Locus Interviews Neal Stephenson

Embedded Geek writes "Locus, the trade magazine of Science Fiction, has an interview with Neal Stephenson in their August issue. Excerpts can be found here. A teaser: 'The world of the 'Baroque Cycle' happens to be 99% factual history, or as close as I can come to it, but what readers of this kind of fiction are looking for is the ability to become immersed in a different world. That's why there is a big crossover between historical fiction and SF.' An interesting read for his long time fans or anyone just wondering what all the fuss is about." So this is a teaser for a teaser, but this makes me want to shell out the $8.

Comments

Re:If you said, "Who?"

[plover]

Heh. Most of us consider Snow Crash to be his his defining work. I almost felt like The Diamond Age was the penance I had to sit through for enjoying Snow Crash so much, that's how much better Snow Crash is than his other work.

It's that good.

stick with it

[k2enemy]

i didn't enjoy "quicksilver" for the same reason, but i did finish it and went on to read "the confusion". the second volume is much, much more exciting than the first. in my opinion, the reward contained in "the confusion" is more than worth suffering through "quicksilver". hopefully "the system of the world" will continue on "the confusion's" success.

Re:stick with it

[Jerf]

I am a very patient reader.

But I don't think it is too much to ask that by page 500, something happen.

I'm not referring specifically to Neal here, though I will refer specifically to the Cryptonomicon. (Please don't try to "correct" me; up to that point in the Cryptonomicon, as far as I'm concerned all that had occured was a belabored explanation of several concepts I had learned about in more detail several years ago in school and that opinion of mine isn't about to change.)

But there is an opportunity cost here; 500 pages is several hours and if you're still building up, I have to ask myself whether my time is better spent on something that may pay off a little faster. Books are not a scarce resource, and while I don't demand wham-bang-boom by page 3, how much do you expect me to wade through?

My point here, I guess, is that I can't really find it in myself to care whether "The Confusion" is any good, if I have to wade through an entire bloated dull book to get there. I don't want to say everybody should feel that way (unfortunately I can think of no clear way in English to express this; it is the nature of a declatory sentence to sound like, well, a declaration of fact), but it is a viewpoint I think authors should consider. If you're going too slow for me, who considers a 600 page, densely printed book like "A Deepness in the Sky" to be "a bit on the short side", you really need to consider getting your ass into gear and letting the editor do a bit more cutting.

Even if you liked Snow Crash...

[lpontiac]

I think people feel a need to be either "a Stephenson fan" or "not a Stephenson fan," and those in the former group (try to) read his entire catalogue.

Quicksilver and Confusion are very, very different books to Snow Crash and The Big U. Rather than assuming that if you liked Snow Crash, you should like this, and if not there's something wrong with it, some people would be better off realising that regardless of authorship Quicksilver simply isn't to their taste, and they should just not pay it any attention.

greatest living writer?

[warrped]

Neal Stephenson is a lot of fun to read, but greatest living writer? I think even Neal (no, not Cowboy) would take issue with that statement.

Re:Baroque Cycle

[Scrameustache]

I never touched Baroque Cycle because Quicksilver made me want to stab my eyes out with a dull spoon.

I'm curious, is it its very existance that angers you? Because if, as you said, you "never touched" the Baroque Cycle, then how, pray tell, would you know that he "described the cityscape of London for the zillionth time" or "took the worst of [Cryptonomicon] and magnified it to create Quicksilver"?

He's Evolved a Good Deal...

[Blic]

I find it quite common that people that really liked Snow Crash dislike his current work, especially the Baroque Cycle.

Conversely, from someone who doesn't read much Sci-Fi, I found Cryptonomicon and the Baroque Cycle much more interesting than Snow Crash which seems such a bit of Cyberpunk fluff.

While he still has technology and its role in history and human lives as a pervading theme, he's pretty much stopped writing Sci-Fi in the narrowest definition.

Though it's a tough transition - Sci-Fi fans dislike his current work, and yet he still has to shed that pulpy Sci-Fi stigma that would keep his books from reaching a larger audience - i.e. in most bookstores he's still in the Sci-Fi section...

Is it Jazz, or is it Memorex?

[bild]

There's a particular aesthetic impression you get from jazz that you can identify and recognize right away. It's the same with SF -- once you get used to it, you just know.
- Neal Stephenson, 2004

I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it.
- Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, 1964

I guess I'm not entirely satisfied with the 'know it if you see it' argument ... certainly, the aesthetic he carries from earlier work is present in Quicksilver, but that could simply be his writing style, showing through.

If Quicksilver can be described as SciFi, it's definitely an outlier in the category. It is obviously fiction, of a historical bent, and it has a lot of science in it, but one could imagine writing imaginary conversations between Newton and Liebnitz, for example, without it being considered Science Fiction.

For inspiration I think of Walter Murphey's 1976 disco classic 'A Fifth of Beethoven'. This reworking of an historical classic is disco for recognizable reasons: the beat, the instrumentation, the structural changes, its length, etc. Similarly, Quicksilver can be seen as a SciFi riff on a historical material for recognizable reasons. Later in the article, he articulates one of those reasons:

How is it going to be used, not just by engineers who design products but by regular people who pick this stuff up and turn it to their own weird ends?

So, science fiction could perhaps be described as speculative writing in which science/technology plays a central role, and in which characters in the story turn the science to their own ends.

Re:Fiction Vs Non

[Bullet-Dodger]

Where the hell did he say his work is 100% fiction? It's called Historical Fiction for a reason, dude. (And if you think his work is 100% accurate, you're off your nut)

Bah. Stick to "Finux" hackers, Neal

[seafoodforklift]

Cryptonomicon was fantastic, but I couldn't get halfway through Quicksilver. The characters are inconsistent and incoherent, particularly the protagonist - who only remembers his religious views when it's convenient for the plot, but otherwise is just a random dude meeting famous peoplem having deep conversations with them and never expresses his own opinions. The view of european history presented is also a caricature, extremely americanised and at times very silly. In addition, alhtough interesting, Stephenson's descriptions present London from the viewpoint of a modern tourist who wants to understand where it all came from. It feels like reading the Lonely Planet guide. And he clearly does not understand Cambridge. Although he talks a lot about Trinity. I doubt he's ever even visited it. 99% crap. Big disappointment.

Re:That is a great article..

[peacefinder]

Whoa, there, pardner!

Read what he said again. He didn't claim that Edison invented anything. He said: "Thomas Edison made electricity into a consumer product and developed the light bulb [...]"

If you will just tie your knee down a second to stop it jerking, you'll see that he actually agrees with you that "Edison didn't do dick"... at least not in the way engineers think of accomplishments.

However, what Stephenson said was accurate: Edison did have a huge influence on the widespread acceptance of electricity, and he did "develop" the light bulb as a consumer product. Edison wasn't half the inventor he claimed to be, but he was a brilliant marketer. (That's how he convinced everyone he was a brilliant inventor.) If you'll just take a deep breath, you'll see that he's simply giving Edison the credit he's due, and no more.

One of Stephenson's strengths as an author is that he understands the painful and symbiotic relationship between engineers and businessmen. This theme is central to Cryptonomicon, and important in Zodiac, Snow Crash, Diamond Age, and the Baroque Cycle.

Actually, now that you bring it up, I'd be delighted if he'd write a book on the rivalry between Tesla and Edison.... he's an author who could show both men as brilliant in their own distinct way.