Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Sci-Fi Entertainment

Four Inducted Into SF Hall of Fame 196

maxentius writes "There are four new members of the Science Fiction Hall of Fame: Chesley Bonestell, Philip K. Dick, Ray Harryhausen, and Steven Spielberg. The Hall, once located in Lawrence, Kansas, is now a part of the Science Fiction Museum in Seattle. This brings to 40 the number of inductees; the newest members will be officially welcomed May 6. According to the SF Museum site, "The event will include a cocktail hour, seated dinner, induction ceremony, and after-party." The ceremony will occur in the middle of the Eaton Conference, a three-day presentation co-sponsored by the museum and the University of California Riverside's Eaton Collection. This year's topic is "Inventing the 21st Century: Many Worlds, Many Histories.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Four Inducted Into SF Hall of Fame

Comments Filter:
  • by FunWithHeadlines ( 644929 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:36PM (#12050622) Homepage
    Philip K. Dick would, of course, find something darkly paranoid about this honor and would have accepted with suspicion. :)
    • Philip K. Dick would, of course, find something darkly paranoid about this honor and would have accepted with suspicion. :)

      Maybe he'd work it into a book which Speilberg could make a movie out of.

      • Re:Philip K. Dick (Score:5, Insightful)

        by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @07:00PM (#12050789) Homepage
        Spielberg would make a dog's dinner out of it and call it a movie. (Not so much a knock at Spielberg as at most attempts to capture PKD on the screen: much the same as the way a killing jar captures butterflies.)
        • Re:Philip K. Dick (Score:3, Insightful)

          by ackthpt ( 218170 ) *
          Spielberg would make a dog's dinner out of it and call it a movie. (Not so much a knock at Spielberg as at most attempts to capture PKD on the screen: much the same as the way a killing jar captures butterflies.)

          Really. Rather see Ridley Scott up there for Alien and Blade Runner, further he's bringing back Andromeda Strain.

          • "...further he's bringing back Andromeda Strain."

            If by bringing it back you mean doing a remake, why? There's nothing wrong with the original and a remake can only be worse.

          • I think the grandparent is quite correct. It is difficult capturing PKD on film. First off, his stories are usually very dense and character driven. That means a long film and being able to do character development.

            For instance, Blade Runner has only the setting of the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and the most basic plot elements. Its missing Deckerd's marital problems, Mercerism, the little existential crisis, lots of important scenes and ideas, etc. Scott pretty much took the story and turned
    • He wouldn't have to search for long. Just look at the headline: "Four Indicted Into SF Hall of Fame."
  • Steven Spielberg? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:36PM (#12050625) Homepage Journal
    Man... The guy will have his version of War of The Worlds come out shortly afterwards. Why would this be? I don't especially associated him with Sci-Fi. Is this a ploy of some sort?

    Lord knows there's a heck of a lot of authors who have done more for Sci-Fi than his films.

    • Well he did do the mini-series Taken, but that's about the only thing that springs to mind at the moment.
    • Re:Steven Spielberg? (Score:5, Informative)

      by raitchison ( 734047 ) <robert@aitchison.org> on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:46PM (#12050702) Homepage Journal

      http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000229/ [imdb.com]

      E.T, Jurassic Park Series, Back to the Future Series, Batteries Not Included, Men In Black just to name a few.

      All of those are classics or wee massively popular, some are both (not going to categorize here)

      Not the greatest contributor ot SciFi of all time but definitely certianly a candidate for the hall of fame.

      • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) *
        http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000229/

        Pop stuff, mostly. JP series was horrible compared to the books. I'd give him a nod for close encounters, but that's about it.

        What about the Michael Crichton, the guy who wrote the JP books?

        Closer to the hearts of /.ers, what about Gene Roddenberry?

        • by Babbster ( 107076 ) <aaronbabb@CHEETAHgmail.com minus cat> on Friday March 25, 2005 @08:15PM (#12051203) Homepage
          Closer to the hearts of /.ers, what about Gene Roddenberry?

          Having looked at the member list, I can only conclude that they're not giving TV scifi any respect. I would certainly expect Gene to enter a scifi hall of fame before Spielberg, if for no other reason than Star Trek came out and had an impact long before Spielberg's stuff. It's certainly had more impact on the scifi culture over four decades.

          A similar oversight in my view is Irwin Allen. He's created, produced and/or directed quite a bit of popular scifi material, most notably Lost in Space.

