Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

This is a spin-off from another thread. Fantasy writers tend to be flowery. I was wondering whose style of writing sci-fi readers liked. Sci-fi writers typically aren't associated with beautiful prose, and I think that's a mistake. I think that, just because they use technical jargon by necessity usually, critics don't see the underlying beauty of the prose. Ursula and Clarke come to mind immediately. I think Clarke's prose is underrated. Yeah, he came up with great technical visions for his time, but the words have a great flow to them. I even think Asimov had fantastic prose. Nice and simplistic like Hemingway. I'm not talking plot here, just prose. Who are some of your faves?

Dan Simmons nailed his prose pretty well. It felt like a whirlwind at times

Neal Asher's prose is pretty cool. He's got a good handle on describing the strange and alien.

I dunno if Gene Wolfe is technically scifi, but I think his writing style is excellent - word choices, descriptions, everything works together to create a powerful atmosphere.

Also not exactly scifi maybe but, Frank Herbert in Dune managed all types of things from songs to scientific reports to "history" book quotes and OC Bible verses, all mixed in with the story and realistic dialogue without making any of it seem gratuitous, boring, or too weird. You just absorb the world as you read, no boring pages of backstory or explanations.

Pure scifi, I prefer writers where I don't actually notice the language (good or bad) and I can focus on the story. I don't mind technical descriptions if they are mixed in well and not pages and pages of dry boring details. Peter F. Hamilton, Scalzi, James S.A. Corey come to mind.

I think William Gibson's prose is gorgeous, even when it's describing ugly things. "The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel" is the science fiction equal of Raymond Chandler.

Gibson for pure prose style. Heinlein for a weird ability to just slip into the story and almost effortlessly move through it.

Amusingly given the OP most fantasy prose annoys me since it's deliberately flowery and seems to use more words than is needed to pad things out.

Rick wrote: "Gibson for pure prose style. Heinlein for a weird ability to just slip into the story and almost effortlessly move through it.

Amusingly given the OP most fantasy prose annoys me since it's delib..."

Agreed on the fantasy authors. Even Eddings and Brooks slip into the purple prose-ish drivel now and then. And Jordan just drove me batshit crazy at times.

Gibson's a good one. I wish he had more stuff written for me to read.

Heinlein for me. I like his homey writing style. You feel like you're having a conversation.

My favorite is Timothy Zahn, I just like his economy of words and the way he mixes that with depth of character/plot/world. I like that his writing often surprises me, that I can't always predict where a sentence is going (or a story).

Based on the reaction to Downbelow Station last year I doubt most people will agree, but I really like C.J. Cherryh's style -- it's very clipped and economical and seems to work well in the worlds she's creating.

John wrote: "Heinlein for me. I like his homey writing style. You feel like you're having a conversation."

I agree with this. Some critics have blasted Heinlein for having no discernible writing style but that's on purpose. You're not supposed to notice the writing, just get swept into the plot. It's like film-makers say; if you notice the FX then they're doing it wrong.

That all being said some writers do have a nice turn of phrase. Harlan Ellison stands out for me.

While I think he is more known for his plots, I always have thought Neal Stephenson had a good combination of "just the facts" when needed and "flowery descriptions" when there was time.

Also the lack of over written emotional descriptions is what draws me to hard sci-fi writers like Kim Stanley Robinson and Alastair Reynolds.

My preference in writing style tends towards the literary and I think that is more commonly found in fantasy than SF, in part because of the influence of the likes of John Campbell etc for simple straight forward storytelling in SF and partly the main markets for SF during its development and hey day and the writers emerging SF writers have emulated were dominated writers by pulp sensibilities of cents per hour.

Samuel Delany has always impressed me with the way he writes.

Greg Egan - noted for the amount of science in his fiction also is able to write exceedingly well. I have only read some of his short stories but I have really enjoyed the writing.

There are various literary writers who have dabbled in SF such as Junot Diaz (His Monstro is appearing in The End is Nigh although I read it in the New Yorker) and Kate Atkinson who I have really enjoyed their writing.

Wolfe has already been mentioned and I consistently admire and sometimes love the way he writes. Quite often he goes for first person narrators, some of which i connect with and love and others less so. The quality though, is always there.

John wrote: "Also the lack of over written emotional descriptions is what draws me to hard sci-fi writers like Kim Stanley Robinson..."

