My suspicion is that this is the case, although I'll be honest and say I'm not really reading much in that area at the moment, though I am becoming increasingly tempted- there are lots of new names whose books are being presented in non-traditional ways in terms of not looking like Horror titles, but their jacket blurbs always mention it- and you are a discerning reader, my friend, always a pleasure to listen to your videos. Be well.

I virtually never read any new books as there are far far too many old ones to catch up on! Love concrete island too! That and Crash are the only ones I have read but have a couple of Ballards on my TBR Shelf!

Yes, the fact that we now 'live in the future' is another factor in SF retreating backward in development to the still-distant 'space fantasy' -as PKD called it- of Space Opera etc. For me, I find the excitement in the line between what used to be definitively SF and definitively not SF being rubbed out or confronted- which is why Ballrd (who was doing this by the early 70s) is such an important figure for me. I think if young readers find Fanyasy a more stimulating 'mind space', they are merely Cosplaying in their heads- at least with SF when we were young, we had a Gernsbackian belief in the future -that although dangerous, it offered up possibilities. Ballard said 'The future will be boring,' and in many ways, he was right...

Absolutely. Think of the moment in 'Nineteen Eighty-Four', when O'Brien suggests a toast to Winston and Julia, to the future or the past- and Winston replies 'the past,'. "The past is more important," O'Brien replies....here we are, in the age of Newspeak, when people think they are so wise by focusing on 'the new', not understanding that people have done this from the dawn of the Modern...

I don't think you need to stay current, but that's just me- I think over a lifetime of reading I've developed an understanding of the historical context writing and publishing are happening in and when they're in a fallow period. I agree about examining the back catalogue though, it's a must do.

'Wasp' is tight but routine adventure fiction but worth reading. Hope you enjoyed all the others, great books, though the Moore is not her at her best.

also just got a Next of Kin by Russell sphere because of the Foss cover art

Wasp is a good fun book. As the OB says

Yes, the current trend is for Fantasy, written by female authors, aimed predominantly at female readers, bith having recently 'matured' out of YA (in theory, though as you say, it's pretty much the same except for more sex and violence). The sales in this area have changed SFF in bookselling and publishing more than anything I can think of in my 40 years in the industry. In my experience and looking with a critical eye, Indie bookshops are not that different to chains in what they stock-what is in demand. Where chain stores can win is on scale and size- the larger ones naturally have bigger ranges and you're just as likely to find surprises in these as you will in an indie. I actually don't think current SF is that existential: the New Wave of the 1960s was a lot more so, with its focus on existence preceding essence and man being thrown into a contingent universe where he had killed God. There is some of this, yes, in contemporary SF, but there is a lot more about Identity Politics and Intersectionality, the 'what about my community?' angle - when of course SF started tackling this big time in the 1960s. A writer like Becky Chambers just does 'Friends' in space and as you say, where's the What If? It's still key to good SF. Thanks for your comment.

Search Ballard on my channel and you'll fall through your floor: I have tons of rare JGB firsts, mostly signed by the great man- who I knew, met only once, but we kept in touch- and I used to write for 'Deep Ends', the annual JGB tribute anthology. One of my idols!

Thanks for your trenchant comments, Jack. Is it there? I don't know...certainly no-one is publishing it. Next year, we may find out as I have plans to edit an anthology of radical SF...but time, money etc...we'll see.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal will that anthology be accepting new works, or do you plan to use reprints? I’m obviously asking because if there’s going to be a call for submissions, I plan to get in line.

I love re-reading. Sometimes you fall in love all over again, sometimes you realise you've changed, or that other reading over the years has shown you that book or writer isn't as great as you thought. Moore and Kuttner were innovators, unlike most writing today...thanks as ever, Daniel!

Kuttner was great fun, as was Eric Frank Russell, and Sturgeon. Different from each other, but very human SF.

