Slashdot Mirror
Singularity Sky
The main idea of the story, that a semi-sentient information-gathering alien system called the Festival comes to a backward farming planet and begins granting wishes -- in the form of advanced technology -- in exchange for stories and information, is only the seedbed for the larger exploration of the societally backward planetary system and what happens when the revolution you hoped to lead finally comes and it doesn't need you.
As a lifelong reader of science fiction, I hate that most SF is just as backward-looking as most Fantasy. Part of the problem with recent SF work is that we've come to a point in science where a lot of what made science fiction new has been done and what's coming is almost impossible to imagine, which I'll get to in a second. Space exploration can still be exciting but most new space stuff has been infected with the Star Trek Syndrome, as I call it, where everyone is boring and has no flaws, and the status quo rules. People just don't look to space exploration as exciting in real life so that translates to the SF work that people do. Real life science is changing so fast that it leaves even science fiction people in the dust. The result is the rise of 'Fantasy with robots and aliens' and 'Space Opera,' two facets of SF that seem to be dominating the landscape. Even Neal Stephenson, who was at the forefront of real technological future SF with The Diamond Age and Snow Crash has gone backward with Quicksilver and to a lesser extent Cryptonomicon.
The issue is The Singularity. This is Vernor Vinge's idea that technological progress proceeds at an exponential rate until there is a complete break with what came before. The End Of History, as people call it. This comes with the creation of a human-level AI that quickly proceeds past human-level, the invention of Upload technology that will allow us to live in computer systems and artificial bodies, something of that nature that we can't imagine. The problem with writing futuristic work in the time before a Singularity is that you can't see beyond it. Everything is different, so much so that all we can hope for is the fire up our imaginations to the point where we can begin to think in new ways.
One of the main goals of science fiction as I see it is to prepare us for the future. You can't hope to cope with the future if you've never been innoculated with new ideas. Singularity Sky is one of the first post-Singularity novels I've read that takes the idea seriously and examines it, allowing us to open our minds to the vast possibilities. Stross doesn't shy away from it like so many others. He uses the Festival's coming to show the speed of the change that comes with a technological Singularity and what happens to people in the aftermath. He also shows a culture trying desperately to hang on to old ways and the futility of doing that in the face of such rapid change.
There are problems with the book, mostly in the perennial bugbear of science-fiction, character development, but the rush of ideas glossed over that for me. This is only Mr. Stross's second book, I believe, the first being a collection of short stories called Toast: And Other Rusted Futures, that is high on my Must Read list. Charles Stross is a name that you will hopefully hear a lot more from in the coming years. His imagination is up there with the best and brightest and with his work as an accelerant my mind can't help but burn with new ideas. I hope more science fiction writers see this book and decide to move forward to meet him.
You can purchase Singularity Sky from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
I thought it was good.
You got to love a book that starts with it raining telephones.
-- -- The Dragon De Monsyne
Play nice with Piers Anthony. While Anthony's sci-fi books are definitely space opera, without his work, I would never have become the sci-fi reader I am today. His "Bio of a Space Tyrant" series was my first glimpse into some of the ideas that would germinate into a lifelong love of science fiction. He's an enthusiastic writer, and really does interact well with his fans, as evidenced by the fan correspondence he includes at the end of his books. Finally, at least it's reading and it's fun - I think the tradeoff for my hours is well worth it.
Reviewer needs to get off his high horse. It's fine that you experienced a loss of faith or whatever the smeg changed for you, but don't insult the rest of us who still like the sci-fi you sneer at (ooohhh, space operas, how amusingly plebeian- give me a break).
It is easy to knock the guy if you think he is 100% Xanth. However, this is the same guy responsible for "Macroscope" (Nebula award nomination). The Cluster/Tarot series is also a worthy effort, with imaginative aliens that beat Niven's creations. There is also "OX", a decent attempt to make a novel around John Conway's "Game of Life".
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I'm always on the lookout for something different in the SF world. This review appears well done enough by not being all rosy, and instead focuses both on the pluses and minuses of the work. It has convinced me to at least look at the work for myself.
Thanks!
