Well, I just did another Mind Meld for the SF Signal folks. This time we were asked ‘Who Are Tomorrow’s Genre Stars’? you can read the discussion over on SF Signal. I think it’s interesting how we’ve all interpreted the idea of new, up and coming, and genre star.  For my own money, there are a bunch of writers I don’t mention over much because I think they are stars now; they have commercial success etc. For example, Scott Westerfeld is a New York Times Bestseller who has been publishing for over a decade and is well-established in the field. He’s one of today’s stars. Same thing for Charlie Stross. A question I want to ponder for a while is not ‘who are tomorrow’s genre stars’, but ‘who will still be being read in twenty years’? I can see Westerfeld and Stross being active and widely read then. But who else?
That’s something I would never take bets on. There are writers who were extremely active early on in their careers–eg Lucius Shepard. Then he wrote very little for about five years and then started producing stories and novellas again like nobody’s business.
Bruce McAllister has had three bursts of creativity over his career so far-and in between hasn’t published anything for about five years.
Stuff happens.
A question I want to ponder for a while is not ‘who are tomorrow’s genre stars’, but ‘who will still be being read in twenty years’?
Or, indeed, “who has been writing for twenty years and is still doing good work?” Let’s not let our neophilia get *too* carried away …
In twenty years? It is impossible to know if we will read in a post-Singularity world, let alone who or what we might read. Presumably our AI overlords will tell us when the time comes, and I for one welcome their input.
I’d give Doctorow and Stross a better than even money shot at surviving that scenario, in some form. ;-)