Hot Best Seller

Speculative Fiction 2012

Availability: Ready to download

How do you write female characters with agency? What did J.R.R. Tolkien learn from Attila the Hun? What is it like to be a dragon? Is science fiction stuck in a rut? The Internet has the answers. Speculative Fiction 2012 collects over fifty articles from some of the top bloggers and authors in science fiction and fantasy, including over two dozen reviews. Contributors incl How do you write female characters with agency? What did J.R.R. Tolkien learn from Attila the Hun? What is it like to be a dragon? Is science fiction stuck in a rut? The Internet has the answers. Speculative Fiction 2012 collects over fifty articles from some of the top bloggers and authors in science fiction and fantasy, including over two dozen reviews. Contributors include Joe Abercrombie, Daniel Abraham, Niall Alexander, Kate Elliott, N. K. Jemisin, Aidan Moher, Abigail Nussbaum, Christopher Priest, Adam Roberts, Tansy Rayner Roberts, Sam Sykes and Lavie Tidhar.


Compare

How do you write female characters with agency? What did J.R.R. Tolkien learn from Attila the Hun? What is it like to be a dragon? Is science fiction stuck in a rut? The Internet has the answers. Speculative Fiction 2012 collects over fifty articles from some of the top bloggers and authors in science fiction and fantasy, including over two dozen reviews. Contributors incl How do you write female characters with agency? What did J.R.R. Tolkien learn from Attila the Hun? What is it like to be a dragon? Is science fiction stuck in a rut? The Internet has the answers. Speculative Fiction 2012 collects over fifty articles from some of the top bloggers and authors in science fiction and fantasy, including over two dozen reviews. Contributors include Joe Abercrombie, Daniel Abraham, Niall Alexander, Kate Elliott, N. K. Jemisin, Aidan Moher, Abigail Nussbaum, Christopher Priest, Adam Roberts, Tansy Rayner Roberts, Sam Sykes and Lavie Tidhar.

30 review for Speculative Fiction 2012

  1. 4 out of 5

    Caroline

    This is a cool project rounding up reviews and blog posts related to science fiction and fantasy over a particular year. The editors have assembled a nice balance of voices (though there's clearly a progressive/liberal bent to them overall -- this doesn't seem to be an attempt to capture voices across the political spectrum, since I know for a fact there are loud right-wingers and reactionaries blogging about SF all over the place -- and on thinking about it, I rather wish that the editors had m This is a cool project rounding up reviews and blog posts related to science fiction and fantasy over a particular year. The editors have assembled a nice balance of voices (though there's clearly a progressive/liberal bent to them overall -- this doesn't seem to be an attempt to capture voices across the political spectrum, since I know for a fact there are loud right-wingers and reactionaries blogging about SF all over the place -- and on thinking about it, I rather wish that the editors had mentioned that selection bias, not because I *want* to read those posts but because the stated goal of the project is to capture the state of online writing in 2012, and somebody reading this decades in the future would get a picture of a blogosphere being more progressive and in-accord than it was). Otherwise I loved a lot of the selections and found almost all of them interesting or useful in some way. The one thing that bugs me is that there are 3 rather lengthy pieces, each harping in their own way about how hardly anything of value is being produced in SF, and how the genre needs to live up to certain standards that the author has decided on, and nothing else has any worth. This is a pretty familiar kind of article for anybody who has spent anytime reading literary reviews, and it's pretty much my least favorite kind of article for lots of reasons (everything you're interested in and thought you had been learning about in the rest of this book SUCKS, more fool you). I understand having these articles in here, but I'm assuming that each of them started conversations when they were published (I assume the point of that kind of article is to start conversations) but no reaction to or acknowledgment of these articles shows up in any of the other selections. I'm not sure if the editors' intent was to let the lively conversation reflected in the rest of the anthology serve as a rebuttal to these pieces, but the actual effect was that the negativity of these three pieces (and the desire of my mind to go 'yes, but --' because I don't per se think those writers are wrong, I just hate this fatalistic kind of framing that attempts to render any other conversation moot because it's not addressing the important things that the critic has stated are the only things worth addressing) almost outweighs and unbalances everything I enjoyed. Nonetheless, I've already bought Speculative Fiction 2013...

  2. 4 out of 5

    Stefan

    Fascinating look at the 2012 SFF blogosphere. I won't review this piece by piece (also because one of my reviews is included in the book), but gladly recommend the book to all and sundry. I understand your purchase will support a charity, too. So why wait? More info about this book, including a full list of contributors, can be found on my site Far Beyond Reality! Fascinating look at the 2012 SFF blogosphere. I won't review this piece by piece (also because one of my reviews is included in the book), but gladly recommend the book to all and sundry. I understand your purchase will support a charity, too. So why wait? More info about this book, including a full list of contributors, can be found on my site Far Beyond Reality!