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Not off topic, but meta topic. Rarely do I get to see an interesting slashdot posting as it first appears. A moment of spare comments that allow me to post and comment. Unfortunately I have no interest to comment on this particular article -- but instead comment upon the peculiar way in which Slashdot articles resonate. Comments are a pyramid on slashdot. The earliest posters receive guaranteed exposure to meta-moderation. As the life of the posting grows, new comers, no matter how relevant their comments may be, are relegated to the end. New commenters should appear at the top rather than the bottom and be given a better opportunity for exposure and moderation. Thus people will see recent posts and posts that score highly. Hoorah
I know that you were writing a review of a book, not written by Heinlein, but the comment that most SciFi sucks, IMHO is going overboard. OK, perhaps 30% is lousy, and that might go even higher if you compare everyone to the standards that Heinlein and Clark and Asimov had set.
Obviously I have a lot of respect for the authors stated above, since they all have stong scientific backgrounds and truly understand the human condition. I just had to respond, don't hate me for message.
and you thought the patent office was busy and overwhelmed now
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
I just finished the worst book I have read in years -- "Chindi" by Jack McDermitt. It's awful from the very first line: "The Benjamin ... was at the extreme limit of its survey territory ..." Each chapter is worse than the last, each deft touch reveals it as the more tawdry. Chapters start with quotes from great but somehow sophomoric works of the 23rd century. The ship's captain is gorgeous but unfulfilled. Every character is bored with his or her life and life's work, desperate to relieve the tedium. Reading it was like watching a train wreck. Recommended, sort of.
The whole "magic is indistinguishable ..." bit, as well as 'uploading' yourself into a computer, as well as 'let's see what happens when old fashioned cultures collide with new cultures' is all old hat. Already been done many times before.
This is nothing new. The man you extol as being a fresh creative force for the beleagured sci-fi genre is doing the same thing every author has done for the bast 80 years.
If you think that the majority of scifi sucks these days, you aren't looking very hard. Try Iain M. Banks, anything of his, and then look me in the eye and tell me scifi sucks. Ditto for Stephen Baxter, or David Brin, or Greg Bear or Gregory Benford. Hmm...that's a lot of B's....
---- El diablo esta en mis pantalones! Mire, mire!
Or is it general SF bashing? Most SF sucks, I hate this, I hate that, that is boring, ... /. stories, people, hookers, ...). Get over it and stay on topic next time.
The fact is: most x suck, where x can be anything you like (TV programs,
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
...you'll look back on your Slashdot submission and realize what a pretentious uptight snob you were, and you'll wish you had the time back you spend shunning things that were actually entertaining.
Based on your review, I'll take Anthony over Stross:
There are problems with the book, mostly in the perennial bugbear of science-fiction, character development, but the rush of ideas glossed over that for me.
I'm sorry, I prefer a few good ideas and good characters versus poor characters and many ideas.
The parent link just reposted the spotlight review from Amazon, which is available here.
"I would give my right hand to be ambidextrous."
If anybody is interested in seeing a glimpse of what this author can produce, his short story "A Colder War" is available online for free at http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/colderwar.ht m.
This story is one of the best I've ever read, and it's the only work of fiction I have ever encountered, on paper or on the screen, that actually managed to give me nightmares. Go read it if you haven't!
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
I do have one good thing to say about Pierce Anthony. I was reading him one day and suddenly a little thought balloon formed over my head which read: "This is crap." I threw the book down in disgust and learned a valuable lesson: it's not a moral failing to give up on a bad book. Quite the opposite, it a sin to reward a horrible writer by plowing threw dreck just to finish it.
Sci-Fi has always been a bit difficult for me. I love the ideas of building new technology, visiting new worlds, and finding out new things about the Universe. Above all though, it still should be entertaining.
Unfortunately, most Sci-Fi writers fall into two categories:
1. Taking the "human condition" to the extreme. Futures where sex is the only thing driving humanity. Of course, they're so much more advanced than us because everyone has sex with everyone.
I hate to break it to the authors, but this sort of society would quickly degrade due to a lack of scientific focus. Not to mention that human feelings on the subject are actually pretty immutable. (No matter what anyone says.)
One way or another, these books are no more entertaining than a porno flick.
2. Fantasy dressed up as Sci-Fi. I personally don't like Fantasy books all that much. But these books make it that much worse. Most of them have space travel as a background to get to a fantasy-like world. After that, forget about the Sci-Fi.
