Year's Best SF 5

Rating:
Summary: Curl Up Reading
Review: At first glance, the cover may not be as appealing as the other volumes. The collection of authors is formidable though, as one takes a glance at the back cover. The book is cheap, and you get more than your share of reading material. It's a pity that only a dozen of the stories are worth much notice.

Robert Reed's "Game of the Century" and Stephen Baxter's "Huddle" are geniuinely engaging, and struck me as two of the best in the anthology. Michael Bishop's poem "Secrets of the Alien Reliquary" is worth a read too. Some, frankly, were dissapointing. Perhaps some tried a notch too hard to be imaginative.

Nevertheless, a pedant of SF would enjoy this throughly, so snap the paperbacks up.

Rating:
Summary: Missed the mark
Review: Beginning in the mid nineties and running at least to the present, David Hartwell produces the alternative "year's best" anthologies. The primary series is of course the similarly titled one edited by Gardner Dozois. In some years the Hartwell selection is at least as good as the generally larger Dozois version. In the fifth year of his endeavours though he missed the mark and this book is not so good. Certainly it is not up to the standards of some of the earlier anthologies.

Of course, there are some good stories in here. A competant editor could hardly gather together 25 tales and disappoint with them all but the truth is that less than a dozen of them are better than average for current SF and that hardly counts as "year's best" even if you take into account the fact that there is no overlap with Gardner Dozois' book which presumably gets first choice with the authors.

I think that the best story here is Steven Baxter's "Huddle" which tells of a future Earth stricken in an ice age and populated by people genetically engineered to survive the bitterly cold conditions. Perhaps it is a sign of the times but all of the best stories here deal with the alteration of humans in order to deal with the pressures of life in the future. Terry Bisson's "Macs" introduces the ides of creating clones of criminals just so that they may be killed by the families of their victims while Curt Wohleber's "100 Candles" and Tom Purdom's "Fossil Games" are set in futures in which it is normal for people to be extensively altered and those who have no, or few, alterations feel increasingly excluded from their worlds.

If you are the kind of fan who just cannot get enough short SF then this is worth getting as you will find some interesting stories but otherwise, you might as well give this a miss and hope for a better effort next year.

Rating:
Summary: Comment on SF 5 as a sample for aspiring writers
Review: I bought this book in order to study the kinds of short science fiction that are considered top-of-the-line to give me an idea on how I should write my science fiction. What I found overwhelmed me. Strict application of `science' to the fiction is common; most stories have discussions of scientific principles in them, even in the most simple of tales. Rare are the stories you see the science only applied and not discussed. Even Gene Wolfe's simplistic protagonist in `Has Anybody Seen Junie Moon?' describes a scientific discussion on gravity. So with the primitive Night-Dawn in Stephen Baxter's `Huddle', who puts forth a theorem in a scientific manner, though it was done simply; I take the message to be that whatever humanity mutates into, it will retain scientific reasoning. I hope this does not aggravate the impression of science fiction being `hifalooting'. A couple of stories are mostly talk (Stableford's and Swanwick's); action and movement does not seem to be a looked-for element in a sci-fi story. Of course, I do not disagree that science can be left out of SF, but the acronym can mean just `speculative fiction', and the science need not necessarily be flatly explained. But I do assume that `hard' sci-fi, with scientific explanations, is what most editors are looking for. For me, it seems that applauded sci-fi stories can be hard to understand; I barely got what the authors were trying to put across in `Sexual Dimorphism' and `Everywhere' (The former is especially heavy in scientific jargon). Michael Bishop's poem is a mystery to me. Guess I'm not that sharp a reader of SF as I thought. Traditional themes can be found, like space opera, alternative history, time travel and cyberpunk, but are not easily identifiable unless you've really read between the lines. But there is a trend. Most of the stories here project humanity in various future situations, having moved to new states of life, gone to new places or using new technology, but they still have to deal with problems spawned by these new states. We have human-animals specifically bred for a brutal sport, people living for thousands of years and trying to bear with it, an Attention Deficit Disorder sufferer being treated with a cyborg implant, people living on a threatened moon, among others. New ideas have ceased to appear, so the themes are now more on problems caused by these ideas, and how to solve them. With regard to the editor's comments, I would say that Hartwell gives pertinent info on background. Revealing where the story was first published helps to identify those markets. Analog looks for problem-solving stories, Artemis is about the moon, so forth. His picks were also as varied as possible; different themes, different styles, different origins (Nice to know that there was one Japanese work there, one of those I liked more in this collection). But I wish he'd tell simply why those stories he chose were the best for him. Anyhow, I have an idea on what the editors of the various Sci-fi magazines are looking for. Thanks, David.