          Bottom line is that the people are probably folks who are uppity and don't consider TV high enough art (yes, there have been ST movies but the TV was and is homebase for ST).


          • Awards shows/ceremonies are designed to generate income and attract attention. Roddenberry is not a good choice because he's not as rich, influential or alive as Spielberg.
      • by Sanga ( 125777 ) <snatarajan@@@scu...edu> on Friday March 25, 2005 @08:05PM (#12051156) Homepage Journal
        Are you claiming SS wrote all this (/created all of this from scratch?). If rehashing pre-told SCIFI was fair game you can include AI and Minority Report.

        That way, Kubrick has more of a claim to make it there -- he set the tone for many scifi (/fantasy) flicks to follow.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Are people too young to have seen this? One of the best of the genre. I'm am not a UFO believer, but this had me going. The encoounter with the mothership at devils tower was to die for and sets the standard in first contact scenarios. Totally realistic and fully realized on an epic scale. Required no suspension of disbelief in this hardened cynic.
    • by liangzai ( 837960 )
      He is a great popularizer of science fiction, and therefore eligible.

      You can compare this to scientists like Carl Sagan, whose direct contributions to science weren't tremendous, but whose popularization of science has meant a great deal.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      The bigger question to me is why they're honoring someone whos films are derivative of old school scifi, and ignoring (so far) the icons of new wave scifi of the 60s and 70s.

      Chosing someone like Spielberg, involved only peripherally in scifi, as opposed to Harlan Ellison and Roger Zelaszny, who managed to help scifi stay fresh, interesting and relevant in a post-modern world really makes me wonder.

      And where the hell is William Gibson? Anyone who says that E.T. had anywhere near the impact of Neuromancer
      • Does the fact that they're finally inducting PKD tell you nothing?
        • by 1u3hr ( 530656 ) on Saturday March 26, 2005 @12:59AM (#12052553)
          Does the fact that they're finally inducting PKD tell you nothing?

          It tells me it's a sop to literary SF, to cover up their sell out to Hollywood sci-fi's version, where directors of movies based on SF writer's books are honoured. And Ray Harryhousen?? For God's sake, he was a great special effects guy, but what the hell has that to do with SF? And most moves he worked on I can reall were straigh-out fantasy, animated skeletons, etc.P> If they are going to hounour contributors to movie SF they should have started with the Lumiere Brothers.

          Anyway, this marks the end of any credibility of this so-called "Hall of Fame" in my eyes, call me a snob if you will.

    • I was about to say: Ironic they're simultaneously inducting the rapist [imdb.com] and the victim [barnesandnoble.com]

      And don't anyone start whining about how a movie can never be exactly the same as the novel it's based on -- first of all it was a short story, and second the entire premise of the movie was changed from a logic play on Hofstadterish self-reference to a run-of-the-mill "I was framed!" whodunit.

      And don't even get me started on the product placement.

  • No Olaf Stapledon? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rokzy ( 687636 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:38PM (#12050635)
    I'm no expert and don't recognise most of the names, but thought Olaf would be there?
    • You're right, he should be right up there among the giants. Usually only experts recognise Olaf... and even fewer realize that about 40% of the common SF themes that we still see rehashed owe a great deal to Stapledon. That apparent debt includes writers like Clarke (e.g. Childhood's End).

      Too bad the guy wasn't a better writer. His epic books are mostly compressed collections of myriad plots and themes on a cosmic scale. What an imagination!

  • No Frank Herbert? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by downward dog ( 634625 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:38PM (#12050638) Homepage
    Besides Asimov and Bradbury, I would have thought for sure that he'd be there. The Dune series (and not just the first book!) is a serious contender for greatest work of SF/Fantasy ever written.

    Someone correct me and tell me that I just missed him!
    • Re:No Frank Herbert? (Score:5, Informative)

      by mustbepatient ( 869532 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:43PM (#12050677)
      You're not the only one who thinks that highly of Dune - it's ranked #1 on the Locus list: http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/LocusAT1975.ht ml#allnvl Given that, he should be in soon...
    • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:43PM (#12050681) Homepage Journal
      Besides Asimov and Bradbury, I would have thought for sure that he'd be there. The Dune series (and not just the first book!) is a serious contender for greatest work of SF/Fantasy ever written. Someone correct me and tell me that I just missed him!

