Is THEODORE STURGEON OVERRATED? His key Science Fiction novels re-examined
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ส.ค. 2024
- Steve admits he's always been divided about Ted Sturgeon, doyen of the Golden Age, explorer of the Gestalt and Gender threads of 1950s skiffy...so he decided to revist and read more to reach a conclusion, with a deviation into Naomi Mitchinson territory..
#booktube #bookrecommendations #sf #sciencefiction #bookcollecting #sciencefictionbooks
Is Theodore Sturgeon overrated?
NO.
If there was a Mount Rushmore of SF writers, he would be on it. He was the most stylish pre- New Wave SF writer. It's the short stories where he truly shines. I would be here all day listing the brilliant ones.
and then there's 'Amok Time' ...
He is deserving of all his accolades for his contributions to Star Trek canon, alone.
Your view reflects the critical consensus, so it carries weight.
Your're right. Short stories are where he is at his best.
Personally I think he’s underrated. I’ve enjoyed every story I’ve read by him, as well as The Dreaming Jewels. More Than Human wasn’t quite as enjoyable to me, but I can see why it is important. I like his horrorish stuff, it reminds me of Bradbury and early King stories.
I never read any of his novels but remember reading a lot of his short stories back in the 70s. And thats how I think of him, as a short story writer. I think I must of really liked them because I kept buying and reading them whenever I came across one.
Shots fired!
Sturgeon is one of the SF greats, there's no doubt about that. I'm prepared to agree that his inherent empathy and humanity can tip into mawkishness occasionally, but the same is true of Ray Bradbury and others. What you refer to as his "chewy" prose style you'll either get on with or not, I like it. As for the novels themselves, they're unique of course, and important, particularly as no other golden age writer was writing with the same fluidity, humanity and even, dar i say, grace. However, SF is an umbrella genre that really works best at shorter than novel length and it's Sturgeon's collected stories, all thirteen volumes, to which i turn most often.
I take your point re Bradbury, but I have to say I find RB more consistent stylistically -but then I think Ray had it easier, selling so easily to the slicks as he did, whereas TS probably had less time for polishing and had to get the money in.
More than Human was a fix-up novel using an original novella and some short stories. I like Sturgeon. The Dreaming Jewels is my favourite. The idea of science fiction set in a creepy carnival and freak show provides an incredible setting. It's both disturbing and revelatory. It's in my top 10 of all time.
I refer to its fix-up status in the video, mentioing the appearance of 'Baby Is Three' in Galaxy.
Agreed, The Dreaming Jewels is one of my favorite books, and the concept behind it is one of the few original sf ideas I've run across.
I never got much into his novels, but his short stories are an absolutely brilliant body of work.
I was going to say that I rate him highly, partly because he's unpredictable. But when I think about it, it's getting on for thirty years since I read him. I've collected the Collected Stories, but only dipped into them (and read the intros, mostly by famous SF writers).
Maybe what I recall as "unpredictable" is what you're picking up on as "undisciplined".
Well, I love the unpredictable, myself, but I don't see Sturgeon as that, I see him as uneven as a prose stylist and in terms of his emoting- moody might be a better description, but in the changeable sense. Some of his ideas are unpredictable -which is good- but overall I find him inconsistent at novel length. It is said he disliked writing longer works, hence the plethora of shorts. As a writer myself, I can sympathise with him on this.
The view of Sturgeon from over here. . . it's a little different. I've always seen two texts vying for supremacy; sure there's "More Than Human," but there is also the ubiquity of "Venus Plus X." I find them both widely mentioned in critical sources, and I used to find them both, side-by-side (perhaps a little more "Venus"), distributed in the wild. Clearly it was purchased as much, if not more than "MTH."
In truth I can't remember much of it, I'm not even sure I finished it. When I think of TS, three things come to mind:
1- I know a grandniece of his who dances burlesque.
2-What Harlan says about him in his DV introduction;
3-And his DV story, that haunts my memory to this day. Whenever someone mentions Dangerous Visions it is one of the stories that immediately springs to mind.
When British critics, or 20-something hipsters downplay its importance to the field, dismissing them as 'dirty stories', I always think of Ted's story. I think he was on the short list of people who understood Harlan's vision; to present a truth that always goes unsaid, or write the story you always wanted to, but knew 'they' would never let you; as William Burroughs would say he presented a simple truth "naked at the end of your fork."
