>I suppose there are quite a few people who would laugh at comparing the work
>of Da Vinci to Michael Whelan or comparing Tolstoy to Asimov or Beethoven to
>The Moody Blues. But like you said, why should we bother to compare those
>things? They are aimed at totally different audiences. Sure the works of
>Shakespeare have lasted and will last for centuries to come. I can't say for
>certain if the works of the best of today's science fiction writers will
>stand the same test of time or be held with the same high regard and
>reverance as Shakespeare or Tolstoy or Melville 300 years from now. Then
>again, you never know.
>
>Bob Hobbs
IMHO, it depends ultimately on the intrinsic *themes* of the work: the more
universally they *speak*, the greater the chance the work will transcend
time and be perennially fresh for the ages.
James
|