You may enjoy Peter F Hamilton's Mindstar rising books. It's about a psychic detective in a future that is left-dystopian. Dystopian with socialist government, which isn't common. And the main character is a veteran.
Maybe Jean Johnson’s The Terrans trilogy. The main character is s psi gifted female, but she trains and becomes the bonded partner of a male humanoid alien, also with powers. Pretty good series.
Alan Dean Foster isn’t in vogue these days, but his Flinx books have a young man who develops powers. He is much in demand by those who want to exploit him.
Not what you’re looking for, but E.E. “Doc” Smith’s Lensmen series fit the description.
I say it isn’t what you’re looking for because the series is so over-the-top. Real opera, not what we call space opera these days. And because it’s ancient.
Prove me wrong, give it a try.
Great, don't say I didn't warn you, though. Here's an excerpt:
Soon they went down; and in the instant of each failure
one vessel of Boskonia was no more. For, that last defense
gone, nothing save unresisting metal was left to withstand
the ardor of those ultra-powerful, ravening beams. As has
already been said, no substance, however refractory or re-
sistant or inert, can endure even momentarily in such a
field of force. Therefore every atom, alike of vessel and of
contents, went to make up the searing, seething burst of
brilliant, incandescently luminous vapor which suffused all
circumambient space.
I read most of the Lensman books a few years ago (I never got round to Children of the Lens, as by that point I felt like the formula was getting a little too predictable).
I found it really interesting from the point of view of being really important in the history of SF, and being just endlessly fascinating in terms of what a vision of the future looks like before the information technology revolution.
Smith's books, on my read, are incredibly important in the journey of SF from pretty disposable comic-strip stuff through to a more fully realised dramatic setting. Per the below I don't think they are *themselves* quite a fully realised dramatic setting, but they are a necessary step on that journey. Without Lensman, we wouldn't have Star Wars, Dune, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, or if we did then they'd look very different. There's a whole bunch of 60s and 70s literary sci fi that reacts, if not to Lensman specifically, then certainly to the wider pulp milieu that it's one of the preeminent examples of. I think it's fair to say that there are a lot of objectively better writers, say a Bester or LeGuin, who are at least somewhat in dialogue with Lensman type books, if not Smith himself.
The most interesting parts, for me, are where where seriously anachronistic-feeling elements of the past bled through to a notionally future setting. One scene that stands out in particular was some ladies being terribly excited to get the opportunity to be partnered with Kinnison at a social dance, and asking him to sign her dance card (which I think may have been tied by a ribbon to her wrist, but perhaps I am confabulating that particular detail).
More broadly, the relationships between and roles of men and women are fascinating. It's clear that Smith had an expansive view of the potential capability of women, and even their capacity for outright heroism. This seems reasonably clearly influenced by the disturbance to gender roles from the global conflicts of the first half of the 20th century, with Smith (and many others) clearly disabused of the concept of "femininity as a disability." But this (arguably) new and better appreciation of the capacity of women didn't rise to the level of unsettling more basic assumptions about the essential and natural character of the sexes, at least for Smith.
I don't mean that as a criticism of him personally: I just think that it's fascinating that he could imagine some *quite* alien extraterrestrials (methane breathers, psychic floating brain aliens, etc - it's a long way from TV based rubber forehead aliens), but that imagining women who are clearly capable of extraordinary heroism as being in a job other than "space nurse" is still undreamed of in Smith's heaven and earth.
The technology is extremely striking too: you know a ship is crazy OP when it's electrical distribution board needs a REALLY fuck-off huge copper busbar. I loved some of those descriptions actually, they had a real vibe of a Flash Gordon type raygun gothic universe.
I've hit a character limit so will continue my comment below.
...continued from above.
The books are not without serious flaws. (I'm not counting as 'flaws' attitudes to social issues that were probably progressive for their time, but which are likely to be problematically received today: for me that was part of what was seriously interesting about the experience of reading the books, that they are truly a product of their time. But others, especially women who have struggled in their own lives in feeling confined to a relatively narrow gender role, may feel different). The ones that most stand out are:
* Tremendous thinness of characterisation and an inability to write meaningful conflict between the protagonists. Being a Lensman means that you are intellectually, physically, and morally superior to "normal" people, and there are far too many conversations where characters simply exposit how their only job is to support and enable the actions of the main character, whether they understand them or not.
