Finally, someone who has the love of a reader, and the brain of a literary critic. I mean that as a complement as this book came closer than anything I've reading in explaining mainstream literary criticism distain for and ignoring of science fiction. The books age means it cannot comment on the explosion of fantasy that happened in the late 1990 to the present, nor the weird fact that most fantasy is now geared toward teens, and I would have liked to have heard his analysis, but as a book explaining the history of the genre's somewhat ignoble roots, nothing matches it. ( )

I picked up this book long ago in paperback, read the first chapter or so, and sent the book to my mother. My parents have been quite understanding of my interest in science fiction, but I don’t believe they’ve ever quite understood it. The first chapter, and indeed the rest of the book, is a wonderful introduction to science fiction and the culture it engenders. I don’t know if my mother has ever read this, but I’m glad that it was there to send to her. I picked up this book again three years ago from an ad in Locus. It sat on my bookshelf until this past semester, when I did a study of science fiction fandom for my sociology class. David Hartwell’s excellent study then came in quite handy as a reference tool and quotebook for the paper that I wrote. Useful? Quite. I recommend it as probably the best study so far on science fiction fandom, mainly because it is the only one. Other books make reference to the subculture; only Hartwell dedicates an entire book to it. If you’ve ever wondered why fans are as they are, this might be your answer. ( )

I think this is a book any science fiction writer should read. It's important to know the roots, to know the expectations that still pervade the genre, despite all the "new blood" that's carving a nitch for themselves as well. I know that I am certainly not a science fiction reader of the past, and that's something important to remember when I do read the classics, or when I read books that do everything they can to invoke a sense of wonder in the reader. I know said books aren't my cup of tea, nor am I said writer's target audience, so maybe I should be more forgiving of books that try to recreate the science fiction of old? We'll see. :) I still have my own expectations in writing, but I will say I'm more inclined to read some of the classics than I was before, and that's definitely a good thing.

For a full review, please click here: http://calico-reaction.livejournal.com/19125.html ( )

Many of the chapter titles of David Hartwell’s “Age of Wonders” are typical panel topics at various science fiction conventions: “The Golden Age of Science Fiction is Twelve,” “Let’s Get SF Back in the Gutter Where it Belongs,” etc. These panels are discussions between SF professionals and fans, seeking to understand both SF and fandom itself, and touching back to them typifies what role Hartwell’s book may play.

This isn’t a rigorous academic study of SF. There’s some history here, some literary criticism, some fun anecdotes and myths of Fandom. It’s all presented with a light tone and a breezy voice. Hartwell claims that it is aimed at people not already members of Fandom:

“This is an outsider’s guidebook and road map through the world of science fiction, pointing out the historical monuments, backyard follies, highways, and back streets of the SF community – a tour of main events and sideshows, and a running commentary on why the SF world is the way it is.”

However, I think that it will have the strongest appeal to those who are already into SF, perhaps are even already part of the subculture, but are trying to find their bearings. From my own perspective I found the chapter on the New Wave controversies particularly interesting, as it is a period of the history of SF I’m only just now learning about. Likewise the chapters on the subculture of Fandom were fascinating, telling the story of the early days in a particularly user-friendly way.

This isn’t an authoritative, carved-in-stone survey of the field. Hartwell has been and continues to be one of the field’s foremost editors and anthologists and this seems like a tribute to a literature and a way of life that he clearly loves. Sometimes there is even a hint of nostalgia in the tone, perhaps wistfully noting that there just isn’t as much female nudity at Cons anymore, not like there was in the 70s. Certainly reading this 20 years after it was written though, one has justification in saying: “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” It’s good to know that as much as fans may scream at each other, argue, burn out, and come back – they’ve been doing the same thing since 1930. ( )