Slashdot Mirror
Quicksilver
First, let's make it clear that Quicksilver is not science fiction. It's historical fiction, occasionally about science, for people who like science fiction, i.e. geeks. It has math, optics, and vivisection, but no computers, no code, and no high-speed pizza delivery.
This is also not a book that gets anywhere quickly. It's 900-plus pages, and it's not padded so much as it is fractal. Stephenson wanders down side tracks, stages elaborate adventures and morality plays, explores philosophical issues and geometric proofs, assembles obscure puns, and drags in all manner of famous people and events, purely for his own amusement. Either you sit back and enjoy the game, or you hurl the book (with effort) at the wall somewhere in the first few hundred pages.
Daniel Waterhouse is a seventeenth-century geek; his father's a prominent associate of Oliver Cromwell, but Daniel's more interested in Natural Philosophy than in decapitating kings and Catholics. At Cambridge, he befriends Isaac Newton; later he becomes sort of a grad student and chief bottle-washer to the Royal Society. He starts out as naive observer of London politics, but over a few decades, gravitates into the intrigues of both the Court and the European intelligentsia. Just as Lawrence Waterhouse befriended Turing in Cryptonomicon, Daniel Waterhouse orbits Newton and Leibniz. It seems to be the fate of Waterhouse men to be brilliant thinkers eclipsed by the geniuses of their age.
Jack Shaftoe is a legend in his own time, a thief and mercenary who propels himself around Europe on sheer balls and avarice. He bumbles into and out of ridiculous scrapes, including an ostrich-chase at the Siege of Vienna that results in his rescue of the slave-girl Eliza from a Turkish harem. Eliza's business savvy draws the pair back across Europe to Amsterdam, where Eliza becomes entwined in both the Dutch stock exchange and the court of Versailles.
Cryptonomicon readers will remember the improbably long-lived Enoch Root, who shows up occasionally to nudge the plot along. Most of the story takes place between 1655 and 1689, but it opens with Enoch in Massachusetts in 1713, interrupting Daniel's efforts to found MIT by presenting him with a summons from England. Daniel spends the next several weeks being chased around Plymouth Bay by the pirate Blackbeard, only to have his plot thread left dangling with no apologies. Either it will be picked up in the sequel, or Stephenson is attaining a new degree of sadism.
Where Cryptonomicon was about secrecy and deception, Quicksilver is about revealing the hidden and the unknown, and the free dispersal of ideas and money. Stephenson uses quicksilver as an unsubtle symbol of the scientific discovery that was beginning to percolate through the known world. He highlights the dichotomy between the religious viewpoint, of a world that began in perfect knowledge and order and has steadily decayed since the Fall, and the scientific viewpoint, of a chaotic world that is slowly being brought into order and the reach of understanding. Much of this understanding was accomplished through the efforts and correspondence of the Royal Society, which operated in a state of excitement, enthusiasm, and confidence that they would decipher the mechanisms of nature: an attitude not unlike that of the dot-com startup era, but fueled more by wonder and less by naked greed.
Lesser writers dump blocks of expository prose into the narrative; Stephenson shamelessly shovels it into his dialogue. As a result, much of the dialogue is stilted, and the banter is painfully odd. You get used to it. Some bits are more blatant than others, such as a dialogue between Waterhouse and Newton and a Jewish prism-merchant, in which Stephenson trots out a brief overview of European coinage of the time, while cycling through a catalogue of synonyms for "Jew."
So, is Quicksilver worth the effort? On the one hand, it's an insightful look at both the Scientific Revolution and the Glorious Revolution. On the other hand, it's got plague, pirates, astronomy, sex, explosions, daring rescues, religious strife, and the profound effect on European history of stockbrokers and syphilis. It's a terrific book, but don't expect it to resemble Stephenson's prior books in anything but ambition and length.
You can purchase Quicksilver from bn.com -- the official release date is September 23rd. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Ref: Amazon has it for the same price as bn
Free shipping applies if you spend $5.50 more...
Quicksilver, Volume One of the Baroque Cycle, is the new doorstop...
;)
You know, it's a good thing I love Neil Stephenson, 'cause 900 pages is not so much doorstop sized as *door* sized.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
Can't wait to read Quickselver, though. I'll even spring for the hardcover to go next to my Cryptonomicon.
-- ac at work
900 more pages about Waterhouse and Shaftoe.... How many generations can these families bump into each other?
I can't read this book now because it would violate my first rule of book selection: I don't read any books that are part of an incomplete series. He's got to write faster so I can get my fix! Then again, I already sort of broke my rule by reading the sample chapter...
And yes, you should read Cryptonomicon. (It will be interesting to see if this novel has a less abrubt ending that most of his other 90's books though)
Glad to see that Neal is as independent and cantankerous as ever. Cryptonomicon was so phenomenal that I gave my copy to a fellow geek-traveller (and old friend), who has probably passed it along like some virus in Snow Crash. Stephenson's books have expanded my mind and I am sure that Quicksilver will be worth a long slog. What the review failed to mention was whether or not the entire book was actually first written using a fountain pen, as I had read it would be years ago. If so, one has to wonder at the determination of an author literally penning a "doorstop". Off to the bookstore...