Our upbringing makes us flinch at the story, but were we to look at it with scientific detachment it makes perfect sense.
Likewise, when anyone talks to me about Ted Sturgeon, I suddenly remember Harlan's sincere praise of him (always a feat!) To paraphrase (for brevity's sake): " if I know everything about hate, then Ted knows everything about love."
With those things as a priori assumptions, I tend to keep giving TS the benefit of the doubt. . .
Well, first of all, Walt, this isn't a 'British' view as it were, but my view- as you can probably tell, I find Sturgeon's unevenness frustrating- there are moments where I think his work really sings, but others when it collapses in a sugar rush like a badly baked cake. Also, you'll note I said I feel I need to read more of the short work. A few commenting here have questioned if he is still highly rated and it seems clear to me that the critical consensus still reveres him.
...expect another Sturgeon video in a year. Good to hear your thoughts, man.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal To Be Clear, I wasn't calling you out (THIS time, . . . on *that* one 😉) I just noticed British booktubers, and British authors really poo poo American New Wave SF as being "only about sex". It comes up a bit, and it really rankles me. Heck Chris Priest even says it in one of your interviews with him. I know you are far too well read and cosmopolitan to fall into that trap.
I must remember to send you a private letter and not rant endlessly in the comments! 😆
@@salty-walt No problem mate. I see differences between US and UK New Wave in a general sense- but only in the same way I see differences between British and American literary tones. Personally, I think British New Wave was equally concerned with sex- which I see as a supremely relevant subject for literature of all kinds. Also, I think I was at pains in my Top 10 New Wave UK to include several US authors who were active in the UK around New Worlds - to me, it's all one thing historically, though I would say Harlan's over-emphasis on taboo breaking - though he had a point, as he was talking about editorial, publishing an market restrictions in US SF then - does tend to polarise and skew the dichotomy between US/UK New Wave a bit. Non-historically, though, I think there were two New Waves, the British one being about reconnecting SF with mainstream literature in Britain, which was not such an aim in the USA.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal I'd always assumed they had the same goals, (elevating the genre out of a literary ghetto) and different cultural variations on a theme. But I do trust that you have made more of a study of it than me. In fact when saying they were trying to rejoin the British literary mainstream, I realize that I have read so infrequently in contemporary literature that I don't really know what the important literary fiction in the UK in the 60s 70s and 80s *really means*.
@@salty-walt Priest has spoken about how the 'invention' of SF as a genre/ghetto/marketing category via the Gernsback project divided SF from its existing pre-1925 presence as a standard element of UK literature. I do think the aims were common, but there does seem to have been more restrictions on writers in the USA in the early 1960s whereas in the UK after the Chatterly obscenity trial things opened up quite a bit over here, so the market elements seems to me more problematic in the States then. I'd say looking at the way that British 'mainstream' writing has been massively infected by SF since the end of the 70s, New Wave achieved the aim of reinvigorating the wider corpus of British literature without many of the establishment noticing- except where they laud Ballard. This has happened in the USA as well, but there's also the factor that at this moment in Culture, the mimetic novel has long been in trouble, stagnant and arguably waning in relevance if not in popularity.
I've read all twelve of his novels (including his obscure non-genre ones) and almost all of his short stories. Went through a Sturgeon binge in the '90s, when I was in my twenties!
Like Scott Bradfield, I know you are a fan of reading short stories in their original collected sequence. In the same way that 'The Beast That Shouted Love at the Heart of the World' is your favourite Harlan Ellison "album", my favourite Theodore Sturgeon album is the wonderfully titled 'Sturgeon is Alive and Well...' (1971). Highly recommended! Brilliantly sequenced, terrific balance of sardonic cynicism. 👍
Impressed to hear of your dedication to his ouevre -I'll pick up that collection, know the title, but it's not in the collection...but will be.
Van Vogt is pretty much overlooked if not forgotten these days. A pity.
I see TONS of VV books secondhand these days, but you are talking about the later ones, which are more often than not expansions of much earlier shorts- the more seminal work, such as 'Slan', 'Space Beagle' and 'The Weapon Shops' series are far less common. I think the real problem is the failure of publishers to market 'Space Beagle' for what it is- the Ur-Text of Hollywood SF (inspiring as it did 'Forbidden Planet', 'Star Trek' and 'Alien')...and in the UK it has not been in print for over thirty years. Should be a Gollancz Masterwork, as 'Weapon' series should be too...that sentence is almost as inelegant as a Van Vogt clunker...
