Below is a reply to my attached essay.
Please answer the Bold question:
You clearly express your preference for a more reality-based kind of â€œnearâ€ science fiction (at least thatâ€™s what I gather from your statement that â€œLand Ironcladsâ€ is good because it dealt â€œwith future technology, which has been achieved/is achievableâ€ and was â€œabout something likely to become a reality in due timeâ€).
I agree with you that Wellsâ€™ â€œironcladâ€ vehicles became a reality soon after his story was published, whereas the worlds of Frankenstein and The Island of Doctor Moreau remain far in the future (and may never be realized at all). But surely thereâ€™s more to good SF than just this. In addition to telling us â€œabout something likely to become a reality in due time,â€ an SF work should also be good in other ways â€” ideally, it should have a compelling plot, interesting characters, etc. Itâ€™s the â€œscienceâ€ part that makes it science fiction, but the â€œfictionâ€ or literary part is important as well.
So, if we look at Frankenstein, The Island of Doctor Moreau, and â€œLand Ironcladsâ€ with our focus on their purely literary qualities, which do you think is best?