In principio erat Verbum.
The Cryptonomicon was terrific! I hope I enjoy this one just as much. A lot of his complaints about Quicksilver appeared in the Cryptonomicon, esp. the plot jumping. Nothing like leaving the plot to discuss the revolutions of a bicycle chain.
Vertical
72 CD D7 52 D0 7E D8 47 44 91 D5 84 D1 59 F1 A9-This is my 128bit integer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Stephenson uses quicksilver as an unsubtle symbol of the scientific discovery that was beginning to percolate through the known world.
So he is trying to say... what? That the scientific revolution had seven independently operating fans?
Words to live by. This sort of became my personal motto after reading Cryptonomicon. When things get crazy at work, I just think to myself, "What would Shaftoe do?" Display some adaptability, that's what.
between another 900-page epic from stephenson, FzeroGX and Freevo, ill be surprised if i manage to graduate this semester...
turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
and I'm only on page 200 or so after a couple of weeks (due to many silly reasons like kids and job). So it's with reluctance I succumb to the desire to read yet another (not to say there are too many) of Stephenson's books.
:-/
I enjoyed "Diamond Age" quite a bit and started in on "Cryptonomicon" shortly after finishing it, but I have to say that the characters are so complex in this book that I have trouble keeping their background straight. I do feel that once in awhile he (Stephenson) takes the character for a ride but forgets to take us along, too. That's not to say that I don't enjoy the stories; far from it. I think he's able to create quite a tapestry in his stories, and I just can't remember all of the individual threads (much like real life).
Looking forward to reading this novel when I finish "Cryptonomicon" several weeks from now.
- Leo
You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.
Sounds like more of a defense than a review.
The 900-pages consist of a plot 'not padded so much as it is fractal' and apparently 'purely for his own amusement.'
I prefer novels written for the amusement of readers, thank you.
Lesser writers dump blocks of expository prose into the narrative; Stephenson shamelessly shovels it into his dialogue. As a result, much of the dialogue is stilted, and the banter is painfully odd. You get used to it.
After 900 pages 'you get used to it' is hardly is glowing endorsement.
I enjoyed Cryptonomicon quite a bit, but the historical gaffes in Snow Crash make me a little hesitant about Stephenson diving back into anything before current events. His descriptions of Sumerian myths, and of the book of Deuteronomy being all about kings, still make me cringe.
Let's hope his research was better this time around.
Historical fiction in which a man who embodies Scientific Thought clashes with relgious zealots against the background of social upheaval in Western Europe. Contains lengthy divergent sections dealing with strands of physics, mathematics, theology and sex.
I think Stephenson has been reading a lot of Umberto Eco (either "Name of the Rose" or "Foucault's Pendulum") recently.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
I couldn't agree more. The idea of two generations of the same families coincidentally bumping into each other after 50 years totally ruined Cryptonomicon. Don't get me wrong - I'm a big fan of surreal plot elements. That is, if they are in surreal novels.
Unfortunately Cryptonomicon was a sci-fi novel, which implies that amazing coincidences don't happen unless there's a good reason. Overall, I thought he made some very odd choices, as compared to his earlier work like "Snow Crash" and "Diamond Age". Perhaps Stephenson was aiming for something like the stream-of-consciousness "Gravity's Rainbow"?
I don't want to wait for the official release; I'll be on my plane already! So, how did you get the advance copy for a review? Since it's 900 pages, I presume you received it some time ago. Or read -really- fast.
I'll eagerly read it, regardless, but I wonder -- has Stephenson learned to write:
a) an ending
b) a sex scene that doesn't make one cringe
At least with sex scenes, he could just leave them out since he's so obviously uncomfortable writing them. Writing a book without an ending would be tricky, though, and might invite a lawsuit from Lionel Hutts.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
You can purchase Quicksilver from bn.com
When you embed a sourceId into the link, it is reasonably ethical to disclose who will be the beneficiary of the referral.
This description reminds me of Umberto Eco's "The Island of the Day Before". Eco's book is set in the 1600s and revolves around the search for a method to measure longitude during war and political and religious intrigue.
Maybe if you like this Stephenson book, you'll like that. Eco's books tend to be a little smarter than most people enjoy, however.
It sounds like Stephenson is turning into Thomas Pynchon.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
If you're going to work through 900+ pages of a novel, may I also suggest David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest?
Neal would be proud of you.
jack's bicycle is music to my ears
W.W.S.D?
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
Stephenson borrowed the main idea behind Snow Crash, that language was invented at a specific time and place, from Julian Jaynes's book "The Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind". It's a nice idea and all but I think Stephenson took it too far, and the whole Metavirus thing didn't really work.
