Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Ok, let me explain. I’m a pretty die-hard H. Beam Piper fan. I have been since my father handed me a copy of Little Fuzzy when I was eleven years old. It was actually the first science fiction novel I had ever read (the gateway drug for me, I suppose). It’s a wonderful book, and when I heard that it was being redone I was horrified.

Now, I have gotten over the idea that Scalzi may be profaning one of my dearest childhood memories. The original is in the public domain, so he has the right to use it. Also, not all re-boots suck.

So, I’m seeking input from those of you who have already read Fuzzy Nation. Without giving any spoilers, do you think a Piper fan will like it? I’m willing to go into this with an open mind, but I’d rather not give it a shot if I’ll just be left cursing John Scalzi.

I’m very fond of classic science fiction, but I like the new stuff too. I’ve never read any of Scalzi’s work, though.



Some more information about H. Beam Piper

Piper was a contemporary of Asimov and Heinlein and I would argue that he would have risen to the same level if he had not committed suicide before his writings became popular. His Federation and Empire stories paint a detailed and complex “future history� of the humans in space.

His Paratime series tells of a civilization that learned to move between parallel versions of our world (I’m convinced that it inspired the TV series Sliders). In one of his best novels, Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen, a modern day cop is transported to a medieval version of the earth, and uses his knowledge of gunpowder to get ahead.

Most of his work is in the public domain, so if you use an e-reader these are available for free. Do bear in mind that this stuff was written in the 50s and 60s, so the customs and analog technology will seem dated.

I'm about halfway through Little Fuzzy, having read Fuzzy Nation first.

Not sure what to tell you, since this is my first H. Beam Piper's book and I have read the Fuzzy books in the "wrong" order now.

What I can say so far is that I think the books have very different feelings. Little Fuzzy, as far as I can tell right now, seems pretty old-fashioned with pipe-smoking men working in their cabins, shooting stuff. In fact, if this wasn't sci-fi, it should be a Western.

Fuzzy Nation on the other hand really takes a different turn, it's more of a sci-fi legal dramedy or something. It reminded me a lot of the TV shows these days. Jack Holloway is different, too. Both the character and his back story.

That said, I guess you could go either way. You could either hate what John Scalzi did with it, since it doesn't have the nostalgia feeling, or you could like it because it's different enough so it's more like a variation on a theme and not some simple modernization.

Sorry, the answer was so vague, but maybe it helps a bit.

Free the land prawns!

I found Fuzzy Nation to be a very fast read; so you'll be finished reading it before you even know if you hated it or not.

Like Anne said, the tone is totally different. I think it depends on what you want/expect out of a remake.

Any updated work should set a different tone and, of course have better technology. Jack's portable movie film lab was considered hi-tech and futuristic at the time, for example.

Do you think the characters of Jack Halloway or Little Fuzzy are essentially the same (perhaps minus the pipe smoking and cowboy-like shooting)?

No. They're pretty different, I'd say. I got the feeling that Scalzi's Jack was a lot younger, more annoying and kind of selfish. Piper's Jack reminds me of some old ranger or something.

Maybe it's just me, though. Would love to hear what others think.

Anne wrote: "Piper's Jack reminds me of some old ranger or something.

If you listen to the Audible version of Little Fuzzy Jack sounds like an old codger from a spaghetti western. Very...odd.

OK, I read it. Or, rather, I let Wheaton read it to me.

I can't say I HATED it. The basic arc of the plot and most of the major themes remained intact. I really wish that Scalzi's version of Jack Holloway wasn't such a dick, but I respect that this was central to the plot. I don't personally share the view that good literary characters must be deeply flawed, but far be it from me to fault an author for developing a character.

So, I thought it was ok. I don't think I'd read any sequels if the author decided to go that route, but I haven't made a Scalzi voodoo doll either.

I get the impression that Scalzi did approach this from the perspective of a fan of the original novel. I don't give much credence to the notion that Piper's estate gave it's blessing. I'm not sure who comprises the estate, but it's noteworthy that the estate allowed Piper's body to remain in what was essentially an unmarked grave for decades. His fans had to raise money to erect a proper headstone a few years ago.

@John, I agree that audibles reader did make Halloway sound like an old codger. Weird.

Thanks for the feedback, everyone!

Tamahome wrote: "Free the land prawns!"

I missed the land prawns.

I read Little Fuzzy shortly before I listened to Fuzzy Nation. As much as I like Scalzi, I thought the original was far superior to the re-boot. It actually seem LESS dated to me than the newer work. I really loved Jack Holloway in the original and found the new Jack Holloway to less likeable.

Little Fuzzy is in the Public Domain so I am not sure if the Piper Estate ever had any real legal say in the matter.