      Tell me about it. I used to work in a library and had to look after the sci-fi section for months. What about Clifford Simak? Ben Bova? Alice Sheldon (aka James Tipree)?

      at least not L. Ron Hubbard

    • Besides Asimov and Bradbury, I would have thought for sure that he'd be there. The Dune series (and not just the first book!) is a serious contender for greatest work of SF/Fantasy ever written.

      I'm not arguing with you that he shouldn't be there. I believe he has a place, for sure...

      But it could be that your quote itself explains why he's not there. It's the "Science Fiction" hall of fame, not the Fantasy hall of fame.

      Science Fiction != to Fantasy, and there are a lot of fantasy elements in Dune. I'd
      • by unitron ( 5733 )
        "But it could be that your quote itself explains why he's not there. It's the "Science Fiction" hall of fame, not the Fantasy hall of fame."

        The presence of the recently deceased Andre Norton on the winners' list rather argues against that explanation. I suspect that since they've only been at it since 1996 they have a lot of catching up to do, and the self-imposed "2 living, 2 dead" rule probably complicates things as well.

      • But it could be that your quote itself explains why [Herbert]'s not there. It's the "Science Fiction" hall of fame, not the Fantasy hall of fame.

        Right. And what science fiction has Ray Harryhausen ever done? And looking at earlier literary inductees, before they went Hollywood, we have Michael Moorcock, who is far over in the fantasy side. Fritz Leiber and Jack Vance have certainly done some SF, but are both better known for fantasy. Since it's authors, not works, being honoured, Herbert has quite a few t


    • > Besides Asimov and Bradbury, I would have thought for sure that he'd be there. The Dune series (and not just the first book!) is a serious contender for greatest work of SF/Fantasy ever written.

      I enjoyed Dune, but the other books I read in the series were in the yawner genre.

      IMO. YMMV.

      • That was my experience the first few times I tried reading the series. The first book was great (war, intrigue, villians, you name it) - but books 2-5 seemed boring to me. I first read the series at the age of 15. Maybe I wasn't ready for it.

        Then at the age of 25 I picked it up again, and WOW! The rest of the series is every bit as good as the first. Maybe better.

        Books 1-3 are basically the story of Paul, and 2-3 are my least favorite in the series (though they are still good). Book 4 happens thousands of
  • Spielberg? O_o (Score:2, Insightful)

    by codergeek42 ( 792304 )
    What the heck has he done for Sci-Fi?
    • by handy_vandal ( 606174 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:43PM (#12050680) Homepage Journal
      What the heck has [Spielberg] done for Sci-Fi?

      Given it happy endings.

      -kgj
    • Re:Spielberg? O_o (Score:3, Informative)

      by blackmonday ( 607916 )
      E.T.
      Close Encounters Of The 3rd Kind
      Minority Report
      Back To The Future (Producer)
      Innerspace (Producer)
      Pinky And The Brain (Producer)
      Jurassic Park
      A.I.
      Men In Black (Producer)

      Sure, these aren't "hardcore" SF offerings, but its hard to imagine another guy, other than Lucas, who consistently churns out enjoyable Scifi fare.

      • Slight typo (Score:5, Funny)

        by GuyMannDude ( 574364 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:54PM (#12050755) Journal

        Sure, these aren't "hardcore" SF offerings, but its hard to imagine another guy, other than Lucas, who consistently churns out enjoyable Scifi fare.

        I hate to nitpick but your sentence seems to be implying that Lucas makes enjoyable SciFi fare.

        GMD

        • I hate to nitpick but your sentence seems to be implying that Lucas makes enjoyable SciFi fare.

          You should be more specific. Lucas 1.0 did produce enjoyable SciFi fare, your comment seems to be aimed at Lucas 2.0 (which appears to still be in beta development).

          Feel free to substitute as appropriate. For example, Lucas-Cola Classic vs. New Luke, Lucas 6.22 vs Lucas 95, Luke Mini vs. Lucas IIGS, etc etc.

