Slashdot Mirror


Coalescent

Motor writes "Coalescent is the first book in a new trilogy (Destiny's Children) by Stephen Baxter, a hard SF author with an impressive bibliography; Raft, Ring, and the awesome Manifold trilogy (Time, Space, Origin), among others. Baxter is an engaging writer whose ideas are as numerous as they are interesting and original. Coalescent spans history from the Roman era to 20,000 years in the future, and examines the beginnings and evolution of a strange form of human society. It has three main narratives." Read on to find out what they are, and for the rest of Motor's review. Coalescent: Destiny's Children, Book One author Stephen Baxter pages 480 publisher Gollancz rating 9 reviewer Motor ISBN 0575074248 summary Sisters matter more than daughters. Ignorance is strength. Listen to your sisters.

One thread follows George Poole, an educated and intelligent man in modern day Britain. After his father's sudden death, George has to put his affairs in order, and in the process discovers a previously unknown twin sister sent away to join "The Puissant Order of Holy Mary Queen of Virgins", a secretive (but apparently respectable) sixteen-hundred-year old religious order in Rome. He decides to find out more, and begins to investigate with the help of an old school friend, a member of a "fringe group of outsiders united by new technology" who communicate via the Internet and moderate each other's contributions to keep things ordered -- what a bizarre idea.

At the same time in Rome, Lucia is a fourteen-year old member of the Order who finds herself, unlike her fellow sisters, undergoing some alarming physical changes... puberty.

The other narrative thread follows Regina, a girl born around 400 A.D in Roman Britain. She is spoiled and pampered until her world is shattered by the death of her father and the ending of Roman rule in Britain.

Of the three threads, Regina's story is by far the most vivid and compelling. It is easy to read the broad sweep of history books documenting the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, but what did it mean for the people living through it? Currency, the rule of law, the specialised labour needed to provide metal, and the army to keep the peace... all gone. As one of the characters (Peter, in the "George" thread) says, "It must have been like a nuclear war." No longer enjoying the protection of the Emperor and his armies, the scattered and disorganised British have to fend for themselves against the invading Saxons intent on looting, pillaging and removing all traces of Roman civilisation. Regina must learn how to survive, and eventually her drive and ruthlessness leads her to Rome to confront her past and make a better future for her daughter. Driven by instinct and a desire to protect her family from the barbarian sackings of Rome, she establishes an unusual way of life which threatens to change the meaning of what it is to be human.

There is a great deal more, but it would be unfair to reveal too much and spoil things for others. The dangling threads (the mysterious Kuiper Belt anomaly) and hints (the war 20,000 years hence) leave plenty for future novels in the trilogy to push the story further into big science, big ideas and deep time that Baxter is well known for. Coalescent is scrupulously researched, intriguing, educational and has a genuine effect on the way you see social interactions and communities. Hard to beat, and highly recommended.

You can purchase Coalescent from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

122 comments

  1. Quadrilogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    It was initially a Quadrilogy, but Beyonce didn't like one of the books.

  2. FWIW, by Tirel · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I wrote this review for hackwriters.com, I hope it present an complanar view to the above.

    There is a category of science romance out there, running parallel to science fiction. Neal Stephenson (Snow Crash)- a mathematician is one and Stephen Baxter is another. Putting the science back in fiction and taking us along with it into extraordinary scenarios with fantastic sweeps across history.
    I'd previously come across Stephen Baxter when reading Reality Dust - pure but very alternative and thoughtful science fiction. It was accompanied by an another long short story in the Futures compendium by Peter F Hamilton called 'Watching Trees Grow'. An amazing detective story spanning generations, about a Britain that has never left the Roman Empire. The Empire, now nearly thousand years old never vanished or collapsed, but redoubled it's strength and held on, shaping all of history forever. But it's Stephen Baxter who has reached prominence with an extraordinary output of very intelligent science fiction and non-fiction too, with his engrossing book which traces the path not yet taken in Deep Future.

    In Coalescent Baxter takes a different tack to Peter Hamilton. He sticks to reality. Rome collapses, a slow terrible implosion over hundreds of years as the Barbarians crush the life out of her. He now deals in historical fact. It's Britain where Rome chooses to leave first, needing soldiers to defend Rome itself and Gaul. The population, led from Rome, is used to almost five hundred years of rule of law and prosperity. It cannot adjust, basic craftsmen skills seem to vanish, crime soars, most cannot believe the Emperor won't be back. Order will be restored soon they hope. But this not science fiction; Baxter uses history to chart a novel that is quite wonderful in many respects, doing something that has long been needed and probably should become a textbook for all high schools across the land.