Other than that I enjoyed Snow Crash cause it was unrepentant pulp sci-fi, and didn't have the literary pretensions of Cryptonomicon.
..I believe the exact quote was "display some FUCKING adaptability" - the extra emphasis is needed =)
I liked Snow Crash- I didn't even mind the "non-ending". I also liked Zodiac. But both the Diamond Age and Cryptonomicon left me...bored. Stephenson apparently has decided that he'd rather show-off all his historical research than tell an interesting story.
C'mon guys, couldn't you have waited until TOMORROW when the book is actually released? Now I'm gonna have a major case of blueballs waiting to go to the store tomorrow.
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
"...and the profound effect on European history of stockbrokers and syphilis."
Ah, yes, stockbrokers and syphilis. You just can't have one without the other.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
So, you'd prefer Big Corporate Amazon keep that $1 commision than they give it to some guy? What are you, a Republican?
No, I'd prefer not to get spammed, period.
Here.
Seems a little dry, IMO. I'll probably still buy the hardback.
I really like Stephenson. He's the current living benchmark for literature imho. He writes witty, educated, phantasy rich, thoughtfull and, in ways, seriously esotherical without losing it.
He is consequently ignored by the 'big' literature critics - allways a clear sign of quality - and still manages to fascinate and grip the fun reader and the thoughfull one alike.
Personally, I'm looking forward to this new one from him.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
An insightful passage I think, very relevant today. Anyway, this kind of stuff is characteristic of Stephenson's writing, so I think the books can be forgiven if they don't have good endings.
Well, first, when IT fucked up all the networked laser printers, he'd parachute into their building, impaling himself mortally on a letter-opener on someone's desk. Then, he'd machine-gun the front-line support staff. Then, he'd lob a few grenades into the server room. Finally, for good measure, he'd jump in there himself to make sure the job got done, going out in a big ball of glory.
Now *that's* some fucking adaptability. If you're going to do it like Shaftoe, you fucking do it right, soldier.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
So am I interested in another 900 pages from an author without any apparent editor? No. I'm not interested in reading chapter upon chapter of stuff that has absolutely no bearing on the plot, is uninteresting in its own right, and will be forgotten as soon as the next totally unnecessary twist.
The thing that Neal seems to forget is that the essence of writing is deciding what to leave out. Until he figures that out or hires an editor that can make the decision for him, I'll pass.
Hits hard and fast, and is especially merciless to sci fi writers. (Note, does not apply to fantasy writers as most of them are born retarded and have nowhere to go but dowwwwwwwn)
Is that an insult or compliment?
If you can read this sig - the bitch fell off.
Stephenson is a really excellent author. Although I'm usually left a bit unsatisfied by his books' endings - particularly Diamond Age - this may only be because at the end of his books I wish there were still five hundred pages to go! He is particularly good at populating his worlds with characters who are, for lack of a better phrase, really exceptionally cool. I can't think of any other author whose characters reach a comparable level of out-and-out badassitude - Gibson doesn't even come close.
:) He is able to present versions of morality and faith that are at once true to their roots and capable of thriving in the modern world. Examples that spring to mind are his descriptions of Juanita's efforts to reinvigorate Catholicism in Snow Crash, his depiction of Avi in Cryptonomicon, and the long homage to Victorianism and Midwestern America that is Diamond Age.
I also think that he pressents some interesting and worthwhile takes on politics and modern society, particularly in his portrayal of the faithful. Traditional religion and social conservatism often end up dismissed and/or mocked in scientific and technical communities, but Stephenson manages to present them in a new light and to depict a world where faith and appreciation of traditional values does not necessarily mean intolerance or being terminally lame.
H4x0r Economist - k33ping d3m0cr4cy l33t 51Nc3 1987
I know that Neal Stephenson doesn't much enjoy contact with his readers, so this is perhaps the best place to ask this question. Maybe someone on Slashdot even has an answer. :)
Anyone else suspect a connection between Randy's wisdom-tooth episode and this blog entry from Jamie Zawinski on the same subject? Or is it just my own experience with dental surgeons that makes me cringe at both of these?
First, let's make it clear that Quicksilver is not science fiction. It's historical fiction, occasionally about science, for people who like science fiction, i.e. geeks. It has math, optics, and vivisection, but no computers, no code, and no high-speed pizza delivery.
Personally this does sound like SF. Merriam-Webster describes SF as "fiction dealing principally with the impact of actual or imagined science on society or individuals or having a scientific factor as an essential orienting component." Futuristic elements to the science is a common trait, but not a defining characteristic. So Quicksilver is pure SF just like William Gibson's Pattern Recognition is SF, even though its just dealing with meme-passing and culture creation. Heck, a caveman perfecting the flint spear with an atl-atl is SF. The interaction of man and science is the key, not the nature of the science itself.
What is music when you despise all sound?