I've mentioned a number of times here how I used to keep SF and Fantasy as separate sections and that I believe it should be the industry standard. Also, your point about the 'newer version' - well, that's fine, but it's just a variation on a theme, which is is ok, yes, but it's far harder to originate a concept in the first place than merely reboot it and that's key to SF, which relies on innovation and the New, 'the Novum' to cast the bucket of water in our face and wake us up. SF that doesn't aspire to do this is Craft, not Art, no matter how well executed technically. Clearly, this gets harder to do as time goes on, but it does underline the problem- SF used to be revolutionary and evolutionary and now it's wondering where to go. ...and yes, imagine if publishers and bookshops took the genre seriously: in a video entitled 'My Science Fiction' I talk about how I've been working on this for decades and how it's an uphill struggle. And readers have to play their part- if they allow themselves to be fobbed off with the lowest common denominator by buying and reading it, businesses will keep selling it. Next video- thursday night- is about expectations. Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

Delighted to hear that someone with similar tastes appreciates the channel, thanks very much!

Yes, I agree: the failure of writers to come to terms with what needs exploring now is an issue- but is there, as you suggest, much to explore that's genuinely fresh? And as for the old, well, it's perspective and age as you say. Maybe I'll start arguing for the Space Opera Renaissance of Banks and after that was the moment when SF became Contemporary...

I think there's plenty to write about, had those who consider themselves writers the eyes to see and the minds to realise. Instead they're content to rework yesterday's ideas mostly in inferior ways. There should, for example, be a plethora of novels about a climate change wrecked world, the new disaster novels, there are a few, I've read a couple, mostly I'll conceived because of lack of research. Where are the serious novels about AI, the really speculative tales, or about the future of transportation in a post carbon fuel world... electric cars won't solve everything, or about food production... well, you get the idea,. Themes are many, but it's easier to write yet another hackneyed space opera or tale about dragons and wizards.

I've read 'Concrete' at least three times and feel it is fabulously underrated. 'Empire' does feel long, but as it's disguised autobiography, it explains a lot. If I were to name one long work by Ballard and one short one, I'd go with 'Crash' and "The Drowned Giant".

I know. It's depressing. I am going to try and do something positive soon! You take care, my friend.

People do seem to be enjoying 'Seveneves' as far as I can tell - Stephenson is prolific and very clever, but I always find him longwinded- but I've not given up on him yet. I thought 'The This' was excellent- I reviewed it in hardcover when it was first published (don't know if you ever saw that video). Adam had produced almost two dozen SF novels, most worth reading at the least, many brilliant. He's an iconoclast and a traditionalist at the same time, a dizzying mix.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal Really didn't get on with Seveneves. It's an engineering porn thought experiment spun off the "just go with it" first line. Still, less mindless than Roland Emmerich's "Moonfall" I suppose although about the same lack of affect.

@@theprofessor5253 It takes quite a lot to get me into Stephenson mood, though I hosted him for an event once, we went to the pub afterward, really pleasant interesting guy.

Not read 'Metronome', though I have looked it over. Yes, even authors with talent get sucked into these endless commercially contrived sequences- as you say, why the trilogy all the time? Because if it works, publishers are happy and milk it. Rarely makes for good SF, though...thanks for the compliment too.

You betcha!

I'll admit I keep shying away from Asian SF, largely because of a bad experience with Cixin Liu - who either is a terrible writer, is poorly translated or is politically oppressed (though this doesn't usually translate into having style frowned on by authorities), though of course I've read SF by Mishima and Abe, who fit into a broader Modernist conception. Because 'World SF' is so loaded currently with the virtue signalling of Identity Politicals under the 'diversity' and 'inclusion' banners, I find I can't currently gain enough objectivity to get these trends out of my head before I try reading more Asian SF- I will do so, but I do think that SF owes so much to the Enlightenment and the Western Tradition in its pioneering development in the wake of these that, like virtually all SF after the 1980s, it can only hope to comment on contemporary culture through a political lens. But I will conquer this prejudice, though I'll add that the attempts of DAW in the 1970s to get people reading European SF (German, French, Scandinavian) wasn't a huge success- some Iron Curtain writers got through (Lem, the Strugatskys), but then again they are part of the Modernist tradition so were in luck there....good thoughts, though.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal Steve, I absolutely hear you. Over the past ten years, I've suffered through haranguing novels thinly disguised as SF. And you're right, SF in translation remains a hard nut to crack for readers and publishers. For me Lem's work, the Strugatskys catalog, and Bugalkov's FATAL EGGS, are top-tier SF pantheon for numerous intellectual and philosophical reasons. I could go on and on...but I don't want to bore the community or yourself.

​@@outlawbookselleroriginal its quite possible Cixin Liu was badly translated, but as a reader of Chinese, Chinese style in general is a lot more obtuse and longwinded than modern English. Paragraph long sentences are not uncommon.

