into uncertain territory, he works very
hard to make his characters people (many of his stories really aren't SF,
but are well enough done that nobody really notices or cares) and sometimes
he falls on his face. So does RAH. Spider has Callahans, Stardance, and
parts of Mindkiller (especially 'God in an Iron', which is the second
chapter and was originally in Omni). RAH has his juveniles, Time Enough for
Love, and stories such as 'The Man Who Dealt in Elephants'. Both also have
works that fall on their face, mainly because neither is willing to deal in
'safe' stories. I think both fall into a class of writers that simply don't
have middle ground. You either love their work, or you hate their work.
Ellison is in there, so is Vonnegut. They aren't perfect writers, but they
are good writers, and when they are on, they are REALLY on. It isn't really
fair to take a good work of one (such as TEFL) and compare it to an average
work from the other-- the outcome is biased. Actually, I don't like to
compare authors at all, I prefer to compare a work with the authors
potential.

chuq
-- 
From the ministry of silly talks:		Chuq Von Rospach
{allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui  nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

Deadbone erotica is the prickly panic of forgotten milleniums, it is the moldy 
billion year madness that creeps deep along the spinal behind of my mind.