Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

btboces.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 56 posts

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#41

Post by throw4847285 »

thedanbob wrote: post #27
sonofhans wrote: post #6

I’ll always upvote Bradbury; what a master. Isaac Asimov used to talk about “the big 3” of science fiction of his era: himself (natch), Arthur C Clarke, and Ray Bradbury. The more I read of all those cats, and boy have I read them, I came to see that Asimov was wrong, and that Bradbury was a different and better writer altogether. Bradbury’s stories are about people, deeply real and deeply feeling people. This thread…

> Bradbury’s stories are about people, deeply real and deeply feeling people. ... and less interested in exactly how the ray guns worked. Maybe this is why I never really got Bradbury. When I read scifi, I can't help but consider the logic of the world that's being described, and Bradbury's worlds aren't really logical (e.g. who would live on such a strict timetable? wouldn't all the singing and rhyming be annoying?…

I have the inverse perspective. I am uninterested in the mechanics because to me, all science fiction stories are actually stories about the present. The more mechanical a story is, the more I feel it is obscuring that truth. The author can never erase the fact that they are living in the present and that their work is ultimately about the present. They can only obscure it under layers of verisimilitude that, definitionally, is only an appearance.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#42

Post by sonofhans »

secretballot wrote: post #37
sonofhans wrote: post #6

I’ll always upvote Bradbury; what a master. Isaac Asimov used to talk about “the big 3” of science fiction of his era: himself (natch), Arthur C Clarke, and Ray Bradbury. The more I read of all those cats, and boy have I read them, I came to see that Asimov was wrong, and that Bradbury was a different and better writer altogether. Bradbury’s stories are about people, deeply real and deeply feeling people. This thread…

Strong second here. I’ve read lots and lots of all three. Clarke wrote good stories. Asimov had some good ideas but was a fairly poor writer of fiction (his characters and dialog, in particular, are rarely better than terrible, and many of his stories hinge on a single gee-what-if shower thought and have little more going for them) and is in my estimation easily the weakest of the three. Bradbury… is good good. He ha…

I totally agree. I wouldn’t recommend Asimov to anyone much over 12. After that point I’d hope kids to have outgrown him, like the Hardy Boys.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#43

Post by sonofhans »

thedanbob wrote: post #27
sonofhans wrote: post #6

I’ll always upvote Bradbury; what a master. Isaac Asimov used to talk about “the big 3” of science fiction of his era: himself (natch), Arthur C Clarke, and Ray Bradbury. The more I read of all those cats, and boy have I read them, I came to see that Asimov was wrong, and that Bradbury was a different and better writer altogether. Bradbury’s stories are about people, deeply real and deeply feeling people. This thread…

> Bradbury’s stories are about people, deeply real and deeply feeling people. ... and less interested in exactly how the ray guns worked. Maybe this is why I never really got Bradbury. When I read scifi, I can't help but consider the logic of the world that's being described, and Bradbury's worlds aren't really logical (e.g. who would live on such a strict timetable? wouldn't all the singing and rhyming be annoying?…

FWIW it’s not that I don’t find the worlds logical, just that Bradbury doesn’t explain them. E.g., have you read Seveneves (Neal Stephenson)? At one point he spends about 30 pages describing in loving detail the tech behind a high-atmosphere human glider suit. Really cool stuff. I still don’t remember a damn thing about the person who wore it.

Were it Bradbury, or LeGuin, we’d have had two sentences about the tech behind the suit and pages about the people involved. We’d have learned more about the character and, maybe, our common humanity.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#44

Post by srean »

sonofhans wrote: post #42
secretballot wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong second here. I’ve read lots and lots of all three. Clarke wrote good stories. Asimov had some good ideas but was a fairly poor writer of fiction (his characters and dialog, in particular, are rarely better than terrible, and many of his stories hinge on a single gee-what-if shower thought and have little more going for them) and is in my estimation easily the weakest of the three. Bradbury… is good good. He ha…

I totally agree. I wouldn’t recommend Asimov to anyone much over 12. After that point I’d hope kids to have outgrown him, like the Hardy Boys.

