Great Modern Sci-Fi Authors?

Recommended Videos

sosolidshoe

New member
May 17, 2010
216
0
0
Which modern sci-fi authors do you rate above the others? Which do you consider capable of entering the "hall of fame" alongside Philip K Dick, Heinlein and others? What makes your favourite authors special?

For my money, you can't beat Alastair Reynolds. His novels and short stories extrapolate modern scientific theory out into various, often bleak, futures. In that, he has the advantage of being an Astrophysicist. Yet unlike most "hard sci-fi" authors, many of his stories have an epic, operatic quality; with characters ranging from believable to unfathomable, but always enjoyable to read about. I believe his novels will stand the test of time, because although the theories on which they are based will be modified or even replaced as science advances, the core of his narratives are what good sci-fi is all about - commentary on the human condition and an examination of our potential future.

The technology of his Revelation Space universe(five novels, including one connected trilogy, plus a few short stories) is the most believable I've seen in a far-future setting; starships known as "lighthuggers" are the only means of inter-stellar travel, and as the name suggests are limited to travelling at very near(99.8% I believe) the speed of light, and weaponry conforms to known laws(lasers, bosers(atom lasers), grasers(gamma lasers) and relativistic railguns). The few technologies which are more fiction than science are still rooted in modern physics; at one point characters discover a technology which can be used to suppress inertia, allowing immense acceleration, but great pains are taken by the author to point out the various negative effects, both on human anatomy as a consequence of reducing or removing constants on which it depends, and the causal implications of violating space-time even on a local level.

Perhaps the best aspect of this focus on realism, or at least pseudo-realism, are the space battles. While the main focus of his stories are the characters and situations, when space-borne conflict occurs, it's excellent. Characters within ships sustaining high-G must wear exoskeletons to move around, in one case a main character uses the ship's acceleration as a weapon to murder an enemy; putting herself in restraints and then rapidly switching the engines from positive to negative acceleration by a factor of several gees, battering her opponent to death. Combat takes place over week, month and year-long timescales, with intriguing tactics such as throwing laser-decelerated sheets of solar-sail into the path of a pursuing ship(which at near-light speeds would be like hitting a wall), or scattering nuclear "crustbuster" weapons through the combat zone to illuminate an enemy with their detonations, allowing laser weapons to target more effectively.

The settings in Revelation Space vary from early-stage colony worlds riven by political intrigue, to the bizarre-yet-inhabited ruins of humanity's greatest civilisation which was nearly annihilated by a nanotech virus, to an airless moon riddled with subterranean habitats ruled by a mad theocrat from his mobile cathedral.

In short; believable, well written characters, fantastical settings, operatic tone, and a great respect for modern science. Everything you could want in a good sci-fi series, IMO.

What about you lot?
 

adamtm

New member
Aug 22, 2010
261
0
0
Iain M. Banks

And i say that because im a total fanboy of his Culture Series.

Nobody depicts big-scale politics and intrigue like Banks. All the while crafting a believably omnipotent post-scarcity civilization with really nice real-life commentary and action-adventure elements.

Not since Asimovs Foundation Series has cross-galaxy politics been this interesting and engaging.
Also Banks doesn't take readers for idiots, he does not care if you understand the society, you need to put effort into reading his books. The sheer amount of really hard lore behind it is amazing (got to love books with a dictionary and glossary of words tacked on the end).

Every book is separate, yet they all intersect. Banks is the master of crafting multi-threaded epic storylines. In "Excession" he had 7 protagonists converging onto one event in the galaxy, each of them presenting a unique insight and perspective.

Topics in his books are too many to count, from social dynamics to the philosophy of life, death, afterlife and synthetic life. How would society look if we had no limitation on resources? What if every one of us could potentially have his own planet, a solar system, or a galaxy if we just wanted?
What if greed suddenly vanished because we can have everything we want, whats left, what will drive humanity?

Crafting this believable communistic utopia with unrestrained freedom makes his books unique.
No one can oppose The Culture, The Culture is the final word in the evolution of society. So what does one do when you reached the peak, culturally, scientifically, and technologically?

You play god of course.
You manipulate other lower races.
And this is what The Culture is about, social engineering at its peek.
Good or bad? Thats for the reader to decide, but the protagonists usually are believable individuals, thrust into circumstances bigger than themselves, bigger than their civilization.

Banks is my favorite, and he does not rest, his books actually keep getting better, his style is more streamlined now than it was in the 90s. Its a pleasure to look at a great author that might not yet even have hit his peak.
 

Oliver Pink

New member
Apr 3, 2010
455
0
0
ME!

Seriously though... someday... but by then, this thread will be rotting in a pile of e-leaves.

