I liked much Asimov’s stuff. Heinlein, I can take or leave. I acknowledge his greatness primarily because he affected so many other people.

While I’d put Bradbury at the top of the list someplace, I’m not sure he considers himself a sci-fi writer. While I enjoyed _The Martian Chronicles _ and the other space-themed books/stories, my favorite Bradbury is _Something Wicked This Way Comes_. That book is a much better example of “Bradburyness” than the ostensibly sci-fi stories.

Bradbury, Asimov, Heinlein, Zelazny – I’m at about 90% saturation. Various authors – mainly SciFi from the 30s to the 50s – I’ve read every scrap of parchment that my greedy little fingers can grasp. *Henry Kuttner is the only name that jumps to mind

It shall be a strange experience, post humorously examining the man’s legacy. The voices of current authors shall underlie every subplot, leaving me to wonder whether each idea was plundered by Clarke from some unknown soul, as it was from him.

Perhaps it’s because it’s a vampire novel, and yet the word (in English) isn’t mentioned at all, not once. Perhaps it’s the passage about discipline. Perhaps it’s everything about it.

AGYAR has left a very indelible mark upon me. I just wanted to thank you for the story, before it was too late to let you know that you made as much of an impression on me as Clarke made on you (if I may be so bold).

-Robert, looking out the window at a Minnesota spring day, covered in snow.

My question boils down to this: how do you identify better writers?

The only way I know is through their published work, and then it’s too late–they’re already doing something better suited to their talents than emulating someone else would be. If they can get published telling their own stories, why would they choose to tell someone else’s? (Well, money, I suppose, if their books weren’t selling well.)