Slashdot Mirror
Anathem
Max Tardiveau writes "I just finished reading Neal Stephenson's latest novel, Anathem. I was awaiting it with some anticipation because I absolutely loved Stephenson's best-known novels: Snow Crash, The Diamond Age, and Cryptonomicon. One of Stephenson's non-fiction pieces, called In the beginning was the command line, simply wowed me when I read it. The man can write. A few years ago, I got really excited when I heard that he was writing a whole cycle of novels (the Baroque cycle). But I read the first book of the cycle — Quicksilver — and I was somewhat disappointed, so I skipped the rest of the cycle. I realize that many people enjoyed these novels, but I was hoping that Stephenson would get back his old style and inspiration. So, when Anathem was announced, I was full of anticipation — was this going to be the one? Would he find his mark again?" Keep reading for Max's impressions of Anathem
Anathem
author
Neal Stephenson
pages
935
publisher
HarperCollins
rating
6
reviewer
Max Tardiveau
ISBN
9780061474095
summary
Action and philosophical exploration in an Earth-like future
The first impression of this book is its heft---at 935 pages in the hardback edition, you'll need strong arms, or a good support, just to read the thing. But otherwise, this is a sharply printed, well-bound book. The official retail price is $30, but you can find it for around $24, less if you buy it used.
Anathem is set on a fictional planet called Arbre, which is very similar to Earth, in a fairly distant future. Much has happened, as we discover during the course of the story. World wars, revolutions, climate change, etc... During all these tribulations, religious orders have provided a certain amount of continuity, and have pursued theoretical scientific research. They still live like monks and nuns, even though there are occasional glimpses of highly advanced technology (materials, genetics, etc...).
In a monastery, ruled by an ancient Discipline, our hero is a young monk who is inquisitive, smart but not brilliant, and brave but not foolhardy. We see most of the action through his eyes.
Not much happens in the first 100 pages or so, which can be a bit trying, but soon we learn that mysterious events are in progress, and the narrative picks up the pace after that. I can't say much more without spoilers.
As usual with Stephenson, there are many neat ideas, and a few mind-twisters. The writing is usually clear, the action can be stimulating, the characters can be engaging. And yet...
It's not that Anathem isn't interesting. It's just that it feels ... self-indulgent. It's a 935-page novel that should be 600 pages or less. Perhaps Stephenson's fame and success make it difficult for editors to stand up to him. That would be his loss (and ours). A good editing job would have turned a good novel into one that is worthy of him.
Why do I say that?
First, the story is replete with made-up words that add very little to the story, the atmosphere, the narration, or anything at all. They just stand in the way. I'm not opposed to a judicious use of this device, but here it feels gratuitous and pointless and, yes, at times irritating.
I know it's not supposed to be Earth, but at least half of this gobbledygook could have been skipped without any detrimental effect. I'm afraid I have to invoke Munroe's Law, which states: "The probability of a book being good is inversely proportional to the number of made-up words it contains". In fact, XKCD had a strip about this specifically aimed at Anathem.
There is a lot of dialog and action that adds little or nothing to the narrative. One feels, at times, like Stephenson is filling time. This is where a good editor should step in and tighten things up. One senses that the entire book was published as delivered by the author, with no critical paring, no condensing. I'm sure I'm wrong about that, but the feeling is there nonetheless.
We meet a very large cast of characters, many of whom seem unnecessary. Names appear and disappear, and the reader is left to ponder why they were introduced at all. Is there some ulterior motive? Will they have some sort of meaning later in the book? But alas, most don't, and we feel like we have invested time and emotion in vain.
There are also a lot of uncompleted story lines and plot holes. Perhaps the novel is simply too ambitious, and tries to broach too many topics. Time and time again, Stephenson introduces an interesting concept, or an intriguing subplot, only to drop it without any follow-up. This is most unsatisfying.
This is a surprise, because I am under the impression that Stephenson's audience is in large part made of people like me — somewhat geeky, interested in science, and therefore prone to paying close attention to details of the story. In this respect, this book simply fails. The reader is left with so many open questions, so many unfinished lines of inquiry, that the whole thing feels unfinished, even rushed. The ending is bland and appallingly predictable, worthy of a Bruce Willis action movie--harsh words, I know, but I am not using them lightly.
I was expecting more intellectual stimulation, a significantly faster pace, and more storytelling rigor from Stephenson, and I have to admit to being disappointed. The book is certainly not without redeeming qualities, I was just expecting quite a bit more.