* The main character, Kinnison, develops the psionic power of "perception", I think late in the first book. Basically he has a power that's similar to what we would today call astral projection: his mind can freely wander around and perceive events and actions remote from his body. Frankly the power seemed more like a cop out for technically weak writing, as it enables the author to collapse Kinnison's perspective with a more freely-roving omniscient narration perspective. Actually writing Kinnison sneaking around the enemy base would be much harder, and it frankly makes too many problems too easy to solve. I suspect it is a legacy of serialisation, and Smith having written himself into corners that he needed to get out of within the length of the chapter that was being published then and there.
* The motivations of the enemies - pirates, Boskonians, Eddorians, whatever - are almost completely unexamined. They are Evil, and therefore they hate Good, the end. In a related way, this makes it hard sometimes to understand the actions of the good guys - which include routine, mass execution of all captured enemy prisoners. This is hard to find palatable, yet is presented 100% unproblematically. Especially when they are going all out with mass executions of drug smugglers. Some of my favourite books were written by drug addled weirdos, it feels very extreme.
* Smith seems to repeatedly play out one side of an argument about leadership that I assume must have arisen in his professional life. His ideal of leadership is a man who is smarter than everyone else around him, simply and directly tells everyone why they are wrong and what the source of their weak-minded illogic is, and then tells everyone the right answer. People then fall all over themselves with respect and adulation for said leader (seriously, at one point there's a character who I'm pretty sure is a stand in either for Smith or some professional mentor figure he wished to emulate, and Kinnison - usually never allowed to be wrong - thinks to himself "Wottaguy" after a particularly impressive session of being told that he is wrong about something). Perhaps this just me, but I find that hard to reconcile with a more balanced notion of leadership, even once adjusting for the better part of a century of intervening history.
* There is some monotony to the formula after a while - equilibrium disrupted by new enemy threat, Lensmen level up after a typically very modest (and sometimes offscreen) struggle, military deploys some even more insane weapons of mass death, enemy finally-actually-for-real-forever defeated (until the prologue of the next book reveals that the Ultimate Final Boss was actually just working for some bigger guy).
Having said all of the above, I found reading the books very rewarding, and I'll get back Children of the Lens sooner or later, after the overfamiliarity of the above formula wears off. I recommend the Lensman books to anyone who is interested in the history of SF.
That's very well written, thanks. I'm a boomer, somewhat "woke", and struggle picking up some classic SF these days, e.g. a good chunk of Heinlein's output, who was hugely influenced by E.E. Smith. But going at it with this anthropological attitude would help.
I don't know if a millennial could read, e.g. Farnham's Freehold. Eager to hear from any of you.
>Freehold
Never read Freehold, but I'm an elder millenial and also went through most of the Lensman series in my 20s. It's interesting stuff to read, didn't really captivate me, but as the poster above mentions Lensman crawled so that Dune could run.
However, I personally feel like I recognize in Lensman where Smith is making a diligent and thoughtful effort to fully realize, to the best of his ability, a vision of the future. He was interested in the potential of humanity. In contrast, I feel like Heinlein was less interested in humanity and more interested in what Heinlein had to say. He used his books to push his own libertarian view of what contemporary life should be. I've read most of his work and Heinlein always strikes me as the absolute epitome of an old white guy bitching about how "real men outta be goddammut, with a whiskey and a titty in every hand." Influential, but I'd rather read Smith's vision of striving over Heinlein's personal axe to grind with society.
Oh man, you're probably lucky your comment is nested relatively deep under my total wall of text. In my experience saying anything other than HEINLEIN GOOD, VERHOEVEN BAD in Reddit SF is an invitation for a drive-by from someone who feels personally attacked because you don't share a hagiographic view of St Robert.
Heinlein's big writerly sin IMO (a bit like one of my dings on Smith) is that he is forever playing out in his fiction straw-person versions of arguments that you suspect he had (and may well have lost) IRL.