Rating:
Summary: Comment on SF 5 as a sample for aspiring writers
Review: I bought this book in order to study the kinds of short science fiction that are considered top-of-the-line to give me an idea on how I should write my science fiction. What I found overwhelmed me. Strict application of 'science' to the fiction is common; most stories have discussions of scientific principles in them, even in the most simple of tales. Rare are the stories you see the science only applied and not discussed. Even Gene Wolfe's simplistic protagonist in 'Has Anybody Seen Junie Moon?' describes a scientific discussion on gravity. So with the primitive Night-Dawn in Stephen Baxter's 'Huddle', who puts forth a theorem in a scientific manner, though it was done simply; I take the message to be that whatever humanity mutates into, it will retain scientific reasoning. I hope this does not aggravate the impression of science fiction being 'hifalooting'. A couple of stories are mostly talk (Stableford's and Swanwick's); action and movement does not seem to be a looked-for element in a sci-fi story. Of course, I do not disagree that science can be left out of SF, but the acronym can mean just 'speculative fiction', and the science need not necessarily be flatly explained. But I do assume that 'hard' sci-fi, with scientific explanations, is what most editors are looking for. For me, it seems that applauded sci-fi stories can be hard to understand; I barely got what the authors were trying to put across in 'Sexual Dimorphism' and 'Everywhere' (The former is especially heavy in scientific jargon). Michael Bishop's poem is a mystery to me. Guess I'm not that sharp a reader of SF as I thought. Traditional themes can be found, like space opera, alternative history, time travel and cyberpunk, but are not easily identifiable unless you've really read between the lines. But there is a trend. Most of the stories here project humanity in various future situations, having moved to new states of life, gone to new places or using new technology, but they still have to deal with problems spawned by these new states. We have human-animals specifically bred for a brutal sport, people living for thousands of years and trying to bear with it, an Attention Deficit Disorder sufferer being treated with a cyborg implant, people living on a threatened moon, among others. New ideas have ceased to appear, so the themes are now more on problems caused by these ideas, and how to solve them. With regard to the editor's comments, I would say that Hartwell gives pertinent info on background. Revealing where the story was first published helps to identify those markets. Analog looks for problem-solving stories, Artemis is about the moon, so forth. His picks were also as varied as possible; different themes, different styles, different origins (Nice to know that there was one Japanese work there, one of those I liked more in this collection). But I wish he'd tell simply why those stories he chose were the best for him. Anyhow, I have an idea on what the editors of the various Sci-fi magazines are looking for. Thanks, David.

Rating:
Summary: Disappointing Anthology for the Turn of the Millennium
Review: Science fiction is an immensely broad category. It encompasses stories as diverse as standard monster fare (the movie ALIEN, for example), social satire (the TV series THIRD ROCK FROM THE SUN, the movie THE BROTHER FROM ANOTHER PLANET), farce (THE LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS), adventure (STAR WARS) as well as more traditionally science oriented tales of our society (1984) or imaginary worlds far beyond ours (2001) and much more. Editing an anthology which proports to represent the best short science fiction published in a year must be an incredibly demanding task, and David Hartwell is to be commended for attempting to represent a fair share of this variety. But if this book genuinely represents the best of SF published in 1999, I have to wonder if some bizarre millennial fever didn't strike the SF world a bit early. As SF writers are, by definition, imaginative folks, did they as a group get a bit too worked up worrying about Y2K to concentrate on their writing? Well, of course not; and interestingly enough there is no looming sense of catastrophe in the vast majority of this anthology. Instead, the tales generally treasure our humanity over technology and offer a hopeful view of the future (with a few notable exceptions). And yet...

Hartwell's anthology is sizable, containing 25 short stories. Of these, less than half were memorable enough that as I write this review while looking at the table of contents, I actually remember the stories--this only a few days after completing the book. I'm definitely getting older, sure, and more crotchety; but as yet I've no noticable symptoms of Alzheimer's. The one word that comes to mind with regard to most of these stories is "ordinary".

