Too many links and you have a chain

[threemonkeys]

While I'm in the mood for linking to rants, there is a really interesting one over on Paul McAuley's blog about definitions in SF and the undesirability of creating limiting definitions. It is worth following the links and also the links from this earlier related post.

Comments

[cat-i-th-adage.livejournal.com]

With regard to Ms Rusch's article, I tend not to read tie-in novels because they tend to be bland. There are exceptions (Barbara Hambly's Star Trek and Star Wars novels in particular), but mostly they seem to read like John Clancy novels. I'm not using that comparison in a complimentary way, either.

[cat-i-th-adage.livejournal.com]

Don't get me wrong, I like Space Opera, it's just that novels written as tie-ins, in general, don't have the spiciness I'm looking for.

[threemonkeys.livejournal.com]

They do seem bland to me too. I think the reason is that too many media tie-ins are written to order. The publisher says we will pay you $x to deliver a product in 6 weeks. There is no engagement of interest on the part of the author - it is just a job to make a few bucks in what, for most writers, is a fairly marginal existence.

It is interesting you mention barbara Hambly. I remember hearing her talking about writing Star Wars novels and you could tell that she loved it. She was totally invested in the whole universe. When you get committment, you get spiciness.