@@jumpingjohnflash I'm aware of this as I've read Ken Liu's notes on his translations of Chinese SF. However, despite him pointing out that part of the translator's art is to reproduce as faithfully as possible national characteristics in the writing (let's call them that), I've read hundreds of books in translation that nonetheless scan beautifully in English while rendering a good idea of what the writer's style is. For example, my reading of Italian Crime Fiction in translation- which is around 30-40 books- tells me that Carofglio is the most 'mainstream literary', while Carlotto owes much to classic Hardboiled, then De Cataldo tends toward the tabloid at times. Liu's prose, translated as it is, strongly indicates a writer for whom conveyance of ideas stands far higher over style and elegance- some of the syntax (particularly repetition of words close together in sentences and paragraphs) in 'The Three Body Problem' confirms for me that this is not a writer with advanced literary graces. Ken Liu could have improved the prose for readers of English with some omissions of unnecessary 'ands' and replacing them with commas, for example.

Depends on your age, I guess, but if you are under 30 and reading SF published before 2000, you are an uncommon species indeed. In my job as a bookseller I encounter very few female readers who are looking backward, the vast majority of them having only discovered SFF in the last decade. Good for you!

Yes, it is harder to envision the New, I have said this many times in previous videos. Several people here have also said about how we are now living in the future, again, something I've said elsewhere- these are sound reasons why the old stuff remains fresh, I think.

I don't think he'd have to ad many. It's worth reading Adam Roberts' history of SF, which is more up to date and has some fascinating ideas in it...but that's Adam, his always full of ideas...

I don't think you're wrong: I often say it's good to be behind the curve, as often quality will out in time. I'd also say that TV has gone through some series changes since 'The Sopranos' and 'The Wire', though there is still a lot of dross and that burst of creativity now seems to me to be bleeding out for the last few years. So much fiction writing now is bland, for an audience which wants 'readability' i.e. prose lacking in any kind of flavour or sinew. Alex Garland and Jed Mercurio are two examples of writers who have moved into film/TV and done well. I'll admit to never having watched Mercurio's TV series, but I loved his second and third novels, but like Garland, he's abandoned prose fiction. Garland's 'Devs' is the best SF TV series I've seen in a very long time, I felt and 'Men' was an interesting film to say the least- though I'd have liked a stronger resolution and I regularly pick up and re-read sections of 'The Beach'. His work on the screenplay for 'Never Le Me Go' was excellent too. Andy Weir? Originally self-published, one of the few who did this and crossed over. A book for people who have never read Charles Logan's 'Shipwreck' and Joanna Russ' 'We WHo Are About To...'. If I'm going to read a Robinsonade now, centuries after the form was born, I want it to twist things a little...

You're very kind, I'm flattered. You're right too, hope is all we have....

Tchaikovsky is great. Margaret Atwood with Oryx and Crake, Nick Harkaway, and Tade Thompson.

No, Chris, you read four popular contemporary novels- Modern ended in the late 1980s, as I always say. Which Adrian T did you enjoy? 'Dogs of War' perhaps? No? Read it, it's his best.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal Children of Time.

@@JamesWalker-ky5yrI read and enjoyed Harkaway’s Gnomon but felt it dragged on a bit. Can you recommend any of his other books?

@@ralphmarrone3130 The Gone Away World

I imagined you've seen my D G Compton videos- big hero of mine. My definition of contemporary dates back to the 90s too, as I've said in other videos: 'Modern' ended in the 1980s, culturally, and what we have now is Postmodernism, 'the endlessly contemporary'. I think that when most people use 'Modern', they mean contemporary, but have no conception of 'Modern' as a cultural time (see my video on 'Why The Modern Sf You're Reading Isn't Modern'). I have 'Diamond Age' on my vast re-reads list.

Smith tales some getting used to but is very rewarding. His strangeness is a reminder that SF is supposed to be odd, that the future will not be like the present- reading him is like coming across a book of historical folktales that has fallen through a timeloop into the present. I will talk about the Nayler here when I read it. Go steady with that TBR!