    This is a story of a young girl Regina, a Roman British girl living in a villa with a lavish lifestyle and slaves who is suddenly abandoned by her mother Julia after her father accidentally kills himself. Regina is saved from ruin by her Grandfather, an old soldier and they flee to the safety of the wall. Regina's story is central to this book, told over her lifespan and more, alternating with a more contemporary story of one George Poole searching for his long lost twin sister in Rome.

    It is Regina's story and the story of Britain suddenly engulfed by marauding Saxons and tribal chieftans trying to fill the gap that the absence of Roman garrison's left behind.
    The disintegration of Romano Britain is a huge hole in the teaching of history in schools. We know they came, what they did, when they left, but then history glazes over and becomes the 'Dark Ages'. Baxter shines a very bright light indeed on those years and with subtle weaving entangles the adult Regina and her daughter Brica with the forever battling Artorius (Authur) and his mystic Myrddin (Merlin).
    Baxter is no romantic. This shambolic, receding, violent Britain is full of rapists and killers and Regina has to learn to survive with cunning. Everything is crumbling. Eventually she finds a way to get herself and her reluctant daughter to Rome - ostensibly to find her mother, but also to seek revenge for the man who raped her when she was a beautiful seventeen and left her with child.

    The sub-story of George Poole and his search for his sister is consumed by the growing story of 'The Puissant Order of Holy Mary Queen of Virgins'. What is the connection between this secret convent in Rome and Regina's story some sixteen centuries ago? Who is the mysterious Peter, friend of George's father who seems to appear in George's life without warning. What does he want from George?

    Baxter has a vision and everything always comes back to Rome. Our modern history began there and it is still entwined in modern Europe. Indeed as I write this review, the Prime Minister of Italy is wrapping up six months of Presidency of Europe.

    1. Re:FWIW, by Shimmer · · Score: 1

      It is such a shame for you that "complanar" is not a word. What's it supposed to mean?

      --
      The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
  3. Bizarre indeed. by pheared · · Score: 4, Funny

    "who communicate via the Internet and moderate each other's contributions to keep things ordered -- what a bizarre idea."

    Does he conclude that it doesn't work?

  4. My take on 'Coalescent' by W32.Klez.A · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Coalescent is unmistakeably a Stephen Baxter novel, but it's not the sort of novel you expect Stephen Baxter to write. The material is as big and bold as ever - this is a novel concerned with civilisation and society, order and chaos, as viewed through the lens of evolutionary biology - but the focus is more intense than usual. This is a novel about the role of the group and the role of the individual. This is a novel about family. Specifically, the Poole family.

    I often find it more interesting when science fiction broadens its horizons into the dynamics of relationships and family, and not just blowing up spaceships.

  5. The Series is called what? by Malicious · · Score: 0

    Insert pathetic Destiny's Child (R&B) Joke here.

    --
    01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
  6. Re:can it be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make it so, he's an ugly son of a bitch anyway.

  7. Re:Slashdot trolling phenomena by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Often, someone who is either new to Slashdot or just not aware of trolling (typically somebody that only reads with a +3 threshold) will post a response to a previous comment that is obviously a trolling attempt. In response to such a comment, someone may post "YHBT.", "YHBT YHL FOAD.", or "YHBT YHL HAND.". These intentionally-cryptic acronyms stand for the following:

    YHBT = "You Have Been Trolled" (see Internet troll)
    YHL = "You Have Lost"
    FOAD = "Fuck Off And Die"
    HAND = "Have A Nice Day"

    The acronym HAND is more popular than FOAD.


    I've never seen one of them. Have you?
    These Wiki-guys know shit...

  8. Destiny's Children by Boing · · Score: 4, Funny

    If Destiny's Children is anything like its namesake, the worst of the three books will become disproportionately more popular than the other two, and will be mistaken as comedic and subsequently featured in an Austin Powers movie.

    1. Re:Destiny's Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first time I read the article I though the name was "Destiny's Child". It took me an hour to figure out, that the article was about a book! So no pictures! Darn...

