Slashdot Mirror
Salon Interviews Neal Stephenson
edibleplastic writes "Salon has a great interview with Neal Stephenson, author of such science fiction favorites as Snow Crash, Cryptonomicon, and Quicksilver. He discusses his views on the scientific community (both past and present), the world of science fiction, and writing in general. "I think there are common threads between writing and programming... All I'm saying is that the thing you're making -- the novel or the computer program -- has got a very complicated and finely wrought hierarchical structure to it. The structure has to work right or the whole thing fails. But the only way you can work on it is by hitting one character at a time...""
Neal Stephenson rocks. Seriously. If you haven't already, read Snow Crash. You'll be glad you did.
Now that the fawning and praise and adoration is out of the way... He did an interesting essay a while back called In the Beginning was the Command Line. It's a good read.
"If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."
- Seneca
And the mind of the reader will crash if you make a small mistake?
Why do people treat fiction authors liek gurus? I saw a robotics aritcleon here the other day where people were seriously talking about Asimov's 3 laws of robotics like they were actually applicable to real life.
I don't understand. You don't see lawyers clamoring at the bit for Grisham's insights into their world, but you see IT dorks hanging on every word a sci-fi author drops like he just came down from teh mountain with the 10 tips to avoid being outsourced chiseled into two stone tablets.
What do people think about Quicksilver? I am just finishing it and am very disappointed. I loved cryptonomicon but am struggling thru quicksilver. Why bring back waterhouse and the shaftoes, can't we think of new characters? And the story is dragging by. Long passages on life in feudal europe, the french, the english, the dutch, it's dull. What do other people think though?
All I'm saying is that the thing you're making -- the novel or the computer program -- has got a very complicated and finely wrought hierarchical structure to it
Programming is becoming the the new age lemming work for the 21st century. Writing "a great story" takes the creative juices and adds the authors personality and unique style. Add "unique" style to code and you have just become a sloppy programmer.
Maybe he writes "choose your own ending" books under a pseudonym.
Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
One character at a time. Does that mean writing and programming are both O(n)?
.sig error: carrier signal lost.
Does anyone know if Neil is planning any near future works besides the Baroque Cycle? I loved The Cryptonomicon, but I've heard to many dissapointing things about his last two novels to invest that much time reading them. I want a sequal to Snow Crash! BTW, has anyone else noticed the between Neil Stephenson's Snow Crash and Gibson's Virtual Light? They were published at nearly the same time and I found alot of similarities in the characters and stories.
(for first_book=SUCCESS; current_book!=FAILURE; current_book=rehash(prior_book)}
if someone assures me that is has a @$^@$%&$ ending!
However, the morility plays that have shown up in Grisham novels that I've read were not profound. They were just extensions or plays off of what we already know are current consequences of laws.
On the other hand, Asimov (and I'd point out Philip Dick) put a lot of thought into the moral and ethical issues that could come out of technology that doesn't yet exist.
Some of these predictions have already come true, because they were both profound and well thought out. There has been scientific research into robotics based on ideas from Asimov and Dick.
They all tell good stories, but the bonus of SciFi is the profound consideration of things that could someday become reality.
That said, there are things suggested by SciFi writers that are absurd. But people use thier own judgement as to whether these ideas have merit. Obviously, a lot of people have respect for Asimov's ideas. I think your best bet is to read some Asimov books and judge his ideas in their original context.
Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
a) C is twice as heavy at least, so in a free for all wrestling match it will win
b) C is funnier than S
c) S has the best shaggy dog story (the fight in the mall)
d) C has the best sidebars. The breakfast cereal one, in particular.
e) S is a bit, well, dull. Software hackers (or pizza delivery people) might be very interesting to themselves, but entrepeneurs are more exciting to read about for the rest of us.
I make that 4:1 in favour of the current heavyweight, Mr Cryptonomicon.
Fix! fix!
The Light of Other Days = Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter
I'd recommend Baxter too, especially the Manifold... series. And EARLY James Hogan (Voyage From Yesteryear, Inherit the Stars, Thrice Upon a Time)
----
WWJD...For a Klondike Bar?