I entirely understand what you mean. 'In Ascension' was OK, but I ultimately feel it was trying to have its cake and eat it in that (1) it was clearly an attempt to get a mainstream 'literary' audience to buying into a classic Big Dumb Object narrative while (2) going further than his previous works in terms of a yearning for commercial success by being more accessible to read than his previous book, the remarkable 'Gathering Evidence', which was genuinely eye-opening while tying in with a current obsession in British literary slipstream, which is about things being damp, organic and growing (I talk about this in several other videos over the last few months. Yep, climate change and gender identity are nothing new in SF, which is another reason why I too rail against the contemporary over-use of these themes in current F publishing. Of course, SF publishing is currently dominated by female authors who -quite frankly- seem to have read very little SF and as a result they are retreading old ground their precursors did so much better in the 1960s and 1970s (I think Joanna Russ would roll her eyes at many of them). The question is this: what are contemporary authors bringing to SF that is new? I have to say, however, that I personally don't regard Hamilton and Reynolds as major contributors to the evolution of SF -nice guys that they both are, which i can confirm from meeting and talking to both- and I'd point you to M John Harrison's challenging Kefahuchi Tract trilogy for Space Opera that opens strange doors (also, watch my interview with him on the channel for illumination of these). I have posted several videos here that bemoan the gear-grinding, running down state of SF since the early 90s, partially explaining this in relation to Modernism and Hauntology: all the arts are suffering from a cultural slowdown and SF is no exception. I keep looking for mouldbreaking material and aim to speak about it here, so keep watching as I try and find the best new stuff while revisiting past titles that slide under many radars. Thanks for watching, much appreciated.

Hello mate. I like McAuley now and then when I'm in the mood, though I'll admit I hated him when he first started publishing in 'Interzone' - but re-reading his early stories last year, I felt many of them were great and that I only didn't enjoy the ones where the subject matter seemed generic. And that's the thing, to get the genre in all its glory, you have to go with the old stuff. Great to hear from you as ever, Jon.

I think you should write a satirical novel, you're well on the way there, LOL. Thanks for this :-)

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!

I feel the same: there is stuff around now which is readable, but it is safe and breaks no new ground. The only contemporary SF writers I read by default are Priest, Harrison, Gibson (but they are all good old guys I've been reading for forty years), Dave Hutchinson, Adam Roberts, Chris Beckett and Nina Allan. A few others grab me from time to time, but mostly I read one book by a new author, often think 'fine, but not good enough when I know I only have time for authors who still surprise me..'

@@outlawbookselleroriginal I feel like in terms of plot, character development, readability, and world building newly published science fiction all follows the same recipe intakes from the same region of ingredients. It's tasty but one can get tired of just plain old salt and pepper. And always thanks for your recommendations. que bad Van Halen Where Have All the Good Times Gone

No, not yet. I am going to read it soon as I like Ish, but I do get big misgivings about 'literary' writers doing AI books as usually, they don't know the Genre SF ones and end up covering the same ground. I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised, as I love his prose.

There's always a bit out there of course- I have heard of 'Shoreline of Infinity'. The seagull story sounds interesting too...

I entirely sympathise with anyone giving up SF, I have done it myself in the past. There is very little going on now and while I don't use Goodreads at all, those figures do reflect what I've been seeing in my work as a bookseller for some years and it's grown more intense in the last year. SF is in real danger of dying out now or at least becoming a very minority interest.

I've been riding the surf ahead of this wave for decades- I've been disenchanted with it for almost thirty years. Now, it seems, people are catching up and realising that what they're getting is not good enough!

@@outlawbookselleroriginal You've had your finger on the pulse for longer than most of us have been breathing, which is exactly why we come here. Hope you are well.

@@unstopitable I am still struggling, but we'll see. I am aiming cut my output and rest/read more, but I have time to shoot currently, so am milking that. January though, will be down time...thanks for your concern.

Emma has sadly lost the support of Gollancz, who I feel have failed miserably to sell her work in the UK- she has real talent and deserved a lot more promotion. I hope she gets a new deal soon, as her work was growing in ambition and achievement.

I was discussing Tidhar yesterday with two SF writers I know- I think he writes really well, but I grew tired of his constant referencing of other SF 'Black Gods' Kiss', entitled after a C L Moore story, 'Central Station', which also constantly references Moore. 'Martian Sands' (is that the title?) which tries too hard to reference Dick. I'll admit I've not read him for a while, but I wish he'd stop doing all this Postmodernist stuff and step away from Recursive SF. I liked 'Osama' a lot, although I felt it could have gone further- but maybe I will try him again, though I keep looking at his books- and I read his World SF anthology- and he also continually harps on about Identity Politics issues, which get way too much coverage in the genre as it is. Sorry to moan! What have you read by him recently?

