Hi everyone, first of all I am nothing to promote here just looking for honest advice. I am trying to get into science fiction books but I am not sure where to start. There are so many titles and authors, and honestly I feel a little overwhelmed.

I tried doing some research on reddit sci-fi threads, Quora answers, and also read a few blogs on NewYorkTimes, Tor.com and Goodreads. But still I am confuse because every site recommend different books.

I am looking for something that is engaging, not too hard to read for a beginner but still has interesting ideas, maybe futuristic or space related. So far I found these options that people suggest a lot:

Science Fiction Before Science Fiction – Anthology of Ancient Sci-Fi Texts

  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FHDNPY3H?tag=newyork-times-20

Reboot: ORIGIN OVERRIDE – End of Evolution by Seo

  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F3NCQC44?tag=newyork-times-20

I see that Dune is very famous and has deep world-building, Ender’s Game is quick to read and fun, and The Martian is realistic and exciting.

I would love to hear from people who already read these or other sci-fi books. Which one is best to start with? Or is there another book you think is perfect for someone new to sci-fi?

Book recommendations are subjective, because it depends on what you like. Also depends on whether you widen the net and include fantasy in the discussion.

I never got into Dune back in the day while others loved it. I loved Roger Zelazny (especially the Amber series but also other stuff) Terry Pratchett is enjoyable; I like his sense of humor. John Scalzi’s, too (in Redshirts and The Android’s Dream, at least). I also recall liking Stephen R. Donaldson's Chronicles of Thomas Covenant series.

I think Jasper Fforde’s Thursday Next series and his Nursery Crimes Division books are wonderful, too

A lot of people start off with the 'pulpy' science fiction of the 40/50s ( E E 'Doc' Smith type ) before moving on to the 'deeper' science fiction which is more social commentary in a sci-fi setting.
I started my 'journey' with Galactic Derelict, by Andre Norton ( actually a cat lady ) before she veered off into fantasy while I wanted more science realism of the Dragon's Egg, by Robert L Forward type.

Maybe if you indicate what type interests you, we might be able to recommend what you'd like, not what we like.

17 hours ago, mavoo said:

I am trying to get into science fiction books but I am not sure where to start. There are so many titles and authors, and honestly I feel a little overwhelmed.

Yup there certainly are and further the emphasis has changed over the years.

So, as already said, it depends upon your own personal taste and also your own personal circumstances.

I don't know where you are or what your resources are but let me congratulate you on wanting to read books. +1

So many these days only want stuff on a screen, or are you looking to use kindle or kobo or other online sources ?

In which case you will obviously be limited by what is available.

Going back to books, I don't know if you are proposing to get them from a local library, or but them (many are available cheaply second hand.

Scinece fiction books come in two types.

Collections of short stories, either by one author or by many authors collected by one editor.

These have the great advantage that if you don't like one author or story type you can quickly go on tto the next.

So I would recommend starting with some of these, before movi ng onto full size novels and even long works that span several or even many volumes.

You can also look forward to all sorts of story types, from fast action with Matthew Reilly, macabre stories from Ray Bradbury, miscellaneous collections from thinking authors like A C Clarke, Human sagas from Anne McCaffrey, and of course the spins offs from TV and film like Star Wars and Star Trek and Dr Who.

There were series especially for youger readers one about children born in space stations around Earth - the Kemlo series, another about a flying saucer that visited Earth and took the mad professor and his children on wondrous and adventurous journeys around the galaxy - the same author was responsible for the Biggles series.

If you do plan to check them out from the library, you can ask the librarian for recommendations. They can probably tell you what’s popular, and if they read SF will probably tell you what they like.

19 hours ago, swansont said:

I also recall liking Stephen R. Donaldson's Chronicles of Thomas Covenant series.

I thought that was stark as hell but fantastic too.

The foundation series, by Isaac Assimov, is fundamental to the genre, if you want a deep dive (nerd like); but if you want to be entertained, Douglas Adams is your go too author...

1 hour ago, swansont said:

I never got into Dune back in the day while others loved it.