Metaweb - A wiki about the Cryptonomicon/Quicksilver Universe, with contributions fro Mr. Stephenson
'I ain't a liar, baby, and I ain't proud I just want what I'm not allowed.' -- Violent Femmes, 36-24-36
"Hi, I'm Douglas Coupland. You may remember me from such books as Generation X, Microserfs and All Families are Psychotic" ;-)
</troy mcclure>
The Coupland File, for more info.
"It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue." -- Zork
Snow Crash, OK. Diamond Age, yes yes. But Cryptonomicon is not very science fiction-y. It's more Tom Clancy than SF--I mean these are computer scientists and all, but they aren't neutronic worms living on the surface of a star. And I just know the librarians are going to toss Quicksilver over there once it's off the "New" shelf. This book is historical fiction-- albeit about nerds, but it's "HF" none the less. (I can't wait for the next Con! Ye Olde Renaissance Faire!).
When's this guy going to get some credit for moving on?
blarg.
I mean, come on, it's fiction! It's at least as believable as Elven magic...
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
Finished reading "Con-Fusion" yesterday; great read.
More in a similar vein:
"The Days of Rice and Salt" by Kim Stanley Robinson
"Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus" by Orson Scott Card (the last decent book he wrote)
Less speculative, but historical and rollicking good fun: "The Aubury-Maurtin Series" by Patrick O'Brian, starting with "Master and Commander"
Pure history: "The Invasion of Canada" by Pierre Burton
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
I've read both, and I prefer Snow Crash, because...
1. More consistant pacing. Cryptonomicon meanders in places.
2. Cryptonomicon starts so, and ends so fast you'd miss it if you blinked. It's as if his editor told him to hurry the book up, and Stephenson crammed the ending into as short a space as possible. Diamond Age suffers from this even further, stuffing as much as possible into the ending chapter. An epilogue would be so appreciated. Snow Crash ends a lot better, and seems better planned out.
3. Can't figure out why you think Snow Crash is dull. Personally, I found Cryptonomicon to be dull in a few parts, whilst Snow Crash kept up its fast pacing most all the way through.
Personally, I far prefer Snow Crash over Cryptonomicon. It's also the only Neal Stephenson book I've read that doesn't seem to much suffer from a rushed ending.
You basically have to call them "Science Fiction" because there's no section in the store for "Natural Philosophy Fiction".
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As long as you mention it, I happen to be rereading "Name of the Rose" at night lately, and my impression from the first time -- that he was self-indulgent, like you're saying -- is basically completely gone by now. The book's really written cleanly, it works incredibly well. Also I'm finding his characters are more complete than I'd remembered them. (The movie, though, stunk.)
I truly hate the idea that all fiction has to be so "tight" that every word drives the plot forward another step. If an author wants to assume I'm bright and curious enough to read two pages about pipe organs, and she can write, I'm there. Not everything has to have the narrative compression of a touring Broadway show. Sometimes it's okay to assume your audience is made up of intelligent, curious people who'll stick with you a little.
Thomas Mann is another author whose stuff you probably wouldn't tolerate. Your loss, seriously. Sometimes Peter Cook's "Bedazzled" is cool, but there's a place in the world for "Doctor Faustus" too.
And okay, sometimes those learned digressions are self-conscious fat to be trimmed -- but that isn't limited to "intellectual" fiction at all. Tom Clancy's got as much worthless detail (about military hardware) as anyone. The rafts of detail are painful to wade through, for me.
So, uh, nope -- it's not as "simple as that."
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
I woke my wife up while reading in bed last night and giggling at his description of the spoon.
Now there you go. That's the kind of person that identifies with the nerdy kinds of obsessive/compulsive behavior and intense attention to minutiae that Stephenson can imbue his characters with, as well as the geeky aspects of the characters and overall story. I think people who are nerds will appreciate the highly detailed and circumlocutive descriptions and sequences. Geeks will enjoy the technical descriptions of concepts that they are not familiar with (and perhaps of those which they are). Those of us who are nerds and geeks will really get it, and see ourselves in both the instructor and the instructed when Stephenson exposits through alluding dialogue. We've been the expert, we've been the novice. We will be thankful for being made to follow these often a-mazing intimations and actually think, rather than being force-fed the point like viewers of most TV sitcoms.