@outlawbookselleroriginal Neom & the Lunacy Commission (a novella collection, mostly crime). Yes, it's post-modern & referential. Show me a modern author who isn't! If you're going to ride on the backs of giants, at least be honest about it. It's good to see you've given him a go. As I've often said, if everyone liked the same thing, the world would be boring AF. He's the only modern SF writer I can stomach. His prose is above average, and he is prolific and evolving. His books are different (and the right length). Yes, he wrote a trilogy (Bookman series) early on to appease publishers, but he stopped as soon as he could. His work with the world SF anthologies is worthy, but not why I read him.

@@brettrobson5739 You have a point, many reference, but not quite so indulgently- it is some years since I read him (I read 'Osama' when it first came out), so we'll see. I was looking at his recent novel in a bookshop only 2 days ago, funnily enough. Tell me, have you read Adam Roberts, Chris Beckett and Dave Hutchinson- they are my main contemporary guys I stick with these days.

Yeah, it is a good idea for an SF video, but sadly as you say, he doesn't know what he's talking about- 'Tiger! Tiger!' and 'Man in the Maze' are two of the first books I thought of when I considered tackling this topic, as Existentialism in mainstream fiction is one of my big things. Colin Wilson once wrote a book called 'Science Fiction As Existentialism', an essay, which was pretty good. I'll be doing one, maybe two more Nightfall Diaries, then my partner will be home and dominating the living room...LOL

I like Stross, but as you say, the series things of late have not appealed. Philip K Dick would say that Chambers isn't actually writing SF- and I partially agree, as all she seems to be is write 'Friends' in space- there are no innovative ideas or paradigm shifts. I read the first five Murderbot books ages back and DNF'd the fifth one, as it was padded out to novel length just for the sake of it. They were Mind Candy to meet and despite her skill, they develop very little so they went on my sell pile- they very much aim for an adolescent market that revels in the teen self-pity we all go through (sometimes unfounded) that today it's fashionable to see as 'neurodivergent' (with no censure aimed at those who genuinely are). I'd like to see her turn those skills to something more ambitious. Cline and Weir don't even get across the start line for me, they're simply not sophisticated or writerly enough. I talk about why I don't use 'Speculative Fiction' as a term in an upcoming video, do check it out- it'll be coming soon. Stephenson is pretty much always SF, I'd suggest thinking a little bit more broadly about what the genre is - rockets and rayguns are what you see on screens, SF books have been way ahead of that for many decades, as I'm sure you know. I'm aware I've responded critically to many of your mentions here, but I mean to be positive- I'd suggest looking at the work of Adam Roberts, Chris Beckett, Dave Hutchinson, Tom Toner and Stark Holborn for some fresh jollies.

It's virtually the same thing - 'content' (if done well) is craft. 'Works' are inspired and stand aside, so are art, simple as that. And yes, now it's easier to produce the well-crafted, something that appears great on the surface but ultimately lacks depth. That's a subtext of this channel- although I like doing stuff that is visually impressive, I lack the tech, the time and -in some cases- the craft, so I focus on doing what I want, which I hope is artful. That'e another usage of 'content' - while there are many youtube channels that are well crafted technically, they lack content in terms of weight and substance.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal Good point. However, I'd like to add another perspective: that of the viewer, reader, or consumer. If they increasingly adopt a content-driven mindset in everything they consume, the creator's level of craft and work ethos might become irrelevant. The outcome will be the same. All of us engaged in the digital world are having our tastes and expectations reshaped by the unprecedented consumption of content, whether we realize it or not.

I read 'Titanium Noir' earlier this year and reviewed it here. It's dreadful- the dialogue is sloppy and fake snappy and it's nothing but a crime novel that wants to be SF- shame , as some of its conceits were interesting and I could imagine a PKD or Silverberg doing a grand job of it. There is still some Fiction that is like New Wave- and almost all of it is being published as mainstream fiction. Writers like Adam Roberts, M T Hill, Chris Beckett and Dave Hutchinson are producing NW friendly prose.

It seems (correct me if I’m wrong) the publishing industry doesn’t typically go for original stories but take the safe route mostly, for the reason that risks can be costly.