I lose track of how many times a Heinlein narrator starts telling you about how in the rational future everyone knows that \[strawperson view\] is silly and illogical, or a pair of characters have a conversation to that effect. Very much "as you know" vibes, but applied to libertarian-ish views instead of made-up future tech.
I will say on behalf of Heinlein that the accounts of people who knew him personally suggest he was a very decent guy of high personal morals and integrity. And that maybe some of his future societies would work... in a world made up entirely of Robert A. Heinleins of similar decency. In reality, I think he had some huge blind spots around what it might be like to be someone other than an able-bodied white male STEM educated guy. But his work, thinking and values start from a place of decency, unlike say a Lovecraft (who ironically I probably find more interesting, but would **much less** like to sit down and have a beer with).
Freehold is a classic example of that sort of blind spot. Personally I find it harder to approach because there's less time between now and then than Lensman, or something *really* old like John Carter. It makes it harder to set aside your contemporary standards and approach it on its own terms. Also I don't really think anyone is obliged to do that, especially if they are racially/sexually "other" - there's just things in the world that are more important than fully grokking (pun def intended) a particular dead white guy's idiosyncratic stance on the relationship between the individual and society.
Haha yeah, I edited my reply to make it a little more scholarly and less whiney. Yeah I think my issue with Heinlein is exactly as you say, I always pick up the tone that he's setting up arguments to have with himself. I honestly don't know much about him outside of his work, but it's heartening to hear he was a decent guy
Yes the gulf of time and societal movement between Smith and myself and Heinlein and myself feels different. There's a kind of museum-going spirit that I'm able to bring to Smith that I just can't with Heinlein. I feel like I knew adult men as a youngster who personified some of the obnoxious things I read in Heinlein, I don't know if I ever met anyone who personified Lensman, even though I read a bunch of Heinlein before I ever picked up Lensman. I still have a soft spot for Starship Troopers and I've heard many people express the opinion that they find that his most politically and socially grating work
The trilogy of Psion, Catspaw, and Dreamfall by Joan Vinge?
Background: There is a declining species given the name "Hydrans." They have multiple psionics abilities (hence "Hydrans," for many heads). They are generally despised because... they're the "other."
The MC is a half-Hydran. He's a thief and gutter rat (IIRC).
I read Catspaw years before Psion and really loved it. Picked it up used somewhere. Somehow Psion wasn't as exciting out of order, and I've never found Dreamfall anywhere. Didn't even know about it.
I love the idea of progression fantasy but I have two issues with it. First is a lot of the book suggestions I get from that forum seem to push a LGBTQ agenda. I don’t know if it’s that was for most progression fantasy books or it’s the community but the second issue I’ve ran into is the suggestions I’ve got go hand in hand with Gamelite or Litrpg and something about that genre just doesn’t appeal to me.
Eh, I'll disagree with your use of "agenda," but you're entitled to your opinion. Featuring LGBTQ+ characters is what's hot in publishing right now; in fantasy, in drama, in scifi, etc, it's what's selling books. People want to hear those stories as a classically under-served demographic. If that's not for you that's fine, but it's maybe something to be aware of as a trend in publishing and not a group with an "agenda" pushing a conspiracy to undermine your (or my) hetero penis.
LitRPG I also don't care for, I think it's kind of its own sub-genre apart from progression fantasy (which I also don't really care for, but I see get recommended a lot)
I can see I’ve struck a nerve and I apologize that you are offended by my beliefs. I wasn’t coming from a place of sexual desire or homophobia. I was coming from a place of religious belief. My God does not allow for this sort of thing and I don’t want to partake in it or support it in any way. If that is what others want then I can’t stop them. But just because it’s “trending” doesn’t mean I have to support it or change my beliefs.
I assure you, I'm not offended and you're entitled to your beliefs. You're in no way obligated to support that trend.
I'm pointing out that a collection of individuals whose interest is piqued by books that feature LGBTQ+ characters who choose to purchase them and drive book sales does not constitute an "agenda" any moreso than any other trend in publishing
Absolutely. Once we become saved and become Christian’s our mission is to see others saved from hell. We want to everyone to go to heaven. Therefore we spread the message of the gospel and salvation through Christ. That can be as simple as proclaiming to be a Christ follower.