His non-fiction though ... among the best.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#45

Post by culebron21 »

aebtebeten wrote: post #2

the soviet cartoon version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LNHYz89sNc

The English description says "Russia, 1987". This is incorrect. It's 1984 (before the Perestroyka polity), Uzbekfilm studio in Tashkent (now Uzbekistan). Interestingly, the crew surnames are some Uzbek, some Russian, some Korean (Tsoi) and even one German last name.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#46

Post by thedanbob »

sonofhans wrote: post #43
thedanbob wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bradbury’s stories are about people, deeply real and deeply feeling people. ... and less interested in exactly how the ray guns worked. Maybe this is why I never really got Bradbury. When I read scifi, I can't help but consider the logic of the world that's being described, and Bradbury's worlds aren't really logical (e.g. who would live on such a strict timetable? wouldn't all the singing and rhyming be annoying?…

FWIW it’s not that I don’t find the worlds logical, just that Bradbury doesn’t explain them. E.g., have you read Seveneves (Neal Stephenson)? At one point he spends about 30 pages describing in loving detail the tech behind a high-atmosphere human glider suit. Really cool stuff. I still don’t remember a damn thing about the person who wore it. Were it Bradbury, or LeGuin, we’d have had two sentences about the tech be…

I really enjoy the original Earthsea books. I guess my expectations of sci-fi are different than magic/fantasy; technology feels like it should be explainable in a way that magic doesn't. I'd probably enjoy Bradbury more if I approached his stories as fairy tales rather than sci-fi.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#47

Post by sonofhans »

srean wrote: post #44
sonofhans wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree. I wouldn’t recommend Asimov to anyone much over 12. After that point I’d hope kids to have outgrown him, like the Hardy Boys.

His non-fiction though ... among the best.

He was a fucking genius, and seemed never to stop writing books. Good qualities all told.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#48

Post by sonofhans »

thedanbob wrote: post #46
sonofhans wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW it’s not that I don’t find the worlds logical, just that Bradbury doesn’t explain them. E.g., have you read Seveneves (Neal Stephenson)? At one point he spends about 30 pages describing in loving detail the tech behind a high-atmosphere human glider suit. Really cool stuff. I still don’t remember a damn thing about the person who wore it. Were it Bradbury, or LeGuin, we’d have had two sentences about the tech be…

I really enjoy the original Earthsea books. I guess my expectations of sci-fi are different than magic/fantasy; technology feels like it should be explainable in a way that magic doesn't. I'd probably enjoy Bradbury more if I approached his stories as fairy tales rather than sci-fi.

I think that’s a fair take. A lot of his stuff is straight fantasy, some is very nearly realism; a lot of time he seems to enjoy ignoring the lines while he colors. Try “Something Wicked This Way Comes,” perhaps; almost zero science to it :)

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#49

Post by sonofhans »

throw4847285 wrote: post #41
thedanbob wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bradbury’s stories are about people, deeply real and deeply feeling people. ... and less interested in exactly how the ray guns worked. Maybe this is why I never really got Bradbury. When I read scifi, I can't help but consider the logic of the world that's being described, and Bradbury's worlds aren't really logical (e.g. who would live on such a strict timetable? wouldn't all the singing and rhyming be annoying?…

I have the inverse perspective. I am uninterested in the mechanics because to me, all science fiction stories are actually stories about the present. The more mechanical a story is, the more I feel it is obscuring that truth. The author can never erase the fact that they are living in the present and that their work is ultimately about the present. They can only obscure it under layers of verisimilitude that, definit…

I remember reading a golden age science fiction story where an engineer is angry because he dropped his slide rule as he was getting into his backyard moon rocket. We’ve not always been good at predicting the future, that’s for sure.

Re: There Will Come Soft Rains (1950) [pdf]

#50

Post by secretballot »

srean wrote: post #44
sonofhans wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree. I wouldn’t recommend Asimov to anyone much over 12. After that point I’d hope kids to have outgrown him, like the Hardy Boys.

His non-fiction though ... among the best.

My "fairly poor writer of fiction" looks that way for a reason.
Post reply on HN