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.

Comments

Trilogy books that don't stand on their own...

[ewanrg]

... 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

Re:Good read, if you can get through it.

[Suppafly]

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.

Baxters writing is painful

[Suidae]

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.

What should a /. SF book review be like

[ThufirHawat]

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

LOTR

[Ender Ryan]

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