I would not recommend this book as an introduction to Stephenson. If you're a real fan, you'll probably read it no matter what, but otherwise you can safely skip it. If you've never read anything by Stephenson, then you owe it to yourself to read the three novels I mentioned at the beginning of this article. They are truly excellent. Anathem, sadly, is not cut of the same cloth.
You can purchase Anathem from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Anathem is set on a fictional planet called Arbre, which is very similar to Earth, in a fairly distant future. Much has happened, as we discover during the course of the story. World wars, revolutions, climate change, etc... During all these tribulations, religious orders have provided a certain amount of continuity, and have pursued theoretical scientific research. They still live like monks and nuns, even though there are occasional glimpses of highly advanced technology (materials, genetics, etc...).
In a monastery, ruled by an ancient Discipline, our hero is a young monk who is inquisitive, smart but not brilliant, and brave but not foolhardy. We see most of the action through his eyes.
Not much happens in the first 100 pages or so, which can be a bit trying, but soon we learn that mysterious events are in progress, and the narrative picks up the pace after that. I can't say much more without spoilers.
As usual with Stephenson, there are many neat ideas, and a few mind-twisters. The writing is usually clear, the action can be stimulating, the characters can be engaging. And yet...
It's not that Anathem isn't interesting. It's just that it feels ... self-indulgent. It's a 935-page novel that should be 600 pages or less. Perhaps Stephenson's fame and success make it difficult for editors to stand up to him. That would be his loss (and ours). A good editing job would have turned a good novel into one that is worthy of him.
Why do I say that?
First, the story is replete with made-up words that add very little to the story, the atmosphere, the narration, or anything at all. They just stand in the way. I'm not opposed to a judicious use of this device, but here it feels gratuitous and pointless and, yes, at times irritating.
I know it's not supposed to be Earth, but at least half of this gobbledygook could have been skipped without any detrimental effect. I'm afraid I have to invoke Munroe's Law, which states: "The probability of a book being good is inversely proportional to the number of made-up words it contains". In fact, XKCD had a strip about this specifically aimed at Anathem.
There is a lot of dialog and action that adds little or nothing to the narrative. One feels, at times, like Stephenson is filling time. This is where a good editor should step in and tighten things up. One senses that the entire book was published as delivered by the author, with no critical paring, no condensing. I'm sure I'm wrong about that, but the feeling is there nonetheless.
We meet a very large cast of characters, many of whom seem unnecessary. Names appear and disappear, and the reader is left to ponder why they were introduced at all. Is there some ulterior motive? Will they have some sort of meaning later in the book? But alas, most don't, and we feel like we have invested time and emotion in vain.
There are also a lot of uncompleted story lines and plot holes. Perhaps the novel is simply too ambitious, and tries to broach too many topics. Time and time again, Stephenson introduces an interesting concept, or an intriguing subplot, only to drop it without any follow-up. This is most unsatisfying.
This is a surprise, because I am under the impression that Stephenson's audience is in large part made of people like me — somewhat geeky, interested in science, and therefore prone to paying close attention to details of the story. In this respect, this book simply fails. The reader is left with so many open questions, so many unfinished lines of inquiry, that the whole thing feels unfinished, even rushed. The ending is bland and appallingly predictable, worthy of a Bruce Willis action movie--harsh words, I know, but I am not using them lightly.
I was expecting more intellectual stimulation, a significantly faster pace, and more storytelling rigor from Stephenson, and I have to admit to being disappointed. The book is certainly not without redeeming qualities, I was just expecting quite a bit more.
I would not recommend this book as an introduction to Stephenson. If you're a real fan, you'll probably read it no matter what, but otherwise you can safely skip it. If you've never read anything by Stephenson, then you owe it to yourself to read the three novels I mentioned at the beginning of this article. They are truly excellent. Anathem, sadly, is not cut of the same cloth.
You can purchase Anathem from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
... I agree with Max's review. I'm almost halfway through Anathem and it's simply not compelling at this point. The made-up words that littered the first part of the story were amazingly painful to slog through, at least in the beginning. I either don't notice them so much now or their usage is toned down a little. They're still irritating, though.
While I love Stephenson's earlier works, his later works are disappointing to me. If you could somehow plot a trend of his writing style, beginning with something like Snow Crash and continuing until the present, you'd find Anathem right on that trend line. If you've been reading his stuff all along, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. Anathem is like the Baroque cycle, but more so.
Are ANY of his books really THAT good? The CW is that they are, but I know a lot of people that find them subpar.
Anathem is the classic slow starter. I almost gave up at first, but by the halfway mark it was on my all-time short list. Its great strength is the theme of intellectual elitism. Not the modern "liberal condescension" interpretation of that term, but rather the deeper idea that those willing to do what it takes to perceive reality are both rare and precious. If the book has a flaw, it is in promulgating the idea that intellectual elites are to be found in academic cloisters.