@@outlawbookselleroriginal The first sentence of Space Beagle (or Dark Destroyer, if you prefer) is one of the classics of SF. But what fun clunkers they were.
You sum up my feelings about Sturgeon very well. I have tried to read More Than Human several times, but the cloying sentimentality of his treatment of children and of people of limited intellectual ability always put me off. There is an over-romantic idealistic view of children (that he shares with Bradbury and several other US writers) that makes me wonder if he had much contact with real children. Wyndham doesn't make this mistake. He also seems to enjoy putting his characters through some very unpleasant experiences, which probably comes from his early horror writing.
I do like some of his shorter work, but I remember reading someone (think it was Delany, but might have been Ellison) talking about being so blown away by one of his stories that they read it over and over again to try to work out how he achieved some plot reversal. I just never got that. I must give The Dreaming Jewels another try. I have a rather nice Corgi paperback from 1971.
I can only agree. Wyndham is far more realistic re children, I'd say.
I have a modest pile of Theodore Sturgeon, so your video decided whether they go further down or up! I also remember the film Killdozer fondly from when I was a kid. Theodore Sturgeon sounds like a weighty author's name, he sounds like he should be great :)
Well, the critical consensus has long been on his side and remains so.
I can recall when Sturgeon was regarded as far above, say, AE van Vogt, James Blish, or CM Kornbluth, right up there with Ray Bradbury and Alfred Bester - and MORE THAN HUMAN was a deathless classic for the ages.
Just goes to show how much and how far things can change.
Well, I think the critical consensus is still for him, overall. I just find his uneven quality frustrating given his standard with the consensus.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal I tried to read MORE THAN HUMAN when I was in my 20s. I could probably get through it now, but at the time I found it be hugely overwrought, to the point where I set it aside and went on to other things. Life is too short, as they say....
Great commentary! Lots of details, Rich chewiness to think about.
I *really* appreciated the sideways foray into Naomi Mitchison, who I've never heard of!
For writers like Sturgeon, it reminds me, I wish there was a really good, detailed, authoritative listing of short stories with a concentration on which ones are "must reads" both for quality as well as (perhaps more importantly for) genre impact.
Great vid!
Thanks as ever!
I went through a Sturgeon phase decades ago but eventually I got tired out. I read mostly his short stories. He seems to have been a kind of guru for some writers. I read The Dreaming Jewels a long time ago. It was ok, but not something I'd reread. I think Sturgeon was obviously of his time.
Yeah, the jury is still out for me. I won't make a definitive judgement until I've read more shorts.
Personally, I think it's important to visualize and understand the prevailing sentiments and tastes of the buying public during Sturgeon's era, in order to put his work in a coherent light (pardon the laser pun). That said, I'm not defending him in any way whatsoever, just bringing up what I feel is a pertinent note. "People who are in the canon, they are so troublesome". Well said, OB. Regarding the canon, I am super-critical of any of them and pick and choose what I like from the respective catalogues. But I prefer the "one hit wonders" sometimes, they surprise pleasantly like, for instance, A Canticle For Leibowitz by Miller, Earth Abides by Stewart, and off-subject but in the historical fantasy realm, Pillars Of The Earth by Follett (although Follett isn't a one-hit wonder but Pillars is in and of itself, kind of in that category to my mind). I found this episode very enjoyable, as I do all of your posts. And as always, OB, another gem here, with great content, production, quality and especially presentation! Cheers.
I think context is super-important, yes. I think I mentioned elsewhere here that had TS been selling to the slicks, like Bradbury, his work may have been more polished and even- but I've also read that he disliked writing, hence the small number of novels, so he may have been hasty. LeGuin's comparison of him to Borges doesn't hold water, I feel, but I think 'the golden age of science fiction is twelve' factor certainly plays parts in all our views of writers we admire at times.
I find the canon difficult as I agree with so much of it, yet I feel that the idea of the 'universal' is restrive and the antithesis of all arts since Modernism. I do, however, feel that good grammar, syntax and vocabulary are vital- and the other day I came across a mention of 'readability' somewhere and that's not to be sniffed at. How things sound when read allowed is a good indicator of quality, I feel.
