‘New Scientist’ Polls Readers About Best SF
Even scientists like to have fun every now and then. England’s New Scientist magazine will be exploring the SF world in their November issue and along the way want to get reader input on the best and worst to date.
“We plan to explore this question in a special edition of New Scientist out on 15 November – as well as reviewing the best new science fiction books and talking to some of the world’s leading writers,” they write at the magazine’s website.
To engage readers prior to the issue’s release, they ask for people to vote on their favorite science fiction books and films. In order to kick start the debate, they polled themselves and named Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy the best book. “Hitchhiker’s Guide as the out-and-out best sci-fi book by several dead whales and one bowl of petunias. Anyone who disagrees with me is clearly a crass Golgafrinchan who should be forced to listen to Vogon poetry for as long as it takes," wrote one of their editors.
We applaud their choice of L. Ron Hubbard’s Dianetics as the worst science fiction novel.
Blade Runner was the clear favorite film among the magazine staff, noting "It’s a great story, emotionally involving and well acted – and still has a mystery. Was Harrison Ford’s cop really a cyborg?"
Steve McQueen’s The Blob took the worst film title. "I saw The Blob when I was about seven years old and haven’t eaten jelly since," said one of the staff.
Of course, Dianetics, while it may well qualify as fantasy, isn't a novel…
Perhaps they meant the Battlefield Earth toolongogy?(I've always said it was a shame: Hubbard actually WAS a pretty good pulp writer before he hit upon the Church of Elronn …)