I don't honestly know any good Modern sci-fi authors.
 

adamtm

New member
Aug 22, 2010
261
0
0
oliveira8 said:
adamtm said:
Iain M. Banks
He started publishing in the 80's! The guy has almost 30 years of career. Far from modern...
Oh cmon, the 80s are not modern?

Well sorry ill go back to my "classical" SF of the 80s then.

Also Consider Phlebas was published in 87, give me a break.
 

Hoplon

Jabbering Fool
Mar 31, 2010
1,839
0
0
oliveira8 said:
adamtm said:
Iain M. Banks
He started writing in the 80's! The guy has almost 30 years of career. Far from modern...

I think the OP was aiming at the more recent authors, like Richard Morgan.
Anyone still currently publishing is a modern author.

I would add Neil Stephenson to the list, truly awesome books such as Snowcrash, The Diamond Age, Cryptonomicron and the Barque cycle.
 

oliveira8

New member
Feb 2, 2009
4,726
0
0
adamtm said:
oliveira8 said:
adamtm said:
Iain M. Banks
He started publishing in the 80's! The guy has almost 30 years of career. Far from modern...
Oh cmon, the 80s are not modern?

Well sorry ill go back to my "classical" SF of the 80s then.
No. it's a last generation Science Fiction author. And his first book was in 84.

Dom Kebbell said:
Anyone still currently publishing is a modern author.
No they aren't. Ray Bradbury still is writing, yet he isn't a modern author. At all.

Modern authors would include people like Richard Morgan, Paolo Bacigalupi or China Miéville(If you want to call his stuff Science Fiction), that are part of the new wave of Science Fiction authors that showed up in the last 10 years. That is modern, they are new authors. Not people who have been writing for 30-50 years.
 

Outright Villainy

New member
Jan 19, 2010
4,331
0
0
oliveira8 said:
Modern authors would include people like Richard Morgan, Paolo Bacigalupi or China Miéville(If you want to call his stuff Science Fiction), that are part of the new wave of Science Fiction authors that showed up in the last 10 years. That is modern, they are new authors. Not people who have been writing for 30-50 years.
Why not? That's your own perception of modern.
I'd consider Cormac McCarthy modern for that matter.

Ot: I'm pretty ignorant of Sci-fi to be honest, though I'm trying to rectify that. Right now I'm reading Richard Morgan.
 

Unrulyhandbag

New member
Oct 21, 2009
462
0
0
oliveira8 said:
adamtm said:
No they aren't. Ray Bradbury still is writing, yet he isn't a modern author. At all.
YEAH! take that Ray, cram your stupid, backwards anachronism of a literary style back up that dark crevice where it belongs!

grow up. Literature doesn't age, it's the immortal word after all Shakespeare's work is still valid and if he were still writing today he'd be a modern writer.

Ray is still alive and still writing and that is what all that counts to be a 'modern writer'

and yes Iain Banks it s definite hall of fame writer get him in there.
 

Hoplon

Jabbering Fool
Mar 31, 2010
1,839
0
0
oliveira8 said:
adamtm said:
No they aren't. Ray Bradbury still is writing, yet he isn't a modern author. At all.

Modern authors would include people like Richard Morgan, Paolo Bacigalupi or China Miéville(If you want to call his stuff Science Fiction), that are part of the new wave of Science Fiction authors that showed up in the last 10 years. That is modern, they are new authors. Not people who have been writing for 30-50 years.
Given that Paolo Bacigalupi was first published in the 90's he can't really be modern can he?

utterly absurd definition.
 

narethlian

New member
Jan 4, 2008
5
0
0
Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan saga is some of the best SF I've read in recent years. Sadly some of the books are discontinued and you'll have a hard time finding them.

If you don't mind short stories down by relative unknowns I've always recommended going to Raygun Revival. There are some great stories to be had and some real talent there. My personal favorite series there is L.S. King's 'Deuces Wild'. Sadly with the publishing company behind them changing hands, the e-zine is being dropped. They hope to get new hosting/funding so they can continue to be a creative outlet for up and coming writers.
 

oliveira8

New member
Feb 2, 2009
4,726
0
0
Unrulyhandbag said:
YEAH! take that Ray, cram your stupid, backwards anachronism of a literary style back up that dark crevice where it belongs!
Nobody said that his work was old and has no meaning in the literary sense. That was you. He just isn't part of the contemporary movement of authors. HE IS NOT A NEW AUTHOR. That is what modern is. NEW! Ray Bradbury stopped being considered a new author 40 years ago!

It has nothing to do if the author is still writing or not.

Dom Kebbell said:
Given that Paolo Bacigalupi was first published in the 90's he can't really be modern can he?

utterly absurd definition.
Yes in 99 a short story. His first published book was in 2009. You have to try harder than that.
 

Hoplon

Jabbering Fool
Mar 31, 2010
1,839
0
0
I see, your confusing new with modern.

