# Top 100 Sci-Fi Books **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [December 31, 2006, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213 "2006-12-31T15:46:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/1 "2006-12-31T15:46:56Z")
[Top 100 Sci-Fi Books](http://home.austarnet.com.au/petersykes/topscifi/lists_books_rank1.html) - This link via Fark is an interesting read. It’s interesting (to me) that I haven’t read several of the to rated ones like Neuromancer, Hyperion, and Snowcrash ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/2 "2006-12-31T15:59:45Z")
Yeah, I’ve read about 70% of them, but nearly all of the top rated ones (not counted the H.G. Wells, who I haven’t read enough of). ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/3 "2006-12-31T16:09:35Z")
[QUOTE=astro] [Top 100 Sci-Fi Books](http://home.austarnet.com.au/petersykes/topscifi/lists_books_rank1.html) - This link via Fark is an interesting read. It’s interesting (to me) that I haven’t read several of the to rated ones like Neuromancer, Hyperion, and Snowcrash [/QUOTE] For what its worth, I can heartily recommend Hyperion and Snowcrash. Snowcrash is just awesome. Hyperion probably changed the way I think a little. -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![Astroboy14](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/df705f/32.png) [@Astroboy14](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astroboy14)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/4 "2006-12-31T16:51:13Z")
I was reading through that list, slightly puzzled at some of their selections, when I came across **Battlefield Earth** at number 57… obviously their standards of judging the top 100 are vastly different than anything I would come up with. ---
**Author:** ![Hello\_Again](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/85e7bf/32.png) [@Hello\_Again](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hello_Again)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/5 "2006-12-31T16:59:46Z")
[QUOTE=Astroboy14] I was reading through that list, slightly puzzled at some of their selections, when I came across **Battlefield Earth** at number 57… obviously their standards of judging the top 100 are vastly different than anything I would come up with. [/QUOTE] Truly. In what alternate dimension is _Jurassic Park_ a superior book to _UBIK_? And _Pattern Recognition_ doesn’t even belong on that list. Its not a SF novel. Its a thriller about Market Research, mostly. But you know how these lists go. They just give geeks something to argue about. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/6 "2006-12-31T17:06:29Z")
I agree with Astroboy. They seem to give a lot of weight to books that have had influence on the culture outside the SF community. There’s “1984,” “Brave New World” Atwood’s “A Handmaid’s Tale” and LeGuin’s “The Dispossessed.” None of them exactly hardcore SF, all of them included I suspect because some elements of mainstream culture found them important. And yet, none of Norman’s Gor novels are included, even though they spawned a subculture as surely as some of the others did. There’s some great hardcore SF on that list: The Diamond Age, A Fire Upon the Deep, Use of Weapons, but the overall selection process seems very, um, problematical to me. ---
**Author:** ![Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e47c2d/32.png) [@Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/7 "2006-12-31T17:15:51Z")
How can **The Shadow of the Torturer** be halfway up the list, and the rest of the tetralogy nowhere to be seen? I’d be inclined to let **The Book of the New Sun** count as a single book, myself. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/8 "2006-12-31T17:30:10Z")
Was this list affected by voting? Battlefield Earth may have gotten on due to Scientologists flooding the poll. Weird list. Too weighted towards popularity, and some of the choices were baffling. _Valis_ and _Cryptonomicon_ aren’t really SF. Three Ender books? So much Crichton? I think you’d have better luck asking for SF recs on the SDMB. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/9 "2006-12-31T17:34:35Z")
I rarely take lists like that even remotely seriously, as they are compiled by morons. Or rabble-rousers. 😃 _Alas, Babylon_? Sci-fi? In whose universe? ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/10 "2006-12-31T17:38:05Z")
I actually liked Battlefield Earth the book. I read it in my teens without any Scientology baggage. As a pure sort of pulp adventure it was great. Each time I’ve read it I was sad when it ended because I wanted more. The rest of the list has some hits and misses. Dune at #1 I think you could argue for. It’s certainly one of the top contenders. Ender’s Game at #2? I like most of Card’s stuff, sure. But that’s way too high. Does Slaughterhouse Five count as SF? The Mote in God’s Eye at 27? Too low! Varley’s ‘Titan’ made the top 100? I just finished that and REALLY had to work to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Illuminatiprimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/illuminatiprimus/32/11520_2.png) [@Illuminatiprimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Illuminatiprimus)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/11 "2006-12-31T18:36:57Z")
I’d agree that this list is a little skew whiff. Whilst I’m happy to see Dune at no 1 I fail to see how Ender’s Game is above 1984, given that the latter practically created the totalitirian distopian future genre and the former isn’t widely known outside of sci-fi circles. As much as I love Cryptonomicon (and indeed anything written by Neal Stephenson) I’m also not clear that it’s sci-fi. ---
