# NPR's top 100 SF/Fantasy list **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [August 14, 2011, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676 "2011-08-14T13:12:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/61 "2011-08-16T13:34:32Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > This list was nominated and voted on by the public. So it’s more a People’s Choice type list. Looking at the list, and at the rankings within the list, I think I have to agree with William Tecumseh Sherman: “Vox populi? Vox humbug!” ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Rieux](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Dr.Rieux](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Rieux)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/62 "2011-08-16T19:02:01Z")
A major omission–Jack Vance. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/63 "2011-08-16T19:12:16Z")
I can’t say I’m surprised there’s no Cherryh, but I’m still disappointed by it. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/64 "2011-08-16T19:12:27Z")
The problem with Vance is that despite the fact that he’s produced a staggering amount of consistantly excellent work, he has no real standout novel or collection that can be nominated. Ask 10 SF fans to name the best Vance book, and they’ll give you 10 different titles. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/65 "2011-08-16T19:14:51Z")
I would have put _Dragonlance_ on there before considering the pretty terrible _Drizzt_ series (if we’re considering the A/D&D books at all) but it still made me chuckle that ole Angsty-Two-Scimitars beat out Xanth. ---
**Author:** ![Busy\_Scissors](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d78d45/32.png) [@Busy\_Scissors](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Busy_Scissors)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/66 "2011-08-16T21:44:30Z")
> [@Zsofia](#): > > I can’t say I’m surprised there’s no Cherryh, but I’m still disappointed by it. It’s disappointing given some of the howlers on the list, sure. But would you really put her stuff in your top 100 All Time SF / fantasy list? I’ve read a lot of her fantasy stuff and it’s good, but not top 100 all time good. Her weaker books are also written to a pretty bad standard. I’ve not read some of her more celebrated SF books though, so could well be missing out on her best stuff. For Vance, has to be _Cugels Saga_ for me. Peerless. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/67 "2011-08-16T22:06:22Z")
I love _Cryptonomicon_, but I don’t really see it as science fiction or fantasy. ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/68 "2011-08-16T22:44:31Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > I like all the Frank Herbert _Dune_ novels, even _God: Emperor_. I think God Emperor is the best book of the series, personally. I was also hoping for some John Varley, Lovecraft, Fritz Lieber. This list seems like the voters were all born post-1990, with obligatory Lit 101 reading list inclusions mixed with recent popular selections. ---
**Author:** ![Sudden\_Kestrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@Sudden\_Kestrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sudden_Kestrel)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/69 "2011-08-16T22:45:25Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I personally wouldn’t have put Xanth on the list (if it absolutely _must_ have some Piers Anthony, then make it the five Incarnations books), but something way down at #99 is necessarily going to be rather iffy. > > While I have very little quibble about what made the list and what didn’t (aside from the omission of Harry Potter), I do have some complaints about the order. I can’t argue with _Lord of the Rings_ at #1, but _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ not coming in until #34? I’ve read almost everything ahead of it on the list, and it’s definitely ahead of most of them. I agree with both of these points. I wonder if the Xanth multiplicity wasn’t selected over worthier entries simply because just about everyone is bound to have tripped over a passel of them at some point. I’d be happier with Heinlein’s rankings if we switched the positions of _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ and _Stranger in a Strange Land_. Not a fan of the Harry Potter stuff, but I do think that’s an odd omission. Meanwhile, I’m just glad to have a list that includes a bunch of stuff I haven’t read. Whee! ---
**Author:** ![HookerChemical](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/278dde/32.png) [@HookerChemical](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HookerChemical)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2011, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/70 "2011-08-16T23:01:04Z")
> [@Suil\_Dubh](#): > > The fact that the list is vox populi explains some of the more eyebrow-raising choices, but yeah, where’s H.P. Lovecraft?! He’s immensely popular. From here (the nomination page): [http://www.npr.org/2011/06/24/137249678/best-science-fiction-fantasy-books-you-tell-us](http://www.npr.org/2011/06/24/137249678/best-science-fiction-fantasy-books-you-tell-us) > [@Rule #3](#): > > 1. Horror and paranormal romance are also out, which disqualifies most of Stephen King (also a big winner in previous polls), Charlaine Harris and Stephenie Meyer. Once again, we’ll cover horror in a future poll. I image that eliminates almost all H.P. Lovecraft and all Lovecraft worth considering. ---
**Author:** ![Miss\_Woodhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/838e76/32.png) [@Miss\_Woodhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miss_Woodhouse)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/71 "2011-08-17T00:21:17Z")
Xanth?? Crazy people. The first book is fun and pretty good. The ones just following until Night Mare are fun reads. Everything after that is pure and utter dreck. And also the exact same plot. I was surprised I had read as many of those as I have. It definitely gives me a good list to take to the library next time I go. I have many holes to fill in my fantasy education. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/72 "2011-08-17T01:07:12Z")