    • Re:Spielberg? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by GnarlyNome ( 660878 )
      Eric Flint for starting Open Source Science Fiction Library http://www.baen.com/library/
      And dDavid Baen for sponsoring it
      • the baen free (beer) library was the first place i went after i picked up an REB 1100 ebook reader. loads of good stuff and it's available in .rb (also in a bunch of other formats) format so i didn't have to dick around with converters.
  • by sheetsda ( 230887 ) <doug.sheetsNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:39PM (#12050652)
    For anyone with a taste for the bizarre (like me), I recommend checking out A Tribute to Ray Harryhausen [malevole.com]. (Macromedia Flash required)
  • Adams (Score:3, Insightful)

    by schnits0r ( 633893 ) <nathannd@NOspam.sasktel.net> on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:40PM (#12050656) Homepage Journal
    What? No Douglas Adams? He was my favourite
    • I love Douglas Adams writing as well, but i picture him more as a satirist/comedian than a Sci-fi writter. That might have something to do with it.

      Phillp Dick, OTOH, was long overdue.
    • Re:Adams (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SlashThat ( 859697 )
      He should definitely be on the list. It's hard for people to appreciate in year 2005, but Adams' understanding of where the computing world was heading, back in 1978, amazes me.

      My favorite part of H2G2 is when Adams tells about the robots with "genuine people personalities". I.e. Marvin (the paranoid android), the doors that go "thank you" when you go through them and Eddie, the ship computer. What is amazing is that Adams not only visioned that computers will be user friendly (in 1978!), but also how an
    • Just you wait and see :-)
  • by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) ( 613870 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @06:58PM (#12050777) Journal
    ...are excellent film makers but they've brought shame on science fiction by making "science fiction movie" synonymous with "action movie with dinosaurs and aliens 'n' stuff". Maybe someone should reserve some spaces in the Hall of Fame for film makers who actually make their audiences think as much as a well written science fiction novel or short story.

    (Note: I love Harryhausen's movies (I have the 3 DVD Sinbad set for a start) and one or two of Spielberg's. My gripe is only with which Hall of Fame they're being placed in.)

    • I think you're missing an important point.
      Spielberg's big gift to Sci-Fi is that he's gotten more people into it than anyone else. Even if he bastardises the novel for the sake of the big screen, he exposes countless people to Sci-Fi who would never ever pick up a book (without at lease some inspiration).
      Thus, he belongs in the hall of fame.
      -nB
      • I wonder if what you say is true. I've never heard anyone say "I read science fiction because I saw [insert favorite Spielberg movie]" although I know many people who have seen Spielberg movies because they were already readers of science fiction.
      • ...and as for Harryhausen, his successful works inspired people like Spielberg and Lucas to make their own films.
      • Maybe Spielberg should be inducted into the Suicide Hall of Fame, because I had a strong urge to kill myself while watching AI.
      • Spielberg's big gift to Sci-Fi is that he's gotten more people into it than anyone else. Even if he bastardises the novel for the sake of the big screen, he exposes countless people to Sci-Fi who would never ever pick up a book (without at lease some inspiration). Thus, he belongs in the hall of fame.

        NO HE DOES NOT. A "Hall of Fame" is for people who CREATE, not PUBLICISE. Is this the triumph of marketing over creativity? Otherwise, there are many publishers and editors who did much more to create and nou

  • Robert Sheckley (Score:2, Interesting)

    by AmicoToni ( 123984 )
    I am absolutely shocked to see that Robert Sheckley is not in the list!

    The author of the AAA Ace Agency series, Mindswap, the priceless Dimension of Miracles, and countless others...!
    How can it be??

    For further info: http://www.sheckley.com/ [sheckley.com]
  • by Timesprout ( 579035 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @07:03PM (#12050810)
    The slashdot explosion of rage when George Lucas gets inducted.
  • by uhlume ( 597871 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @07:09PM (#12050845) Homepage
    what this headline has to do with San Francisco gets dumped in the Bay. That is all.
  • Isaac Asimov (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Winckle ( 870180 )
    His book of short stories entitled I, robot is simply fantastic. I have it in pdf format if you PM me. It's nothing like the hollywood garbage of the same name, before i accidently start a flamewar!
    • "I, robot" (the movie) was as related to the book as "Starship troopers" was. Both Asimov and Heinlein are spinning in their graves so fast that they're time travelling.

      PS: Both books ("I, Robot" & "S.T.") are excellent, i agree.
  • by L-Train8 ( 70991 ) <Matthew_Hawk AT hotmail DOT com> on Friday March 25, 2005 @07:15PM (#12050877) Homepage Journal
    The Hall, once located in Lawrence, Kansas, is now a part of the Science Fiction Museum in Seattle.

    The Hall was originally run be a group in Lawrence, Kansas, but there was no actual physical place. They would hold meetings to induct members, then send plaques to the new inductees. It wasn't until the Science Fiction Museum worked out a deal to house the place that it became a physical reality, some place that you could go visit.