  3. 4 out of 5

    Nicholas Whyte

    http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2307449.html[return][return]I am easily pleased sometimes. This is a collection of online commentary on sf which was published in 2012, pulling together the sorts of essays I always like reading and wish I could write more often. All the usual suspects are here - in-depth examinations of race and gender as they are manifested in the genre, but also simple critiques of writing as writing. It's not perfect - the internal ordering of the pieces seems half thought throu http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2307449.html[return][return]I am easily pleased sometimes. This is a collection of online commentary on sf which was published in 2012, pulling together the sorts of essays I always like reading and wish I could write more often. All the usual suspects are here - in-depth examinations of race and gender as they are manifested in the genre, but also simple critiques of writing as writing. It's not perfect - the internal ordering of the pieces seems half thought through (is it alphabetical by author's first name? Not quite, but if not, then what?) and I would have dropped most of the shorter pieces in favour of some more long ones - but I was pretty sure from an early stage that I would give it a high place on my Hugo ballot. Then I reached page 297 and found my own name in the first line. Yep, I'm easily pleased.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Norman Cook

    I read this book because it was nominated for the Hugo Award. As an anthology, it had some entries that were excellent and some that were not. I found a number of the articles to be too long, and the overall book probably could have been shorter. There also seemed to be less diversity than one would expect in something billed as an overview of online publishing; there really was nothing from the vocal conservative crowd that makes up much of the internet. If I had read this book outside the cont I read this book because it was nominated for the Hugo Award. As an anthology, it had some entries that were excellent and some that were not. I found a number of the articles to be too long, and the overall book probably could have been shorter. There also seemed to be less diversity than one would expect in something billed as an overview of online publishing; there really was nothing from the vocal conservative crowd that makes up much of the internet. If I had read this book outside the context of a Hugo nominee, I probably would go away relatively satisfied; there were enough pieces to keep me interested. However, all of the entries were first published in 2012 (or earlier), so although technically eligible for a 2013 award by dint of being anthologized in 2013, I have trouble accepting this as a viable winner. Anthologies by definition reprint old material. I would rather give an award to new writing.

  5. 4 out of 5

    Tyrannosaurus regina

    As I began to get excited for the coming 2014 edition in this series, I suddenly realised I'd never actually finished reading the 2012 book. It was interesting going back from the distance of just a couple of years and seeing parts of conversations I remembered, and the seeds of things that would be a much larger part of the 2013 collection. Some of the pieces were excellent and some were slight or uneven, and I was particularly pleased that some of them I disagreed with very much. Issues have m As I began to get excited for the coming 2014 edition in this series, I suddenly realised I'd never actually finished reading the 2012 book. It was interesting going back from the distance of just a couple of years and seeing parts of conversations I remembered, and the seeds of things that would be a much larger part of the 2013 collection. Some of the pieces were excellent and some were slight or uneven, and I was particularly pleased that some of them I disagreed with very much. Issues have many sides and it's good to see some of them coexisting here.

  6. 4 out of 5

    Lulu

    While including a large and varied collection of reviews, essays and blog posts, some of these were really wobbly on quality, and probably did not deserve placement in this collection. An interesting read, with some great thoughts put across, but the reviews, in particular, were hit and miss, especially a few that attempted a poor humour. I will be reading the 2013 edition in hopes that this will have improved, and will provide more of the good things this collection held.

  7. 4 out of 5

    Beth

    This is a series of reviews and blogs from the year 2012 about speculative fiction--reviews of specific books and authors and fantasy and science fiction in general and a few controversies that I hadn't actually heard about. As all anthologies, the quality varies, but on the whole this was very engaging and interesting to anyone who enjoys SciFi/Fantasy. This is a series of reviews and blogs from the year 2012 about speculative fiction--reviews of specific books and authors and fantasy and science fiction in general and a few controversies that I hadn't actually heard about. As all anthologies, the quality varies, but on the whole this was very engaging and interesting to anyone who enjoys SciFi/Fantasy.

  8. 4 out of 5

    Teleseparatist

    (I didn't read all of it, I flipped through and read those that interested me, rating based on those.) I wish they'd had someone to answer to Christopher Priest's odd attack on Clarke award 2012, I remember how odd that was and that there was a lot of controversy, so an inclusion of a response might have been useful, but perhaps the timeframe didn't permit it. (I didn't read all of it, I flipped through and read those that interested me, rating based on those.) I wish they'd had someone to answer to Christopher Priest's odd attack on Clarke award 2012, I remember how odd that was and that there was a lot of controversy, so an inclusion of a response might have been useful, but perhaps the timeframe didn't permit it.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Kim

    Really good variety of articles, often contradicting each other. Very broad in approach and concerns.

  10. 5 out of 5

    Eugenia Doran

    Some of the reviews/essays/articles collected in this volume were great and some were a load of wank. As expected, to be honest.

  11. 4 out of 5

    Megan

    3.5ish.

  12. 5 out of 5

    Forestofglory

  13. 4 out of 5

    Giorgos

  14. 5 out of 5

    Katharine (Ventureadlaxre)

  15. 5 out of 5

    Stephanie

  16. 4 out of 5

    Stephanie

  17. 5 out of 5

    Michele

  18. 5 out of 5

    Michelle Johns

  19. 5 out of 5

    Louise

  20. 4 out of 5

    Mateja Vidaković

  21. 4 out of 5

    Brett

  22. 5 out of 5

    Robert

  23. 5 out of 5

    aditi bharadwaj in dubai and chennai

  24. 5 out of 5

    Lauren

  25. 4 out of 5

    Johnathan

  26. 5 out of 5

    Hélène

  27. 5 out of 5

    Pugugly

  28. 4 out of 5

    Curtis

  29. 5 out of 5

    Mark

  30. 5 out of 5

    Otto Hylli

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.