A collection of very mixed value

kw: book reviews, science fiction, speculative fiction, fantasy, science fantasy, anthologies, collections

Long gone are the days I could pick up a book of short Sci-Fi stories, or an issue of Analog or The Magazine of F&SF, and read from cover to cover with few or no pangs of conscience. I don't mind the discomfort of learning, nor that of attaining a new viewpoint, as long as I gain something of value. But I don't like taking in something that drags me down and is hard to be rid of.

In SF genres, I prefer short stories to novels. Starting in about 1980, during a period in which I read very little SF, Tor began publishing in the genre and became a leader in the field. But now that sword-and-sorcery fantasies have come to dominate the genre, even being placed in space settings and alien planets, I read a lot less than I did before. Tor seemed to have a pretty good lineup of the "sword free" stories I prefer. Unbeknownst to me until this past week, Tor has an online imprint, Tor.com, that publishes shorter pieces, up to novella in length.

Tor.com is almost eleven years old, and to mark their first decade in business they gathered 40 stories into a hardcover book, Worlds Seen in Passing: 10 Years of Tor.com Short Fiction. I began to read with great anticipation, and when the first two stories ("Six Months, Three Days" by Charles Jane Anders and "Damage" by David D. Leving) earned my personal "Glad I Read That" distinction, my anticipation increased. Then, "Thud, Bam!", I read the next two ("The Best We Can" by Carrie Vaughn and "The City, Born Great" by N.K. Jemisin). The first was so-so at best, and the second made me cringe, not in any good way; it earned "Sorry I Read Any of That" distinction by 1/3 the way through, and I didn't complete it. A few stories later I came across my first "Didn't Read Any" ("Elephants and Corpses" by Kameron Hurley). The editors of Worlds Seen were kind enough to put a brief summary ahead of each story, which helped me select the ones to not even try. Scores for the 40 stories:

1. "Glad": 10
2. "So-So": 10
3. "Sorry", didn't read much of it: 7
4. "D.R.", didn't read any of it, or no more than a paragraph or two: 13

For someone who loves good SF, that is a sad commentary. Why do I dislike certain stories? First and most important, they offer to take me somewhere I don't want to go, and put something in me I wish I hadn't imbibed. I try to catch these as early as possible, and the summaries helped. Secondly, in others the main character(s) go nowhere, learn nothing, and leave a reader feeling at best like the time to read was just wasted. I look at such stories as fodder for the feckless Millennials of the stereotype (and I thank God that, among the Millennials I know, few are truly so directionless and void of aspiration). Thirdly, some stories are just plain evil.

Well, then, what do I like in SF? Firstly, the characters either dwell in a world I'd like to inhabit, or are effectively working toward constructing one. Secondly, the characters (and by extension, the authors) are capable of constructive thought and able to learn, unthreatened by the abilities of others. Coda: In a longer story, characters may not begin that way, but grow into it. That also makes me happy. Thirdly, if malice or evil makes an appearance, it is thwarted; neither is it over-dwelt upon.

I suspect the Tor.com editors thought all these stories were just peachy. Each story had its own editor, but I didn't count how many editors participated in the volume. It's a sure bet that no more than a fourth of them are people I'd be willing to count as friends.