I think these days an SF connection would be a boost to other books; I'm sure more people have read my two little detective puzzles because of the SF connection.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
A large fraction of the most interesting scientists have read a lot of SF at one time or another, either early enough that it may have played a part in their becoming scientists or at some later date just because they liked the ideas.
There's certainly more new SF available than when I started writing. That means there's also more bad SF available. Whether there is also more good is a matter for future historians of the field.
I read a lot of detective novels.
An SF author who reads only SF will have little new to contribute, but someone with a broader experience will bring more to the table.
People who would never sneer at sci-fi and murder mysteries have no trouble damning the whole romance genre without reading one.
When I was a teenager, I got into SF, quite heavily, and that too has had a major impact on my writing.
Some people become passionate readers and fans of science fiction during childhood or adolescence. I picked up on SF somewhat later than that; my escape reading of choice during my youth was historical novels, and one of my favorite writers was Mary Renault.
I do not read SF as much as I used to. It's too much like a busman's holiday.
I grew up reading SF in the '70s and '80s, and I like fast, thought-provoking plots that take you places in fully realized worlds.
I try not to recommend too many books, frankly, because I think there's a certain synchronicity that happens when people discover books.
No opposing quotes found.