Isn't Quicksilver the model of an Apple G4? Stop confusing us!
:::sound of slashdot crickets:::
Sorry this comment didn't quite rate a "+5 Funny". But it may not be that Slashdot is trying to confuse your poor little mellon. It may be more the case that in this wonderful little essay Stephenson wrote about a few years back Stephenson reveals himself to have been at one time a real Apple fiend.
In it, he describes how he sadly left the Apple fold after his beloved blackbird powerbook ate a story he was working on. It was (according to him) irretrievably lost. He then embarked on a journey through other operating systems (including BeOS and WinNT)that culminated into a real enthusiasm for Linux.
But that essay was written a while ago, so maybe since the move to OS X he's come back to Apple.
Perhaps he was writing his new book on his new Apple hardware and thinking to himself "Title...title...hmmmm...what to all this wonderful new story of mine...ah-HA!"
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
V was really good, but to be honest, Vineland didn't do much for me.
But don't get me started on Gravity's Rainbow, one of the greatest novels of the 20th century. "Ficht nicht mit der Rocketman!" (sp?)
-- ac at work
Every time I read about people swooning over Cryptonomicon, I just don't get it. I've read the first few hundred pages and after failing to be excited on any level - emotional, intellectual, spiritual - I had to put it down. There is no decent plot, zero (!) action and yet zero deep introspection. If a book is going to be slow and without much action and plot, dear God, please at least let it be deep?
To contrast this with something, I loved every single Dune book. While some books had more action, others, without much action, had plenty of depth to keep me satisfied. I felt like swimming in another mind and in another soul, and it was great. When I was reading Cryptonomicon, I felt like chewing paper. The taste was very dry, void of any nutritional value, nothing whatsoever was happening in the book, with the most exciting action scene being the american guy adventuring in a bar full of asians - boooooooriinnggg....and this is coming from someone who is fascinated with asian culture. On the other hand, there is absolutely zero spiritual, OR intellectual content. Zero. I don't expect great spiritual depth from this author, but at least, as a hacker (or a hacker wannabe, or a hacker in spirit, what have you), he ought to be more engaging mentally at least.
I also find it amusing that the stale styrofoam such as Cryptonomicon got a link and yet, the arguably better book, Snowcrash is without a link.
I realize that many people love this book, but I don't understand why. Why?
I like his endings.
He flies right up to the brink and then stops the car. Apparently most slashdotties have their seatbelts on. I like to leave mine off and fly off that cliff.
He gives you so much to chew on with his endings. plenty of space for "what if..."
I always remember his books far longer than most simply BECAUSE it's not all spelled out for you in detail.
"You worthless post!"
-Shakespeare, 2 Gentlemen of Verona, 1. 1. 147
I'll eagerly read it, regardless, but I wonder -- has Stephenson learned to write:
a) an ending
b) a sex scene that doesn't make one cringe
At least with sex scenes, he could just leave them out since he's so obviously uncomfortable writing them.
Stephenson uncomfortable writing a sex scene? We talking 'bout the same author?
I find his sex scenes- at least the one in Cryptonomicon - classic at worst. I nearly laughed my head of. And if *you* cringe at his sex scenes, you should maybe come to think that that could be what he intended for *readers* that are uncomfortable with sex scenes.
At least that sex scene made me horny *and* laugh at the same time. Quite good a writing if you ask me.
'...imperial pint of semen...' - I'll *never* forget that one. Absolutely classic. LOL!
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
less than 9 - Terrible book. Avoid like the plague.
9 - Average. 90% of books fall into theis category. Only read it if you are particularly interested in the subject matter.
greater than 9 - Great book. Read it.
I'm trying to decide if I should order from Amazon tonight.
If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.
You want an ending?? Remember, this is book one of a series. Neal doesn't *have* to write an ending in this book. In fact, he *never* has to write an ending. At the end of every book in the series, he just writes "... to be continued".
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
While Stephenson's endings may seem to come rather abruptly, atleast they involve substantive changes in the world of the book. Something happens. The reader is meant to think about what exactly that entails, to imagine the possibilities of that change on human experience.
I'd argue that that's what science fiction is all about.
On the other hand, Crichton's books always seems to involve a restoration of the status quo at the beginning of the book. Think sphere, jurassic park. It's a cop out. It's a pansy way of ducking the big questions. It's like a bad tv show, where you know the ending, because there's no continuity. All the characters' relationships are going to stay the same. Everything has to unfold back to square one.
I loved Cryptonomicon, but there was one little thing bugging me. When Randy, in jail, decrypts the WWII radio transmissions that mentioned the location of Golgotha, why did that message have English plaintext? Wouldn't the Japanese have used Japanese, which Randy does not speak?
The only 3 reasons that I can think of are: 1) Mr. Stephenson didn't want to confuse the reader by switching languages, the crypto was potentially confusing enough, 2) The messages were sent by the Conspiracy, in English, and I didn't notice that in my reading, 3) Mr. Stephenson made a mistake.