However, about 10 of the stories were worth a read. Of these, the two best were Cory Doctrow's "Visit the Sins", portraying family relationships that developed after an attempt to cure Attention Deficit Disorder goes horribly awry; and Chris Lawson's "Written in Blood" was an engaging look at the border between faith and technology, with prejudice and hope entangling one another.

Robert Reed's "Game of the Century" posited a future in which genetic engineering gives us superhuman athletes, but more importantly explores how they would feel growing up as such. Sarah Zettel's "Kinds of Strangers" follows the psychological breakdown of the crew of a deep-space craft after a devastating equipment failure. Stephen Baxter's bleak "Huddle", about a future molded by genetic engineering and planetary catastrophe was easily the darkest story in the book. Curt Wohleber's "100 Candles" and Chris Beckett's "Valour" were genuinely well written, well conceived stories with interesting characters. Finally, translated from the Japanese, Hiroe Suga's "Freckled Figure" was a beautifully told tale that somehow bound together the spirit of ancient Japanese craftsmanship with the love of anime and technology that drives so much of Japan today.

For the sake of these stories, YEAR'S BEST SF 5 is worth a look. But if you really want great sci-fi, I'd HIGHLY recommend STARFISH by Peter Watts. I've just finished it and have to say it is the best sci-fi books I've read in many many years. I hope that David Hartwell is able to find fiction of that quality for future anthologies.

Rating:
Summary: Disappointing Anthology for the Turn of the Millennium
Review: Science fiction is an immensely broad category. It encompasses stories as diverse as standard monster fare (the movie ALIEN, for example), social satire (the TV series THIRD ROCK FROM THE SUN, the movie THE BROTHER FROM ANOTHER PLANET), farce (THE LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS), adventure (STAR WARS) as well as more traditionally science oriented tales of our society (1984) or imaginary worlds far beyond ours (2001) and much more. Editing an anthology which proports to represent the best short science fiction published in a year must be an incredibly demanding task, and David Hartwell is to be commended for attempting to represent a fair share of this variety. But if this book genuinely represents the best of SF published in 1999, I have to wonder if some bizarre millennial fever didn't strike the SF world a bit early. As SF writers are, by definition, imaginative folks, did they as a group get a bit too worked up worrying about Y2K to concentrate on their writing? Well, of course not; and interestingly enough there is no looming sense of catastrophe in the vast majority of this anthology. Instead, the tales generally treasure our humanity over technology and offer a hopeful view of the future (with a few notable exceptions). And yet...

Hartwell's anthology is sizable, containing 25 short stories. Of these, less than half were memorable enough that as I write this review while looking at the table of contents, I actually remember the stories--this only a few days after completing the book. I'm definitely getting older, sure, and more crotchety; but as yet I've no noticable symptoms of Alzheimer's. The one word that comes to mind with regard to most of these stories is "ordinary".

However, about 10 of the stories were worth a read. Of these, the two best were Cory Doctrow's "Visit the Sins", portraying family relationships that developed after an attempt to cure Attention Deficit Disorder goes horribly awry; and Chris Lawson's "Written in Blood" was an engaging look at the border between faith and technology, with prejudice and hope entangling one another.

Robert Reed's "Game of the Century" posited a future in which genetic engineering gives us superhuman athletes, but more importantly explores how they would feel growing up as such. Sarah Zettel's "Kinds of Strangers" follows the psychological breakdown of the crew of a deep-space craft after a devastating equipment failure. Stephen Baxter's bleak "Huddle", about a future molded by genetic engineering and planetary catastrophe was easily the darkest story in the book. Curt Wohleber's "100 Candles" and Chris Beckett's "Valour" were genuinely well written, well conceived stories with interesting characters. Finally, translated from the Japanese, Hiroe Suga's "Freckled Figure" was a beautifully told tale that somehow bound together the spirit of ancient Japanese craftsmanship with the love of anime and technology that drives so much of Japan today.

For the sake of these stories, YEAR'S BEST SF 5 is worth a look. But if you really want great sci-fi, I'd HIGHLY recommend STARFISH by Peter Watts. I've just finished it and have to say it is the best sci-fi books I've read in many many years. I hope that David Hartwell is able to find fiction of that quality for future anthologies.