The first 50 pages are such a slog, having to learn the basics of thousands of years of fictional history. It was worth the investment for the first three books, but after that I lost interest.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

I also recall liking Stephen R. Donaldson's Chronicles of Thomas Covenant series.

This was a love/hate relationship for me. I kept reading all the books but I was always frustrated with Thomas. He could never accept that he wasn't a leper when visiting the Land, and I found his lack of wonder frustrating.

Just now, Phi for All said:

The first 50 pages are such a slog, having to learn the basics of thousands of years of fictional history. It was worth the investment for the first three books, but after that I lost interest.

I think "God Emporer of Dune" was the opus.

I sometimes like to say that when I became a SF (which stands for the broad category of speculative fiction) fan, I never walked past the start of the alphabet (not really true, and I did eventually reach Vernor Vinge, Connie Willis, Gene Wolfe and Roger Zelazny. But early readings did seem to be the ABCDs - Aldiss, Asimov, Anderson, Bradbury, Bester, Clarke, Dick. Later, I encountered an alphabetical phenomenon which actually has a formal name among fans, the Killer B's of Hard SF which, if memory serves, includes Gregory Benford, Stephen Baxter, Ben Bova, Greg Bear, and (my favorite bee) David Brin. (For the newbies to SF, "hard SF"' refers to the more science-anchored subgenre of hard science fiction which emphasizes plausible and accurate use of science as central to the narrative)

For an introduction to the broad genre, one could try an anthology - libraries will often have such, annual collections with titles like year's best SF, or there are thematic anthologies on a certain topic like, say, time travel or robots or first encounters with ETs. Those are a great way to get introduced to a variety of authors and see who you like. My anthology intro was a couple, one called Dangerous Visions (late sixties), edited by Harlan Ellison (the eccentric madman and jester of SF circles, back in the day), and the other called Orbit, which was a series of anthologies edited by Damon Knight.

And don't overlook mainstream authors who have stepped over into the SF genre to produce notable work, from Margaret Atwood to George Orwell to Doris Lessing.

And finally, those who use SF as a vehicle for comedy and satire - Doug Adams (as already mentioned), Kurt Vonnegut, R.A. Lafferty, Terry Pratchett and John Scalzi, to name a few.

Not that I'm a SF fan or anything.

Edited September 5Sep 5 by TheVat
How TF did I omit Pratchett

20 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

The first 50 pages are such a slog, having to learn the basics of thousands of years of fictional history. It was worth the investment for the first three books, but after that I lost interest.

For some reasons it was one of the books that I liked as a kid and didn't care that much about for later.

21 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

The foundation series, by Isaac Assimov, is fundamental to the genre, if you want a deep dive (nerd like); but if you want to be entertained, Douglas Adams is your go too author...

I think Asimov is a good indicator of what your preferences are in literature.. Sci-Fi often has some kind of idea or hook which is then extrapolated. From that perspective, Asimov is fantastic. Great ideas with a lot of world-building and fantastic logical flow. On the other hand, the prose is dull (just as you would expect from someone in natural science) and pretty much the only distinguishing feature of his characters are their names.

Still love those. Also, if world-building is of interest, Iain M. Banks culture novels are also fantastic. That being said, and I am not entirely sure but for some reasons I found that I like the style of Scottish writers (I found out after looking at the bios of my favorite writers and for some reasons the list was British and especially Scottish writers).

From American authors, Gibson's Neuromancer has been genre-defining (cyberpunk) though slightly dated (which gives it an interesting air of nostalgia IMO) and Butler (a very different voice in scifi) come to mind among those who have not been mentioned yet. But I would echo @swansont's recommendation to check out a library and figure out what you enjoy.

ETA - after all that rambling, I just want to name one novel, which I consider one of the finest get-your-feet-wet introductions to the genre:

Ringworld, by Larry Niven.

I missed the author of Jurassic Park off my list, Michael Crichton.

He has many feasible near future scenarios, a gripping style with plenty of suspense ans suprises.