Agree re the one hit wonders. The secret is knowing when to stop reading such authors- so many times I've nailed 'the book' by someone, then read 2-3 others and found them wanting. These days, time growing shorter, I'm even more selective...thanks as ever, mate, for your kind words.
I do like how the conversation in the video strays beyond the subject into related topics and authors.
Rambling tangentially is a good way to develop ideas, find yourself in surprisingly useful blind alleys and forging connections that broaden your cultural pleasure, I find.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal I should say 'roam' or 'reach' really, it was meant to be a positive!
@@PaulScott-fw1cq I know mate, sorry if my tone suggested otherwise 😀
Where will you go for the short stories? I recall some felt Selected Stories didn't do him justice. Not long ago I read Jessica Amanda Salmonson making a similar argument to yours and she was friends with him.
I own several collections.
Well, this one caused some healthy differences of opinion -and none of them expressed in a childish, gainsaying manner, which is positive- I meant to add that checking 'Solution Three', it actually came out in 1975- I was thinking of her earlier SF novel when I cited the early 60s- which makes it even more behind the times than I initially felt. Shame.
Hard for him to be overrated when he's barely rated at all. He's mostly forgotten these days - is anyone championing Sturgeon's work?
I think you'll find that if you consult the major critical works, Sturgeon has always been acclaimed - the key standard source, The Encyclopedia of SF - now in its fourth edition- still regards him highly.
How come nobody calls him Teddy??😅
@@glockensig Because he couldn't bear it.
@@kid5Media rimshot please!!😅
I’ve only read More Than Human. Enjoyed it for the most part but you’re right about the excesses.
never have read sturgeon, but i am currently reading "The Mote in gods Eye", am liking it quite a lot and getting repulsed by it always , have read 250 pages in 3 days , i normally do that much in a day. The book is very much preachy. can you pls share your thought on that and can u pls name a better classic first contact novel
Well, don't expect literature from Niven & Pournelle. I'd say read 'Solaris' by Lem - but then I like First Contact novels that are about the problem of actual exchange of knowledge. For something more traditional, try .If The Stars Were Gods' by Gregory Benford and Gordon Eklund.
I reread TMIGE recently for the first time in over 40 years. I can't think of anything preachy about it. It's obviously of its time in respect of human gender roles, but still a fascinating work. I woudl recommend "Eden" or "Fiasco" in preference to "Solaris" for a Lem first contact work. I think Solaris is simply better known due to Tarkovsky's movie adaptation.
Caviar is delicious on blinis accompanied by a nice white wine - the taste is very buttery and rich. Not sure how sturgeon tastes but I imagine it is salty.
I read the Killdozer short story recently and I was a bit bothered by the ending, so i looked on the googles and it turns out it has 2 different endings. The older ww2 version and the newer missile age version. I think the older one would make more sense. That story is full of details about how to operate a bulldozer from the forties. I think if you work in construction or collect old tractors you'd love it. :-) There's another story in that collection called "Bulldozer is a noun" which I really enjoyed though.
FWIW, Sturgeon drove a bulldozer (during WWII?).
Another highly informative video - thanks. I think Sturgeon's short stories are especially good. Both in ideas as well as in the quality of their prose (better than most SF). I especially like 'The man who lost the sea' and 'Microcosmic God.'
Always fancied reading sturgeon but having watched this episode and just read everyone’s comments I’m confused he seems a very polarising figure may still give him a go. I did like someone’s comment on van Vogt I think slan and beagle are terrific,although I was a teen when I read them . Just acquired some beautiful second hand copies going to reread some soon .
You should always read for yourself, of course.
Van Vogt doesn't age well. I really enjoyed reading him when I was an early teen, but he's virtually unreadable now. Sturgeon is head and shoulders above him.
There is a Sturgeon collection titled Caviar.
I know. I've seen copies of it sitting around second hand bookshops since the 1980s. Nveer got around to buying a copy.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal A truly elegant and thoughtful wrier! One of my favorites for over fifty years!
