Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

I've heard that Frank Herbert really disliked being labelled a "New Wave" writer.

I think it is obvious that he is a New Wave writer - distrust of technology; use of "psi" phenomena; etc. I am surprised that he didn't like the term.

Is anyone familiar with a text or interview in which he related his disapproval?

Thank you!

I wouldn't say he distrusted technology but how people might use it.

Sorry, I don't have a source for that... I've never really noticed him being called "new wave" and to be honest, I don't really know what it means.

Freakzilla wrote:I wouldn't say he distrusted technology but how people might use it.

Sorry, I don't have a source for that... I've never really noticed him being called "new wave" and to be honest, I don't really know what it means.

That's a good point about distrusting how people might use technology.

You know how people say that the Dune series was written as a reaction against Asimov's Foundation series? Asimov is considered to be a "Golden Age" SF writer. Golden Age SF is normally associated with "Hard SF".i.e. very science/technology driven. The "New Wave" writers emerged during the 1960s...so there is the hippie influence of mysticism, drugs, etc.

It was just something I was curious about.

I see. I can see where he might object to being labeled as such.

Google is quite a good tool when you are curious about any subject.



Last link :
http://sciencefictionlab.lmc.gatech.edu ... p/new_wave" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This sounds interesting

Linked Bibliography

Criticism/Theory

Ellison, Harlan. “Introduction: Thirty-Two Soothsayers.” In Dangerous Visions, ed. Harlan Ellison. Garden City: Doubleday, 1967.
Greenland, Colin. The Entropy Exhibition: Michael Moorcock and the British “New Wave” in Scienc Fiction. Routledge: London, 1983.
James, Edward. Science Fiction in the 20th Century. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1994.
James, Edward. The Cambridge Companion to Science Fiction. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2004.
Merril, Judith. “Introduction.” SF: The Best of the Best, ed. Judith Merril. Dell: New York, 1967.
Merril, Judith. “Introduction.” The Year's Best Science Fiction, Volumes I-IV. ed. Judith Merril. Gnome Press, 1956-59. Volumes V-IX. ed. Judith Merril Simon & Schuster, 1960-64. Volumes X-XII. ed. Judith Merril. Delacorte, 1965-68.
Merril, Judith. “What Do You Mean: Science? Fiction?” Extrapolation 7. May, 1966: 30-46.

I'm not sure that FH would have wanted to be opposed to anyone or genre, but it's just a gut feeling for now.

EDIT TO ADD
Someone seems to have a lot to say on the subject here too http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/884 ... -biography" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lotek wrote:Last link :
http://sciencefictionlab.lmc.gatech.edu ... p/new_wave" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't actually dispute that the label of "New Wave" was applied to Herbert. Someone told me that he didn't like the label...I was curious whether anyone had come across an interview or article about this. That's all, really.

I read the Goodreads article a while ago, but I didn't read the comments. I guess sometimes the comments are more interesting than the article!

Thanks for the responses.

Syzygy wrote:I don't actually dispute that the label of "New Wave" was applied to Herbert. Someone told me that he didn't like the label...I was curious whether anyone had come across an interview or article about this. That's all, really.

Yeah I got that but I never asked myself that question, at least consciously since you'd have to be stupid of KJA not to realize the difference between Asimov style SF and FH's take.


NB : Georgia Tech ftw ^^

I'm not sure if there's a confusion between New Wave and Flower Power going on here, but New Wave in terms of sci-fi simply means that the stories started to become more elaborate and thoughtful in contrast to the more simpleton golden age stuff. Dune certainly was a very distinct novel that took sci-fi into this new direction, whether you want to call it New Wave or something else.

Lengthy Wiki entry here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Wave_(science_fiction" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

Well New Wave and the hippies had at least a free and new approach to sex and drugs in common ^^

Wiki classifies FH as New Wave btw.

Syzygy wrote:I guess sometimes the comments are more interesting than the article!

That seems to apply more frequently all over these days.

Syzygy wrote:I've heard that Frank Herbert really disliked being labelled a "New Wave" writer.

I think it is obvious that he is a New Wave writer - distrust of technology; use of "psi" phenomena; etc. I am surprised that he didn't like the term.

Is anyone familiar with a text or interview in which he related his disapproval?

Thank you!

