When I was a kid I loved Heinlein, Asimov, Piers Anthony, Howard, Lovecraft, among dozens of other then popular scifi and fantasy authors

Heinlein is some weirdo libertarian fascist

Asimov hates women and was a notorious sex creep

Zanthony is a pedophile and his books are full of creepy shit

Howard was staggeringly racist

Lovecraft is also famously racist.

And that's just the ones off the top of my head.

At some point I learned that all these guys were creeps, came to terms with it, and moved on with my life. Like an adult.

So all these people whining that "oh no I can't let go of my childhood!!!!" fill me with contempt. Many of the great shit-head scifi/fantasy writers of the 20th century made great contributions to the field of fantasy and sci fi. Our conception of robots wouldn't be the same without Asimov. Heinlein changed military sci-fi forever. Howard's Conan had a lasting impact on fantasy fiction far beyond what was merited by his mediocre writing. Lovecraft introduced the notion of Cosmic Horror that continues to push back the borders of science fiction today.

Rowling can claim none of that. Her wizard books are extremely mediocre with poor plots, flat characters, and no new ideas. Their popularity is the result of a then unprecedented marketing campaign, not any particular artistic merit. They're entirely pedestrian and forgettable and there's no reason to read them except as a historical curiosity or a case study in successful marketing of children's literature.

I gave up many genuinely influential and talented writers when I realized that they were jackasses. There was nothing riding on it. No one is using Lovecraft to justify violence against Inuit people or something. I just found out they were jerks and said "Well shit. Guess I won't recommend these to kids anymore".

And all these jackasses have the audacity to say that we should respect their love of the mid wizard book beause it's so important to them?

  • Bloobish [comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Yup, overall I just think Terry Pratchett was good as he wrote from a humanistic perspective compared to how a lot of sci fi writers give off creepy libertarian brained vibes and takes (looking at you Heinlein).

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      2 years ago

      The young witch novels are also spoken fondly of by a lot of people. Tiffany Aching is a young woman who has adventures, and unlike Harry she's clever, kind, courageous, and benefits from the mentorship of capable elders. Kind of everything that sucks about Harry is done well with Tiffany.

      Pterry also introduces one of the most beloved version of DEATH and I know a lot of people facing death and hardship have been comforted by the idea that someone like Pterry's DEATH might be there to shepherd them to their end.

      • Bloobish [comrade/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I honestly loved his version of death and reading the 'Reaper Man' was a treat.

    • BeamBrain [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      We need more communist sci-fi creators with a good grasp of historical materialism. I try to be that, though I'm more of a game writer than a prose writer.

      • Bloobish [comrade/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        There's Ursula K Le Guin, good example of discussing a sci fi post scarcity commune and how it influences cultural vocabulary (written in the perspective of a character from a shitty capitalist mining world).