Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: The Starmaker Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,sci.physics.relativity,rec.arts.sf.written Subject: Re: Fat books Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2026 22:38:37 -0700 Organization: The Starmaker Organization Lines: 113 Message-ID: <6AD45B5D.570A@ix.netcom.com> References: <11amvqh$15f3n$1@dont-email.me> <6AD3C2CC.475F@ix.netcom.com> <11b0g92$grpc$1@dont-email.me> <6AD45A20.55FF@ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2026 05:38:25 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; logging-data="919304"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18MsWI13qOKhhVV7KysuTVPM8RQwKFe+uI="; posting-host="26d8b803eb2dc857292e6b05ac9ad2a4" Cancel-Lock: sha1:2pozau+jAxEodNUJHuptO6AmYh4= sha256:r7Xy80RzC25l+kYrNva3vus5bB/B4udMHuaadp2Jru8= sha1:96ZnI38tWSslM8rOqAeAvb/sE4g= sha256:IKrB39YzoL0JMM2CeQUsts2y2aRmG56a/NU00Xed4Eg= X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 261017-6, 10/17/2026), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Xref: csiph.com alt.usage.english:1152475 sci.physics.relativity:674578 rec.arts.sf.written:661016 I never read a fiction book and I certaintly never read a science fiction book That's like giving a 3 year old LSD. Who do you think reads science fiction books? People who want to go to Mars! Fiction and science fiction... that's a fucking double wammy!!! Give the kid a half a tab of LSD. The Starmaker wrote: > > Let's stop with all dis science fiction stuff.. > Mars is not a planet! > > There is no reason to go to Mars because > Mars is not a planet! > > It's just a rock. > > No different from the Moon. > > Mars is just a balancing system > to keep the Earth on course.. > and from flying away to some freeway. > > Blaine wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > Peter Moylan wrote: > > >> > > >> I've griped about this issue before, but once again I find myself annoyed. > > >> > > >> I was reading "Robots and Empire", by Isaac Asimov. This is possibly the > > >> worst novel Asimov ever wrote. As a story it's mostly well-told, but the > > >> padding and waffle are enough to irritate the most patient reader. > > >> > > >> Let me quote from Chapter 45. "I think you must either get to the point, > > >> Dr Mandamus, or leave." This is not the only such case. Many of the > > >> characters in the book are incapable of getting to the point. They take > > >> half a dozen pages to say something that could be put in one chort > > >> paragraph. Get to the point, Dr Asimov. It's so bad that even the > > >> characters in the story are complaining about the padding. > > >> > > >> A competent editor could have made this a much better book by cutting it > > >> to about one third of its length. > > >> > > >> I wonder whether this hurt Asimov's reputation. I've certainly seen > > >> comments that his later (thick) books are not as good as his earlier > > >> writing. > > >> > > >> It's not all his fault. Many other authors are as bad. They're used to > > >> being paid by the page, and publishers are letting them get away with > > >> it. Maybe publishers don't employ editors any more, and have given up > > >> any attempt at quality control. There are some authors that I refuse to > > >> read because their books are too thick. > > >> > > >> But surely, I tell myself, the publishers must have noticed that books > > >> don't sell as well as they used to. Or do they? Am I the only person to > > >> complain about this? > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org > > >> Newcastle, NSW > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not literary criticism. It is a self-indulgent tantrum from a > > > reader who confuses personal irritation with objective analysis and then > > > tries to inflate it into an industry-wide conspiracy. > > > > > > You mistake dialogue for padding and call it proof. Quoting one > > > character telling another to get to the point does not demonstrate > > > authorial failure. It demonstrates a character who is frustrated. > > > Treating in-story dialogue as a meta-confession by Asimov is the > > > critical equivalent of believing a novel’s villain is the author’s > > > autobiography. > > > > one character may not demonstrate the failure he is referring to, but it > > struck a chord with me. Try getting very far into the followups in > > Stephen R. Donaldson's space opera with Angus Thermopyle. It's just like > > this and of such badness that it reminds one of someone using > > copy-paste, but with an AI to twist up the words slightly so that it > > can't be labeled that simply. The reader just doesn't need that many > > similar brushups on what happened last novel. I set it down before > > finishing. > > > > -- > > Can you strip away so we may start again? > > "There’s a switch and they don't > > seem authentic or themselves. It > > feels like I’m an unnecessary > > body and it’s a waste of time to > > even be there." -- Grim, playful Blaine. > > -- > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, > and challenge the unchallengeable. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.