I will be the first to admit that an accurate definition of “science fiction” simply does not exist and there will always be a few quibbles whether a particular novel or story really should be called sf. But I think I can safely state that *Alice in Wonderland * does not belong on a science fiction list.
44/100
One thing to note is that it is only one man’s list. Anyone of us could come up with a list that would be just as idiosyncratic and odd. I’d be far more worried about what I’ve not read if it was a consensus list.
Thirty-five, most in my teens and college years. Some of 'em, I read so long ago I had to realy think if I’ve really read them, or just *think * I remember I’ve read them!
53 of the 100, although I was doing great until about 70.
I, too, find the selection really odd. There are three books by Philip K. Dick in the top 13, for crying out loud.
So who is Keith Olexa?
He’s 2 years younger than I am, for one thing. So he’s coming to some of the legends (van Vogt, Gernsback, et al) from a later perspective, just as I did. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, his earliest exposure could have been as a child in the early 70s, he’s still 40 years out of context for those works.
He’s an established presence in SF fandom, editor of Phobos books, former editor of STARLOG, and a published author. Bio up at the DragonCon site: http://www.dragoncon.org/people/olexak.html
I’m not inclined to grant him the right to pick the list of the best, though. He’s one person, albeit a fairly qualified one, and his individual tastes are likely to play far too large a role in the selections.
Isn’t 1984 fiction at this point? I don’t recall reading anything in that book that isn’t possible for a governemnt to do nowadays.
I’ve read 4 of those. I’ve been meaning to get around to Starship Troopers.
That you are a well read Mercotan ?
Just had to Post that I have an impressive (to me) 29 of these books under my belt. Lists like this though remind me of all of the books I’ve got to get to some day.
Alice in Wonderland Science Fiction? I don’t think so.
35 or so at a quick glance.
All top 100 lists, one way or another, are skewed and biased. Whoever created the list (Keith Olexa?) may not have the same definition as other folks.
- I have no problem with * Frankenstein * being in the top ten and would heartedly agree it belongs there.
-
- Dhalgren*. I read the whole thing back in the early or mid eighties. It is very literary science fiction so obviously not for folk who distain literary pretension.
-
- 2001: A Space Odyssey *. Okay, who got smacked with the retarded stick by choosing this one. * 2001: A Space Odyssey * is a flipping movie! It was based on a famous short story, made into a movie, and the author did a novelization. Strike it from the list, pronto! Add a book of Clarke stories if the original is that important.
-
- Upanishads*. Great literature and well worth reading. But not science fiction in itself. IMHO. Ditto on *Alice In Wonderland. * No doubt the two have had a strong influence on science fiction, but that is a different thing from being science fiction. I would, however, agree with the statement “Each one should be part of every SF reader’s—not to mention every SF writer’s—repertoire” because the repertoire should be harshly limited to books solidly within the genre.
Amen, brother. I can count on my nose the number of books I have started and haven’t finished. This one is it.
It means he has been researching our culture for decades, searching for a weak point through which his thundering armada might swarm…
(Do Mercotans swarm? Really, I would think that folks who can eat neutronium would tend to be loners.)
32 / 100. Better than I expected.
I must say that I was inordinately pleased to see Flowers For Algernon make the list. 
I found about 38 I know I’ve read, and there’s 5 or 6 more that I may have read 30 years ago.
I noticed the Upanishads too, and thought WTF? And I’ve never read any Philip K. Dick. Strange list.
Well, Larry Niven once pointed out that the first “Hard Science Fiction” trilogy was…
La Commedia Divina by Dante Aleghieri. :eek:
I just wanted to say I have read 21 out of them. And I think I am really well-read, but I guess I don’t just read sci-fi but a lot of fantasy and other stuff, too.
But I am going to try and up my count.
I’ve read 15, which is about twice as many as I thought I’d find on that list; don’t delve much into the genre, but am glad for the link in case I need any ideas in the future.
Like you’re not planning the same thing on behalf of the Old Ones ? 
- Several of which I’d forgotten about and just remembered when I read that list.
But I feel completely cheated that only one Barsoom book was mentioned, and not even the best one, IMO.
What, no Charles Sheffield? That’s a travesty.
I’ve read 20/100. I’ve started 10 or so more, but never finished, like Verne and Wells books.
40 including The Man in the High Castle which I finished yesterday and Brave New World which I finally managed to slog through last week. Quite a few books on the list that I’ve been meaning to get around to as well.
The list seems to be constructed around books that had a major impact on science fiction as a genre along with a fair mix of best of various sub-genres. Not a bad list, though obvious everyone is going to quibble over it; I think that’s what top 100 lists exist for.
I don’t quite understand what you’re saying. Regardless, the book and movie were written and produced in unison, despite the book releasing shortly after the movie.