  9. Plagiarized comment? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

    Your final line is nearly identical to James Joyce comment two comments above. Are you schizo (logging in under two names) or a plagiarist? No quotes are indicated.

    BTW - I'm always suspicious of book review comments as the author/significant others/rabid fans/competition comments always pile on.

  10. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Frisky070802 · · Score: 1

    Your review of Quicksilver should be modded offtopic, since this article was about a completely different book. Accidental or troll?

    --
    Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
  11. some more reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are some more reviews out there.

  12. Trilogy books that don't stand on their own... by ewanrg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... shouldn't be written as trilogies. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say they shouldn't be published seperately. I don't mind reading book 1 in a trilogy and waiting to find out more if the book would have been a good read on it's own. But this book comes across as a novel that is more than a little unsatisfying without the following books.

    My .02 worth

    1. Re:Trilogy books that don't stand on their own... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean, like The Lord of the Rings (which was obviously one book published in three volumes, but is now treated as a trilogy).

      The purpose of the trilogy form (which goes back to 6th c. bc Greece) is to tell a story which is simply too long for a given form. It also gives a writer structural opportunities (action, reaction, resolution; the Greeks saw the structure in terms of the structure of their choral odes/dances, strophe, antistrophe, epode).

    2. Re:Trilogy books that don't stand on their own... by ewanrg · · Score: 1

      I figured someone would bring up LOTR. But I would venture that if all you ever had of LOTR was the first book that you would feel you had a fairly good read on it's own. Yes, there are several questions you would like answered, but you don't feel the sense that the book couldn't stand on it's own. The second book in the trilogy might be a little hard to argue the same.

      Then you have the Hitchhiker series where it's very obvious that each book (except possibly the last one) could qualify as a good book on it's own.

      I didn't get the same feeling from this book, but as always YMMV.

    3. Re:Trilogy books that don't stand on their own... by Lukey+Boy · · Score: 1

      Coalescent can easily stand on its own in my opinion. There are ties to his other works, but nothing that would prevent you "getting" the whole thing.

  13. Jack Whyte by CptNerd · · Score: 4, Interesting


    If you're interested in non-fantasy books (at least books with no orcs and dragons) about post-Roman Britain, look up the Camulod Chronicles books by Jack Whyte. Very well written, and well-researched. I just wish he'd finished them.

    --
    By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
  14. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Suppafly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Only at /. would a comment about a Stephenson book get modded up in response to a review about a totally different book by a different author.

  15. ATR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No longer enjoying the protection of the Emperor and his armies, the scattered and disorganised British have to fend for themselves against the invading Saxons intent on looting, pillaging and removing all traces of Roman civilisation.

    Think "Grover Norquist".

  16. Re:can it be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this will surely trigger CARNIVORE, expect a visit from men wearing sunglasses...

  17. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is this? National mod-up-a-troll day?

  18. PARENT IS A TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reposted review of a different book. Fantastic.

  19. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there is something going with this aens person. this is the same person that copied a post in the DARPA article and a post about 'Quicksilver' is completely unrelated and I doubt it came from him anyway.

  20. Sam North by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sam North

  21. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Your review of Quicksilver should be modded offtopic, since this article was about a completely different book.

    Exactly what I was thinking...

    > Accidental or troll?

    At a guess, troll.

  22. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Plus his delusion that he's a lawyer.

  23. What the hell?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean WHAT THE FUCK?

    1. Re:What the hell?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush rocks. I'll vote for him.

      Then again, I'd vote for Jerry Springer if he'd run for president.

    2. Re:What the hell?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intolerance, oppression and legalized psychological torture rules. It's so much easier than to put up with all that morale stuff.

      As an American, I want to watch celebrities and game shows on TV and I want a president who constantly tells me how great I am so that I can feel like a winner!

    3. Re:What the hell?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey, stop trolling a troll.

      Maybe you'll like this show as well.

    4. Re:What the hell?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've already read Somethingawful today, but thanks anyway.

    5. Re:What the hell?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh you mean intolerance like shutting out certian people bacuase of their view? and shutting them up kinda like with the affirmative action cookie bake sell things? or PC speech crap? or maybe shutting out christan symbols out of schools while allowing muslim or jewish symbols?

      oh wait that doesn't fit what you're trying to say nevermind...