> [@Busy\_Scissors](#): > > It’s disappointing given some of the howlers on the list, sure. But would you really put her stuff in your top 100 All Time SF / fantasy list? I’ve read a lot of her fantasy stuff and it’s good, but not top 100 all time good. Her weaker books are also written to a pretty bad standard. > > I’ve not read some of her more celebrated SF books though, so could well be missing out on her best stuff. > > For Vance, has to be _Cugels Saga_ for me. Peerless. You are - I can’t read her fantasy for love nor money (though I haven’t tried in a decade) but I’ve read her Foreigner and Chanur books several times, and _Cyteen_ is an amazing work (although divisive as I understand.) Not to mention _Downbelow Station_ and the rest of her Alliance/Union books. I just reread _20,000 in Gehenna_ and _Merchanter’s Luck_, as it happens, and there was a lot more to them than I really got the first time around as a teenager. ETA - IMHO, she is absolutely peerless in the sci-fi mini-genre of “going native stories”. She was apprenticing in Chanur (although they’re definitely more fun) and doing her masterwork with Foreigner. ---
**Author:** ![lisiate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f05b48/32.png) [@lisiate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lisiate)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/73 "2011-08-17T01:38:06Z")
> [@Dr. Rieux](#): > > A major omission–Jack Vance. See post #54 > [@Alessan](#): > > The problem with Vance is that despite the fact that he’s produced a staggering amount of consistantly excellent work, he has no real standout novel or collection that can be nominated. Ask 10 SF fans to name the best Vance book, and they’ll give you 10 different titles. You raise a very good point, have Vance’s prodigious talents and longevity rendered any single work nuncapatory when compared to the totality of his career? If pushed to settle on just two books I’d back _Suldren’s Garden_ for fantasy and _The Languages of Pao_ for science fiction. ---
**Author:** ![Reno\_Nevada](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Reno\_Nevada](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reno_Nevada)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/74 "2011-08-17T02:07:30Z")
I think that a lot of the “howlers” are books that skew very young. I liked Xanth a lot when I was 13, and The Belgariad when I was 16, but they were both unreadable by the time I hit 20 or so. I would guess the Zz’dtri Chronicles (or whatever it was) are similar. All in all, not a terrible list, and there are a few great books that don’t often show up on these lists–I am thinking of \*The Last Unicorn \*here. I have read about 60 of them–and I am now reading \*Sunshine \*for the first time. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/75 "2011-08-17T03:13:36Z")
I imagine a lot of the votes (those **Reno** mentioned, plus things like the Star Wars books) are from people for whom that’s the only SF they’ve read. ---
**Author:** ![4d3fect](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/4d3fect/32/9728_2.png) [@4d3fect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/4d3fect)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/76 "2011-08-17T06:17:27Z")
Surprised to see Canticle for Leibowitz on the list, remember that vividly from college–thought it was more of a niche novel. No James Tiptree? Harlan Ellison? Stanislaw Lem? ---
**Author:** ![Suil\_Dubh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/85f322/32.png) [@Suil\_Dubh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suil_Dubh)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/77 "2011-08-17T12:10:46Z")
> [@HookerChemical](#): > > I image that eliminates almost all H.P. Lovecraft and all Lovecraft worth considering. Ah ha! That explains it. Thanks for digging that up. I was thinking… one of the reasons that Rowling and the _Harry Potter_ books are absent might be because no one wants to admit to reading them, or taking them seriously (for what it’s worth, I enjoyed them). > [@Chronos](#): > > I imagine a lot of the votes (those **Reno** mentioned, plus things like the Star Wars books) are from people for whom that’s the only SF they’ve read. Yeah, I think the list would look a lot differently if it were from _Asimov’s_ or _Analog_ readers as opposed to NPR listeners. I think we’d see a lot more of the missing “classic SF” authors that other posters here have noted. ---
**Author:** ![Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barkis_is_Willin)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/78 "2011-08-17T13:08:48Z")
Harry Potter and Narnia were omitted because the list [excludes Young Adult (YA) books](http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2011/08/11/139346998/nprs-top-100-science-fiction-and-fantasy-novels-parsing-the-results). That’s probably a good thing, else \*The Hunger Games \*would likely have been voted on. I agree with the poster who mentioned the absence of Sturgeon. I recently read _More than Human_ and it is one of the most unique concepts I’ve ever seen. The only problem is I think it may be out of print and somewhat hard to find. ---
**Author:** ![hogarth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hogarth/32/1773_2.png) [@hogarth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hogarth)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/79 "2011-08-17T15:12:57Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > Harry Potter and Narnia were omitted because the list [excludes Young Adult (YA) books](http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2011/08/11/139346998/nprs-top-100-science-fiction-and-fantasy-novels-parsing-the-results). I’m sure I know more people who’ve read the Harry Potter books as adults than the Xanth books! ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2011, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676/80 "2011-08-17T17:21:22Z")
> [@](#): > > I agree with the poster who mentioned the absence of Sturgeon. I recently read _More than Human_ and it is one of the most unique concepts I’ve ever seen. The only problem is I think it may be out of print and somewhat hard to find.[URL=“[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=14147902](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=14147902)”] OK, THAT one is going on my Nook list. I read it when I was quite young. My mother’s father was quite an SF fan, and he was delighted that at least one of his grandkids also read SF…even if I WAS a girl. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-top-100-sf-fantasy-list/592676.md?page=5)