This has led to several successful films.

19 minutes ago, CharonY said:

From American authors, Gibson's Neuromancer has been genre-defining (cyberpunk) though slightly dated (which gives it an interesting air of nostalgia IMO) and Butler (a very different voice in scifi) come to mind among those who have not been mentioned yet.

Glad you mentioned them. I'm not sure Gibson stills owns up to being American, having fled to Vancouver long ago. Agree that his cyberpunk novels do have that nostalgic element. Same goes for Bruce Sterling. I still haven't read Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash, which apparently makes me only semiliterate in cyberpunk circles.

Also should mention the whole transhumanism SF subgenre, of which Charles Stross is a notable example. Absolutely mind-blowing stuff.

20 minutes ago, TheVat said:

ETA - after all that rambling, I just want to name one novel, which I consider one of the finest get-your-feet-wet introductions to the genre:

Ringworld, by Larry Niven.

Yes that is excellent, except for the implicit misogyny. Sessile females etc.

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

I'm not sure Gibson stills owns up to being American, having fled to Vancouver long ago

My good friend practically forced me to read some short stories of his. One of them was Johnny Mnemonic, actually "Burning Chrome." Hated it, I hated the writing style.

Admittedly though I do not like the genre overall, I prefer fantasy.

So Wizards, goblins, elves, spells, warriors and wars as opposed to robots, lasers, space ships and Ai.

2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

The first 50 pages are such a slog, having to learn the basics of thousands of years of fictional history. It was worth the investment for the first three books, but after that I lost interest.

Yeah, I recall being told you have to wade through the first ~50 pages, and I just couldn’t do it.

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I missed the author of Jurassic Park off my list, Michael Crichton.

He has many feasible near future scenarios, a gripping style with plenty of suspense ans suprises.

This has led to several successful films.

Yeah, I enjoyed The Andromeda Strain and Jurassic Park.

(also puzzled that Douglas Adams didn’t pop into my head for my earlier post)

14 minutes ago, TheVat said:

I still haven't read Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash, which apparently makes me only semiliterate in cyberpunk circles.

It is interesting- sometimes a bit high-octane for my taste, but a good read for sure.

15 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Glad you mentioned them. I'm not sure Gibson stills owns up to being American, having fled to Vancouver long ago.

I didn't know that. Perhaps that is why I like his books?

27 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Ringworld, by Larry Niven.

It is a very good book with great world-building. I would echo exchemist's notion, though. A lot of scifi of that period has a very two-dimensional view on women which makes it less enjoyable for some (especially female readers, who are are otherwise scifi nerds).

21 minutes ago, swansont said:

Yeah, I recall being told you have to wade through the first ~50 pages, and I just couldn’t do it.

My memory is hazy, but I recall a lot of exposition which amounts to an imperialist society ending up with something of a Lawrence of Arabia meets Soviets and Mujahedeen. On drugs. Lots of drugs.

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

For some reasons it was one of the books that I liked as a kid and didn't care that much about for later.

Perhaps it was because all the exposition was front-end loaded. Many authors are pretty ham-handed when it comes to telling you things you're already supposed to know. With Dune, if you really invested in the first 50 pages, you didn't have to suffer through a bunch of clumsy mono/dialogues as the characters try to develop a backstory for you.

It ends up being a roller-coaster ride, but it takes forever getting up that first big lift hill.

28 minutes ago, pinball1970 said:

My good friend practically forced me to read some short stories of his. One of them was Johnny Mnemonic, actually "Burning Chrome." Hated it, I hated the writing style.

Yes it is definitely an acquired taste. I like the chrome-neon vibes coupled with a mix of fairly cold descriptions of society (matching the feel) juxtaposed with the almost poetic (if abstract) elements of the virtual world.

5 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Yes it is definitely an acquired taste. I like the chrome-neon vibes coupled with a mix of fairly cold descriptions of society (matching the feel) juxtaposed with the almost poetic (if abstract) elements of the virtual world.

