Philip Farmer and "River World" Series

I used to read alot of science fiction, and one of my favorites was
Farmer's "River World" series (To Your Scattered Bodies Go, etc). Is
he still writing books? And are there any more books in the series?

Art Layton
Stamford CT

Art Layton wrote:
I used to read alot of science fiction, and one of my favorites was
Farmer's "River World" series (To Your Scattered Bodies Go, etc). Is
he still writing books? And are there any more books in the series?

Art Layton
Stamford CT

I don't think he writes much any more, he is 85 now and I think rather
frail. Don't think there's been any fiction from him since the early
1990s.

Yes, there are more books,but they got steadily worse. /The Fabulous
Riverboat/ was still good, /The Dark Design/ was OK but didn't end the
story, when it was supposed to, and also retconned the previous books.
/The Magic Labyrinth/ was really the second half of /The Dark Design/
and did more poor retconning. /Gods of Riverworld/ was just a waste of
time, and that's where I stopped.

The original "Riverworld" story, in /Riverworld and other Stories/, was
good though.

I think Farmer has written three or four other novels set on Riverworld,
and sanctioned a couple of shared-world anthologies, but I couldn't be
bothered after /Gods/.

A good (if incomplete) source for information on titles in this genre is
the Internet Science Fiction Database (ISFDB) hosted by Texas A&M at
isfdb.tamu.edu.

Mike M
--
Xenocyte Books. Now on eBay. They're back. And this time it's serious.
http://tinyurl.com/g1jt Today's top item: "Harry Potter and the Order
of the Phoenix". With printing errors on the first page of the story
.... how collectable is that?

Mike McKeown wrote:
Art Layton wrote:

I used to read alot of science fiction, and one of my favorites was
Farmer's "River World" series (To Your Scattered Bodies Go, etc). Is
he still writing books? And are there any more books in the series?

Art Layton
Stamford CT


I don't think he writes much any more, he is 85 now and I think rather
frail. Don't think there's been any fiction from him since the early
1990s.


He wrote a "pulp" detective novel, NOTHING BURNS IN HELL, published by
ToR in 1998.

Jim Barker

"Art Layton" wrote in message
om...
I used to read alot of science fiction, and one of my favorites was
Farmer's "River World" series (To Your Scattered Bodies Go, etc). Is
he still writing books? And are there any more books in the series?

I don't know if he's writing, but he is selling on Ebay. I'll take this
opportunity for a small brag. Red Orc is shown on my website, I haven't
scanned Dayworld Breakup.

Farmer, Philip Jose Red Orc's Rage 1991 TOR NY. Original manuscript.
Consists of photocopied pages with handwritten corrections in various
colors. Included are all of the research materials in various manilla
folders, a photocopy of the galleys for the paperback edition, and a signed
and dated (July 16, 2000) letter of provenance from the author. Good to
fine.

Farmer, Philip Jose Dayworld Breakup 1993 TOR NY. Original manuscript.
Consists of computer printout pages with copious handwritten corrections in
pencil by the author. Included is a letter of provenance from the author's
agent, dated April 23, 1993, attesting that this is the final draft, along
with the mailing enevelope (the author's addressed is crossed out by hand.)
Contained in a box with the label of the Scott Meredith litarary agency
affixed to the top. Fine.

---Mike
http://www.booktouronline.com

"Mike Berro" wrote in message
...

Farmer, Philip Jose Red Orc's Rage 1991 TOR NY. Original manuscript.
Consists of photocopied pages with handwritten corrections in various
colors. Included are all of the research materials in various manilla
folders, a photocopy of the galleys for the paperback edition, and a
signed
and dated (July 16, 2000) letter of provenance from the author. Good to
fine.

Farmer, Philip Jose Dayworld Breakup 1993 TOR NY. Original manuscript.
Consists of computer printout pages with copious handwritten corrections
in
pencil by the author. Included is a letter of provenance from the author's
agent, dated April 23, 1993, attesting that this is the final draft, along
with the mailing enevelope (the author's addressed is crossed out by
hand.)
Contained in a box with the label of the Scott Meredith litarary agency
affixed to the top. Fine.



Two questions:

(1) Isn't a "computer printout" a "typescript" as opposed to a "manuscript,"
even if it has manuscript corrections?

(2) Do the AB condition grades make any sense in reference to unique items
like manuscripts or typescripts? One should certainly describe the
condition of the item--its completeness, its legibility, its fragility, etc.
But aren't the condition grades intended mainly to distinguish one
originally identical manufactured item from another? In other words, if you
have an original and valuable literary manuscript, who cares whether it's
"near fine" or "very good +"? E.g., I have an autograph manuscript of a
poem by the Anglo-Irish poet Aubrey de Vere (1814-1902):

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04763a.htm

I still haven't made certain that the poem has been published--but it has
never crossed my mind to grade the condition of the page. The uniqueness of
the item outweighs any thought about its graded condition.


