Customer Reviews

Reflections and Refractions: Thoughts on Science-Fiction, Science, and Other Matters

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I discovered Robert Silverberg's work while browsing the library. I was a book called The Book of Skulls. I thought it looked interesting so I took it home and read it. I haven't looked back since. I have read nearly everything I can find by this wonderful man. That brings me to this book. When I finished this book, I had reached a turning point in my life. I began reading Golden Age SF. It really bothers me when younger people say why should I read that? A bunch a dead guys wrote that smelly stuff (since most/nearly all SF was in the pulps). I have read Cliff Simak, Lewis Padgett (who is really C.L. Moore and Henry Kuttner), Robert A. Heinlein, Lester del Rey, John W. Campbell (Night is beautiful), A.E. van Vogt, and many others, and I must say, though some is extremely corny (The Vault of the Beast by van Vogt..."Ha! We're going to take over mankind!), it provided much of the richness that is now in the field. Before reading Reflections and Refractions, I had no idea about this other world. Now I have begun reading about the authors themselves, and the editors, and definitely believe my life is fuller because the great Golden Age.

I'm a great fan of Robert Silverberg. His books are among the finest in science fiction. Some authors, when they are away from their computer, say incredibly dumb things. But Silverberg pens very intelligent and profound essays about writing, other authors, politics, publishing, history, science and a dozen other subjects. If you are a science fiction fan, as I am, his essays on other science fiction writers are extremely entertaining.
Silverberg has the rare and valuable trait of making the reader think even if you disagree with the essayist. A political writer who can do the same is Charles Krauthammer, who is so intelligent and so precise in his prose, he forces you to consider his point of view. Unlike some other reviewers, I'm not sure we can pen Silverberg down on the political spectrum. And why bother? The reader gains knowledge after reading every essay.
By all means, read this volume and you will not be disappointed.

Here is a collection of essays (mostly from _Galileo_, _Amazing_, and _Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine_) that Robert Silverberg describes as "pontifications." They may be placed alongside John W. Campbell's _Collected Editorials From Analog_ (1966). But my approach in analyzing the books is a little bit different. With Campbell, part of my task is to separate editorials with which I agree from editorials with which I disagree. With the Silverberg collection, no sifting is needed. I find myself in agreement with Silverberg on virtually every topic that he tackles: creationism, political correctness, gay gene research, holocaust deniers, genetic hysteria, the importance of spelling, definitions of words, children's books, a sense of wonder, and writing techniques.

Silverberg,like Campbell, may be described as a "libertarian/conservative" (xviii). But there are differences between Campbell and Silverberg:

I am not such a doctrinaire libertarian that I favor the abolition of government inspection of food products or an end to government regulation of medicines; I am not such a doctrinaire conservative that I look kindly on government attempts to legislate morality, or favor manditory religious instruction in state schools. (xviii)

Perhaps Silverberg might best be described as a moderate rationalist using his essays as a means of urging a sense of sanity on an increasingly radical world.

Another difference between the essays of Campbell and those of Silverberg is their style. Campbell's essays are assertive; he wants to grab you by the lapels and shake you into thought. Silverberg's essays are more gentlemanly-- the writings of a man who used to be an arrogant little pisher, but who gradually learned (sometimes painfully) that there was more to writing and life than he once believed. The style is polite-- the mark of a man who somewhere along the line learned that other people's feelings matter. But none of this style prevents Silverberg from being honest about his positions.

Here he is on the proposal to teach creationism as an alternate hypothesis to evolution:

Why not, you say? Shouldn't all viewpoints be given equal opportunity for testing?
Well, actually, no... If we teach Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden to our children at school, should we not also teach the Creation myths-- pardon me, Creation theories-- of other all cultures? (110)

And here he is on the hypersensitivity of minority goups in political correctness criticism:

And-- minority sensitivities or no-- _it is not the job of the artists to be nice to people_. We are not social workers. We are not therapists. We are not crusaders. We are tellers of tales, inventers of fiction. What we offer is not comfort but vision. Not all the visions are cuddly ones. (353)

Of particular interest are a number of portraits of science fiction writers and editors, including John Campbell ["Not only did he know what went into a good sf tale, he understood how the universe worked"(264)], Robert A. Heinlein ["The word that comes to mind for him was _essential_"(248)], and Isaac Asimov ["He was... more unique than any of us"(247)]. But my favorite was his portrait of Lester del Rey: "My feelings for Lester went beyond metaphor. I was one of his sons; he was one of my fathers, with all the complexities and turbulance that such a relationship implies" (261).

I have read all of the essays in this book at least three or four times, and I expect to reread them many more times in the future. I can think of no higher praise.

This is a good book for anybody who reads a lot of science fiction/fantasy and has a real interest in the people who write it. Robert Silverberg is an author who will be given the Grand Master award from SFWA in the future. His novels like Dying Inside, The Book of Skulls, and A Time of Changes are classics of the field. Even some of his later works like The Face of the Waters and The Alien Years show signs of greatness.

But, this book is a collection of essays that RS has written over the years. They show us inside his thinking process. He also tells us about the world of an SF writter and about the other personalities who make up the field.

Good book for people interested in the author and his work.