Re: ~ Arthur C. Clarke, Science Fiction Author and Gay Man, Dies ~

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 01:16:35 GMT, winston@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) wrote:

>In article <ddfr-320ABC.11392919032008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, David
Friedman <ddfr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>>In article 
>><edccdd3f-8d47-4744-8a29-451703b7cbf8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>> Will in New Haven <bill.reich@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 19, 1:22 pm, "Frank R.A.J. Maloney" <fr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> > Will in New Haven wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > On Mar 19, 1:05 pm, "Mike McKinley" <mp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> > >> "Franklin Hummel" <hum...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> >
>>> > >>news:frrh00$oid$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> >
>>> > >>> In 1988, when I was Director of the newly formed Gaylactic
Network, an
>>> > >>> association of organization for gay science fiction fans and
their
>>> > >>> friends, I wrote Sir Clarke
>>> > >>     I believe he would be called Sir Arthur.
>>> >
>>> > > That's all right. Anyone who thinks Sir Arthur is "Likely the
present-
>>> > > day world's most famous science fiction author," is probably going
to
>>> > > get everything else wrong too. Even narrowing the definition of
>>> > > "science fiction author" so that it doesn't include Rowling won't
do
>>> > > it.
>>> >
>>> > Of course we would exclude Rowling since the Harry Potter series is
>>> > fantasy, *not* science fiction.
>>> >
>>> > So who do you think is the world's most famous science author?
>>> 
>>> Asimov gets more than twice as many Google hits.
>>
>>Assuming one believes the Google "about" figure on hits, 
>>
>>Heinlein gets 638,000
>>
>>Clarke 120,000
>>
>>Asimov 2,720,000
>>
>>Orwell 4,750,000
>>
>>Rand  2,130,000
>>
>>Which points out one ambiguity in "world's most famous science fiction 
>>author." Orwell is probably the most famous person who was an sf author,

>>unless there is some other famous person I haven't thought of who also 
>>wrote sf. But Orwell isn't really famous as an sf author, or at least 
>>not primarily. I think the same is true of Rand.
>>
>
>How about L. Ron Hubbard?

Now that brings up some really tricky questions.  Must the fame
*derive* from the SF writing; or if Gentry Lee won the lottery,
knocked up Britney Spears, and assassinated George W Bush, would
he become the hands-down winner?  If the former, must the work be
*identified* as SF?  If so, must it be so identified a) by the
author, b) by most of his readers, c) both, or d) neither?

-- 
Bill Snyder  [This space unintentionally left blank]