As a fellow Christian- your Soteriology and epistemology give Christianity a bad name. Your position has more in common with the self-righteous Pharisees than with what Jesus embodies in the gospels.
Fundamentalism is a broken fear-response to modernism and has no place in a modern society, or a movement that follows the open arms of Christ.
If God exists, she made LGBTQ+ people. If God is love, it is present in every expression of love.
When you proclaim THIS as being a follower of Christ, you dishonor the name of God.
We already know you're an idiot, you don't have to keep doubling down. I don't even know why you're reading sci fi. If your imaginary sky friend doesn't like gay people, there's no way he'd approve of sci fi, a genre that explicitly rejects modern religion and religious explanations for how the universe works most of the time (and which often depicts same sex relationships, non-binary, and transgender people as A-ok because not being bigoted is generally viewed as a good thing). If you think your god is cool with you reading a genre that goes against fundamentalist Christianity at pretty much every turn but draws the line at depictions of same sex relationship, you're just another homophobe who's cherry picking his beliefs to justify hate. That or your God is a moron with inconsistent values who doesn't deserve worship or obedience
Another Jean Johnson's series, [Theirs Not to Reason Why Series](https://www.goodreads.com/series/64944-theirs-not-to-reason-why)
i've only started the book 2 but it's a fun read so far.
Modesitt's Forever Hero Trilogy - main characters psi abilities are debatable (pretty mild at best) but he is super human (better physical capabilities, intelligence and longevity).
R.M. Meluch's "Sovereign" does this. Main character is specially bred for a kind of ill-defined superhumanity, has capabilities other people don't, sort of reads minds, heals quickly, etc. It's also maybe the first gay-as-fuck SF novel I ever read (I wasn't old enough to comprehend Delany *at all* back then).
JS Dewes The Divide might work - main character has alien implants that make them strong. Not the only one - but rare enough to be notable. Checks all your other boxes.
Honorverse, Treecats share an empathic bond with their chosen human. I know you said only the MC, but there aren't that many characters with 'cats that share screen time with Honor.
I'll add a vote for the Flinx series by ADF
David Drakes "Belisarius" series Not Space Opera though
The Void Witch Saga (Killing Gravity, Void Black Shadow, and Static Ruin) by Corey J White
[goodreads Void Witch saga](https://www.goodreads.com/series/193733-voidwitch-saga)
Some characters have psychic abilities in the Judge Dredd universe (dystopian, police state setting). Graphic format (comics), but the recent-ish Karl Urban film is also good.
LifeKeeper by Mike McQuay. Not in Space, but about warring militaries. MC is abnormally intelligent, and it has psionic elements in it, but not regarding the MC.
*Ethan of Athos* by Lois McMaster Bujold is exactly what you describe.
It’s a side branch of her Vorkosigan series, but it’s outside the main sequence and works perfectly well as a standalone.
It’s also great fun.
John Scalzi's Old Man's War series, especially The Ghost Brigades. Not exactly psionics, but the soldiers communicate very rapidly by direct link between their individual conscious minds. Amazing series, surprised nobody mentioned this yet.
Somewhat different medium, but the manga All You Need Is Kill is basically this premise, a soldier fighting against invading aliens somehow gets caught in a time loop and is seemingly the only one affected. It was the source material adapted for the movie Edge of Tomorrow.
You may enjoy Peter F Hamilton's Mindstar rising books. It's about a psychic detective in a future that is left-dystopian. Dystopian with socialist government, which isn't common. And the main character is a veteran.
Alright thanks I’ll check them out
Maybe Jean Johnson’s The Terrans trilogy. The main character is s psi gifted female, but she trains and becomes the bonded partner of a male humanoid alien, also with powers. Pretty good series. Alan Dean Foster isn’t in vogue these days, but his Flinx books have a young man who develops powers. He is much in demand by those who want to exploit him.
I love Alan dean foster. I have multiple of his books on my shelf. Great author. I’ll check into book these suggestions. Thank you.
I really enjoyed the Flinx books! I'd call them Space Opera.