Unlike every other Stephenson novel - this one has a real conclusion!
While I'm a big lover of Stephenson's work, I've felt like in his other novels the end is just hacked off without literary justification. This time, Stephenson provides us with a satisfying conclusion. It sort of blew my mind.
As to the rest of the novel, I enjoyed it overall. But I felt like Stephenson did fall prey to the trap of letting his characters discusses theoretics overmuch at the expense of some narrative.
Also, I'm not sure that forcing readers to learn so much invented vocabulary for the sake of his imaginary world was entirely worth it. Sure, there might not be a word in the English language that perfectly encapsulates the idea he was trying to communicate, but most writers are forced to overcome this obstacle every day, and do so without making up new words. It added a layer of complication to Anathem that was unnecessarily daunting.
So, read the book if you're already into Stephenson, you'll probably love it. But - as the review said - you'd be better off falling in love with the man's writing somewhere else.
Mod my comments down. It'll be fun.
Don't read Tolkien's less common stuff. By less common, I mean, haven't had a movie made out of it yet. I've been working on the tales from middle earth/unfinished stories boxed set... Woah, talk about a lot of propper names! Names for places, elves, dwarves, dragons, etc... Add to that the fact that one person may have 5 names over time (big characters like gandalf have more.) AND that he'll throw out a name, expecting that you know it, even though it may be the first/only time ever used, or you would have had to read a previous/later work to know it.
There are proper names for trees, jems, weapons, armor, animals, etc.
I know I sound like I'm complianing, but I'm really enjoying it. Some are easier to read than others. Some are dissapointing because the tales are UNFINISHED!
Who goes and dies before they finish their books!
I'm waiting for the Silmarillian movie ;)
The Enemy of Sauron
Gandalf - name given by the Men of the North, the Dunedain.
Gandalf the Grey
Gandalf the White
Gandalf Greyhame - name given by the Rohirrim
Grey Fool
Grey Pilgrim - translated from Sindarin
Grey Wanderer
Incanus
Lathspell - "Ill News"
Mithrandir - Sindarin Elvish name "Grey Pilgrim"
Olorin - name in Valinor
Tharkun - name given by Dwarves
White Rider.
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
I, too, was hoping for something out of Stephenson more like his older books. I loved Snow Crash, and Diamond Age. I felt Cryptonomicon to be somewhat self-indulgent of the the author in the sense mentioned by the reviewer.
Yes, some of Stephenson's books were, IMHO, outstanding. Snow Crash was great. I even thought his first novel, "The Big U", was hilarious (apparently unlike many others... it did not sell well or get good reviews).
After reading this, I doubt very much that I will bother reading Anathem.
But after Cryptonomicon, I was reluctant to dive into the Baroque Cycle books. Too much prose, for too little effect. Stephenson would do well to return to the more terse writing of his earlier years.
or an eBook reader. I picked up the Sony PRS-505 last month and read several books using it. Love it. I can carry a metric ton of books in one hand. Anathem may be next.
The intro paragraph to the review reads like one of those annoying little kids that won't shut his mouth and never seems to get to any kind of point.
If it ain't Baroque, don't fix it.
The ending is bland and appallingly predictable, worthy of a Bruce Willis action movie--harsh words, I know, but I am not using them lightly.
Woah, there's an ending??
Okay, I say that in jest, I've only read Snow Crash and quit reading Quicksilver.
Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
Self-Indulgent... that's a pretty good description of his latter books. He really needs to think about filtering his mind-to-"written word" interface somewhat. Haven't read it yet. Also dropped the Baroque Cycle mid way.
To me its clearly Stephenson's best book and the only one he has written that hasn't fallen apart towards the end. His prose is so much more mature in this. Its such a pleasure to read a book which expects so much of its readers. His humour in the book plays across an enormous range of questions and schisms in philosophy, language an physics and I found myself giggling whilst amazed at his audacity in expecting so much from his audience. Yes it is self-indulgent but only so much as it indulges his target audience. If you found it boring and you didn't find it extremely funny throughout then I guess he was expecting a little too much of you or you were under-estimating him. Seriously, this book puts the rest of his work to shame. Please try re-reading it. Everything else he has written is practice in order to get it right for Anathem.
Nick
The biggest issue, though, is this complaint that is levied about the language and the made-up words. If you have completed the book, please finish it before slamming the words themselves. You cannot understand the reason that he uses these words until you understand the larger message of the book. I felt for a long time that it added little, and while I got used to the words I wished that they weren't there. Then I read the last 20% of the book, and I got it. It made sense. You could still disagree with the approach, but at least you would be able to do so intelligently. The previous poster who wrote that he was halfway through the book and annoyed at the made-up words should finish the book first. If he is still annoyed, then fine. I wasn't at that point.
