I post about details that strike me. They might be linguistic, stylistic, historical, philosophical etc. Themes have emerged like food, multi-sensory descriptions, the pathetic fallacy, moments of realization etc. However, there are many details that I miss through lack of interest or specialist knowledge. I am a philosopher, not a scientist, and also have no particular interest in military history or hardware, unlike Andrea who knows every detail of every European War at least from the Napoleonic period to WWII. (The Russians had better tanks.) I must ask him about the Crusades.
Blog readers who are able to analyze the accounts of military organizations or the background scientific information in the sf novels discussed here are invited to do so. Between us, we should be able to construct an adequate appreciation of the works of Poul Anderson, SM Stirling and at least some of their predecessors and contemporaries. I have not kept abreast of most recent sf but would anyone like to tell us about it?
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
Yes, the Soviets had better tanks in WW II. The problem, for them, was their lousy tactical doctrine and horrendously wasteful use of good and brave soldiers.
I thought Poul Anderson esp. good in speculating what naval battles in space would probably be like. Jerry Pournelle and S.M. Stirling in turn were very good at describing futuristic land warfare. To say nothing of what Drake/Stirling gives us in THE GENERAL books.
Sean
Post a Comment