    Also, the Kansas group was the Sci Fi/Fantasy Hall of Fame, but the Seattle Sci-Fi Museum didn't want to include fantasy. Fortunately, all the members with a background in fantasy also had at least some sci-fi in their ouevre.
  • There are four new members of the Science Fiction Hall of Fame:

    Well that's better than being conducted into the Fantasy Hall of Shame: which includes such industrious hacks as Robert Jordan, Stephen R. Donaldson, E. Gary Gygax, and L Ron Hubbard.
  • What About . . . (Score:4, Insightful)

    by White Roses ( 211207 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @07:31PM (#12050958)
    Charles Dikkens?

    That's Dikkens with two k's, the well known Dutch author.

    Seriously, though, what about Python animator and accomplished director Terry Gilliam? 12 Monkeys? Time Bandits? Brazil? Cripes, that one scene in Life of Brian?!? Now, that's science fiction. If we're nominating directors now, Gilliam is high on my list.

  • It's sad that it took until last year to get the grandmother of sci-fi inducted. You'd think they would have jumped at the opportunity to be gender-friendly in a genre that is historically dominated by men. Tiptree, LeGuin, and Vonda McIntyre would have been high on my priority list as well.
    • by Kiryat Malachi ( 177258 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @08:26PM (#12051273) Journal
      They've been at it since 1996, and induct 4 per year (2 living, 2 dead). So she was inducted after a grand total of 16 other people. Which other people?

      Isaac Asimov. Alfred Bester. James Blish. Edgar Rice Burroughs. John Campbell, Jr. Hal Clement. Hugo Gernsback. Heinlein. Damon Knight. Fritz Leiber. Abraham Merritt. C.L. Moore (a woman). Eric Russell. Theodore Sturgeon. A.E. Van Vogt. Jules Verne. H.G. Wells. Donald Wollheim.

      And if you look at the competition, Shelley was up against some tough competition. Was Frankenstein historically important to the development of sci-fi? Absolutely. But was Shelley more important than people like Asimov, Heinlein, Campbell? I'd even argue that inducting her before PKD was doing a huge disservice to the genre. Gender-friendliness is nice, but when you're talking about the best of the best, there's no shame in acknowledging that *due to historical and cultural reasons*, the majority of those are men. Going out of your way to induct a woman just because she's a woman makes a mockery of both the idea of an award, and of the body of work of the individual so "honored".

      (Oh, yeah. LeGuin was inducted in 2001, Andre Norton in 1997, and CL Moore in 98. FOAD with your accusations of gender bias, please.)
  • And I am sure they will enjoy the ceremony immensley! I am looking forward to seeing Phillip K there with a G&T in his hand.

    Who was it who said giving somebody an award after they are dead does them no good and advertises your stupidity for being slow on the uptake.

  • Zeladbury (Score:3, Funny)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @08:16PM (#12051213) Homepage Journal
    The SF Hall of Fame won't be complete until it inducts writers not yet born. I nominate the hybrid clone of Bradbury and Zelazny.
  • Am I the only surprised he isn't already in it? I mean, he's up there in the top 10, I would imagine.

    P.

    • Re:Philip K Dick (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MSBob ( 307239 )
      True enough. I was also surprised he wasn't there. To me the guy made sci-fi into a respectable genre. Before him it was mostly flying saucers and men in sliver suits firing guns with light bulbs.

      That said, I find his work a mixed bag. From absolute total brilliance (Ubik, Three stigmata of Palmer Eldritch, Martian Timeslip) to some pretty lame crap (Clans of the alphane Moon, We can build you). He was a very prolific writer but he also has his share of crap.

      On average though he's probably #1 in Sci-Fi

      • ...some pretty lame crap (Clans of the alphane Moon, We can build you).

        Arrgghh, I'm reading "We Can Build You" Right Now, I'm only 30 pages in, should I drop it? It's a library book, so I wouldn't be out any change.

        Also, wouldn't the namesake for the Philip K. Dick Science Fiction award automatically be inducted?
        • I thought "We can build you" was weak. But you should read it anyway because one man's trash is another man's treasure. However, if you haven't read things like "Ubik" or "Three Stigmata" or "Martian Time slip" return the book and pick up "Ubik". It's PKD at it's finest.
    • He never received the respect he deserved in life, why would you expect any different in death?