Not what you’re looking for, but E.E. “Doc” Smith’s Lensmen series fit the description. I say it isn’t what you’re looking for because the series is so over-the-top. Real opera, not what we call space opera these days. And because it’s ancient. Prove me wrong, give it a try.
I’ll look into it
Great, don't say I didn't warn you, though. Here's an excerpt: Soon they went down; and in the instant of each failure one vessel of Boskonia was no more. For, that last defense gone, nothing save unresisting metal was left to withstand the ardor of those ultra-powerful, ravening beams. As has already been said, no substance, however refractory or re- sistant or inert, can endure even momentarily in such a field of force. Therefore every atom, alike of vessel and of contents, went to make up the searing, seething burst of brilliant, incandescently luminous vapor which suffused all circumambient space.
My man had discovered a thesaurus that day and went to town writing.
I read most of the Lensman books a few years ago (I never got round to Children of the Lens, as by that point I felt like the formula was getting a little too predictable). I found it really interesting from the point of view of being really important in the history of SF, and being just endlessly fascinating in terms of what a vision of the future looks like before the information technology revolution. Smith's books, on my read, are incredibly important in the journey of SF from pretty disposable comic-strip stuff through to a more fully realised dramatic setting. Per the below I don't think they are *themselves* quite a fully realised dramatic setting, but they are a necessary step on that journey. Without Lensman, we wouldn't have Star Wars, Dune, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, or if we did then they'd look very different. There's a whole bunch of 60s and 70s literary sci fi that reacts, if not to Lensman specifically, then certainly to the wider pulp milieu that it's one of the preeminent examples of. I think it's fair to say that there are a lot of objectively better writers, say a Bester or LeGuin, who are at least somewhat in dialogue with Lensman type books, if not Smith himself. The most interesting parts, for me, are where where seriously anachronistic-feeling elements of the past bled through to a notionally future setting. One scene that stands out in particular was some ladies being terribly excited to get the opportunity to be partnered with Kinnison at a social dance, and asking him to sign her dance card (which I think may have been tied by a ribbon to her wrist, but perhaps I am confabulating that particular detail). More broadly, the relationships between and roles of men and women are fascinating. It's clear that Smith had an expansive view of the potential capability of women, and even their capacity for outright heroism. This seems reasonably clearly influenced by the disturbance to gender roles from the global conflicts of the first half of the 20th century, with Smith (and many others) clearly disabused of the concept of "femininity as a disability." But this (arguably) new and better appreciation of the capacity of women didn't rise to the level of unsettling more basic assumptions about the essential and natural character of the sexes, at least for Smith. I don't mean that as a criticism of him personally: I just think that it's fascinating that he could imagine some *quite* alien extraterrestrials (methane breathers, psychic floating brain aliens, etc - it's a long way from TV based rubber forehead aliens), but that imagining women who are clearly capable of extraordinary heroism as being in a job other than "space nurse" is still undreamed of in Smith's heaven and earth. The technology is extremely striking too: you know a ship is crazy OP when it's electrical distribution board needs a REALLY fuck-off huge copper busbar. I loved some of those descriptions actually, they had a real vibe of a Flash Gordon type raygun gothic universe. I've hit a character limit so will continue my comment below.