    6. Re:What the hell?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh?

  24. I like Baxter, but... by Wylfing · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Baxter is a great short story writer. But when he gets into the roominess of a novel you see that he has a very gloomy and pathetic opinion of humanity. I mean, having the entire human race obsessed with waging war on the Xeelee because we can't stand being second best? Come on.

    --
    Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
    1. Re:I like Baxter, but... by kirbyman001 · · Score: 1

      Uhhh... and what do you think just about any war in the history of world has been based on?

      --
      To debunk the metaphysicist, one needs only to take him outside and throw a rock at his head. If he ducks, he's a liar.
    2. Re:I like Baxter, but... by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

      Errr ... and then lose because they were second best.

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
  25. ... baxter ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Gargh! I hate this author so much and yet I've read more of his books than any other author. They are annoyingly stupid and yet you can't stop reading them. Probably because the ideas are so balls out sci-fi and enjoyable at the same time (a genetically engineered squid flying a ship from earth to the astoroid belt anyone? [from the book Space]).

    I find his "science knows all and God doesn't exist" attitude to be a little childish (once or twice okay, but as a recurring theme in nearly every book?).

    1. Re:... baxter ... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      (a genetically engineered squid flying a ship from earth to the astoroid belt anyone? [from the book Space]).

      Actually, it's from "Manifold: Time". And personally I found the book to be rather depressing. It started off great, with a push toward space. But in the end, it was basically, "Let's see, who's not dead yet? Oh, I know! The ENTIRE HUMAN RACE!" Ugh.

      And the Squid was over the top. It sounds great in the context of the book and everything, but it just doesn't jive. I mean, how exactly does the author propose that a little Frankenstein type surgery on a squid brain would result in a super intelligent squid? Or that this attribute would be passed down through generations when it wasn't actually DNA encoded?

      Ugh. That's my review.

    2. Re:... baxter ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, thinking God doesn't exist is indeed quite childish. Clearly, any person of sufficient maturity must find the abundant evidence for His existence overwhelming.

    3. Re:... baxter ... by Uncle+Barnard's+Star · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Ya, I found the astrosquid to be over the top too. What I don't like most in sci-fi is anachronistic technologies. I don't mind worm holes and warp drives, even if we don't have the physics yet to support their existence. But I find it ludicrous at best that a novel where a species can hop galaxies will also show them as suffering from ailments like old age, disease and even death. In my book the cure for death will be found before somebody figures out how to build the first warp drive. Technologically it's far far easier to cheat death (at least until the universe itself runs down) than to beat the speed of light.

      By the time we figure out how to "enhance" a creature's IQ, we'd have found out how to create an autonomous enough artificial intelligence. Perhaps Baxter was just trying to counterpoint Clarke's HAL. I still find machines (or robots) to be the best substitute for a crewed mission to (put your favorite space exploration destination here).

    4. Re:... baxter ... by erc · · Score: 1

      I don't mind worm holes and warp drives, even if we don't have the physics yet to support their existence.

      You're kidding, right? The physics behind wormholes and warp drive has been well established since the 40's. Where have you been?

      --
      -- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@pobox.com PGP KeyID: 0x0BD32C9B What I'm up to: http://intuitives.mine.nu
  26. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At a guess, troll.

    Well yes, even a casual glance at his posting history should be enough for anyone to see that. The more interesting question is whether the up mods he gets are from his own other accounts, from other trolls, or whether there are people who actually think his comments merit them.

  27. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aens is a martyr in the jihad against the slashdot infidels.

    He seems to be pretty successful at it too.

  28. some questions by d3m057h3n35 · · Score: 1

    how does this book stand up to such Baxter literature as Vacuum Diagrams (i realize that this is a collection of stories, but comparable to a book) which is another one of his excellent rambles through history? Baxter excels at such writing, which is evident in such works as the Time Ships, an elaboration (and stunning improvement on) Wells' Time Machine. When he grounds himself in too small a time frame, i find his imagination is somewhat constricted, which is why the manifold trilogy was good in my eyes, but was overshadowed by his more temporally epic work.

    Baxter and Stephenson, who've been much discussed so far, are both doing incredible work in science fiction. anyone who hasn't read them definitely should. i would recommend Baxter's Time Ships (a lengthy but very enjoyable read) and Stephenson's Snow Crash (so entertaining) to begin, and then explore other books authored by them.