      He's the first person I thought of when I saw this headline, with the feeling that he probably was overlooked. Nice they're finally getting him in there, but it is way overdue.

      I also knew the overrated Ursula K. Le Guin would be in there. Hate everything she's written.
  • by __aaasvk1266 ( 854980 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @09:06PM (#12051483)
    because of a high fan-boy index, shame on you.

    He has no business getting in ahead of (in alphabetical order):

    J.G. Ballard: Not all of his is writing is SF. But his Vermilion Sands type work certainly qualifies.

    William Gibson: Only created Cyberpunk.

    Frank Herbert: As others have mentioned, should have a ballot for Dune.

    Stanislaw Lem: Not seeing him in the HoF is a fucking embarassment, and shows how shallow the average American SF reader is. He has far better material than Solaris.

    Larry Niven: Big Iron stuff like Ringworld earns him a slot, along with his humor (Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex).

    G. Harry Stine: If you don't know who he is, shame on you again. Go back to school. He's as important as Shelley.
    • Thanks for pointing out Lem. He's one of my favourites as well as my fellow countryman. Besides his writing he is also credited with bringing to focus the works of Philip K Dick who was a relatively obscure writer in Europe until Lem started to pimp him in all respected Sci-Fi magazines.
    • G. Harry Stine: If you don't know who he is, shame on you again. Go back to school. He's as important as Shelley.

      I knew and liked Harry Stine, I've read a lot of his stuff, both fiction and non, and had quite a few conversations with him. He's certainly made significant contributions -- they don't call him the father of model rocketry for nothing -- but comparing him to Shelley? Why? I don't think Harry would have agreed with that.

      Oh, and Vernor Vinge has a better claim than Gibson to inventing cyber
      • Oh, and speaking of Gibson's Neuromancer, just what color was the sky above the port?

        When I first read "The sky [...] was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel", I imagined the mottled grey of a screenful of static -- or a ragged overcast. Some years later, owning a newer TV, I read that as the vivid blue generated by the TV when it detects no signal -- the deep, clear blue of a sky utterly free of cloud or haze.

        So, what color was the sky? It changes the whole atmosphere of that opening scen
    • I was also VERY suprised not to see Stanislaw Lem on there as well.

      I personally think that a good introduction to his work is "One Human Minute" and the other two stories that are normaly included with that one. They are short, and very good.
  • This wonderful, talented painter, illustrator and architect did a stunning series of paintings -- many reproduced in an article in Collier's Magazine in 1948 -- graphically depicting nuclear attacks on New York and Moscow (both the detonations themselves and their aftermath). Prints of these have never been made available to the public, although several are reproduced in the book "The Art of Chesley Bonestell". After Bonestell's death, they were left/given to the New York Historical Society. They are not cu
  • Hello, is there something I am missing here? Is it an All-American affair?
    • Re:Stanislaw Lem? (Score:3, Informative)

      by 1u3hr ( 530656 )
      Is it an All-American affair?

      Not quite. There's Mary Shelly, Brian Aldiss, Arthur C Clarke, Jules Verne, Eric Frank Russell and Michael Moorcok, for instance. But now they're indicting movie directors and stop-motion animators don't hold your breath for many names not known to the presenters of "Entertainment Tonight".

  • What needs to happen is that all past deserving scifi creators need to be included in this hall of fame now and then add new ones as they appear. As many previous posts have suggested there are plenty of deserving candidates not in this hall as of now.
    Perhaps some wealthy individual could be persuaded to ante up the funds to build a building to house the expanded group. Is Scott McNealy a scifi guy? He could build a big building like Paul Allen's EMP, but plop it down in Redmond somewhere and make it tall
  • Chris Carter (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Scott7477 ( 785439 ) on Saturday March 26, 2005 @01:53AM (#12052726) Homepage Journal
    belongs in the scifi hall of fame now! "The X-Files" has been to TV scifi what "Amazing Stories" was to magazine scifi. The exploration of the conflict between skepticism and faith, demonstrating the use of science to solve crimes, in general consistently excellent storytelling, development of complex characters, high quality musical scoring, mixing individual stories with a lengthy unifying background plot, a healthy willingness to not take the characters and the story too seriously, are all attributes of this series that contributed to it being one of the all time greatest television series. IMO, "X-Files" is far superior to Star Trek.

What is now proved was once only imagin'd. -- William Blake

Working...