Once on the fantasy world, the laws of physics no longer apply. There aren't even social-political issues to work out. There's just some big quest for something. Or a, "look at how much better they are than humans." Blech.
Personally, I thought Heinlen's juveniles were the best examples of Sci-Fi. Rocket Ship Galileo, The Rolling Stones, and Time for the Stars inspired those of us who wanted to some day reach the stars. Which is amusing since so many of his adult books fell into the categories above.
Here's what I'd like to see: Someone should write a series of books on what space would be like if we developed nuclear engines. (Orion, NERVA, GCNR, M2P2, NSWR, etc.) Build a grand story around the concepts and push the public to make it happen. We always see space as far in the future. It doesn't have to be!
An even better bit of Sci-Fi would be a television movie showing the conflicts of developing the first nuclear launch methods. The struggle between the pro and anti nuclear groups. Showing how far people are willing to go for their beliefs. And the results of finally reaching the stars.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And as another person who has also read a great deal of Mr. Piers Anthony Jacob's works, he entertains well, and often slips in useful observations on life. (A certain RAH was also known for that once upon a time.) He entertained you well once, or you wouldn't have kept reading him.
To want those hours back now (or someday) is to say that time spent reading is not time well spent. I respectfully disagree, although time spent writing is even better time spent. What else would you have done during that time really that would have been better for you now? Split your time between reading the Encyclopedia Britannica and running cross-country to improve your health? I think not!
And if P.A. Jacob no longer meets your reading needs, it is not because he has changed, but rather you have. This is not a bad thing for either you -- or him.
Regardless, you have succeeded in interesting me in this book, and I'll add it to my list as well. However your reasoning behind it seems less than universal.
And consider reading some authors who only publish on the Internet. Some ideas are too leading edge to sell to editors and publishers. That's how I found this sig line.
Peace!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Sorry sir, you lost me.
Your introduction slams other authors for no aparent good reason. If you are reviewing a book you can easily say it is better or worse, in your opinion, than some other works.
It is not necessary to drag in some other persons works and knock them down.
comment directly in my journal
Try Permutation City by Greg Egan, Everyone in Silico by Jim Munroe or Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect by Roger Williams.
MOPI is even available as a free text at the website. And these are just the three excellent examples that spring to mind, I know I've read at least a dozen other decent explorations of this unimaginable future.
lysergically yours
Come now, there's no need to let your feelings be hurt ... by a book review.
But still I agree with you, partly: badmouthing is not needed to contrast praise.
Jag pratar lite svenska.
While much of what Piers Anthony has written is crap, he has written several books which I would personally consider good science fiction:
* Macroscope
* The Apprentice Adept (books 1-3 only)
* Incarnations of Imortality (books 1-4 only)
I'm omiting from this list books that were entertaining but not really good, and books that are clearly fantasy and not sci fi. Of this list only Macroscope is what I'd call pure sci fi, containing no fantasy elements, but it was really quite good, one of his first.
Most of his sci fi is really quite tollerable and an enjoyable read. When in doubt skim the first chapter, and if the word panties is mentioned skip the book.
I did of course also quite like his lighter fluffier stuff, it was a staple of my reading from ages 12-17 when I bought anything he wrote.
---
I support spreading santorum
But he can't write an ending to save his life. His books just sort of peter out, or end so abruptly you're left going WTF? Destiny Road is a great example of the latter: major plot points are still being resolved on the 3rd to last page. Stephenson, for all that's he's loved here, is another like that. I love Snow Crash, but the ending- sheesh. It's obvious in The Diamond Age that he just got bored and stopped writing.
Could be worse- he could be Peter Hamilton. Now there's a godawful writer.
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
Yes, much SF is junk (like much of Zelazny and Farmer, and I *thoroughly enjoy* their work); that shouldn't surprise anyone. (Harlequin romances, anyone? Junk is all over literature, and SF is no exception.) Of course, "junk" here has a wildly variable and subjective meaning.
As far as space opera, I just finished David Weber's "Path of the Fury", and while it doesn't stand up there with Lois McMaster Bujold or C.J. Cherryh, or Weber's other works (comes off somewhat as though put together out of spare parts to turn a buck), it was a great way to spend a 6-hour airplane ride. Best thing I could have done with the time.
