One of the most important books ever written. It can and should change your life. You can't teach curiosity or creativity, but this book can facilitatOne of the most important books ever written. It can and should change your life. You can't teach curiosity or creativity, but this book can facilitate the learning. I feel sorry for anyone who gives this less than five stars after reading it. This book is a blessing to anyone with an open heart and childlike sense of wonder....more
Some good Falstaff moments. Interesting that this is part of what really was a serial by WS. HENRY V is by far the best of it. This is filled with theSome good Falstaff moments. Interesting that this is part of what really was a serial by WS. HENRY V is by far the best of it. This is filled with the lower class carousing, but only a few moments of it show strong wit. From this play comes the phrase heavy hangs the head that wears the crown....more
I think John Brunner is a genius of storytelling. I have only ever read one other novel by him STAND ON ZANZIBAR, and that book just blew me away. ThiI think John Brunner is a genius of storytelling. I have only ever read one other novel by him STAND ON ZANZIBAR, and that book just blew me away. This one...I am not sure what to think. I want to give it three stars or five stars, but...I don't know...it just felt like a light version of SoZ because of its brevity. Only 185 pages, and it only covers about two days of time in the universe he creates. We get to see some wonderfully crafted characters, so real yet so much creatures of the future. I just can't bring myself to rate this as high as SoZ, which is a masterpiece of complex yet compelling storytelling. I really enjoyed this because it felt like Brunner was doing his version of a Philip K. Dick novel. Yes, it's SF, but really it is social commentary, satire, and very smart satire at that.
If anyone does not like this it is likely because it does what SoZ does...breaks the traditional Freytag pyramid of plot. 90% of the book feels like a set up and when the end comes, it's a bit too easy. The point is that Brunner's point is not the plot. Like Philip K. Dick, he likes to set the table up with his wonderful ideas and see what it looks like. PKD had wacky ideas and character who I loved to read about, but in the end it was usually a big mess. I loved the mess. Brunner is a bit neater, tidier, in presenting his material. You can tell it's all part of a plan, but it is so intricate, it takes awhile to get the big picture, and then in the end it is as complex, nearly, as the real world.
Finishing this makes me want to read SoZ again and then the sort-of sequels he wrote to it....more
This was a step up from his previous work. It still feels a bit like hodge podge of stories others told before him, but he engages in more original moThis was a step up from his previous work. It still feels a bit like hodge podge of stories others told before him, but he engages in more original moments amidst the plot. Moments like these quotes make WS a worthy master of the language.
"The man that hath no music in himself, / Nor is not moved with concord of sweet sounds, / Is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils. / The motions of his spirit are dull as night / And his affections dark as Erebus. / Let no such man be trusted. / Mark the music."
"That ever holds: who riseth from a feast / With that keen appetite that he sits down? / Where is the horse that doth untread again His tedious measures with the unbated fire / That he did pace them first? All things that are, / Are with more spirit chasèd than enjoyed."...more
Another reviewer said it best. Even kids need beach reads. This barely qualifies. It is similar to the SERIES OF UNFORTUNATE EVENTS, but it fails on eAnother reviewer said it best. Even kids need beach reads. This barely qualifies. It is similar to the SERIES OF UNFORTUNATE EVENTS, but it fails on every level. It's not smart enough for adults. It is not very kid friendly as many of the "jokes" are really bad, lame dad-jokes. The plot is never surprising, the characters not quite weird enough, the dialogue is contrived, and it is just dull. It starts out all mysterious, teasing you along to keep reading. It just does not work. Not reading any of the other books....more
Some poetic moments. Clearly this was written in a culture obsessed with royal succession because of the fear and unknown future caused by being ruledSome poetic moments. Clearly this was written in a culture obsessed with royal succession because of the fear and unknown future caused by being ruled by an aging virgin queen....more
So wordy. So tedious. So much overlong description of going places without getting anywhere. The character of Ayesha and her 2,000 year life experiencSo wordy. So tedious. So much overlong description of going places without getting anywhere. The character of Ayesha and her 2,000 year life experience and philosophy make this interesting enough to finish and to make me want to read the sequels....more
I have read reviews here by readers who say this novel is either poorly written or badly translated. I think it's neither. It's fable. It's satire. ItI have read reviews here by readers who say this novel is either poorly written or badly translated. I think it's neither. It's fable. It's satire. It's not supposed to read like a traditional novel. Read GULLIVER'S TRAVELS, which it most resembles. It's like that. Metaphor. Allegory. It was very different than most everything I've read, and for that I loved it....more
Everyone who is in middle school, teaches middle school, or has middle school children should read this book. It might lead them all to being kinder aEveryone who is in middle school, teaches middle school, or has middle school children should read this book. It might lead them all to being kinder and more understanding than they were....more
The first witch character makes this book worth reading. Her personality and dialogue maker her one of the funniest, saddest, and most real charactersThe first witch character makes this book worth reading. Her personality and dialogue maker her one of the funniest, saddest, and most real characters I have read. She starts out like a caricature, but then depths are revealed. The two main characters are okay, good mouthpieces for the authors, I suspect, but the first witch...take her out or make her a different type and I am giving this book two stars at best. There are other elements that make the book worthwhile, but her personality encapsulates the entire theme of the book, and yet you don't know this until 80% of the way through; until then she is mostly (hilarious) comic relief.
So this is a time travel and magic book. A bit of SF, a bit of fantasy. It took me awhile to get over this since I love SF and have a great distaste for most things magic. I enjoyed this book because it did not bother answering "why" magic works--it just focused on "how" and some of the philosophical and moral issues raised by it. I think more could have been made of this. The last 20 pages have some of the best discussion of magic in any book ever, but it feels like more could have been made of it throughout the novel rather than just rushing some deep thoughts in at the end.