Reason #2 seems most likely to me, but I didn't get that from reading. Do you, dear Shashdotters, have any insight?
I've loved every Stephenson book I've read, and I've read all of them except zodiac and the um... the one with the U;) I forget the exact title and I'm lazy... but in any event... I have had this book on pre-order since July and I'm hoping that next-day delivery really means next-day...
Since a lot of people commented about Cryptonomicon... I wonder, did anyone else try to find Qwghlm on a map, or was that just me? haha I swear I thought maybe it was an island in the UK that I never heard of LOL
Chaos is Divine *
Dude, reconsider. That book is awesome. Think of it as "William Gibson meets true literary skills". :-)
But are there pictures?
in the hammock, above the skerries.
Root is in the book. His lifeline seems to fit SF much better than other genres, except fantasy.
Saturday the NYTimes (reg, you know the drill) reviewed this book. here's the link.
It's a terrific book, but don't expect it to resemble Stephenson's prior books in anything but ambition and length.
but you know what I always say... if it ain't Baroque, don't fix it!
[ducks for cover]sorry[/ducks for cover]
No man is an island, but Gary is a city in Indiana.
The man is a third rate hack. He has some of the more dire dialog I have seen, his characters are 2d sterotypes, he's needlessly complex just to show how clever he is and he couldn't come up with a quality ending to a story if his life depended upon it. That being said he does write some interesting stories and I've actaully read and enjoyed most of what he's written, but great (or even good)literature it is not.
He is consequently ignored by the 'big' literature critics - allways a clear sign of quality -
Um, actually Stephenson's writing has been written up (from Snow Crash through Cryptonomicon) in the New York Times Book Review so I don't know what "'big' literature critics" you're talking about.
Are you talking about academic literary critique? I know for a fact that several universities (those that aren't so Canon-bound; Penn State is one) read Stephenson at the graduate level. Likewise they read PKD and detective fiction. Sure, Martin Amis hasn't written a critique of Stephenson but I bet there is some published work being done.
I assume your problem is the fact that SF is being "marginalized" as genre fiction and not accepted into the Canon along side Ulysses, Old Man and the Sea and Canterbury Tales. Well the problem is that Literary Criticism is interested in 'literature' not 'reading'. A good story is a good story, yes, but that isn't what literary study is about: it is about understanding the way people write. Style, technique, editing. Gravity's Rainbow is considered big not because it reads "well" but because of its post-modern design (i.e. the entire story is parabolic, starting with a single thread, building to a central mass, and then, simplifying at the far tail... tracing the parabolic tragectory of the V-2 rocket at the beginning and the end). For all of Stephenson's positive traits, his writing doesn't expand the landscape of literature.
Literary criticism isn't about reading good books. It's about understanding the theory of writing itself.
What is music when you despise all sound?
Being ignored by critics, even the 'big' ones, is not always a clear sign of quality.
It took me a couple years to get through Crypto and now there's more? By the end I could only read what was happening in the present day, screw Goto Dengo slithering through the jungle for pages and pages.
That makes a lot of sense.
I really like Stephenson. He's the current living benchmark for literature imho.
You obviously have Neal Stephenson mixed up with David Foster Wallace. Don't worry, it's an easy mistake to make.
He writes witty, educated, phantasy rich, thoughtfull and, in ways, seriously esotherical without losing it.
phantasy? thoughtfull? esotherical?!
OH, you're on shrooms. I understand now!
I'm currently on page 800 of my proof copy and thought I might try writing a Slashdot review. Fortunately, somebody beat me to it! Instead I'll present the following points:
1) If you did not (like|understand|pretend to get|claim to have read) Cryptonomicon, this is not the book for you. I can't imagine Mr. Stephenson was looking to expand his fan base with this book. This book is easily an intellectual achievement and as such, is written to satisfy an audience of 1: Neal Stephenson.
2) Generally, Stephenson's books are best after multiple readings. If you don't like reading books over again, you should steer clear of this author altogether. Quicksilver is no exception. There is a lot going on and, if the other books serve as guides, you will get more out of them a second time around.
3) After reading parts of this book you are going to want to track down articles on (wikipedia|everything2) to refresh your memory about late 17th century European history. Even so, this book is not "late 17th century European history." This is a book about 17th century hackers and, if you believe the premise, how much and how little things have changed. Either way, this book merits a Companion guide.
4) The sixth paragraph above is a pretty big spoiler. Don't read it.
5) I don't think Christina Schulman, the reviewer, (and despite the Epiphyte reference) made it through the book. The Quicksilver metaphor is important in the first book. The second and third books in the Quicksilver volume go on to other metaphors.
6) don't expect it to resemble Stephenson's prior books in anything but ambition and length. Ummm, I disagree. The parallel story line method is Stephenson's trademark, whether you are reading The Big U, the Diamond Age, or most noticeably Cryptonomicon. This book is more of what Stephenson does best, but in a very different setting.
