Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site bunkerb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!uwvax!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittvax!bunkerb!mary
From: mary@bunkerb.UUCP (Mary Shurtleff)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Re: space "operas"
Message-ID: <516@bunkerb.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-May-85 08:19:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: bunkerb.516
Posted: Fri May 31 08:19:13 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Jun-85 07:11:08 EDT
References: <2056@topaz.ARPA> <694@udenva.UUCP> <1187@hound.UUCP>
Organization: Bunker Ramo, Trumbull Ct
Lines: 28

> On the other hand, I have always thought of the space opera as characterizing
> that branch of SF where there is considerable action on a relatively large
> canvas. To me some of the most rewarding and enjoyable stories would bear
> the name space opera rather proudly. For example,
> Pattern for Conquest, by George O. Smith, is certainly a classic in the genre.
> Probably all of the stories of the immortal E.E.Smith, PhD.
> The Foundation Series by Asimov.
> Star Wars Trilogy 

I haven't read Pattern for Conquest, but I'll agree with you very strongly on
"Doc" Smith's work (the Lensman and Skylark series epitomize space opera to me).
I have to disagree on The Foundation Series, however.  While the environment is
large, lots happens, and it takes place over a long period of time, it is not
characterized by:

		A hero too good to be true (a la Kimball Kinnison)
		A hero's girlfried too good to be true (Clarissa MacDougall)
		Lots of space battles and blaster play (beams, rods, needles,
		and helices of force, plus trusty DeLameters)
		Supremely evil bad guys (what could be worse than a Plooran?)
		Space ships that get faster and more powerful with more
		outrageous weapons in each successive book/chapter.

The Foundation Series is much more idea-oriented than space opera, and so does
not qualify.


M. Shurtleff