  29. Baxters writing is painful by Suidae · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Heres a review I did of Ring, the only Baxter book I've read. Keep in mind I'm no writer myself, this is just my opinion, not a professional review.

    As far as the ideas of grand scifi go, Ring ranks near the top. The story spans 5 million years, two universes and includes one character, Lieserl, a once-human AI whose life spans nearly all 5 millon years. Lieserl is one of the two most interesting characters in the book, the other is a 1000 year old man named Uvarov. Unfortunately, both characters exist only to serve a couple of key plot points. All of the characters are flat and uninteresting, with no decernable personality or drive.

    The major elements are interesting, everything between is grating. Particularly the characters propensity to speak the name of the person they are addressing every second time they open their mouths. By the end of the book you will be subconciously filtering out the names, or just skipping the dialog outright. For the most part, you won't miss it.

    Every problem is solved almost magically, the characters never break a sweat. Mostly they stand around addressing each other by name and explaining to each other (purely for the readers benefit) the technology and history of the story. The plot is very obviously there only as a tool for the author to speculate about some of the very cool things that an incredibly advance race might do with the universe.

    If this book were a blanket, it would be a net of irritating wool holding together some very finely cut jewels. Thats why I'm giving it three stars. Its irritating to use, but still worth having around. If you want silk sheets, try Vernor Vinge instead.

    1. Re:Baxters writing is painful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Baxter can converts good science into a complex and often interesting story, but the focus on science does not make up for the unacceptable character development. Characters are frequently mere placeholders for plot devices with too-little development, consistently making poor (and perhaps a little irrational) choices. The resolutions are often unsatisfying, and Baxter seems to have a rather dim view of humanity. That view is particularly evident in his Manifold series, as well as the slightly more contemporary and relevant Titan. Nevertheless, I think that his work is frequently more thought provoking than many other contemporary science fiction authors.

      I also must echo the sentiment that on the whole, works by Vernor Vinge are much more polished and refined with fuller characters and intriguing stories that still present amazing science fiction ideas, and as such, should be considered before Baxter if you are only going to read one book...

    2. Re:Baxters writing is painful by Suidae · · Score: 1

      Apostrophes are overrated.

      I see two missing in the last paragraph, are there more?

    3. Re:Baxters writing is painful by Tukla · · Score: 1
      Baxter can converts good science into a complex and often interesting story, but the focus on science does not make up for the unacceptable character development.

      Heh. I agree with you. The funny thing is, if you substitute "Asimov" for "Baxter", your statement is equally correct. Thanks for the chuckle.

  30. Obviously not worth the paper it isn't printed on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if I'm not even in the damned thing.

  31. Re:Obviously not worth the paper it isn't printed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah. I mean, they even put the greased up Yoda doll guy in there. Even though he only existed for a few weeks. Where is Trollkore, I ask you, WHERE IS TROLLKORE?

    Stupid philistines.

  32. Parent is trolling, and mods bit the bait by klipsch_gmx · · Score: 2, Informative
    1.) Stolen straight from Amazon.com customer reviews (second one down) with slight modifications.

    2.) Homepage URL is a porn link.

  33. God's grace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You know what the world evangel means? Check it out at Merriam-Webster. It means good news.

    Now I would like to hear more about how you have come to the conclusion that God's incredible gift of sacrificing his son's life so that the human race could rejoice in the heavens instead of being cast to the fiery depths of hell equates to "intolerance, oppression and torture"?

    1. Re:God's grace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If God sends me a few free bitches I'll vote for him.

      Otherwise, I'm sorry but Mr.Dean will get my vote.

  34. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Frisky070802 · · Score: 1
    Actually, the mixed reviews had me still guessing. Then I saw a response to a post saying this account was probably linked to various other troll accounts. So either this is indeed a troll (which subsequent responses agree) or the people throwing darts at it are trolls.

    Only at slashdot could people spend more time worrying about bogus postings than the real content.

    --
    Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
  35. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    And what's wrong being a "troll"?

    Being a troll means that you disrupt the groupthink and don't buy into the party-line.

  36. Re:can it be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hope you enjoy the secret service...

    fucktard

  37. Re:can it be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dubya will kick in his door, walk into his house wearing a flight suit and holding a shotgun while shouting "WHO'S YOUR DADDY, WHO'S YOUR DADDY BITCH?!"

    It's gonna be totally cool. Thanks God our president is such a great leader.