7) Despite having a proof copy, I'm getting the hardcover of this sucker. Stephenson is worth it.
8) The Real Character puzzle from the website was only a glimpse of what was to come in the book. Given the time and effort (and application of programming skills/OCR) I don't expect to be disappointed.
Bottom line, if you're new to Stephenson, you'll want to try Cryptonomicon first. Quicksilver can be a page-turner but it is by no means a quick read. I usually fly through books but have taken over a month on this one. This book represents an incredible amount of effort and cements Stephenson's position top among the most versatile, intelligent, (Linux friendly) authors today.
sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
SPOKEN: THE MOST INTERESTING THING ABOUT KING CHARLES I IS THAT HE WAS 5'6" TALL AT THE START OF HIS REIGN, BUT ONLY 4'8" AT THE END OF IT...
BECAUSE OF...
Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protecteur of England
PURITAN
Born in 1599 and died in 1658
SEPTEMBER
Was at first
ONLY
MP for Huntingdon
BUT THEN
He led the Ironside Cavalry at Marston Moor
in 1644 and won.
Then he founded the new model model army
And praise be, beat the Cavaliers at Naisby
And the King fled up North like a bat to the
Scots.
SPOKEN: BUT UNDER THE TERMS OF JOHN PIMM'S SOLEMN
LEAGUE AND COVENANT, THE SCOTS HANDED KING
CHARLES I OVER TO...
Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protecteur of England
AND HIS WARDS
Born in 1599 and died in 1658
SEPTEMBER
But alas
OY VAY!
Disagreement then broke out
BETWEEN
The Presbyterian Parliament and the Military
who meant
To have an independent bent.
And so...
The 2nd Civil War broke out
And the Roundhead ranks
Faced the Cavaliers at Preston Banks
And the King lost again, silly thing
STUPID GIT
SPOKEN: AND CROMWELL SEND COLONEL PRIDE TO PURGE THE HOUSE OF COMMONS OF THE PRESBYTERIAN ROYALISTS LEAVING BEHIND ONLY THE RUMP PARLIAMENT...
Which appointed a High Court at Westminster Hall
To indict Charles I for...tyranny
OOOOHHH!
Charles was sentenced to death
Even though he refused to accept that the court had...jurisdiction
SAY GOODBYE TO HIS HEAD
Poor King Charles laid his head on the block
JANUARY 1649
Down came the axe, and...
SPOKEN: IN THE SILENCE THAT FOLLOWED, THE ONLY SOUND THAT COULD BE HEARD WAS A SOLITARY GIGGLE, FROM...
Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protecteur of England
OLE
Born in 1599 and died in 1658
SEPTEMBER
Then he smashed
IRELAND
Set up the Commonwealth
AND MORE
He crushed the Scots at Worcester
And beat the Dutch at sea
In 1653 and then
He dissolved the Rump Parliament
And with Lambert's consent
Wrote the instrument of Government
Under which Oliver was Proctector at last
The end.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
For those of you already wondering when the next books will be out, Stephenson is trying a Matrix approach:
HC: When can we hope to see the next volumes in the Baroque Cycle?
NS: They're coming out at six-month intervals, so April 2004 for The Confusion, and then October 2004 for The System of the World.
http://www.baroquecycle.com/interview.htm
sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
OTOH, I agree, it could have been less cryptic.
"I will take the Ring," he said, "though I do not know the way."
But why isn't Cryptonomicon the first book in the Baroque Cycle?
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
$20 for 900pp is better than a buck a page! Seriously, the density and non-linearity bear multiple reads. I've enjoyed all of Iain M Banks several times, ditto Crypto and Diamond Age, and every time I pick up a dog-eared Ellroy I'm shocked and thrilled again. Lots of potential for mindscaping in a work of fiction is an invitation to return again and again, like a favourite piece of music. I'm not impressed with proto-critic literary crotch thrusters: the academic reverence given to Dostoevsky does not mean normal people are stupid for liking great yarn - written way better than you or whoever's 9 year old could manage. And puhleez, if you are going to diss a work, better finish it off first. NS is good and I particularly like the long convoluted ones; glad to see other people feel the same.
But only if you're not worried about incredibly annoying (non)endings, wild expositions and tangents, and flicking repeatedly to the footnotes...
None of these things worry me too much - Infinite Jest is unreservedly the best, most entertaining thing I've read in my life and I'm looking forward more to Foster Wallaces's next book than I am to Mr Stephenson's (IMO none of Stephenson's characters can compare to the sheer, gnarly, human horror of Poor Tony Krause - tho I did just order the new book by my second favorite author and I'm expecting more great things.)
Both of these authors have the gift that their kind of inventive, curious spirit rules in all spheres.
Rather hypocritical when you consider how much /. pushes stories about ethics w/regards to other businesses, eg. Microsoft's business practices.