William M. Klimon
http://www.gateofbliss.com

A movie was made from the first two books and shown on the Sci-Fi Channel a
few months ago. It will be airing again on July 26 at 7:00 pm.

http://www.scifi.com/onair/scifipictures/riverworld/

"Art Layton" wrote in message
om...
I used to read alot of science fiction, and one of my favorites was
Farmer's "River World" series (To Your Scattered Bodies Go, etc). Is
he still writing books? And are there any more books in the series?

Art Layton
Stamford CT

"Sandy Malcolm" wrote in message
news:3f172658$0$23650$afc38c87@britishlibrary...

Indeed, for collectors (or me, anyway) it does have a specific meaning -
it
means it's written by hand, not typed. I don't see what's wrong with
"typescript", which at least has the merit of accuracy; it doesn't sound
to me
as if it necessarily refers to an unimportant document, any more than
"manuscript" sounds as if it refers to an important one (as you point
out). I've
got a few ms items, none of any great importance, and a couple of
typescript
ones, of no greater importance, but I want two different terms to
distinguish
them, I think; "manuscript" and "typescript" seem to fit the bill pretty
adequately.



The problem is simply that "manuscript" has two accepted meanings: one
bibliographic meaning "written by hand," the other literary meaning "the
author's original copy" (the OED has this meaning definitely attested in the
late 1960s).

Perhaps the best solution is to say something like "computer-printed
manuscript" or "typescript manuscript."


William M. Klimon
http://www.gateofbliss.com

"Sandy Malcolm" wrote in message
news:3f172658$0$23650$afc38c87@britishlibrary...

Indeed, for collectors (or me, anyway) it does have a specific meaning -
it
means it's written by hand, not typed. I don't see what's wrong with
"typescript", which at least has the merit of accuracy; it doesn't sound
to me
as if it necessarily refers to an unimportant document, any more than
"manuscript" sounds as if it refers to an important one (as you point
out). I've
got a few ms items, none of any great importance, and a couple of
typescript
ones, of no greater importance, but I want two different terms to
distinguish
them, I think; "manuscript" and "typescript" seem to fit the bill pretty
adequately.

I wasn't clear. Manuscript *does* imply importance (to me.) Holographic
means handwritten.

---Mike

I wasn't clear. Manuscript *does* imply importance (to me.) Holographic
means handwritten.

---Mike

But you mentioned that a laundry list is a manuscript (if it's handwritten),
which seems right to me, even if it's not that interesting a document in itself.
I can't see that the word includes any value judgment, it's simply descriptive;
likewise typescript. (In fact, what would you call the hypothetical handwritten
laundry list - "A laundry list which isn't a manuscript because it's not
important enough even although it's handwritten"?) My impression from looking at
dealer's catalogues is that they'll always distinguish the two by the terms
manuscript and typescript (or at least not use the former when they mean the
latter), even if the manuscript's a laundry list and the typescript's the
authorially-typed pages of a novel. "Holographic manuscript", as you said
before, is redundant because they both mean handwritten.

As with many book-collecting or bibliographical terms (condition being an
obvious one, eg 'good' meaning 'not good'), the words have different usage
outside a group of collectors (and evidently within one as well). Bill mentioned
the OED quotations from the 1960s, and two of those are evidently from
mainstream, or at least not bibliographical/collecting works. The third's from
the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules of 1967, which says 'Manuscript, a writing
made by hand. (Original typescripts are generally treated as manuscripts in
libraries.)'. That doesn't say that they're _called_ manuscripts in libraries,
only (I think) that they get the same standards of care in cataloguing,
conservation etc as they would if they were manuscripts, because they're
original authorial copies.

You said that you were open to suggestions because you see difficulties with the
terms that were proposed before (holographic ms, ribbon-copy ms etc). Those
difficulties disappear, it seems to me, if you confine the term manuscript to
handwritten items, and use typescript and computer printout to describe those
other formats. If you treat them as descriptions rather than value judgments,
it's pretty straightforward. (Does 'Original typescript' - as in the OED
quotation - sound better than just plain 'typescript'?)

Actually, I have a slight difficulty seeing that a computer printout, unless (as
in your case) it's been uniquely augmented by the author, even just with a
signature, should have quite the same 'status' or level of interest as the
manuscript or typescript of a literary work, since producing a computer printout
is no more difficult than clicking the Print icon on a PC. (There seems to be a
good deal of work these days on how archiving, bibliography and textual
criticism fits in with the digital world, which I must admit I don't find
particularly interesting, probably because I spend quite enough time working
with computers as it is.)

Sandy

I'll agree to disagree. William Klimon said it better than I.

---Mike

"Sandy Malcolm" wrote in message
news:3f1b0dc4$0$2888$afc38c87@britishlibrary...
"Holographic manuscript", as you said
before, is redundant because they both mean handwritten.

Actually, I realised after I posted that that "holographic ms" isn't
redundant
at all - a ms is only holographic if it's in the handwriting of the
author, or
the person under whose authority it's issued. So the ms of a novel isn't
holographic if it's been dictated to a scribe or secretary; similarly an
official document (eg a royal proclamation) is unlikely to be holographic
since
it's almost bound to have been written by a clerk and then signed by the
king,
queen or whoever.

Sandy