How come nobody calls him Teddy??😂
The first Sturgeon I read was a short story called "Some of Your Blood." (I can't remember the anthology, it might have been edited by Douglas Winter, who at least in the 80s/90s seemed to doing some great collections.) The story was powerful; it had true pathos; the ending knifed me through the heart. But then I felt guilty for not liking some of his other stuff, which seemed muddled. I never disliked his prose, though. LeGuin once called him "our homegrown Borges," and I was shocked. Even though I've lived in Buenos Aires, love Borges (but I love Cortázar more), and speak Spanish, I almost questioned my own sanity. Did this great writer--LeGuin--see something that I couldn't? His too-long short story in Foundations of Fear (one of my favorite anthologies) is the only dead flower in that beautiful bouquet. But I don't feel so guilty now after watching this. Thanks. About the Shrinking Man (a novel I've re-read I don't know how many times): what makes that novel so great is how Matheson transcends his own premise. The ending--surprising and yet logical--is truly transcendental. I look forward to that video.
I mention 'Some of your blood' in the video toward the end, but I've read the expanded version.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal Yes, I saw the very end, after I wrote my comment (I had to break up my viewing). It''s the story in which a loner-type saves a badly injured woman. I won't spoil the ending. I'm pretty sure it was "Some of Your Blood." But I could be mistaken. I look forward to your thoughts on Matheson. Cheers.
Just read More that humans and i did really like it
I think in parts it's superb.
No. Just rebought a book of his short stories which I haven't read in ages.
Well, it may go down good.
Nice to see the Library of America volume! I have the PKD box set.
I keep thinking about those LOA series, but I really dislike the paper- it's too thin. I will crack and get them at some point, just so I have things like 'Dr Bloodmoney' between boards. I do get a bit annoyed with them, though, picking the writers they feel are now canonical - Dick, LeGuin, Butler (for political reasons), Russ- while they ignore writers of equal status like Thomas M Disch.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal
I can’t imagine it would be an easy task selecting books for Library of America with a name like that, but I think for the most part they do a very good job. I have interest in about 30% of their catalogue. I especially like the box sets.
I am sorry for being off topic here... I was wondering if you have covered Michael Marshall Smith's SF offerings on here? I seem to have a memory of a random video in which you mentioned him. Could very well be misremembering though. I just finished Only Forward and enjoyed it greatly. Wanted to know if your thoughts on him were already on the web!
I have read MMS, but not for many years. Did an event with him once, nice guy. 'Only Forward' was hyped massively but flopped. I was never sufficiently impressed to comment on him in any major way here, but you never know...I'd say try 'Spares' next.
@@outlawbookselleroriginal good to know, thanks! Yeah, i am eyeing Spares.
The answer to all such questions is , No!
:-)
Farmer ,Sturgeon ? I will never forget Dalenys" aye and gomorrah" .That and sturgeons " If all men were brothers would you let one marry your sister " were in DVs . Sturgeon was a mild jolt , Daleney was the shocker . And Dalaney story much more within " reason ??? " that S .( My bias informed opinion ). Thank for the take .
Delany- the MAN!
Another informative excellent video, I've not read any Sturgeon but I think I'll have to give him a go at some point.
It's important to try critically rated authors for oneself- subjectivity is truth, as Kierkegaard said.
For me I feel the same way with Ray Bradbury. I know people love him and his writing and metaphor's. But for me it just doesn't work lol.
I haven't seen the 1970s TV adaptation of Killdozer, and I've heard its... ok? Not so good? But I liked the short it was based on. I recommend a 1959 short of his, 'The Man Who Lost the Sea', as one of the great short SF story's of all time. Not to forget his early short, 'Microcosmic God' (1941) as a true gem of the Golden Age.
Well, y'know, TV movies of the mid 70s have a certain period feel and I was about 11...
@@outlawbookselleroriginal I love 70s TV sf. I turned 11 in 1978. Sadly I never saw Killdozer as a kid. Another 70s TV sf I would love to see but didn't and haven't is the Shatner starring adaptation of Zenna Henderson's The People.
@@antyphayes Never seen that, don't think it was ever shown in the UK.
Yes, he is.
He has written some (a few?) interesting short stories. But, his novels do suck.
"More than Human" is definitely NOT a classic, far from it.
Is body of work is mostly junk.
He was very uneven, I feel.
90% of Sturgeon is crap.
Strong words, Mike- but I do agree his status needs questioning as you'll have gathered...and a fun play on his Law there...
You might think it's clever using Sturgeon's law against him, but it's also wrong. He was a pioneer, but his stuff is still better than 90% of the sf published today.
@@karlkellar8614 Humourless internet absolutism wins against personal opinion. I'm wounded.