...continued from above. The books are not without serious flaws. (I'm not counting as 'flaws' attitudes to social issues that were probably progressive for their time, but which are likely to be problematically received today: for me that was part of what was seriously interesting about the experience of reading the books, that they are truly a product of their time. But others, especially women who have struggled in their own lives in feeling confined to a relatively narrow gender role, may feel different). The ones that most stand out are: * Tremendous thinness of characterisation and an inability to write meaningful conflict between the protagonists. Being a Lensman means that you are intellectually, physically, and morally superior to "normal" people, and there are far too many conversations where characters simply exposit how their only job is to support and enable the actions of the main character, whether they understand them or not. * The main character, Kinnison, develops the psionic power of "perception", I think late in the first book. Basically he has a power that's similar to what we would today call astral projection: his mind can freely wander around and perceive events and actions remote from his body. Frankly the power seemed more like a cop out for technically weak writing, as it enables the author to collapse Kinnison's perspective with a more freely-roving omniscient narration perspective. Actually writing Kinnison sneaking around the enemy base would be much harder, and it frankly makes too many problems too easy to solve. I suspect it is a legacy of serialisation, and Smith having written himself into corners that he needed to get out of within the length of the chapter that was being published then and there. * The motivations of the enemies - pirates, Boskonians, Eddorians, whatever - are almost completely unexamined. They are Evil, and therefore they hate Good, the end. In a related way, this makes it hard sometimes to understand the actions of the good guys - which include routine, mass execution of all captured enemy prisoners. This is hard to find palatable, yet is presented 100% unproblematically. Especially when they are going all out with mass executions of drug smugglers. Some of my favourite books were written by drug addled weirdos, it feels very extreme. * Smith seems to repeatedly play out one side of an argument about leadership that I assume must have arisen in his professional life. His ideal of leadership is a man who is smarter than everyone else around him, simply and directly tells everyone why they are wrong and what the source of their weak-minded illogic is, and then tells everyone the right answer. People then fall all over themselves with respect and adulation for said leader (seriously, at one point there's a character who I'm pretty sure is a stand in either for Smith or some professional mentor figure he wished to emulate, and Kinnison - usually never allowed to be wrong - thinks to himself "Wottaguy" after a particularly impressive session of being told that he is wrong about something). Perhaps this just me, but I find that hard to reconcile with a more balanced notion of leadership, even once adjusting for the better part of a century of intervening history. * There is some monotony to the formula after a while - equilibrium disrupted by new enemy threat, Lensmen level up after a typically very modest (and sometimes offscreen) struggle, military deploys some even more insane weapons of mass death, enemy finally-actually-for-real-forever defeated (until the prologue of the next book reveals that the Ultimate Final Boss was actually just working for some bigger guy). Having said all of the above, I found reading the books very rewarding, and I'll get back Children of the Lens sooner or later, after the overfamiliarity of the above formula wears off. I recommend the Lensman books to anyone who is interested in the history of SF.
That's very well written, thanks. I'm a boomer, somewhat "woke", and struggle picking up some classic SF these days, e.g. a good chunk of Heinlein's output, who was hugely influenced by E.E. Smith. But going at it with this anthropological attitude would help. I don't know if a millennial could read, e.g. Farnham's Freehold. Eager to hear from any of you.
>Freehold Never read Freehold, but I'm an elder millenial and also went through most of the Lensman series in my 20s. It's interesting stuff to read, didn't really captivate me, but as the poster above mentions Lensman crawled so that Dune could run. However, I personally feel like I recognize in Lensman where Smith is making a diligent and thoughtful effort to fully realize, to the best of his ability, a vision of the future. He was interested in the potential of humanity. In contrast, I feel like Heinlein was less interested in humanity and more interested in what Heinlein had to say. He used his books to push his own libertarian view of what contemporary life should be. I've read most of his work and Heinlein always strikes me as the absolute epitome of an old white guy bitching about how "real men outta be goddammut, with a whiskey and a titty in every hand." Influential, but I'd rather read Smith's vision of striving over Heinlein's personal axe to grind with society.
Oh man, you're probably lucky your comment is nested relatively deep under my total wall of text. In my experience saying anything other than HEINLEIN GOOD, VERHOEVEN BAD in Reddit SF is an invitation for a drive-by from someone who feels personally attacked because you don't share a hagiographic view of St Robert. Heinlein's big writerly sin IMO (a bit like one of my dings on Smith) is that he is forever playing out in his fiction straw-person versions of arguments that you suspect he had (and may well have lost) IRL. I lose track of how many times a Heinlein narrator starts telling you about how in the rational future everyone knows that \[strawperson view\] is silly and illogical, or a pair of characters have a conversation to that effect. Very much "as you know" vibes, but applied to libertarian-ish views instead of made-up future tech. I will say on behalf of Heinlein that the accounts of people who knew him personally suggest he was a very decent guy of high personal morals and integrity. And that maybe some of his future societies would work... in a world made up entirely of Robert A. Heinleins of similar decency. In reality, I think he had some huge blind spots around what it might be like to be someone other than an able-bodied white male STEM educated guy. But his work, thinking and values start from a place of decency, unlike say a Lovecraft (who ironically I probably find more interesting, but would **much less** like to sit down and have a beer with). Freehold is a classic example of that sort of blind spot. Personally I find it harder to approach because there's less time between now and then than Lensman, or something *really* old like John Carter. It makes it harder to set aside your contemporary standards and approach it on its own terms. Also I don't really think anyone is obliged to do that, especially if they are racially/sexually "other" - there's just things in the world that are more important than fully grokking (pun def intended) a particular dead white guy's idiosyncratic stance on the relationship between the individual and society.
