Is the Shrike the edgiest character in literature?

First book 7/10
Second book 6/10

I have no idea why you faggots like Hyperion so much. It's a tryhard attempt at literary science fiction, but is a shallow work and falls on its face.

The Shrike is one of the most distinctive and memorable villains across all fiction. It resembles an 80s Japanese-aesthetic Lucifer. Probably the only great aspect of the tetralogy.

>but is a shallow work and falls on its face.
You gonna elaborate on it, or you just hate any sci-fi that dares to venture outside it's genre fiction reservation?

I don't need to elaborate on anything to plebs on a useless image board.

But Wolfe takes shits on Simmons utterly.

The first book was awesome. The second I couldn't even finish. I couldn't care less about the Keats clone and endless political intrigue masturbation, and the pacing was horrible compared to the first.

I liked the environmentalism theme in the first though, first time I saw that in sci-fi.

>first time I saw that in sci-fi.
Negro are you serious
2novels.com/dune/appendix-i-the-ecology-of-dune-71387.html

He said the first time HE PERSONALLY saw it in science fiction, not that it's the first time ever it was done in science fiction.

Learn to read you fucking faggot.

good joke
shit book
only good story was the android love story
that book dragged on and on

Did you see yourself in King Billy, Veeky Forums?

Okay but if he hasn't been reading the entire sci-fi canon in chronological order since he learned to read, why is he posting?

Because the scifi canon is bologna and only worth reading for scifi fans. Nerds like you aren't helping its reputation.

he's being sarcastic

No he was being ironic. Sarcasm is sharper in tone and directed at the opponent, fool. Either way, he's an idiot.

Second book is entirely mediocre and not worth reading except to see how the story resolves. SPOILER: it ends exactly the way you're probably imagining it, except a little dumber.

>king of the littlest hill in town

Enjoy it, user. You've peaked.

>sci-fi that dares to venture outside it's genre fiction reservation?
Actually it stays safely inside its reservation. The first book is almost a survey of sci-fi subgenres, and the second is just a standard space opera.

It makes me laugh when people call it "literary" sci-fi. It's not and isn't trying to be.

Ι fucking loved the cliffhanger. I wish the book ended there. Fuck all of you people.

And I'll keep peaking and lording it over you, pleb.

Because you were born only to make me look better.

If you had actually read the book, you'd know it makes multiple attempts at trying to establish its merits by referencing several literary authors. It doesn't accomplish this well.

Hyperion is a little more than a scifi trying to be litrerary, but it's not a superior work.

Shit, are you still here? I thought I was being sarcastic ...

Because one of it's characters is a poet? He wouldn't be very convincing if he didn't know about poetry.

If you think this is sci-fi trying to be literary, you have no grasp of sci-fi or literature. Next you'll be drawing parallels with Tolstoy.

More evidence you're a pseudo who didn't read the book.

I bet you haven't even read Tolstoy either.

>More evidence
None so blind as those who will not see.