Any quotes from articles about this? As far as I know Frank was rather "modern" in his approach to technology. He even build his own computer when they were not yet mainstream tools.

Serkanner wrote:

Syzygy wrote:I've heard that Frank Herbert really disliked being labelled a "New Wave" writer.

I think it is obvious that he is a New Wave writer - distrust of technology; use of "psi" phenomena; etc. I am surprised that he didn't like the term.

Is anyone familiar with a text or interview in which he related his disapproval?

Thank you!

Any quotes from articles about this? As far as I know Frank was rather "modern" in his approach to technology. He even build his own computer when they were not yet mainstream tools.

I believe he was all into "green" tecnology too.

I keep thinking about the fact that technology isn't quite front and center in the Dune series. For example, despite access to atomic weapons, shield technology (if operational) renders it null and void...this results in a feudal empire where problems are resolved with knife fights.

I agree with the other poster that it wasn't so much a case of Herbert distrusting technology itself, but rather the people who eventually misuse it.

Lasers, too. But they have interstellar travel, suspensors, cloning, brain probes, biometrics, etc...

The New Wave in SF came out of Galaxy Magazine's change of the focus of SF on plot-driven adventure and science (sometimes super-science) stories to character and psychology and all of the other attributes that are associated with more mainstream writing. The Galaxy magazine heyday was in the 50's. The New Wave started in the 60's and took writing to some extremes. New Wave writers were often highly focused on things like psychology, drugs, altered realities, and produced stuff that could be in some cases called avant garde, at least at the beginning of the New Wave literary movement. I have always viewed the New Wave as the narrow part of the hour-glass between the Golden Age and what we have today, as the post New Wave era gave us all kinds of changes in what was considered acceptable SF, including literary SF, post-modernism, feminism, etc. I like to say that the New Wave changed the focus of SF from outer space to inner space; to the effect of the universe upon the indivicual, from the individual's effect on the universe.

FH is often associated with the New Wave movement because he was one of the early literary writers whose focus was on more than adventure, and in that respect the critics are right. But FH was more than a New Wave writer; he was the New Wave writer who showed others how it was done, and the throw-back qualities of Dune (including dragons/mosters in the wasteland, a scion of a murdered king cast into the wilderness, massive ships in space, evil emperors, swordsmen with poisoned blades, downtrodden serfs and massive battles, to name a few) could be cast in a new light by using new ideas (corporate domination, drugs, expanded consciousness, psi-powers, psychology, nature control, resource manipulation and scarcity, etc) and a few new literary ideas (feminism, inner dialog, focus on character, creation of detailed historical contexts, scientific research and planning, etc).

Exactly.

Frank also didn't like being pigeon-holed. I feel that he would have some lecture ready about the dangers of "labeling and jargon" ready to go at the drop of a certain phrase.

Omphalos wrote:The New Wave in SF came out of Galaxy Magazine's change of the focus of SF on plot-driven adventure and science (sometimes super-science) stories to character and psychology and all of the other attributes that are associated with more mainstream writing. The Galaxy magazine heyday was in the 50's. The New Wave started in the 60's and took writing to some extremes. New Wave writers were often highly focused on things like psychology, drugs, altered realities, and produced stuff that could be in some cases called avant garde, at least at the beginning of the New Wave literary movement. I have always viewed the New Wave as the narrow part of the hour-glass between the Golden Age and what we have today, as the post New Wave era gave us all kinds of changes in what was considered acceptable SF, including literary SF, post-modernism, feminism, etc. I like to say that the New Wave changed the focus of SF from outer space to inner space; to the effect of the universe upon the indivicual, from the individual's effect on the universe.

FH is often associated with the New Wave movement because he was one of the early literary writers whose focus was on more than adventure, and in that respect the critics are right. But FH was more than a New Wave writer; he was the New Wave writer who showed others how it was done, and the throw-back qualities of Dune (including dragons/mosters in the wasteland, a scion of a murdered king cast into the wilderness, massive ships in space, evil emperors, swordsmen with poisoned blades, downtrodden serfs and massive battles, to name a few) could be cast in a new light by using new ideas (corporate domination, drugs, expanded consciousness, psi-powers, psychology, nature control, resource manipulation and scarcity, etc) and a few new literary ideas (feminism, inner dialog, focus on character, creation of detailed historical contexts, scientific research and planning, etc).

Thanks Omph' !