David Pringle's Best 100 Science Fiction Novels

Definitely try the Alfred Bester books. Absolutely marvelous.

I read the author's introduction to the book. I believe he picked 49 because he considered it the beginning of modern SF novel publishing (after the war) and the end of 1984 (I was off a year in my original post) because the book was published in 1985. He did of course acknowledge Wells and Verne.

At a guess, I probably have one of the largest stacks of books I've bought (or checked out of the library) and haven't read yet. One entire room full of bookcases is dedicated to that purpose. (And no, I'll probably never catch up, especially while still living near powells.

But the recommendation is noted. :)

I just reread Way Station; it is excellent. And a great example of "Good Sci-Fi doesn't have to be scary" (though I'm sure Hollywood could make it scary.)

81 percent!! Daaaamn. I figured you'd win, but not by such a wide margin (I was secretly guessing you'd weigh in between 50 and 70 percent). So which ones have you not read?

I've read an awful lot of science fiction, but most of what I've read has been stuff published after this list was pubilshed. I didn't start reading SF until college (except for a few things in high school) so never quite caught up on all of my classics.

As for the list itself, the introduction goes somewhat into why he picked the books he did, and that no other person would probably entirely agree. It also has a couple pages on each book (but I haven't read many of those yet). It's worth checking if you library has it.

The movie version of DAY OF THE TRIFFIDS is absolute and unmitigated crapola dipped in shit. (Am I making it plain that I didn't like it?) I know you haven't said you liked it, and I hope you didn't. Back in the 80s there was a BBC mini-series version that was quite good, but I've never seen it offered again on t.v. nor on video.

Unfortunately I borrowed the book the list came from from the library so I can't go back and look at the author biography easily.

I found David Pringle using a search engine. He is a critic, author, and the editor of a British SF magazine called 'Interzone', but I don't recall coming across it before, and I am in England.

Extracted from a preface to the list, which helps to explain some omissions:

QUOTE: David Pringle is a master of science fiction bibliography and criticism. Some find him a bit of a Britophile . . . Here is his list of the 100 best science fiction novels of all time (through about 1984, when Everything Changed anyway). It is a strange list in many ways; there are no Van Vogt books, Asimov's Foundation isn't included, but it is a good list in most aspects. UNQUOTE

Link to his sci-fi list

This is his 100-best fantasy list

I didn't actually put together that list, just put it up here for comment. I believe he's the editor for one of the science fiction magazines.

Six Dick novels on the list.

I actually wasn't overwhelmed by Camp Concentration now that I finally got around to it.

Pringle’s list is exquisite and very exciting; as an authority, he’s on a par with Knight, Blish, Aldiss, Boucher, Budrys, Dozois, Hartwell. So, yes, his choice is interesting, very down—to—earth, refreshing and no—nonsense. Otherwise, of course any choice, or list of choices, is debatable, etc.. His hundred is a conventional doorstep; many other books deserve attention, and ‘The Forever War’ and ‘Solaris’ are such items.
Van Vogt is present on another Pringle list—the best novels of modern fantasy, his very likable summary from ’87. (On that other list, one will be glad to meet also Williamson, Graves, Vance, Leiber, Anderson, Golding, Fowles, Pynchon, Rushdie, Yarbro, Updike, Ackroyd …).
Ballard is well represented on both lists (’62, ’66, ’73, ‘75& ’79, ’87)--which is a good amount of the output); perhaps a Pringle favorite, which is a good thing.

To me, his Asimov choice is meaningful, though coming from a reader who perhaps doesn’t like Asimov very much.

Pringle’s list deserves to be acknowledged and popular, is often quoted and referenced, and might not say much to occasional readers of SF, but its quality speaks for itself.

As to the Dick selection—pardon the pun and send the kids to the playground—‘Time …’, ‘The Man …’, ‘Martian …’, ‘Palmer Eldritch’, ‘Bloodmoney’, ‘Do Androids …’ (there are six, not five, novels on the list, ’59—’68) are all enjoyable reads.
The list covers 36 yrs. of SF output. The first 18 yrs. get 52 picks, and the next 17 yrs. (because ’67, the 1st year of the 2nd half, is skipped) get 48 picks.
The gist of such a list is that these are not merely books to read—but books to re—read.
Anyway, to me, Pringle’s picks mean more than other people’s.