David B Williams wrote:
Gersen wrote:
I strongly disagree with that post by DBW that said any SF by Vance prior 1956 is of secondary quality. Big Planet has some real strong parts that are later period JV SF novels. It had weaker finish but it was better than secondary quality.

Not to mention some quality early SF shorts stories i have read.

We disagree on the definition of quality. My standard was Vance's later work. Compared with his later writing, his pre-1956 work was of secondary quality. During his first decade he was still learning his craft and it shows. Big Planet is simply not as smooth and stylish as Lurulu, although the plot mechanics are the same -- a journey-quest from point to point and the interesting things the protagonist finds at each stop.

I guess it depends on what we mean with secondary quality because of of course some of early SF stories like Big Planet, the best 50s shorts are not as strong as 60s-90s(have not read the last novels like Lurrulu).   

It shows he was learning his craft of course but some 50s short stories i have read of his i couldnt tell was written before 1956 and was so polished that i assumed it was middle period 60s works. 

I guess i overreacted to secondary quality which sounds to me like it sounds like Big Planet is as weak as the worst Vance stories the pulpy gimmick stories like World Thinker.   Its also a given Grandmaster Vance who wrote a novel 50 years later is better than the 50 years younger writer.