In article ,
"Lawrence" wrote:

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
.. .

I was told that to best see Clarke's brilliance, read Heinlien. I never
did. Got talked into Tolkein. Mistake, ymmv.
--

That's interesting, I'd never heard that before. I'm not sure that any of
them is a true window into the others although it is likely that they were
aware of each others work. Indeed each of Asimov and Clarke would insist
that the other was a better writer. (Clarke-Asimov treaty). I reagrd them
each as best generation SF writers. The next iteration of authors is good,
but they seem somehow to lack the spark of true invention. The stuff today
is uninspiring for the most part to me, strange when we have not truly
discovered much, it seems they'd have more to work with as mankind discovers
so many more questions.

Having grown up during the 50s and 60s, and reading SF since I was 11 or
so, I'd have to say that "uninspiring for the most part" describes SF
(or any type of fiction, for that matter) during the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s,
and so on to the present. Sturgeon's Law wasn't (and isn't) a joke.

What happens is that most of the dreck gets forgotten, certainly rarely
reprinted, and we eventually forget about it, remembering only the
better remainder. The same thing happens with antique furniture,
machines, etc etc etc. Once the cheap junk crumbles away, the best
remains, along with an unwarranted impression that "they did things
better back then, none of this cheap modern stuff, by jingo!"

Which gives us memories of a Golden Age that wasn't all that shiny when
it was happening. Our grandkids will likely say the same things about
right now, happily able to ignore the fluff and dross.

To pull things, kicking and screaming, into the aviation realm again;
there have been a lot of homebuilt designs over the years, but the ones
that stand out are the best, with the indifferent to poor being
abandoned and forgotten.

Well, except for some of the *really* bad stuff, mostly for their
entertainment, or frightening the kids, value.