I did like this one,( from wiki, )"The Killing Star is a hard science fiction novel by American writers Charles R. Pellegrino and George Zebrowski, published in April 1995."

Again pretty stark, but what caught my friends interest was the discussion at the end of the book, which discussed the seemingly science fiction concepts in terms of the actual science fact advancements.

Thirty years on it would be interesting to read it again.

10 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Yes it is definitely an acquired taste. I like the chrome-neon vibes coupled with a mix of fairly cold descriptions of society (matching the feel) juxtaposed with the almost poetic (if abstract) elements of the virtual world.

I do not want to derail the thread but just a quick note. I have trouble with the literature, the genre but I like a lot of the films, the visual element.

With fantasy it is the other way round, reading LOTR say I am in middle earth with Glorfindel taking on the wraiths and the visual representation will never match up. (They swap Glorfindel for Arwen! Legolas in the cartoon I think)

Joe Abercrombie "the first Law," is a good one. Fantasy rather than science fiction and not a first crack at the genre for a newbie.

I read David Eddings "Pawn of prophecy," 30 years ago, I liked it but I am an amateur when it comes to this. Not well read for a 58 year old.

Edit Eddings was also fantasy and was quite funny from memory.

I could not get into Terry Pratchett by comparison, just not funny, stilly rather.

36 minutes ago, pinball1970 said:

I could not get into Terry Pratchett by comparison, just not funny, stilly rather.

Of course literary preference is just a matter of taste even in if you are objectively and undeniably wrong here ;).

1 hour ago, pinball1970 said:

I could not get into Terry Pratchett by comparison, just not funny, stilly rather.

Not well read on Pratchett, but possible that Going Postal might be more accessible than some of his others.

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

. I like the chrome-neon vibes coupled with a mix of fairly cold descriptions of society (matching the feel) juxtaposed with the almost poetic (if abstract) elements of the virtual world

I recall the second Sprawl book, Count Zero, did this rather well, and rather audaciously imagined AIs which broke up into splinters that manifested as Haitian voodoo gods. Also rather prescient in its view of techno-billionaires struggling for dominance.

2 hours ago, CharonY said:

It is a very good book with great world-building. I would echo exchemist's notion, though. A lot of scifi of that period has a very two-dimensional view on women which makes it less enjoyable for some

Yep, Ringworld (and early sequels) were the sort of imaginative romp where you might like the vast setting and adventure and mind boggling engineering but would have to "take the best and leave the rest" -it's very much of its time. I own the first paperback printing, which has a famous error in which Louis Wu goes the wrong way around the Earth to prolong New Year's partying, and there are only a few copies extant (most of that press run was recalled by the publisher and shredded). Apparently it's worth something. It's fortunate that I've kept it sealed in cling wrap and in a cool dry basement for decades, since its high-acid pulp paper deteriorates pretty fast.

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

Yep, Ringworld (and early sequels) were the sort of imaginative romp where you might like the vast setting and adventure and mind boggling engineering but would have to "take the best and leave the rest" -it's very much of its time.

That is a very good way to put it.

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

I recall the second Sprawl book, Count Zero, did this rather well, and rather audaciously imagined AIs which broke up into splinters that manifested as Haitian voodoo gods. Also rather prescient in its view of techno-billionaires struggling for dominance.

True- it is funny, in a way. Bits of it, such as how he imagined what is basically the internet (matrix) or virtual reality was clearly a product of its time and got rather dated. But in other concepts, perhaps how we interact with AI is very modern. The class struggle element is core to the "punk" aspect and it was very interesting how Gibson (and other authors in the genre) imagined things. In the early days the scrappy tech startups were often seen as the rebellious types vs the big corporations. That obviously didn't hold up well.

12 hours ago, CharonY said:

Of course literary preference is just a matter of taste even in if you are objectively and undeniably wrong here ;).

I know I'm in the minority on this. My problem I think is that I read Lord of the Rings when I was too young and read everything else when I was too old, fantasy wise. I just ended up making comparisons.

I think if I would have read "Hitchhikers" when I was older I probably would not have given it a fair chance.