Slashdot Mirror


Neal Stephenson's The Confusion Released

Jon Lasser writes "Neal Stephenson's 'The Confusion', second volume of his Baroque Cycle is released today. I received an advance copy and have a book review up here. The hypertext site for the trilogy is here. The short review: if you liked 'Quicksilver', this one is better; if you didn't, don't bother."

13 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. Cryptonomicon, Quicksilver by dmh20002 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I loved Cryptonomicon. It was a page turner all the way through. I got bored with Quicksilver half way thru. I liked the parts that involved Newton and other real scientists, but when the fictional characters went off on their own it got complicated and boring. I never finished it.

    thats probably just me.

    1. Re:Cryptonomicon, Quicksilver by borud · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I've read about 540 pages of Quicksilver now and I have to agree that for the first 300 pages it was a pretty slow read for the most part. The parts with Newton and Waterhouse were very entertaining, but when Stephenson goes off putting things in a bigger historic perspective (or whatever he tries to do), things get a bit boring.

      Almost all of book two, where Shaftoe makes an entry, is really good so far. I like Stephenson's way of telling a story. He is good at describing the dynamics of inter-personal relationships and he uses a geeky sort of language that is really funny.

      When there's a story to be told, Neal Stephenson is a great writer, when not, you just want to kick him real hard. (Still he is not as bad as le'Carre, who has a nasty habit of drowning good plots in the kind of drawn out, mediocre, masturbatory adjective-slinging, twaddle that my teachers were so fond of.

      Still, Quicksilver was seems worth reading now that I'm a bit over half way through, and I have already ordered "The Confusion".

      I just hope that the Baroque Cycle has an ending so, like "The young lady's primer", it doesn't just come to a screeching halt like a bad B-movie run out of money.

    2. Re:Cryptonomicon, Quicksilver by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Each to their own I guess. I like him partly because of the stuff you don't like. Things I know he relates in a humorous way, things I don't (bletchley park, etc etc) he makes fascinating. He bridges gaps for many who aren't the "digerati" that we profess to be. But the best part is none of that, nor the endings, nor the ideas, but the angle from which he explores those ideas, his turn of phrase, etc. Hmmmm... maybe his sense of humor is the key. He makes digging a mine shaft fun and interesting. I thing he could write a Star Office training manual that would make learning it a total hoot. And it would still be greatly enjoyed by those who know Star Office well. YMMV obviously.

      --

      Operator, give me the number for 911!
  2. Opportunity for profit by product+byproduct · · Score: 5, Funny

    Easy way to make cash if you're Cowboy Neal:

    - Write a book titled "Stephenson".
    - The book cover should say in big letters:

    Cowboy
    Neal
    Stephenson

    - Cash in on people who think this is "Cowboy" from Neal Stephenson.

  3. Re:Still haven't finished Quicksilver by squidfood · · Score: 5, Informative
    When I got Cryptonomicon, I put off reading that until I had a 15 hour flight. I got through the bulk of it in the 30 hour round trip.

    I took Quicksilver on a 12-hour flight, and at hour 4 I was fervently praying for it to alchemize into a different book.

    One the way back I bought three Terry Pratchetts in the airport instead.

  4. book reviews, not links to book reviews by sdedeo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I thought the tradition for book reviews was for slashdot contributors to post their own, here. It would be disappointing if we forewent this to just post a link to somewhere else.

    Slashdot has a lot of interesting readers who, because they aren't tied up in the mostly non-functional reviewing world, can contribute interesting takes on whatever's come out. Online and off, most of the book reviews are either LCD "here is a book about stuff neither of us understand", or unmitigated love-ins where authors review each other in a mutual backscratch.

    I would hate to see people stop writing reviews for first post on slashdot, and I would hate to see slashdot stop supporting its own review culture.

    --
    Protect your liberties. Donate to the ACLU
  5. I like Stephenson, BUT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The boy is in need of a good editor. His 1000 page books are more like 500 page books with lots of flab.

    And the endings... they're usually so awful that I can almost feel the author cringing as he types. Its like he runs out of steam and then can't figure out an ending, so he says "oh, the diesel fuel burns and melts the gold". Its a total surrender to laziness.

    Maybe if he cut out the description of dive tables he could muster up the energy for a good ending.

  6. Cryptonomicon, Quicksilver, & the downward spi by drdread · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Snowcrash, IMO, was one of the great works of our time. The same can not be said of Cryptonomicon or Quicksilver. Cryptonomicon suffered from endless diversions from the story, and the end was like the end of Monty Python & the Holy Grail or Matrix: Revolutions or so many other stories where the author did not have a start-to-finish vision of how the story would unfold. That is, the story just ended, with little meat or satisfaction for the reader.

    Quicksilver, honestly, was a burden to read. The story had its moments, but when you're 700 pages into a book and have little or no idea where it's going and little or no motivation to keep reading, I submit that the author has basically failed. I frequently felt like the author was writing just to "hear himself type." I'll probably read The Confusion just because I hate to leave thing unfinished, but if it's similarly burdensome, I think I'll just have to give up on Stephenson altogether.