  38. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then I saw a response to a post saying this account was probably linked to various other troll accounts. So either this is indeed a troll (which subsequent responses agree) or the people throwing darts at it are trolls.

    If you're seriously suggesting it's open to doubt, try comparing this post (the first "Aens" made) with this one, from several months earlier.

    Of course, he's probably just delighted with all this attention, but that's no reason to deprive him of it, poor little thing.

  39. Re:Good read, if you can get through it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being a troll means that you disrupt the groupthink and don't buy into the party-line.

    No, that's called "thinking for yourself". It isn't even slightly similar to posting junk that you copied from elsewhere.

  40. LIAR LIAR - It's a good link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pants on fire

  41. Peter F Hamilton by kcm · · Score: 2, Informative
    It was accompanied by an another long short story in the Futures compendium by Peter F Hamilton called 'Watching Trees Grow'.

    I've said it (here) before, and I'll say it again. If you're looking for excellent authors in the space-opera subgenre of SF, read all of Peter F Hamilton's stuff first.

    I just finished his Second Chance at Eden, a collection of short-stories loosely related to his other novels and works. Very good stuff. But, the Reality Dysfunction/Neutronium Alchemist/Naked God trilogy (6 700+ pg paperbacks in the US) is just plain excellently engrossing, in my opinion. Check it out.

    1. Re:Peter F Hamilton by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      I too have mentioned him, and second the reccomendation. I've read most of his stuff by now, all very good. I even thought the Greg Mandel trilogy was pretty good, don't let the super-cheesy covers scare you away. Nowhere near as good as the Night's Dawn Trilogy, but decent for a fan of Peter Hamilton's writing.

      It's been about a year since I finished the last page of the Naked God, but I'm itching to read it again. An amazing series. A newer book, Fallen Dragon, is also most worthwhile.

      It was one of the first handful of sci-fi books I read since my new found love of sci-fi. I always read a lot of non-fiction, but never really like fiction. When Episode II, I started reading a couple Star Wars novels, then Dune, and some other classics, finding out that I dig the space opera, as long as it isn't overly fantasty-ish. Big ups to Peter.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    2. Re:Peter F Hamilton by kcm · · Score: 1
      Fallen Dragon was indeed excellent.. although, there's an entire new trilogy on the horizon!

      More info here.

      I'm very tempted to pre-order it along with Richard Morgan's new books (Broken Angels and Market Force) from amazon.co.uk, if shipping wasn't so much.

    3. Re:Peter F Hamilton by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Woohoo! I didn't know that the new book was a first book in a trilogy, though I heard of it through Amazon. Can't wait til it comes out!

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    4. Re:Peter F Hamilton by tbannist · · Score: 1

      While I really liked that series, Reality Dysfunctin can be a bit of a slog to get through, but the rest of the books more than make up for the slow start.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  42. "Good" if you like that sort of thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever floats your boat.

  43. Good as in "goes to where it says it goes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're such a jackass...lying about redirects to a site just because you hate the spammer who posted the link.

    1. Re: Good as in "goes to where it says it goes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defending a spammer? Nice. What's your email again? Or is this Abdullah posting AC again?

    2. Re: Good as in "goes to where it says it goes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not "defending a spammer" as much as "defending the truth". Just because someone does something wrong doesn't allow you to lie about him (sorta like GWB talking about Saddam's WMD. Just because Saddam is satan-incarnate doesn't justify Bush lying about him to start a war against him.)

      Also, don't bitch about people posting AC when that's what you're doing too, you hypocrite.

    3. Re: Good as in "goes to where it says it goes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who's bitching about posting AC? I just find it amusing that poor Abdullah can't post under his old Slashdot handles anymore because he'd give away his spammer-identity and be modded down instantly. Funny how that works.

      Defending the truth? Nah, you're just protecting your commissions. But thanks for playing.

    4. Re: Good as in "goes to where it says it goes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      commissions from what? There are some ads on geekybooks but I don't think he gets commission unless you click on it. They're not pay-per-hit ads like on slashdot. Just go to his site and go for the reviews and everything is cool.

  44. Duplicate posts considered harmful by Frisky070802 · · Score: 1
    If you're seriously suggesting it's open to doubt, try comparing this post (the first "Aens" made) with this one, from several months earlier.

    Sold.