Here is a hint, new =/= modern, if he meant new, he would have said new, modern is "writing in the current era"
 

Unrulyhandbag

New member
Oct 21, 2009
462
0
0
oliveira8 said:
Nobody said that his work was old and has no meaning in the literary sense. That was you. He just isn't part of the contemporary movement of authors. HE IS NOT A NEW AUTHOR. That is what modern is. NEW! Ray Bradbury stopped being considered a new author 40 years ago!

Modern does not meant new it means of the current time. Ray Bradbury still writes and he writes well his style has changed as he's aged which keeps his work contemporary, modern in fact.

Modern has never meant new, the closest it get is in occasional use as futuristic (which all SF writers of competence are) and by not admitting him as a modern writer you marginalise his work making him seem anachronistic.
 

adamtm

New member
Aug 22, 2010
261
0
0
oliveira8 said:
Unrulyhandbag said:
YEAH! take that Ray, cram your stupid, backwards anachronism of a literary style back up that dark crevice where it belongs!
Nobody said that his work was old and has no meaning in the literary sense. That was you. He just isn't part of the contemporary movement of authors. HE IS NOT A NEW AUTHOR. That is what modern is. NEW! Ray Bradbury stopped being considered a new author 40 years ago!

It has nothing to do if the author is still writing or not.

Dom Kebbell said:
Given that Paolo Bacigalupi was first published in the 90's he can't really be modern can he?

utterly absurd definition.
Yes in 99 a short story. His first published book was in 2009. You have to try harder than that.
With what does this leave us then?

Stephenie Meyer, Tim LaHaye, Jerry Jenkins, Tara Gilesby and Squirrelking?

Seriously, lol-
 

oliveira8

New member
Feb 2, 2009
4,726
0
0
Dom Kebbell said:
I see, your confusing new with modern.

Here is a hint, new =/= modern, if he meant new, he would have said new, modern is "writing in the current era"
Modern generally denotes something that is up-to-date, new, or contemporary.

People like Ray Bradbury, Jack Vance, Gene Wolfe belong to a different era. Even if they are still writing they are no longer considered modern. They are already are part of the "classical" authors. They don't need to die/stop writing to become classics. They already are. Same thing for Ian M. Banks. But you stop being modern after awhile. Time moves on.

Hell science fiction these days, is completely different from what science fiction was when all those authors began publishing, and SF in 20 years will be completely different from what SF is today.

It's a genre that keeps evolving, with new batch of authors that are completely different from the last one. Ray Bradbury is not a modern author just because he still writes. That's silly. SF evolved a lot since Ray started writing. Mainly because of him.

Just pick up a book like Altered Carbon or Windup Girl. They have nothing to do with Fahrenheit 451, Starship trooper or Book of the New Sun.
 

fullbleed

New member
Apr 30, 2008
765
0
0
Ask any 40K fan and they will tell you Dan Abnett, I mean he's just undisputed in the warhammer world.
 

Boneasse

New member
Jul 16, 2008
1,960
0
0
Who wants modern sci-fi anyway? Now if you'll all excuse me I'm going to go back to my cave and read my Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov!
 

cefm

New member
Mar 26, 2010
380
0
0
Dan Simmons - did the Hyperion series, and also the Illium/Olympus books. A bunch of other stuff, not all of it sci-fi too.
 

Hoplon

Jabbering Fool
Mar 31, 2010
1,839
0
0
oliveira8 said:
Dom Kebbell said:
I see, your confusing new with modern.

Here is a hint, new =/= modern, if he meant new, he would have said new, modern is "writing in the current era"
Modern generally denotes something that is up-to-date, new, or contemporary.

People like Ray Bradbury, Jack Vance, Gene Wolfe belong to a different era. Even if they are still writing they are no longer considered modern. They are already are part of the "classical" authors. They don't need to die/stop writing to become classics. They already are. Same thing for Ian M. Banks. But you stop being modern after awhile. Time moves on.

Hell science fiction these days, is completely different from what science fiction was when all those authors began publishing, and SF in 20 years will be completely different from what SF is today.

It's a genre that keeps evolving, with new batch of authors that are completely different from the last one. Ray Bradbury is not a modern author just because he still writes. That's silly. SF evolved a lot since Ray started writing. Mainly because of him.

Just pick up a book like Altered Carbon or Windup Girl. They have nothing to do with Fahrenheit 451, Starship trooper or Book of the New Sun.
An interesting idea, if complete bollocks, they fit the label contemporary, since they are still writing and cannot help but be affected by the world, some of their books may no longer be modern, but that does not stop them being so. unless they started writing in the style of the medieval saga's while I wasn't looking...

fullbleed said:
Ask any 40K fan and they will tell you Dan Abnett, I mean he's just udisputed in the warhammer world.
*long series of expletives impugning mr Abnett and his heritage* him and Dan Brown both!