    To the commenter who asked why Stephenson features gay characters and their homosexuality so prominently, all I can tell you is that Turing was, in fact, gay, and it was a major issue for him and for the people who worked around him. It's not surprising to me that any story on cryptography would feature Turing and his homosexuality. I can't say as much about Newton simply because I'm only familiar with the history of his work rather than the history of the man.

    Who ever said Stephenson needs an editor is right on. Quicksilver is a 300 or 400 page story told in 900 pages. Keeping the length down would do a great service towards making the thing more interesting and readable. But somehow I suspect that neither of these issues are high on Stephenson's list. :(

  7. Re:Why I didn't like Cryptonomicon or Quicksilver by Xeger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Given that Daniel Waterhouse's Puritan upbringing and steadfast devoutness in the face of his peers' all-but-secularism is one of the defining aspects of his personality, I would say that Stephenson does a rather fair job of doting on Christianity.

    Compared to speculations about Newton's sexuality (which are limited to a few vague hints scattered throughout the book), Waterhouse's faith virtually drives the plot. His mentor is a bishop who believes that the established church is heresy -- that one should be free to worship as he sees fit, unhampered by politics. Many of Waterhouse's misadventures are due to his similar beliefs. Most characters in Quicksilver are devout Christians, even some of the homosexuals (viz Leibniz).

    If you read Stephenson's earlier work, you'll see a repeated theme of tolerant, unperturbed spirituality in his stronger characters. Juanita from Snow Crash is a devout Catholic -- she shuns organized religion because she believes most of it is politicized claptrap designed to control the masses -- but she is Christian nonetheless. She and her unswerving faith ultimately play a principal role in the book.

    If Stephenson goes out of his way to illustrate Turing's homosexuality, or Newton's probable bisexuality, it is merely to shed more light on areas of human experience that have been ignored by history.

    For 2,000 years, Christians have had a rich mythology that teaches them valuable lessons on life and gives them a slew of inspiring role-models. For 1,500 years, Christianity has been the accepted "normal" religion throughout most of the developed world; often it is even sanctioned as the state religion. Until very recently, Christians have been constantly reinforced by unanimous, positive feedback from the community, the state and the church that yes, they are good and right and are going to Heaven.

    In the same time period, homosexuals have had little or no public acknowledgement of their existence: no role models, and certainly no acceptance from society. In several places and times during the past thousand years, homosexuals have been tormented, imprisoned, tortured and murdered merely for being who they are. Christians had to endure this suffering at first, but by the time of the Spanish Inquisition it was Christians doing the burning and torturing.

    I live in southern California, in a city whose populace largely identify themselves as liberals. Just the same, not 18 months ago, a gay man in my neighborhood was doused in gasoline burned alive as he slept by a Catholic man who had befriended my neighbor before discovering his sexuality. Bigotry, hate and intolerance toward homosexuals are very much alive today, and much of it comes from people who call themselves "good" Christians.

    In summary: if Stephenson chooses to showcase homosexuality slightly more than Christianity, perhaps he's merely acknowledging the fact that Christianity has already been showcased enough.

  8. Re:Why I didn't like Cryptonomicon or Quicksilver by decapentaplegic · · Score: 5, Funny
    If Stephenson doesn't have a personal issue with "gay" people, fine, but he doesn't have to turn his books into an advertisement for homosexuality.
    Man, you said it. It's about time people writing so called "literature" quit wasting my time with junk like character development and multiple layers of contextual meaning. And authors who use so-called art to present their views of the world? What a yawner!

    And I totally agree on how his books overdo the sexuality politics. I mean do you know how much effort was wasted pushing the heterosexual agenda in Cryptonomicon? Page after page of "Randy" getting worked up over some chick in a wetsuit. And that WAY too descriptive het-sex in the car scene. Imperial Pint?!? YUCK! Too much information!

    I sure as hell don't want to have to think too hard about why they do stuff. Just hurry up and get to the good parts where they wire routers and blow stuff up.
  9. Re:The problem with Stephenson is male-female dial by Anonymous+Cow+herd · · Score: 5, Funny

    What about eliza made you feel supposed to be banter?

    --
    Ita erat quando hic adveni.
  10. Metaweb by Bullet-Dodger · · Score: 5, Informative

    Didn't see it mentioned so, The Metaweb is Stephenson's wiki about Quicksilver (presumably information on the rest of the trilogy will be added). It's very interesting, has all kinds of information on the people and ideas in the book. Especially the annotations, add a lot of interesting background and details.

  11. Re:Why I didn't like Cryptonomicon or Quicksilver by Bullet-Dodger · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've read both of these books and (nominally) enjoyed them as far as the story was concerned, but on the whole, both of them left a bad taste in my mouth because of Stephenson's inability to tell a story without injecting his own political viewpoint into it. Take for example heterosexuality. Both books feature sympathetic and heroic characters (Jack Shaftoe and Bobby Shaftoe) that are heterosexuals. However, their heterosexuality has nothing to do with the story. Why mention it at all? I mean, Bobby sleeps with two different women in the book! Stephenson is obviously hitting out over the head with his pro-heterosexual agenda. Why can't we just have good old fashion books about upstanding Christians of undisclosed sexuality?