I've spent many an otherwise-wasted hour reading good and bad SF, and I cannot honestly say I regret ANY of it, even *shudder* half of Battlefield Earth (as a research project in "Gods below, surely the book wasn't THAT bad, the filmmaker musta taken liberties... Gaah, he didn't, it was, it was!"). Consider the alternatives, like Harlequin romances, USA Today, and broadcast TV. Even bad written fiction is better than most TV, and it lets us exercise our imaginations instead of rotting our minds.
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
Grew up and realised that:
most science fiction sucked
Yes, of course.
May I refer you to Sturgeon's Revelation.
My main problem is not the stories themselves, but the quality of the writing. That many of them are written for 14 year olds doesn't help (although this in itself doesn't make it poor writing).
We need SF book for adults, for people who have actually become somewhat literate in their dotage. I know they're out there, because I own a few.
Piers Anthony will never see another dime from me. He wrote in one his newsletters last year that he can't see "why some people get so outraged about protections on digital works". He often claims to hate tyranny and love personal liberty but is completely unable to see the connection those things have to DRM.
I had an email back and forth with him and he brushed off as completely unimportant:
Forced format changes
Locking independents out of the market
Forced choice of platforms
Retroactive changes of licensing terms
Rewriting history
Every other thing about DRM that is problematic.
Oh and he completely doesn't get that what one clever human can do another clever human can undo which ultimately makes the so-called benefits of DRM moot.
He seems to think that DRM is his only hope of getting paid in the future. I got the distinct impression that to him Disney and the *IAA are completely reasonable aggrieved souls. For all of his professed love of liberty and justice, he comes off like Jack Valenti when it comes to his wallet. His works emphasize his dislike of censorship. He hasn't seen anything yet and he has no idea that he is now an advocate of censorship. If he likes DRM then he'll have to like everything that comes with it.
This is fine. I won't misappropriate his stuff online but I won't fund him anymore.
Check out the Omnivor/Orn/Ox series he wrote back in the day. That was good writing. The first Xanth was fun too. But yes, most of his recent work is just so much verbal masturbation
Hi there.
If you want to read more of my stuff, there are some (older) stories on my fiction pages.
If you want to know when the sequel, "Iron Sunrise", is due out (and the other books I've got coming), see my books FAQ.
And there is of course the obligatory weblog, but because it's CGI-mediated and my server's decidedly on the elderly side I'm not going to post the URL here. (If you want it badly enough and you're clueful you'll find it :)
Other than avoiding the Sci-Fi Comfort Food syndrome, how was it? Was it well based? Were the characters interesting and believable? Was the technology well worked out, or just wish-fulfillment stuff?
While I agree with much of the reviewers ranting, I was really disappointed in this piece as a review.
Stefan "More about the Singularity here!" Jones
"Permutation City" by Greg Egan.
The year is around 2054 and rudimentary AI's are here. People have been digitized, but only run at the maximum allowed then at 1/17 time ratio.
The book deals with spam filters (baneysian and adaptive ai - if the spam filter acts as you, is it really avoiding what you want?), AI, duplication of the mind, evolution, government.. There's some pretty heavy theory in this book.
What I can tell is it's mainly sold in Australia and UK as mine's pried only as such. I got my copy at a 1/2 priced book store here in Indiana.
I reviewed this book on IBList.org last year. I figure I'll repost it here just to add another voice to the chorus.
-----
Economics, espionage, nanotechnology, black holes, social enginerring, and carnival phenomena. This book winds all these disparate subjects together into one (mostly) cohesive plot. This tends to lead to parts of the book reading more like college textbook excerpts than light sci-fi reading, but that may very well increase the appeal for the hard-core geek readers. The pacing occasionally suffers from the massive amounts of technobabbling exposition, but you still slog through it like a rubbernecker watching a car crash -- you just can't wait to see what it all means.
The character development is better than average, though there could have been more character-building scenes without significantly slowing the pace. Indeed, the technologies and concepts often get more ink than the characters do. (Because, really, there's only so often you can be hit over the head with the "socialism/marxism/communism/*-ism is bad!" bat before you're ready to start skimming instead of really reading.)
