Ray Bradbury died at 91 yesterday. He never got a drivers licence. It was because he witnessed a fatality in LA.
Ray Bradbury was an Iconic creative force. In general, I don't think the world mourns enough when a writer dies.
Bradbury was an insatiable, feverish learner of things. A library addict. The spark (whatever it is) caught him and he spent his life trying to make sur that it would also catch many others. He wanted to be buried on Mars.
That's what people said when Wells, Orwell and Verne died and young writers like Bradbury, Clarke and Asimov were just getting started. The greats are alive and writing, you just don't know it until they get older and are declared "great".
Or that it's easier for some to classify you as a science fiction writer, even when you're not considered one George Orwell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Wells and Verne were ahead of their time in being imaginative of future technology. Clarke and Asimov had the same creative imaginations about interstellar space travel. Most current Sci Fi authors seem to have adopted standard conventions of a hypothetical future, and focus on character development vs postulating completely new technology.
This list of 100 best Science Fiction novels is from the book, _Science Fiction : The 100 Best Novels (1949-1984)_ by David Pringle. The ISBN is 0-88184-259-1, published by Carroll & Graf in 1985 and has a foreword by Michael Moorcock. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. _1984_ by George Orwell [1949] 2. _Earth Abides_ by George R. Stewart [1949] 3. _The Martian Chronicles_ by Ray Bradbury [1950] 4. _The Puppet Masters_ by Robert A. Heinlein [1951] 5. _The Day of the Triffids_ by John Wyndham [1951] 6. _Limbo_ by Bernard Wolfe [1952] 7. _The Demolished Man_ by Alfred Bester [1953] 8. _Fahrenheit 451_ by Ray Bradbury [1953] 9. _Childhood's End_ by Arthur C. Clarke [1953] 10. _The Paradox Men_ by Charles L. Harness [1953]
Just because David Pringle lists 1984 as his top science fiction book does not mean we should then lump all of George Orwell's work as science fiction.
Pringle and Moorcock would have at least equal status with "anonymous" of Wikipedia. I think Pringle and Moorcock's views are more representative of science fiction writers view of Orwell's "1984". Interestingly, many compare Orwell's 1984 to Bradbury's Farenheit 451 as similarly themed science fiction novels.
The wikipedia article has a pretty good survey of George Orwell: he was passionate about social and political injustice. To lump all of his work to 1984 and catagorize him as a science fiction writer is a disservice. Pringle and Moorcock rate 1984 as a great science fiction book (they're not claiming that Orwell should be considered a science fiction writer based on one of his novels)....look at all of his awards as a writer: most are not science fiction awards.
If someone writes arguably the best science fiction novel ever written, they are by default a science fiction writer. They may do other things also, they may be more well known for the other things they do but they are science fiction writers. In Orwell's case, I think most know him for his science fiction work, "1984".
George Orwell has also recieved as many awards for Animal Farm and Homage to Catalonia (Animal Farm was the first Orwell book I read). When you look at his biography, as well as his own quotes, I would think he'd like to be remembered as a social commentator: not primarily a science fiction writer. Establishing satire, be it with animal metaphors or a hypothetical future, is more then just the science fiction genre.