Sure, it's a relatively minor thing, but still something to think about.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Sorry, I'm j/k :=)
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Chrisd
Co-Editor, Open Sources
Open Source Program Manager, Google, Inc.
If you could write what he writes (on a technical level, not necessarily with the same flair), you'll probably find his stuff dull.
I couldn't palate the Cryponomicon because I found his diversions atrociously boring. Why? Well, they tended to be about Computer Science, and I have a Masters in the subject. Reading a simplified description of Turing Machines does not get my blood pumping anymore; been there, done that.
Stephenson's works are like one big ad for various things. I think I would have loved Cryptonomicon as a kid, but now it's dull because it's mostly old hat.
And speaking as someone who can dissociate the story from the diversions, believe me, the stories are thin, thin, thin! (Probably could fit in 100 pages or less.)
Objectively speaking, the Cryptonomicon is a very bad story, wrapped in a whole bunch of anecdotes that aren't even "fractally" related to the story (a BS characterization, BTW), because there's nearly no story for them to be related to. Personally I think Neal would be better off writing various coherent columns and skipping the story. But perhaps the story functions as the sugar that makes the medicine go down; goodness knows he gets enough worship on forums like this to show he's got some kind of good deal that work$ for him.
I'm not going to insult anyone for loving the Cryptonomicon, but it's a series of columns in Scientific American masquerading as a novel. If you like the columns, great! But that doesn't make the novel aspect any more then the thin, ratty trash it is. Don't mistake interesting mathematical tidbits for a good novel.
The best work about the English Civil War and the Restoration was written almost 250 years ago by the great Scottish philospher David Hume. The relevant volumes are available in paperback for $10 each: History of England: Volume V, The first two Stuarts and History of England: Volume VI, The last Stuarts and the Glorious Revolution.
For those of you who do not wish to read 18th century prose (which I find delicious, but some of you may think is too much work) try A Monarchy Transformed: Britain 1603-1714 (Penguin History of Britain Series, No 6) by Mark Kishlansky. Avoid the Stone book which is crippled by the author's marxist commitments.
The English Civil War was a key event in American History also. the connections are explained by Kevin Phillips in The Cousins' Wars: Religion, Politics, and the Triumph of Anglo-America
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
...how could anyone not like the ending of "Diamond Age"?
I mean, an army of teenage girls as the cavalry, marching out of nowhere to save the day? Try making that believable. Stephenson did.
I just can't wait until some top-notch anime artist does the movie.
Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
...you're saying that if Stephenson were to produce a comprehensible version of Gravity's Rainbow, that would be a bad thing? Er?! I think we need more geek versions of Ulysses. Bring it on, I say - Pynchon me up!
I love Eco's work, and think The Name of the Rose is the best novel of the twentieth century. But The Island of the Day Before is too tough for me. Eco is always playing games with the reader: that's what he does. But The Name of the Rose has a clear narrative and real narrative drive, which help to carry you through all the mindfucks. I would start there, and if you like it, try Eco's more recent works which are either more brilliant or more self indulgent depending on how you take them.
Mind you the comparison between Eco and Stephenson is an interesting one...
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
He wrote it longhand with a fountain pen.
That is, Snow Crash and Diamond Age are almost, but not quite, entirely unlike Cryptonomicon. I loved SC and DA and really looked forward to Cryptonomicon.
:)
But then I started reading the free excerpt on the web. Whereas SC and DA both sucked me in within the first few pages, Cryptonomicon just bored me. So I am very sorry to hear that he's continuing in the style of it rather than his earlier works.
Useful review in that respect, though. I now know I need look at Quicksilver any further.
Loved Snow Crash and Diamond Age, was somewhat underwhelmed by Cryptonomicon.
Since this appears to be more Crypto, I think I may pass on this.
Get back to your ultra-hip future tales, Neal!
...that Neal's books often have abrupt endings & leave me wishing that he'd add a bit here and there (the open threads...). Come to think of it, his writing is much like every software project I've been involved in!
i was reading through the book and that passage just struck me like wrecking ball
it took so much of the disparate mess that was aimlessly wandering in my brain and suddenly brought it all together for me in a logical and meaningful framework
those two pages alone made the book worth reading
I love Neal Stephenson books, and I have no qualms in rereading books whether they're particularly tricky or not, being a quite avaricious reader. However, there's one thing I don't get.
SPOILER ALERT FOR CRYPTONOMICON
What the hell is Enoch Root still doing alive at the end of the book when he dies halfway through and is pronounced dead by a doctor? He seems fine 50 years later. Did I miss something vital? I feel as stupid as I did finishing Diamond Age, although I'm a bit more sure I've got that one sussed.
Every time the subject of Stephenson comes up, there are people who complain about his endings. No, he doesn't write "Epilogues" or "Codas". He ends the story when it's over. If you want to see Kirk, Spock and McCoy sitting on the bridge chuckling over a little joke at the end of the episode, watch Star Trek. If you want to read a novel, read Stephenson.