Overall, this was a good book. It could even make a good series, should Stross continue to write for it. College students pumped up on technobabble and economic/social theory will breeze through it, but the rest of us will still enjoy it.
One of the main goals of science fiction as I see it is to prepare us for the future.
Funny, I thought it was to prepare us for the present.
It's like if you suddenly stopped liking Legos and Video Games. It's OK to not play with them as much as you used to, but if you truly think of such things as childish and beneath you and uninteresting even for a few fleeting moments you've lost something vital. If you never liked such stuff to begin with, then you're OK. Otherwise, you're repressing something.
Of course, you could just be someone who's gotten to the point where they don't want to admit they like that stuff any more. That's OK. You'll grow out of that stage, too.
My interpretation is to take everything literally. So, Roger and a good chunk of the upper crust of the US government escape to a secret facility on another planet. Everyone left behind is nuked (if they're lucky) or eaten by Cthulhu, where they live forever as he explores all the possible endings to their lives. Delightful.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
>An even better bit of Sci-Fi would be a television movie showing the conflicts of developing the first nuclear launch methods
Heinlein's "Destination Moon" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042393/) had this as a plot element. 1950.
i have seven shelves six feet long stacked with sci-fi books, mostly good and some bad. at one point i stopped buying sci-fi books because there weren't any that were, in my opinion, any good (around 2000) and i had to wait. piers anthony is childish: the books are great for children. my advice is that you not read any of his books after the time when he obtained a computer, i.e. after mars in the eternity series. so is anne mccaffrey but she has a specific purpose in her writing: to co-author books with someone who brings a particular topic and experience to the fore: for example acorna the unicorn book is actually about child slave labour, and the ship who fought is about rape. if you want _really_ good sci-fi books to read, then go for the "masterworks" series, for example "first and last men" by olaf stapledon is incredible: every other sci-fi book a la "space opera" genre just "fills in the gaps" left by first and last men. basically, the masterworks books are what sci-fi writers read. if you want _incredible_ stories, read orson scott card's books - all of them. pay particular attention to the alvin maker series, people from the US. you will find that "book 2" of the trilogy, which is actually the second half of book 1 outside of the US, is not available on the shelves. the reason is because the book covers the murder of 10,000 native red indians. if you want good space opera, i recommend ken macleod (although his politics are a little odd, i.e. he could be branded a commie 20 years ago, until you get to his more recent works where it actually starts to make sense in a universe perspective and things get messy). and also for space opera: greg bear, but greg bear takes getting used to. _really_ getting used to. i do NOT recommend "talking heads" as a first read. also for space opera, alasdair reynolds, peter f hamilton and iain m. banks. alasdair reynolds is very new on the scene, yet his books are extremely well written. peter f hamilton's books are fantastic: i love them, although "a quantum murder" i found disturbing. iain m banks' books are really good, although i would never have read them if i had read "the wasp factory" first. banks' books are very graphic in their violence (but not in a "horror" way) but they are also funny and sad as well as deep and illustrate futility of life. i thoroughly recommend "the player of games" if you want to be shell-shocked even right up to the end of the book. what else. for space opera, don't bother with those stupid nine books by that idiot author who did all those different species, damn i wasted my money on those. there is so much to choose from, you just have to be selective: to make a blanket statememt that time has been wasted is rather disappointing to hear.
It's quite fascinating. I saw the article on /., and decided to read it. But most of the comments that have been highly moderated (forgive me, but I cruise at filter +2) are comments either attacking or defending Piers Anthony instead of discussing Singularity Sky and the talents of Charlie Stross.
/. staff decided to let it in (assuming timothy isn't on the /. staff himself - I wouldn't know).
/. editors.
/. staff should consider this story to be an example of a failure of editing, and should consider the idea that it's better to leave the personal attacks /. readers instead of posters and editors.
Why did this happen?
It happened because the submitter, timothy, decided to attack Piers Anthony in his post as a target of opportunity, and the
Why was this attack posted? If timothy had submitted a post entitled "Piers Anthony Sucks" it wouldn't have been accepted by
At this point it seems that nobody cares about Stross's novel, which is a shame.
For these reasons, I think that the
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!