    Has anyone done a bot to automatically detect such duplication? Seems easy, even with the occasional edit to give it a different checksum.

    --
    Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
  45. MOD DOWN -- PARENT IS A PLAGURIZING TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check out this thread. Also look at his posting history. Although his last few comments got modded up, he has a history of trolling. He's plagerizing insightful comments and storing up karma for future trolling efforts. Please stop him!

  46. Re:can it be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Due to budget cuts they can't afford to fly to my home in europe.

  47. Re:Baxter's writing is painful by Frisky070802 · · Score: 1
    On the whole, I agree. I read the Time Ships a while ago and couldn't make it past the first 30 pages (my limit before putting down a book due to lack of interest). I found the first two Manifold books to be OK, but couldn't stomach the third.

    I certainly agree that Vinge does a better job with this genre.

    --
    Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
  48. Dawkins doesn't say that by Decaff · · Score: 1

    Baxter also seems to implicitly use work by Richard Dawkins, in "The Selfish Gene", where Dawkins argues that organisms are just the vessels by which their genes propagate in time. For the most part, this refers to nonsentient creatures. But the most provocative implication of Dawkins' work is that we too are bound by such imperatives. The plot in this book also seems to follow this thread.

    Anyone who is up-to-date with Dawkins work would know that Dawins says the exact opposite - as sentient beings we are not bound these imperatives.

  49. Banks or Reynolds - Re:Baxters writing is painful by Attitude+Adjuster · · Score: 0
    Couldn't agree more...


    Anyone can do this epic uinverse-spanning stuff, but you have to at least have decent multi-dimensional characters. Vinge's characters I cared about (well, some of them, those annoying kids in A Fire upon the Deep really annoyed me).


    Best British science fction authors are Iain M Banks and Alastair Reynolds IMHO. Baxter is largely not worth reading, let alone buying.

  50. What should a /. SF book review be like by ThufirHawat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So around here we are mostly geeky nerds, right?
    It follows that in order to interest us a review of a fiction book should clearly state at least the following points:
    1. Why, if a trilogy, it is worth reading on beyond the first book (this test fails 87% of all SF, hard, soft, or AI-written);
    2. What is the unique element distinguishing this book from the approximately 50-60 SF new books being published every month (originals, no translations, USA+UK);
    3. Why the reviewer thought worth looking at this particular book rather than documenting the spaghetti code he/she had just written; we want to know a detailed explanation of the urge that assailed him/her, not just the usual fluff;
    4. Before using the expression 'hard SF' which should allegedly make the book more attractive to us (though it's true I hate fantasy quests full of orcs and dwarves), submit the book to the Charles Sheffield test (i.e. every scientific deus ex machina may not be based on chemically pure drivel, but should instead be based on at least one unsupported, perhaps daring, assumption).

    With thanks to all reviewers, though...

    ThufirHawat

    --
    Thufir Hawat
    Part-time Mentat
  51. Re:can it be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    your president is a fucking retard

    if you vote for him 2004 that makes you a fucking right wing religious gun-nut neocon freak.

  52. Manifold was awesome... by jovlinger · · Score: 1

    ... in that I didn't know I would ever throw away a hardcover book. But baxter made me do it. I found myself reading about a diseased, pregnant gorilla on the train. A pregnant gorilla. This is sci-fi? I would have left the book when I reached my station, but they hate it when you leave trash behind, so I threw it in the nearest bin.

    I did like the Xeelee stuff, but after manifold and Triton, baxter will need to send me a personal apology before I spend another cent on his new stuff.

    1. Re:Manifold was awesome... by I+don't+want+to+spen · · Score: 1

      Maybe next time you want to throw out a book, you should try this? I know you didn't enjoy the book, but others might and it strikes me as an unusual social experiment. No, I haven't done it, but I heard about it on the radio and provided you don't get fined for littering it sounds like a good idea!

      --
      Don't go to a brothel if you want to buy broth
  53. Re:Banks or Reynolds - Re:Baxters writing is painf by Suidae · · Score: 1

    I have not read Banks, but I have several of Reynolds books and have enjoyed reading them very much. Good enough that when I browse the shelves his is one of the few specific names I watch for.

  54. LOTR by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1, Insightful
    nuff said - but I'll take a couple minutes to insult you anyway, if only to bypass the lameness filter.