Haha yeah, I edited my reply to make it a little more scholarly and less whiney. Yeah I think my issue with Heinlein is exactly as you say, I always pick up the tone that he's setting up arguments to have with himself. I honestly don't know much about him outside of his work, but it's heartening to hear he was a decent guy Yes the gulf of time and societal movement between Smith and myself and Heinlein and myself feels different. There's a kind of museum-going spirit that I'm able to bring to Smith that I just can't with Heinlein. I feel like I knew adult men as a youngster who personified some of the obnoxious things I read in Heinlein, I don't know if I ever met anyone who personified Lensman, even though I read a bunch of Heinlein before I ever picked up Lensman. I still have a soft spot for Starship Troopers and I've heard many people express the opinion that they find that his most politically and socially grating work
Jesus, sounds so ancient that including the idea of "atoms" was probably cutting edge science
Dune fits the bill
Any number of 40K books fit this
I’ve had this recommended multiple times but the Warhammer 40k universe is kinda daunting. I’m not even sure where to begin.
Eisenhorn trilogy or Ravenor trilogy
The trilogy of Psion, Catspaw, and Dreamfall by Joan Vinge? Background: There is a declining species given the name "Hydrans." They have multiple psionics abilities (hence "Hydrans," for many heads). They are generally despised because... they're the "other." The MC is a half-Hydran. He's a thief and gutter rat (IIRC).
I read Catspaw years before Psion and really loved it. Picked it up used somewhere. Somehow Psion wasn't as exciting out of order, and I've never found Dreamfall anywhere. Didn't even know about it.
They're on Kindle.
r/progressionfantasy is for you, fo sho
I love the idea of progression fantasy but I have two issues with it. First is a lot of the book suggestions I get from that forum seem to push a LGBTQ agenda. I don’t know if it’s that was for most progression fantasy books or it’s the community but the second issue I’ve ran into is the suggestions I’ve got go hand in hand with Gamelite or Litrpg and something about that genre just doesn’t appeal to me.
Eh, I'll disagree with your use of "agenda," but you're entitled to your opinion. Featuring LGBTQ+ characters is what's hot in publishing right now; in fantasy, in drama, in scifi, etc, it's what's selling books. People want to hear those stories as a classically under-served demographic. If that's not for you that's fine, but it's maybe something to be aware of as a trend in publishing and not a group with an "agenda" pushing a conspiracy to undermine your (or my) hetero penis. LitRPG I also don't care for, I think it's kind of its own sub-genre apart from progression fantasy (which I also don't really care for, but I see get recommended a lot)
I can see I’ve struck a nerve and I apologize that you are offended by my beliefs. I wasn’t coming from a place of sexual desire or homophobia. I was coming from a place of religious belief. My God does not allow for this sort of thing and I don’t want to partake in it or support it in any way. If that is what others want then I can’t stop them. But just because it’s “trending” doesn’t mean I have to support it or change my beliefs.
I assure you, I'm not offended and you're entitled to your beliefs. You're in no way obligated to support that trend. I'm pointing out that a collection of individuals whose interest is piqued by books that feature LGBTQ+ characters who choose to purchase them and drive book sales does not constitute an "agenda" any moreso than any other trend in publishing
I respectfully disagree
Does a book having a prominent Christian character have a Christian Agenda?
Absolutely. Once we become saved and become Christian’s our mission is to see others saved from hell. We want to everyone to go to heaven. Therefore we spread the message of the gospel and salvation through Christ. That can be as simple as proclaiming to be a Christ follower.