It isn't a perfect book. Many people will find many faults. Personally, I felt that the last hundred pages felt rushed. I wanted more out of them. And I felt that the book changed from an intellectual discourse into a plot-driven made-for-the-big-screen story. But I still enjoyed it.
And for the award for biggest geek family move of the year, I actually read the entire book out loud to my wife. She wanted to share the book with me, and she loved it more than I did. Go figure.
Neal Stephenson is a complete fraud. He thinks he is (or at least pretends to be) an "expert" on the subjects he writes about, but the fact is he can't even do basic research. Cryptonomicon is so full of nonsense and plain wrong information about cryptology (and about history) that it's not even funny. It's depressing to think that some people will read that and think they've learned something.
Also, he seems obsessed with penises. There are more references to urination and masturbation in Cryptonomicon than there are about actual crypto (and, ironically, some of them as just as incorrect, which makes you wonder how familiar he is with his own physiology).
Plus his writing style is as pedantic as William Gibson's and as prolix as Stephen King's.
Avoid, avoid, avoid.
If you want good science fiction where the "science" part isn't just nonsense or the author's misconceptions passed off as fact, try Arthur C. Clarke, Robert L. Forward, or just about any eastern european author from the 70s and 80s (where "science fiction" didn't just mean "adventures in space, with magic").
It's a 935-page novel that should be 600 pages or less.
You do know who wrote the book, right? He can't type out the 10 commandments without 250 pages, an epilogue, and a vague feeling that it just wasn't quite long enough since the ending was unsatisfying.
Calling his writing verbose is like saying Death Valley is tepid.
I loved this book. I love Stephenson's stuff, generally, but I couldn't make it through the Baroque Cycle. But I got this on audio book and I wonder if that helped me appreciate the book more. Would have I liked it in text form? I can't say. But it is one of the only books I have read this year that I give 5 stars to.
I really enjoyed it, and recommend it. If you are iffy from the above review maybe try audiobook format.
Don't read Tolkien's less common stuff. By less common, I mean, haven't had a movie made out of it yet.
There's a reason that his popular stuff is popular, and his obscure stuff is obscure.
Tolkien found a good balance between the background paraphernalia that gave his world depth and narrative in The Lord of The Rings and The Hobbit. Much of his less popular stuff doesn't find that balance, which makes it fine for us more obsessive nerd types, and not much fun for the average reader.
Mod my comments down. It'll be fun.
Cryptonomicon was bad, too. Didn't read the others. Sigh...
As far as I'm concerned, the reviewer's complaints really only apply to the first third of the book. Yeah, he made up a bunch of words, which was a bit off putting. Also, there was a very prolonged rising action where several hundred pages essentially just introduced the world; the actual plot proper didn't start until maybe page 200 or 300.
And that's where all my complaints stopped. I found the actual plot thoroughly compelling. I found the world very interesting and all of the characters deep and quirky. Towards the end of the book I couldn't put it down. Once I got through all the introductory material, I thought this was one of the most entertaining books I've read in a good while, and I read a lot.
Tonnes of respect for what he's done, but his stories aren't really that great at all. Even Snowcrash which I did enjoy always felt like a pooly told story to me. It had great moments but for the most part was just too unrealistically gratuitous.
What people should really read is Vernor Vinge. Everything by him is excellent. Strong concepts, believable characters, Crisply written.
I feel like the XKCD comic has somewhat unfairly focused the discussion on the book's invented words. While I find it frustrating in some fantasy novels, half of the charm of Anathem for me was learning the rules of this new society- which is what happens in the first hundred pages.
What frustrated me was that, having set up this immersive, complicated world, focused on scholars and their ideas, Stephenson ended up telling a fairly conventional (if exciting) story for the remainder of the book, essentially forgetting about many of the internal conflicts of the monks about halfway through, rather than letting that drive the action. It's as if he doesn't know whether to make this book look more like Eco's The Name of the Rose or a retread of Snow Crash.
Nonetheless, I enjoyed Anathem immensely, and I couldn't finish the Quicksilver series (dropped out halfway through System of the World). I feel like this book was more of a return to Stephenson's writing in the Diamond Age / Cryptonomicon era. It's not his best, but I'd recommend it over Quicksilver.
I'm hoping someone will grab a version from Bookz and edit it down to 300 pages for me. And replace the made-up words. Sort of like The Phantom Edit--the remix of Star Wars without Jar Jar. Lazyweb--make it so!