    Your comment was stupid. Very stupid. One need look no further than the phenomenom known as the LOTR trilogy to see just how stupid your comment was. The LOTR books do not by any means each stand on their own; they may each be enjoying in their own right, but they are incomplete by themselves.

    Ok, I'm done being a dick, heh :P

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  55. Most of the mods are likely friends of the poster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Karmawhoring is such an easy task on this site, unfortunately, and certain trolls know how to harvest the karma. It's a pity that the losers that run this site aren't even aware of this.

  56. In Baxter's Universe, the Xeelee ARE humans by Rabid+Rob · · Score: 1
    It all goes back to Michael Poole. It's no coincidence that this series revolves around the Poole family -- Baxter is building up to explaining where the "exceptional" genius of Poole comes from.


    As far as I can tell, most of Baxter's books are in the same universe. They may appear to be unrelated, but they aren't. Well, maybe not Time Ships, but while creating all the universes, it surely passes through the main Baxter-verse.


    Check out the ultimate fate of Mike Poole, and consider what little was mentioned of the mysterious being which turned him into a super being. Later, when the people of the Raft come back into this universe, and Poole decides to care for them, they're already sitting on top of the ultimate travel machine -- go anywhere in space or time, this universe or the next. Suddenly, Poole's future begins to seem a lot like the mysterious being's past...


    So, Baxter's Universe is a Very Large closed timelike curve. Woot!

  57. Re:LOTR [OT] by kjd · · Score: 1

    FWIW, the LOTR 'trilogy' was intended by Tolkien to be published as one physical book. The cost of publishing such a large book at the time (post-WWII) was such that the publisher divided it into three volumes.

    The names "The Fellowship of the Ring", "The Two Towers", and "Return of the King" were made up after the fact. Tolkien preferred "War of the Ring" as the name of the third, as he believed "Return of the King" gave away the plot.

    Source: Appendices to TTT 4-DVD set. There is some info at Wikipedia also.

  58. Re:LOTR [OT] by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
    Actually, I already knew that, but I fail to see how that is relevent, as the books were indeed published as three separate books.

    Besides, there are other examples of great trilogies. For example, the original Star Wars trilogy. The first and third do, however, stand on their own, but the second, while considered by many to be the best of the series, is in its entirety a bridge from the first to the third and does indeed leave much to be desired.

    There are plenty of other examples - Asimov's Foundation and Robot series - while some of the books do stand on their own, some don't.

    It was an overly broad and generalizing statement the original poster made, IMO. My insulting him was also purely in jest, which some moderator apparently didn't get...

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  59. Manifold Space MUCH better by DoubleReed · · Score: 1

    I agree. It's too bad you read Origins at first. Manifold Space was imho by far the best of the trilogy. To me basically the WHOLE book was like the very end of 2001. This guy is suddenly launched into interacting with powerful aliens, however it is a one way trip because in order to do this he must also travel hundreds of years into the future with every step he takes -- leaving his own culture and society behind forever. Although towards the end it has some aspects which are grueling in the same way where that main guy ends up with some neanderthals. Xelee books are good, Manifold Space is good, but avoid Evolution at all costs! It's like the worst parts of origins for the whole damn book. NO high tech :(

  60. er.... by mantera · · Score: 1


    "Coalescent spans history from the Roman era to 20,000 years in the future, and examines the beginnings and evolution of a strange form of human society. "
    isn't that basically the twist of almost all science fiction novels...

  61. the awesome Manifold trilogy ? by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 1

    I read the trilogy while on a trip, and frankly I can understand any of the hype. I found the work dull and lifeless, with equally lifeless characters. Moreover the books just didn't make any sense, while it was claimed they were "hard science" the only thing "hard" was trying to understand the gigantic leaps of logic in his apparent attempt to make a linear plotline. Replace any technobabble in the story with any other technobabble and the story remains the same -- that's Star Trek, not hard sci fi.

  62. Post-Roman Britain by Thornae · · Score: 1

    Also try Rosemary Sutcliffe.
    "Sword at Sunset", for eg, is her take on the Arthurian legend positing Arthur as the son of a Roman trying to hold back the tides of barbarian darkness after the Romans have left.

    --
    |>
    Here be Dragons
  63. Re:LOTR [OT] by kjd · · Score: 1

    Yeah. I'm not agreeing with the original post (there's plenty of great trilogies around), I was just tossing in some related info for anyone who might be interested.