I adored Name of the Rose, and thoght Foucaluts Pedulum was facinating (though reading it IMMEDIATLY followin the combined Illuminati trillogy was a bad idea for my psychology). On thing did irk the Hell out of me. I'm reading Pendulum and one of the main characters is having a very significant interior breakthrough.. a sort of an internaization of the meaning of the rest of the book... And the Eco forgets that not all of his readers are blessed with the knowlege of 9 languages and swaps into german, latin, and something I couldn't even recognize for the revelation!! Argg.. Its not as if anyone had written footnotes for it a week or two after publication you know? Sorry just my pet peeve.
Um to stay on topic, Stephenson Rocks. Favorites are Snow Crash and Zodiac. For those who havn't done their full digging, also look up the book he co-authored under the name Steven Bury.
I seriously hope that you don't think you are the only one on Slashdot with a deep understanding of computer science. Would it surprise you to discover that there are people here who are more highly educated and more experienced than you in the fields of computer science, cryptology, and physics but who *do* greatly admire Cryptonomicon as a novel?
The fact is that Stephenson is a highly underrated and gifted writer, regardless of the topic. Do you seriously believe that any of us read Cryptonomicon for its educational value. Give me a break. If, as a CS major, you want to criticize his portrayal of Perl scripting that's fine, but isn't plot criticism a bit out of your area of expertise?
Your arrogance is appalling. I certainly hope you are under 30. At least then it is somewhat excusable. When you grow older you will realize how much less you knew than you thought you did. What is not excusable is the assumption that a technical geek crowd would not already understand the basic concepts you allude to.
It's ironic that that same kind of condescending attitude is one that "hard" science majors had towards CS majors for many years. I keenly remember the disapproval of the head of the EE department when I mentioned that I was considering switching to a CS major. His attitude was that it was for intellectual lightweights, and that if I were interested in serious AI research (which he knew I was) I shouldn't even consider it. After all, he knew, a real thinking machine of the future was not just going to be some kind of better written program on a traditional computer, it would need to be an entirely new architecture, perhaps even some kind of wetware. If you are going to criticize Cryptonomicon, at least base it on facts, not on some exaggerated ideas of your superior intellectual capacity.
Stephenson is not some kind of Carl Sagan. Nor does he pretend to be. He is a writer of fiction, of novels. If you don't like them, fine. But to claim that Cryptonomicon is objectively a very bad story and thin, ratty trash says nothing about the novel, and everything about you. You are obviously just some narrow-minded (everythin is about your field), recent CS graduate who thinks he knows everything about every field (including even literature) and everyone else knows nothing.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Moderators are getting really easy. +5 just for the one millionth "In the Beginning was the Command Line" link/reference on Slashdot. Is there anyone here who hasn't yet read that essay? I'm posting this anonymously lest I be accused of the same.
I think that he has two different "styles." You have the Diamond Age and Snowcrash style, and then you have the Cryptonomicon (and it sounds like Quicksilver too)style. Though somewhat disconjointed, I really enjoyed the Diamond Age. Neil is not afraid to spend a chapter or two on some story completely unrelated to the plot or development of the book. He uses these digressions, I think, to give color and depth to his worlds. Not everyone appreciates these digressions though, because it can be viewed as worthless and distracting to the focus of the book.
This has been a pleasurable thread to read. Neil does seem to be one of those authors you either like or you don't. Very few "in betweens."
StyleChief
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! -M. Python
A message that boils down to "get off your high horse" then includes shit like "I certainly hope you are under 30." is thoroughly uncompelling. You may like it; I don't respect your opinion any after that dreck you wrote.
You read arrogance into a message where it didn't exist because you reflected your own arrogance into it. HAND.
Actually, the problem I always find with him is that literary people don't recognise him as a science fiction author.
It's the same thing that happened to Douglas Adams after he died. You go looking for his book in the "Science Fiction" section and find it in the "Literature" section. As anyone who knows anything at a book store or library about this, and their response is that he is too good a writer to be in the science fiction section.
the LEDs, but why? Unless one suspected that Randy was using them to communicate important information, who would bother? As described, their blinking seemed inoculous.
It doesn't boil down to "get off your high horse" at all. What it boils down to is that you think you have developed some sort of objective standard for literature. Go ahead and try to prove that Cryptonomicon is bad and your favorite novel is good. Once you are willing to admit that Stephenson is a competent writer, but one that is simply not to your taste, and that this is not a reflection of your superior intellect or education, then we can actually have a conversation. Until then, it's just name calling.
Your post amounted to stating that anyone who likes Cryptonomicon is both stupid and ignorant. Unless you can come up with some kind of standard by which literature can be judged, all you can really say is whether you liked it or not. You cannot say anything objective about it. The only validity you can claim is that of a subjective feeling.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.