Rating:
Summary: Not a good selection
Review: The choices of stories in this book are not very good. Some of them are repeats of other anthologies. Others are do not present very original ideas. I couldn't really get into any stories in this book. It's average at best.

Rating:
Summary: Worst of
Review: The stories in this book are more like an authors notes than finished work. With the exception of two stories in this collection, they appeared to be a rambling unconnected assortment of pointles writing exercises. Save your money.

Rating:
Summary: The Good with the Bad
Review: This compilation of stories by a assortment of authors surprised me with it's Fifth Edition. I'm more a patron Gardner Dozois' annual collections, but to tide the time till that came out, I read this one and must say it ran the full spectrum of grand to absolutely terrible. First off the utopian "Everywhere" by Geoff Ryman felt like it had something to say about spiritualism, but rather became a predictable jab at spirtualism that was 11 pages too long (it was 11 pages in length) and left me offended greatly. The second story was much better and from a first time writer, no less. "Evolution Never Sleeps" by Elizabeth Malartre tells the tale of chipmunks, the most unassuming creatures in the world, becoming rather combative and violent. Rationalized, the plot was a tad plodding in parts, focusing rather needlessly on wasted character romance but the pay off of the story is rewarding, if abrupt. The third one, an appallingly ignorant story by the otherwise brilliant Kim Stanley Robinson called "Sexual Dimorphism". I loathed a story named "Marrow" last year by Robert Reed, oddly enough one of the best of the years choices by the other collection. "Game of the Century" surprised me though, pleasantly, but I think he should have come up with a much better name for the gene-spliced animal-people than 1-1-2041s. A bit ungangly to say. "Kinds of Strangers" by Sarah Zettel delved a tad too much into madness, but succeeded all in all. My favorite "Visit the Sins" by Cory Doctorow was unique and inventive, focusing on a switch for consciousness and well as the generational gap. Greg Egan's entry "Border Guards" utterly mysterifies the reader with it's setting, a good or a bad thing depending on your viewpoint. Rather mediocre. Terry Bisson's "Macs" had an excellent twist at the end, a dying breed of sci-fi and dealt with profound concepts of morality or culpability for crimes against humanity. "Written in Blood" by newbie Chris Lawson, if nothing else, presented a stark view of the Islamic world. Gene Wolfe's "Has Anyone Seen Junie Moon?" bored me terribly and seemed more like fantasy than sci-fi. Robert J. Saywer's "The Blue Planet" definitely felt like newspaper sci-fi, pre-digested for the masses. "Lifework" by Mary Soon Lee, another gem, presented a world far too close to reality. "Rosetta Stone" by Fred Lerner was a bit tough to swallow, though fascinating. Brian Aldiss' "An Apollo Asteroid" overglofied sex and presented characters no one would much care about losing if the asteroid smacked them right on the head. Curt Wohleber's "100 Candles" was familar, but pleasantly familar. G. David Nordley's "Democritus' Violin" thrilled and showed us that maybe the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Tom Purdom's "Fossil Games" plodded along to no avail and felt more like an ad for a long novel which the writer is undoubtedly writing. "Valor" by Chris Beckett proved it's point that no one much cares about a philosophical lesson. Steven Baxter's "Huddle" fit the mold of Baxter's recent ice age fascination. "Ashes and Tombstones" by Brian Stableford actually fascinated me with it's mention the Hardinist Cabal and their far reaching intentions, but perplexed me with its disapproval of their actions. Michael Swanwick's "Ancient Engines" was another one with a twist, but one rather elusive on the surface about immortality. Hiroe Suga's "Freckled Figure" was what Small Soldiers should have been like not a publicity ad to sell toys. Barry N. Malzberg's "Shiva" felt hurried, but had many interesting things to say about the inevitability of history. The last story by Lucy Sussex "The Queen of Erewhon" overglorified alternative lifestyles with absolutely no point to its madness. I got sick about halfway though. Had there been a rhyme or reason to this then I might have been able to get through, but I was fed up. Unfortunately, compared with the other collection, this one disappointed in many ways, far more than the other. That's why I'm currently reading Gardner Dozois' collection with much pleasure. David G. Hartwell, you could learn a thing or two from him.