From Newsgroup: rec.arts.books

On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 10:25:32 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:

This pressure from publishers acts to hurt the reputation of authors. >"Foundation's Edge" is not a particularly good book, and that's probably >because it's not the book that Asimov wanted to write. Sequels are
rarely as good as original novels.

Piers Anthony is an extreme example of this. He's written some good
novels, but he's also written lots of sequels, and the sequels are crap.
So he gets remembered as the author of a lot of crap books.

I've only read one of his books, "Mascroscope", which I thought was
crap when I first read it in 1973. I reread it in 2003 because I could
remember a couple of scenes from it and thought it couldn't have been
*that* bad, but it was. So I'd be interested in knowing what his good
ones are. I've seen some in our local library, but I've avoided them.

I've had similar experiences with other SF books, if you're interested
see:

<https://khanya.wordpress.com/2019/07/09/on-reading-unbelievably-bad-books/>

For a while I refused to read anything by Philip Jose Farmer, because of
what he did with the never-ending Riverworld series.

Yes, I read the first in the series, and wondered what was going on.
Someone said all was revealed in the final book, so I skipped to that,
and the promised great revelations were absent.

Another example of pushy publishers is William Horwood.

He wrote a fairly good book called "Duncton Wood", about moles. It was
fairly obviously written to cash in on the popularity of Richard
Adams's "Watership Down", and Horwood did for moles what Adams had
done for rabbits. Adams, probably wisely, didn't try to write a
sequel.

But 8 years after the publication of "Duncton Wood", Horwood wrote a
sequel, "Duncton Quest", I suspected that it was pressure from his
publishers, because it wasn't as good as the first.

Then came a third, "Duncton Found", to make a trilogy.

Horwood really should have stopped there, but it seems that his
publishers wouldn't let him, so he wrote a second trilogy, with each
book crappier than the last. I got the impression that he was heartily
sick of writing about moles, and was trying to make his readers sick
of books about moles so they would stop demanding more from the
publishers.

Another sequel that should never have been written is "Wild Horse
Woman" by Walter M. Miller, a sequel or spin off to "A Canticle for
Leibowitz". Some people have only one book in them, and Miller was one
of them.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.books

On 27/09/25 13:49, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 10:25:32 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:

This pressure from publishers acts to hurt the reputation of
authors. "Foundation's Edge" is not a particularly good book, and
that's probably because it's not the book that Asimov wanted to
write. Sequels are rarely as good as original novels.

Piers Anthony is an extreme example of this. He's written some
good novels, but he's also written lots of sequels, and the sequels
are crap. So he gets remembered as the author of a lot of crap
books.

I've only read one of his books, "Mascroscope", which I thought was
crap when I first read it in 1973. I reread it in 2003 because I
could remember a couple of scenes from it and thought it couldn't
have been *that* bad, but it was. So I'd be interested in knowing
what his good ones are. I've seen some in our local library, but I've
avoided them.

Actually, I would have nominated Macroscope as his best book I'd better
leave the recommendations to someone who likes Anthony better.

For a while I refused to read anything by Philip Jose Farmer,
because of what he did with the never-ending Riverworld series.

Yes, I read the first in the series, and wondered what was going on.
Someone said all was revealed in the final book, so I skipped to
that, and the promised great revelations were absent.

What I hated about Riverworld was that you didn't find out that there
was a sequel until the end of the first book; and then you had to get to
the end of the second book to discover that it was a trilogy. I gave up
by about the fifth book of the trilogy. Each time, there was a hint that
the unresolved details would be resolved in the next book; but they
never were.

Another sequel that should never have been written is "Wild Horse
Woman" by Walter M. Miller, a sequel or spin off to "A Canticle for Leibowitz". Some people have only one book in them, and Miller was
one of them.

Totally agree. The first book was excellent. The next one was a big disappointment. And a lot thicker, which makes the disappointment worse.

But he wasn't entirely a one-book author. I have his "The View From the
Stars", a collection of short stories, and some of those are worth reading.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.books

On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 14:50:49 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:

On 27/09/25 13:49, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 10:25:32 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:

This pressure from publishers acts to hurt the reputation of
authors. "Foundation's Edge" is not a particularly good book, and
that's probably because it's not the book that Asimov wanted to
write. Sequels are rarely as good as original novels.

Piers Anthony is an extreme example of this. He's written some
good novels, but he's also written lots of sequels, and the sequels
are crap. So he gets remembered as the author of a lot of crap
books.

I've only read one of his books, "Mascroscope", which I thought was
crap when I first read it in 1973. I reread it in 2003 because I
could remember a couple of scenes from it and thought it couldn't
have been *that* bad, but it was. So I'd be interested in knowing
what his good ones are. I've seen some in our local library, but I've
avoided them.

Actually, I would have nominated Macroscope as his best book I'd better
leave the recommendations to someone who likes Anthony better.

Wow! The only thing I remembered from the first reading and which got
me to reread it was the idea of turning people into glup and
reconstituting them for intergalactic travel. And 20 years after my
second reading, that's still the only thing I can remember.

For a while I refused to read anything by Philip Jose Farmer,
because of what he did with the never-ending Riverworld series.

Yes, I read the first in the series, and wondered what was going on.
Someone said all was revealed in the final book, so I skipped to
that, and the promised great revelations were absent.

What I hated about Riverworld was that you didn't find out that there
was a sequel until the end of the first book; and then you had to get to
the end of the second book to discover that it was a trilogy. I gave up
by about the fifth book of the trilogy. Each time, there was a hint that
the unresolved details would be resolved in the next book; but they
never were.

Yes, that's why I skipped to the last one, when I found it. And when
the denoument of that one didn't reveal all I've avoided his books
ever since.

Another sequel that should never have been written is "Wild Horse
Woman" by Walter M. Miller, a sequel or spin off to "A Canticle for
Leibowitz". Some people have only one book in them, and Miller was
one of them.

Totally agree. The first book was excellent. The next one was a big >disappointment. And a lot thicker, which makes the disappointment worse.

But he wasn't entirely a one-book author. I have his "The View From the >Stars", a collection of short stories, and some of those are worth reading.

Ah, I haven't seen that. Will look out for it.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2