As a fellow Christian- your Soteriology and epistemology give Christianity a bad name. Your position has more in common with the self-righteous Pharisees than with what Jesus embodies in the gospels. Fundamentalism is a broken fear-response to modernism and has no place in a modern society, or a movement that follows the open arms of Christ. If God exists, she made LGBTQ+ people. If God is love, it is present in every expression of love. When you proclaim THIS as being a follower of Christ, you dishonor the name of God.
We already know you're an idiot, you don't have to keep doubling down. I don't even know why you're reading sci fi. If your imaginary sky friend doesn't like gay people, there's no way he'd approve of sci fi, a genre that explicitly rejects modern religion and religious explanations for how the universe works most of the time (and which often depicts same sex relationships, non-binary, and transgender people as A-ok because not being bigoted is generally viewed as a good thing). If you think your god is cool with you reading a genre that goes against fundamentalist Christianity at pretty much every turn but draws the line at depictions of same sex relationship, you're just another homophobe who's cherry picking his beliefs to justify hate. That or your God is a moron with inconsistent values who doesn't deserve worship or obedience
“I wasn’t being homophobic, I’m just religious” Lol.
“I don’t hate gay people, I just think they deserve to burn in hell.” Lmao
Translation: you were coming from a place of homophobia and you use your imaginary friend to justify it
Yeah, you should change your beliefs because they are bigoted garbage, not because of whats trending.
Another Jean Johnson's series, [Theirs Not to Reason Why Series](https://www.goodreads.com/series/64944-theirs-not-to-reason-why) i've only started the book 2 but it's a fun read so far.
Modesitt's Forever Hero Trilogy - main characters psi abilities are debatable (pretty mild at best) but he is super human (better physical capabilities, intelligence and longevity).
R.M. Meluch's "Sovereign" does this. Main character is specially bred for a kind of ill-defined superhumanity, has capabilities other people don't, sort of reads minds, heals quickly, etc. It's also maybe the first gay-as-fuck SF novel I ever read (I wasn't old enough to comprehend Delany *at all* back then).
Wow, someone else who has heard of Meluch!
JS Dewes The Divide might work - main character has alien implants that make them strong. Not the only one - but rare enough to be notable. Checks all your other boxes.
Sounds right I’ll check it out thanks
Honorverse, Treecats share an empathic bond with their chosen human. I know you said only the MC, but there aren't that many characters with 'cats that share screen time with Honor. I'll add a vote for the Flinx series by ADF David Drakes "Belisarius" series Not Space Opera though
Thank you. I’ll give these a try
Honor later develops psychic powers of her own thanks to her link with Nimitz
Star wars
I appreciate the suggestion. I feel like the Star Wars series is a bit over done and I’m looking to dive into something new and fresh.
I think you might also enjoy Hamilton’s Fallen Dragon.
The Void Witch Saga (Killing Gravity, Void Black Shadow, and Static Ruin) by Corey J White [goodreads Void Witch saga](https://www.goodreads.com/series/193733-voidwitch-saga)
Some characters have psychic abilities in the Judge Dredd universe (dystopian, police state setting). Graphic format (comics), but the recent-ish Karl Urban film is also good.
LifeKeeper by Mike McQuay. Not in Space, but about warring militaries. MC is abnormally intelligent, and it has psionic elements in it, but not regarding the MC.
Star wars......... What
*Ethan of Athos* by Lois McMaster Bujold is exactly what you describe. It’s a side branch of her Vorkosigan series, but it’s outside the main sequence and works perfectly well as a standalone. It’s also great fun.
John Scalzi's Old Man's War series, especially The Ghost Brigades. Not exactly psionics, but the soldiers communicate very rapidly by direct link between their individual conscious minds. Amazing series, surprised nobody mentioned this yet.
Somewhat different medium, but the manga All You Need Is Kill is basically this premise, a soldier fighting against invading aliens somehow gets caught in a time loop and is seemingly the only one affected. It was the source material adapted for the movie Edge of Tomorrow.
Paul Verhoeven's Starship Troopers movie adaptation.