After reading a number of SF novels from the last few years, I keep getting frustrated at what feels like a failed renaissance of the genre. I enjoy the emphasis on real world politics, innovative science and weird but believable theories, now that time travel, hyperspace and robots are pretty much exhausted. Many books seem too much "Crichtonized" – trying to match the formula that blends larger-than-life characters involved in a limited version of world-changing events. What they end up doing is create and develop great concepts, throw some characters into them, and eventually shift the focus from the general picture into their personal stories.

Robert J Sawyer is a good writer, however most of his books leave me with a feeling that they would have made awesome short stories but were fluffed up into full-length novels. Greg Bear blew me away with the first half of Darwin’s Radio, but after two thirds of the book, it had turned into some forced love story adventure with no real depth. Cradle of Saturn by James P Hogan did almost the exact same thing. Dan Brown… after Digital Fortress, I wonder how the hell he is even allowed near a wordprocessor.

You could probaly say that Arthur Clarke or Asimov’s and characters and plots were shallow, or Heinlein and Card’s too extreme, and you would be right – but at least they were consistently tied into the story, and not suddenly distracted into forced moral and ethical rollercoasters.

Ahhh I don’t feel I explained my problem with these books adequately. Which proves I certainly am NOT a writer.