@@JeansiByxan That's true, but the reason I mentioned "Harry Potter" is because it was literally the biggest selling series, but if it had been self published J.K Rowling would've been lucky to sell more than 5000 copies! I believe it's very likely that the best books ever written are already out there, but we've never heard of them. Advertising is important!

The best books ever written are out there- and this is one reason why this channel exists. Marketing and advertising is everything. But it would have been better for literature had Rowling not had the breaks - all she did was meld the classic school story with LeGuin's Earthsea and Diana Wynner Jones (but with far less style) and this has led to the growth of YA and the infantilising of what remains of Sword & Sorcery. Sad but true...

@@outlawbookselleroriginal I understand what you're saying. The point I'm making though is that the public went mad for the series, it was hugely successful. Whether it was the best thing ever written isn't my point, my point is that a series that will capture the market like that and get children reading nearly never got published. I do believe it's possible that there are other works that could be popular with the public if only the public knew that they existed.

@@thehound9638 of course

It's only a tragedy in the sense that it is hard for authors to come up with the New, since so much has been done, but that's the nature of our times. I don't mind the craftsmanship of a new take on old tropes, but I do long for the Protean creativity SF seems to have lost. I too was alarmed to see Lovegrove's name popping up in 'Reports From The Deep End', the Ballard tribute anthology recently published- see the video I shot of the multi-author signing a few days back.

No, I think it's a valid point and obviously age and perspective contribute to this. Interestingly, your 'exciting futures with fascinating technology that solves our problems' indicates Utopian SF, which is very uncommon, as Utopias tend toward the static and consequently lack conflict and therefore have no drama, the essence of storytelling- if you watch my recent video about the Utopian fiction of Mack Reynolds, this stuff comes up. When I can get back into writing- next year, I hope-one of my ideas (two actually) are Utopian ones...but then of course one person's Utopia is another's Dystopia....

@@outlawbookselleroriginal Thanks for the response! Good luck with your writing if you end up getting back into it! I'll go back and check out the Mack Reynolds video.

@@geraldderekson8571 Yeah, 2024 is when I begin to fight back through prose fiction!

Of course. I know a number of SF writers under 40 whose actual reading in SF before certain dates is incredibly limited, illustrating exactly what you've said. Since 'Star Wars' the genre has been even more screen-dominant and with the growth of videogames and the internet, the writing as primary influence has been swept into an even more obscure corner than it was originally...

Mieville I consider 'M John Harrison' lite and he doesn't really do it for me, though he is talented. 'The City and The City' is probably my favourite of his, but there are many I haven't read. He was behind the curve for me, but he's clearly a sound guy and I am planning to read some of his recent work, which I haven't got around to. A similar book to 'City' is Dave Hutchinson's later 'Europe In Autumn', but instead of working from the mittel-European harrison/kafka style attempt, Hutch goes in a different prose direction that works very well- try it.

Thank you so much for the Hutchinson recommendation Il definitely try it. I get what you mean about M john Harrison lite re CM. As both are recent for me I'm not nearly as well versed as thee. Read in my teens an just picked up SF again in recent years after an enforced retirement due to health. Having a whale of a time reading the back history. Absolutely fascinating How about you writing the story you want to read? Thanks again Steve you've really opened the Gate for me.

@@severian1916 Always a pleasure!

I've glanced over the former and decided it was not for me- and the writers who praise it confirmed for me that it almost certainly will not be to my taste. 'Highly regarded' - by whom? That's a pertinent question. I've read the Mandel and while she can tell a story, she's no great shakes in my opinion as a stylist or originator. I like Ishiguro- and am at times passionate about his work, as you'll see in an upcoming video about one of his books and while I intend to read 'Klara...' I always have misgivings about writers from outside Genre SF producing AI books- they usually have not read the obvious Asimov things, PKD's pertinent books, Silverberg's 'Tower of Glass' or Sladek's satirical robot books or Chris Beckett's searing 'The Holy Machine', which set the 21st century standard in this area for me. My suspicion is that 'Klara...'will be like Speilberg's take ('A.I.') on Aldiss' "Supertoys Last All Summer Long" instead of the amibiguity of PKD- but I am intending to read it despite misgivings.

