1/ Seeing posts from people talking about how the SFF of the past was relevant and had Things To Say and that nearly all modern SFF is pulp trash that doesn't say anything and isn't relevant and isn't worth reading because all the old stuff is still important, etc.

2/ That modern SFF writers aren't adding anything to the genre and pushing it forward, that publication is now reliant on a diversity checklist rather than telling a good story.

And y'all, that is so bass-ackwardsly hilarious it's hard to know what to address first.

3/ I can only assume the people who think these things haven't actually read much of what's being written in the past decade, especially award-winners, because "isn't relevant?" "Isn't pushing the genre forward?" It's so adorably ignorant that they think that.

4/ I guess, then, that @fran_wilde's "Updraft" didn't actually say anything about how cultures can be formed around ignorance of the truth and the past, and that's not remotely relevant to the growing conversation around how schools teach an American history that's full of lies.

5/ I guess multiple @BluejoWalton novels haven't had anything to say on the social impact of multiverse theory and the power of decision and creation. I mean, that idea SURELY is only a very recent one and was never looked at by past SFF greats, either. Nope, never.

6/ @MadelineAshby's novels about identity and worth when applied to human-appearing machines is 100% pulp and definitely doesn't revisit a question that's been on people's minds for literally decades now. Definitely can't call that relevant, not even a little.

7/ @nkjemisin's "Broken Earth" novels don't add anything to the conversation about climate change, survival, humanity's connection to the world, & questioning tradition I mean, pssh, nobody's talking about those things at all, these days. No relevance or pushed boundaries there!

8/ And those are just some of the BIG names whose works I've read, whose books were written in the past decade.

Want some smaller titles that still contribute to the genre and ask good questions, and that I feel don't get enough love?

9/ @ilsajbick's "Dark Passages" duology explores multiverse theory, perspective, whether any given reality might be someone's late-night scribbles, whether multiverse crossover is possible.

It's YA.

It's challenging.

It's fucking brilliant.

Go read it.

10/ @seeorsea's "The Mad Scientist's Daughter" explores the power of creation, change, whether a romance between humans and advanced AI is feasible, and is a fantastic coming of age story in a post-apocalyptic world.

It doesn't get enough love.

11/ @KatWithSword's "Roses and Rot" asks readers what they might be willing to sacrifice to make their dreams a reality. It also deals with abusive parents, trauma, desperation, beauty, & faerie lore.

I don't see enough people talk about this book & how emotional it is.

12/ @scriptopus's (R)evolution trilogy addresses gene editing, autonomy, the responsibility of the powerful, the abuses of the rich when capitalism goes too far. It's absolutely relevant to many conversations people have today, and I feel too few people know about this series.

13/ It was actually pure coincidence that I didn't end up mentioning any titles written by white men. I actually didn't mention any written by men at all. Diversity checklists be damned; these women have written amazing books that very much contribute to the genre!

14/ To say that modern SFF is nearly all pulp and isn't worth reading is to deliberately ignore the very real skill that multiple authors are demonstrating right now, the questions they're asking, the way they're influencing the conversation.

15/ I'm not going to say that anyone who willfully ignores the most recent contributions to the genre shouldn't really call themselves a fan of the genre, but... *shrug* Let's just say that I think at the moment, Hurley matters a fair bit more than Heinlein.

16/ That's not to say that writers from decades past aren't relevant. Some of them still are. Some of them have written great things, some of them still have things to say.

Others? Well, the world and the genre have moved on. New questions to ask, new stories to tell.

17/ And new audiences to reach. People just getting into SFF today are likely to find more appeal in, say, Jemisin than in Asimov, not because Asimov's stories are bad, but because Jemisin's stories are more in line with the modern world and its conversations.

18/ There's room for the old within the genre. But the old isn't the whole of the genre, nor is it even the best part of it. Closing your eyes to that doesn't make you some awesome genre purist who's protecting the treasures of the past against modern rot.

19/ It at best means your tastes are different. At worst, it means you're happy to remain ignorant about what's actually going on in the world around them right now. And I don't see why people would so easily brag about that.

So, uh, this thread blew up in a massive way, and I was absolutely not expecting it to! I wish I had a Soundcloud or something to steer people toward...