A fun read, more like REAMDE and CRYPTONOMICON than SEVENEVES or DIAMOND AGE, but there are threads of thoughts from all of them in this book, and just a hint of THE BAROQUE CYCLE. In fact, if you read this book and like it, you might like THE BAROQUE CYCLE (which is NS's masterpiece). If you found this book tedious and drawn out and wordy, then by all means avoid THE BAROQUE CYCLE, which is about 1,700 pages longer than this book....more
Well, at least it was coherent, unlike his previous novel. This story is best when ACC is explaining orbital mechanics and things related to the planeWell, at least it was coherent, unlike his previous novel. This story is best when ACC is explaining orbital mechanics and things related to the planets. Again he hatefully attacks all religion (except Hinduism, sort of) and asserts judgmental claims without support and shows he knows little about real politics, human sexuality, and women. Sigh. Unlike PKD, and like Heinlein, I'm glad to be done reading all his novels....more
What a mess. This is the penultimate novel ACC wrote without Gentry Lee, and it appears with it he has hit his own metaphoric iceberg and sunk to the What a mess. This is the penultimate novel ACC wrote without Gentry Lee, and it appears with it he has hit his own metaphoric iceberg and sunk to the bottom. What is the iceberg? Hubris? Lack of care? Needing to bang out a book to make a buck? Losing it mentally? Whatever it was that sunk his ability to write a coherent, much less good, novel, it certainly is shocking. I almost wonder if this was partially ghost written, it is so bad.
Why is bad? Here are some ways. First of all--ACC is fond of using spiritual or even quasi-religious references in his titles, yet he is an atheist--in fact, he is hostile to religion, most vehemently to Christianity. So then tell me--why is this book titled what it is? There are not only no ghosts--there is barely even a passing reference to anything metaphorically a ghost. So the people who died on the Titanic are the ghosts? Okay, but this is barely referenced and certainly is not the focal point of this book.
Which leads to another issue. The focal point is fuzzy. It's about the raising of the Titanic, right? So what in the world do fractals and Mandelbrot sets have to do with any of it? Nothing. It's like ACC was obsessed with M-sets, so he decided to just shoehorn in a side story about it that has absolutely no bearing on any of the main plot. It does not even have a tangential connection to it except that some characters preoccupied with M-sets meet a character who is attempting to raise the Titanic. It is as if ACC intended to make some deep meaningful connection between these two narrative lines and then forgot to actually make it mean anything at all.
Then toward the end of the book he has a character who wants to literally resurrect a corpse from the Titanic? Really? But she is perfectly preserved! Okay. So is the meat in my freezer. ACC just spends a few pages hinting that this might be done since all we are is meat and there is no soul, so why not? But then he just drops this thread and forgets it.
Then he tacks on a cheesy future ending about aliens that comes out of nowhere and has nothing to do with the rest of the book except the Titanic is still on Earth? It would be like aliens coming in to rescue Private Ryan at the end of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. The whole book 99% of the way is SF about Earth and the ocean, then he tacks on aliens because...he is ACC and he wrote 2001 so of course there can be aliens. Ugh.
None of the characters mean anything and serve simply as mouthpieces for the ideas of SF that actually exist in the novel. They are cardboard cutouts, like ACC's early novel's characters, and exactly what people point out about SF that makes it a crap genre. Yet the novel from the 1950s that is paired in the edition of this I read, THE DEEP RANGE, is also ocean SF, but in this one the character's journey is deeply and meaningfully embedded in the idea of the novel.
There are so many little things that just eat at the edges of any possibly quality in this novel: an indirect reference to Polish jokes to get you to laugh but in a way that you can't blame him for this, a reference to something happening that a character thinks is something like out of a Stephen Spielberg movie...which it is...and spoils a serious SF novel, an iceberg out of the blue surprising a character in a way that is too cheesy and unbelievable just because the novel has to end some time, comments on gender and sex that are just cheesy political grandstanding that just don't work and show how little ACC understands humanity and women especially, and just so many other amateur moments to count.
If I have not yet convinced you to not waste your time on this book, I will take one more shot at it. A good test of whether a novel is good or not is whether you would have been better off reading a nonfiction book about the topic. The answer is categorically, yes, absolutely. You will learn nothing about the ocean or the Titanic that you could not more entertainingly find in A NIGHT TO REMEMBER or SHIP OF GOLD or countless other books. In fact, you would probably be better served watching James Cameron's awful movie about the topic than you would reading this garbage.
I enjoyed EARTHLIGHT, RENDEZVOUS WITH RAMA, and THE FOUNTAINS OF PARADISE. I hate this book so much because I know what ACC was capable of, and this just taints his legacy so badly.
Maybe ACC wanted to rush this out in 1990 because of the coming 100 year anniversary of the Titanic sinking? Who knows. I just hope his last novel THE HAMMER OF GOD does not read like a haphazard piece of garbage like this one did....more
One of ACC's best, by far. He does all the wonderful things he did in his early works and later works and does them all here without the flaws of his One of ACC's best, by far. He does all the wonderful things he did in his early works and later works and does them all here without the flaws of his early work. The main character and the idea are wrapped up into a neat bundle. ACC shed the crutch of using a less well informed observer character to tell the story and shows confidence enough to have his main character be a scientist (or, at least, a genius engineer). The only flaw is his persistent use of cheap unsupported pot shots at Christianity (and Buddhism, Judiaism, and Islam, to a lesser degree)....more
One of ACC's best. It has a balance between the personal human story and the larger scientific story of humanity. It lacks the awe inspiring wonder ofOne of ACC's best. It has a balance between the personal human story and the larger scientific story of humanity. It lacks the awe inspiring wonder of RAMA, which I prefer, but it shows a fully mature style that most of his early works lack....more