Yes, I was looking at the Jon Fosse the other day in work, I will probably try it out as it did grab me. Fractured Europe grows in resonance in the second and third volumes, you'll find, so stick with it. Working in a bookshop means a TBR that towers above the mind like a veritable Babel, it never ends....

@@outlawbookselleroriginal thanks as ever for taking the time to reply I really do appreciate it and your insights. Im going to stay with the Hutchinson series as you suggest. I loved the pace and the humour and the overall theme was brilliant. If he intended to leave the reader desperate for more then he certainly succeeded! I watched your interview with Nina Allan, brilliant stuff what a woman!. now added to my TBR

Thanks Barrie- delighted to see that an ol' timer like you, who has been with the channel for ages through thick and thin is still loving the backlist. Much appreciated.

Well obviously if no-one read new books, that would be bad for writing and publishing, but working in the industry, I think there's too much focus on the new and not enough work done to promote backlist. When you say 'Classics', do you mean 'Classic SF', 18th & 19th century novels or 'real' Classics, ancient Greek and Roman works? Thing is, the culture won't 'die' in the sense you mean, as people are so 'onto' new books that publishers and bookshops stay in business. But at times I feel SF is dead- certainly in the way that it was an evolving, revolutionary genre from 1925 to the late 1980s, but then that's the curse of Postmodernism- culture has slowed down, tech has sped up- an SF concept in itself!

@@outlawbookselleroriginal I mean Dostoyevsky, although I have a Tacitus which I have to get into. But the last classic I read recently is Sōseki Natsume. I think he's a classic of Japanese literature. I also got into Silverberg which I knew he was great but in my youth I had the chance to read only a small volume of short stories. And I finally read Frankestein actually pretty recently. Not that impressed, but it's a classic of the genre.

@@onehandslinger1475 I love Dostoevsky, I've deliberately not read 'The Idiot' as it's the only one of his novels I've not read- and it's been over twenty years since I read any, so soon.... Tacitus is great, 'Annals of Imperial Rome', brilliant! Not impressed with 'Frankenstein'?! I'm shocked! But you have to be yourself, that's what counts!

@@outlawbookselleroriginal I'm not of the opinion that everything old is necessarily better, this including films too. I found Frankenstein to be written in an old manner, practically a story told the way anyone would tell a story, covering a lot of facts on a long timeline and so missing details. And it's not the only classic which left me somewhat underwhelmed. I still have to finish The Haunting of Hill House and Treasure Island impressed me more as a graphic comic story which filled me with awe and dread in my childhood, so I had to read the real thing. The Heart of Darkness I found rather strangely written, somewhat confusing, reason for which I read it three times. But, hey, as you can see, I look for the "classics".

There is a body of evidence to support this theory, as we increasingly find....

Banks put me off SF but now PKD has got me interested again.. Long live avant,garde SF

@@user-mb9ll9wy6g Banks is enough to put anyone off....

I think you're absolutely right, Mark and have said as much myself in a number of videos, though I have spoke at greater length on what you say in your first paragraph: it is inevitable that once Modernism ended, the vast exposure to the arts that society has enjoyed through the mass media since the birth of mass printing, film and audio recording would allow us to run through vast tracts of novelty until we exhausted it. Publishing has also become more and more of a problem in its innate commercial conservatism, agreed. Again, I see this up close in my job. The publishing industry is in my view too dominated in number by female workers and intersectional over-representation- what some call 'Rebalancing' now feels like revenge - true, white men did dominate all sorts of walks of life for a very, very long time and as a believer in creative, open thinking, we need diversity- but it has to focus on quality of achievement based on equality of opportunity rather than tokenism and unrepresentational agendas. Of course saying these things makes you the worst in the world, these days, but as culture's quality erodes, all will be left the weaker. SF, with its basis in ideas, is being poorly served currently. Thanks for your comment.

Appreciate your honesty; you have obviously given the issue considerable thought. Agree with every word!@@outlawbookselleroriginal

Good shout.