That's interesting. I love what I've read of KSR, but in Red Mars and 2312 -- the two books of his I've read in the past year -- I think the characters are quite emotional. I've got a few more of his books on my to-read list.

+1 for Heinlein. Or other ambassadors of simplicity like Haldeman and Scalzi. If you want to go into comics, Brian K. Vaughan writes amazing dialog (Vaughan Saga), and you don't hear the Lying Cat disagreeing.

Also, Stephen King and Joe Hill for that magical moment when you recognize something from everyday people in what they write.

Alfred Bester's done some cool typographical tricks in his classic books like The Stars My Destination.

I'm another fan of Gibson's noirish prose. He scatters elegant description through his work, but without letting it take over and slow the pace.

For dialogue I'm a big fan of Warren Ellis's comic writing, which is often full of sci-fi. It's probably not to everyone's taste, but his characters tend towards smartly aggressive banter and elegant discussion of interesting concepts, which for me makes an enjoyable read.

Joaquin wrote: "Dan Simmons nailed his prose pretty well. It felt like a whirlwind at times"

Agreed

Many people on this thread seem to like the 'economical' style of writing. I really think Asimov is the king of this style. He has very little description and not even much action. Most of his writing is dialogue but you can still fully imagine what is happening and what has happened, even without any explicit narrative.

I, on the other hand, enjoy vivid, descriptive writing. Clarke is quite good at this but in my mind, Dan Simmons is the current master. This makes his books dauntingly thick but I feel completely immersed, a bit like GRR Martins.

h.t. - I don't know that I'd characterize myself as a fan of economical prose as much as I like prose that's been honed and polished. Gibson's does this for me. Take the opening of Neuromancer:

"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel"

Boom, in one sentence I know the sky. I don't need 5 sentences. To me, that single sentence is vivid, descriptive. In fact, read the first page of Neuromancer (it's previewable on Amazon or B&N) and even then in his first novel you'll see that he gets across the flavor of things in a few words.

Now, if someone else likes flowery, extended prose that goes on and on... fine.

I enjoy LeGuin's style. It can be terse, but poetical at the same time. Her introduction to Always Coming Home is simply stunning.

Among the hard science fiction writers, I'd have to go with Asimov. He never is unclear or wordy in his writing. It is never poetic, but it never gets in the way of the story. Maybe he was blessed with exceptional editors? They are an unnoticed force behind good authors.

Rick wrote: "h.t. - I don't know that I'd characterize myself as a fan of economical prose as much as I like prose that's been honed and polished. Gibson's does this for me. Take the opening of Neuromancer:

"..."

Gibson's a freak. He can be giving a long exposition on some technical aspect of the story, and it comes across like a poem.

When it's going well, Heinlein's prose is so clear and engaging that I overlook the skill behind it. I also have to agree with every author named on this list. (Those that I've read at least - and now my TBR pile just added 4 new authors.)

But one of my favorites hasn't been mentioned yet -- Roger Zelazny. He's mainly famous for fantasy but he also mixed in some SF. I can't say enough good things about how he used to write so instead I'll link to an author's blog who occasionally does posts on what makes various classic F&SF writers' prose so effective:

I think William Gibson and Neal Stephenson have been trading the Best Prose Heavyweight Belt back and forth for a few years now. Heinlein, Wolfe, Delany and LeGuin are the all time masters, and Larry Niven is underrated from the hard scifi camp. My personal favorites are probably two Ian's: Ian McDonald for his explosive and imaginative sentences, and the late Iain Banks for his captivating depiction of fantastical worlds.

Banks is fantastic at setting. I wish the plots interested me as much as the prose, not that they're terrible or anything.

Frank Herbert

For people who love word operas, nothing beats Bradbury. Martian Chronicles alone should seal his status as an SF Grandmaster.

I'd also vote for Gene Wolfe and Jack Vance.

I agree about Ray Bradbury. I think Heinlein at his best (Moon Is A Harsh Mistress) can be brilliant, but Bradbury has to be the master of storytelling.

Roger Zelazny -- that is all.

Robert Silverberg, William Gibson, Heinlein and Stepheson.

Loved Snow Crash.

Clyde wrote: "Roger Zelazny -- that is all."

Yep.

PKD

Ray Bradbury for evocative prose.
Also Patricia McKillip does something with silence that I always notice.