**Author:** ![Illuminatiprimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/illuminatiprimus/32/11520_2.png) [@Illuminatiprimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Illuminatiprimus)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/12 "2006-12-31T18:37:22Z")
I’d agree that this list is a little skew whiff. Whilst I’m happy to see Dune at no 1 I fail to see how Ender’s Game is above 1984, given that the latter practically created the totalitarian distopian future genre and the former isn’t widely known outside of sci-fi circles. As much as I love Cryptonomicon (and indeed anything written by Neal Stephenson) I’m also not clear that it’s sci-fi. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/13 "2006-12-31T18:53:01Z")
A reasonable list BUT, to even include genuine classics of _literature_ such as **1984** and **Brave New World** is like including Buckingham Palace and Versailles on a list of the world’s nicest houses (and not even be #1, mind you!). Or, having a [$500K Saleen](http://autos.yahoo.com/saleen_s7/;_ylt=AgIByzezXv7XG09eMUKR0t4V8cIF) in a list of best best [Matchbox Cars](http://www.matchboxtoys.com/showcase/product.aspx?product_number=J2369&category_id=7510§ion=). It’s not a matter of apples and oranges. No, more like apples and diamonds. ---
**Author:** ![Charlie\_Tan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/charlie_tan/32/12582_2.png) [@Charlie\_Tan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charlie_Tan)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/14 "2006-12-31T19:40:44Z")
[QUOTE=KarlGauss] A reasonable list BUT, to even include genuine classics of _literature_ such as **1984** and **Brave New World** is like including Buckingham Palace and Versailles on a list of the world’s nicest houses (and not even be #1, mind you!). [/QUOTE] Ehhh… so they’re not SciFi, then? Or SciFi isn’t literature? And BTW, If I could pick any house in the world to live in, Versailles or Buckingham Palace wouldn’t make it to the top 100. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/15 "2006-12-31T20:12:50Z")
Well, any list compiled as the result of fan polling on line is gong to be suspect. I notice that the list is affected significatly by marketing; certain books are on the list that are marketed quite a bit even today, while others that you don’t see much at bookstores are missing, despite being quite good. As an example, you will notice that Heinlein’s \*Have Space Suit, Will Travel \* is on the list (that was juve fiction), but no where to be found is _Downbelow Station_ by C. J. Cherryh, a quite good book that was a Hugo and Nebula award winner. I think that, if you were to ask “experts” (such as the Science Fiction Writer’s Association) about such a list, you would see some differences. Please do not EVER equate any John Norman effort with something “good.” The Gor books are trash, trash, trash. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/16 "2006-12-31T20:54:48Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > I agree with Astroboy. They seem to give a lot of weight to books that have had influence on the culture outside the SF community. There’s “1984,” “Brave New World” Atwood’s “A Handmaid’s Tale” and LeGuin’s “The Dispossessed.” None of them exactly hardcore SF, all of them included I suspect because some elements of mainstream culture found them important. [QUOTE=Jonathan Chance] Does Slaughterhouse Five count as SF? [/QUOTE] > [@KarlGauss](#): > > A reasonable list BUT, to even include genuine classics of literature such as 1984 and Brave New World is like including Buckingham Palace and Versailles on a list of the world’s nicest houses (and not even be #1, mind you!). Or, having a $500K Saleen in a list of best best Matchbox Cars. It’s not a matter of apples and oranges. No, more like apples and diamonds. Three people. Three widely disperate viewpoints. And yet all three make the case in their own ways that “if it’s good, it’s not sf.” A plague on all your houses. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/17 "2006-12-31T21:20:14Z")
[QUOTE=Evil Captor] And yet, none of Norman’s Gor novels are included, even though they spawned a subculture as surely as some of the others did. [/QUOTE] A subculture with a reputation for misogyny and brutality. BDSM for fun is one thing; turning it to an ideology is another. And it’s a fan based poll, and plenty of sci-fi fans _hate_ those books. ---
**Author:** ![Lok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e8c25b/32.png) [@Lok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lok)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/18 "2006-12-31T22:15:14Z")
[QUOTE=silenus] _Alas, Babylon_? Sci-fi? In whose universe? [/QUOTE] You mean when it was written in 1959 we had already had a nuclear war with the Soviet Union? If not, then it would qualify as an alternate history, which is usually considered SF. I know I considered it that the first time I read it in the early 70s. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2006, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/19 "2006-12-31T22:38:54Z")
_Alas, Babylon_ offered nothing new. No new ideas, no new technology. It also dealt with the time it was written. I would consider it no more science fiction than I would _Wuthering Heights_ or _Bleak House_. It was just fiction, not **science** fiction. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2007, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213/20 "2007-01-01T00:02:06Z")
[QUOTE=silenus] _Alas, Babylon_ offered nothing new. No new ideas, no new technology. It also dealt with the time it was written. I would consider it no more science fiction than I would _Wuthering Heights_ or _Bleak House_. It was just fiction, not **science** fiction. [/QUOTE] At the time, story lines which dealt with alternate realities in which nuclear war had occurred were usually considered part and parcel to science fiction. The “science” involved was the relatively new science of nuclear technology. You can verify this by looking at any of dozens of anthologies, magazines, etc. from the 40’s and 50’s. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-100-sci-fi-books/386213.md?page=2)