You may be right that it is too early: but it may also be too late. If you watch my video on Hauntology & Science Fiction - and my related videos on Hauntology and Psychogeography, I reference Mark Fisher;s book 'Capitalist Realism', which I think is essential for anyone looking at why the arts have stagnated. I keep looking at 'Sinopticon' myself. The 'avant garde' SF- if there is any now- is almost certainly being published and packaged as mainstream fiction. It's always been there and there's always a lot of it- but it often suffers from the fact that the writers of such books have no background in Genre SF: but now and then, they do and produce excellent results- Samantha Schweblin's 'Little Eyes', Herve le Tellier's 'The Anomaly' and Tom McCarthy's 'Remainder' are three from recent years I loved.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal I agreed with Fisher's book when it came out back in 2009 but I think the situation has changed and the fracturing of Imperialism has happened; it's just there's no one awake to push it over which a gives us slow and agonizing descent into the abyss - tones of Lovecraft (racism and all) piled on. I'll read the 3 people you've recommended. Illness or not, the quality of your videos are excellent. Stay healthy.

Not read him, I'm afraid.

Seems reasonable!

That's a very good point and true up to a point, but it is up to artists to go beyond this. I've cited the problems with contemporary culture and how we got here in my videos on Modernism and SF.

Absolutely. If you can see this at your age, imagine someone like me who is twenty years older. I started to feel this way by the early 90s (and by the mid 80s re music) -watch my video 'Why The Modern SF you are reading isn't Modern' for my reasoning.

Yes, she is skilled. I reviewed one of her novels here about a year ago, was thinking the other day I must read more of her work. She wrote a non-fiction book about mushrooms a while back that did pretty well.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal I saw last night that as well, reminds me of Sofia Samatar's most recent book -White mosque which is history/travelogue of her visiting an old Mennonite village in Uzbekistan. These tie into what you were talking about how writers can get stuck doing what sells well so you never see them branch out to something different. Related to Samatar - I am looking for fantasy like hers which is really focused on fantasy as exploration of the history in terms of how/what things are remembered/recorded - Samuel Delaneys Neveryóna is an older example I have started reading recently. Do you have any suggestions for who else to look up?

Yep, it is called getting old, I accepted that a long time ago (but as you say, not great!), however, it is about more than that: the history of culture in the Modern era explains a lot, how we were conditioned by Modernity and the hyperfast acceleration of our exposure to culture in that era and how the limits of innovation and originality reached the audience far, far quicker than they would have done due to the hot mass media. I've felt much the same way about music as I do now since the late 1980s, when I was only in my mid 20s. I've felt the same about SF since I was about 30, so it's not just all ageing, it is borne out by what's happened (or not taken place) in the Endlessly Contemporary- though when one was born is a perspective factor here: I think in very young people, this is proven by the fact that more and more of them are looking back at older SF and music for quality. Good comment, great to hear from you.

What about it? Got it, read it. It's OK.

Agreed. But of course Fantasy isn't SF. If there were a way to get it shelved in a different section in bookshops, that would help, I think- but so few people will take up this challenge. I did it in the 1980s and it worked a treat.

You said it.

That's me in 1985.

Never read him, always meaning too, been selling him since the 1990s. He was recommended to me then by another bookseller who I really didn't get on with and i'll admit his popularity puts me off- I hear so much about bestsellers in my job that i have to wait years to read them to gain any objectivity. When I do read him, a video will appear here.

@@outlawbookselleroriginal it does delight me when you reply thanks for taking the time. I think you might like Murakami but I don't know whether you would call it SF. Weird perhaps. Plenty to criticize lots of people loath him but I think thats more personal than literary, which doesn't interest me. I enjoyed his weird meanderings though and will look forward to hearing what you think. Enjoying the recent vids enormously thanks so much Btw not new but new yo me Geoff Ryman didn't make your 100 must reads but is in the Gollancz Sf masterworks series with The Child Garden, strange book, enjoying that so far Keep well

@@severian1916 Yeah I like Ryman, met him once, lovely guy, great writer.

Well, some SF was libertarian and/or military long before Gibson - of course Baen publish almost nothing else, for example (though I would say that as SF is thought experiment up to a point, it's only natural that political speculation/extrapolation can go all ways) - Heinlein, Rand, obvious examples but there were others if you dig. Yes, Identity Politics is an issue- which I'm always saying on the channel (I have no issues with lesbian SF writers, Joanna Russ was one who started publishing in the 1960s- again, nothing new now- and she was brilliant). My issue with the current crop of 'they must be worthwhile and important if they fit a diversity/intersectional tick box' is this: what counts is how well they write, how innovative they are and can they step beyond the boxes. So many cannot, unfortunately...

@@outlawbookselleroriginal True. I'll check out Joanna Russ, thanks.