I read this book on the plane on the way into theatre.
This is Neal's best book yet. His work is high concept, intellectually challenging stuff that winds up educating as much as it entertains, and past Stephanson works have wobbled back and forth between action and education. This one gets it exactly right. It starts slow, but it has to, as there are a lot of new concepts to introduce and a whole different world to paint in before we can get going with the main story. As we learn and gain confidence with the new vocabulary (and there is a lot of it, although it is cleverly constructed to provide semantic clues as to what it means in "our world") he builds and builds on what he has already contructed, and before you know it, we are fully immersed in the culture of Arbre - at which points the story takes off and you can't put the damn book down.
And unlike some of his other work (Diamond Age?) this book ends strong.
I love how this book isn't written to the lowest common denominator. I love that it is willing to tackle things like philosophy, the nature of conciousness, the ramifications of the "many worlds" theory of the cosmos, thinking "long view" with people who only live a short time, and many other subjects, while still wrapping the whole thing up in an entertaining yarn.
After I finished, I felt smarter. How many other authors can pull that off?
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
I dont really hold to the "too many made up words" rule.
Clear exceptions to that rule.
Clockwork Orange
1984
Lord of the Rings
Sniglets
Dune
I agree with the reviewer as well. Buy his earlier work, go to the library for Anathem.
Self-indulgence has always been Neal Stephenson's curse. Cryptonomicon could've been half the length. The Diamond Age got lost in several places.
I think his best work (from an entertainment perspective) is Zodiac. It presents the tightest narrative, without all the unfocused wandering that he often falls into.
If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
But he wasn't always that way. Snow Crash was sharp and fast-paced. Diamond Age had some slow parts but in general was pretty tight.
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
It depends on the goal of making up the words/names. Tolkien created an entire world with actual languages, not just made up ones. He tends to use the made up word when he's presenting something as coming from that culture, the same way that we would pronounce something with a quasi-french pronunciation if that's where we got the word; in this way he distinguishes the item and gives it more background. He was also presenting it as a historical piece, as middle earth being the same earth that we're on right now, only a long time ago. For those reasons, it's less grating to have him make up words. However, that tendency still puts people off of his books and it's hard to fault them for it.
For other books, where they make up new names for periods of time, like "cycle" instead of "day" or make up a new word that replaces "hour", there's no reason to do so. If an author makes up a word, let's say "klek", and then defines it as "60 minutes", they've lost a lot of credibility with me and made it so that I'll almost certainly never recommend that book to anyone else again.
I just have to thrown out a few comments to the people that quit the Baroque Cycle part way through. Yeah, this series is a beast to read (I have 100 pages left, been reading since January) but it's a fantastic story with a scope that I've never seen anywhere before. Book 1 (Quicksilver) doesn't seem to do too much on it's own, but most of what happens in that book comes back to haunt you (and the characters) in book 3 (System of the World). I'm more than impressed with Stephenson's ability to see a story this big. The books occasionally do get a little too philosophical for my taste, but those scenes are relatively easy to gloss over. (Be careful doing that though, Stephenson is a master at making small details very important later.) Over-all, I thought Book 1 was decent, Book 2 was tons of fun, and Book 3 makes it all worthwhile. Maybe the ending sucks (don't know yet) but the trip has been awesome.
That said (and in an attempt to get back on-topic), I really haven't decided whether I'll attack Anathem yet. If there's anyone out there that shares my opinion of The Baroque Cycle, I'd love to hear your opinion on it.
Neal Stephenson is a writer who simply adores a shaggy dog story.
I think he writes for the love of being clever; cleverness for its own sake, whether or not it leads to anything. Contrast this to other, even more wildly inventive authors such as Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett, where absurdity seems to have more of a purpose, which is to make the characters struggles more sympathetic. Everyone can put himself in Arthur Dent's place, because while we might be a little self-absorbed, we're surrounded by even more aggressively self-absorbed people. In the case of Terry Pratchett, we have more pure fantasy; we can imagine ourselves to be stronger and cleverer when faced with the absurdity and corruption of everyday life than we are.
Stephenson's characters seem to me a lot less sympathetic -- not that the have to be. He seems a lot less interested in something you might call "the human condition"; more interested in ideas, places, and things than people perhaps. Cryptonomicon is perhaps the most appealing of his novels that I have read, especially the Goto Dengo character. His survival story is immediately understandable and compelling.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I must read Anathem now...
Personally, I think that Snow Crash, while a good read is not his best (but will make a great movie). Zodiac sucked. I really liked The Diamond Age and Cryptonomicon.
I find the Baroque Cycle (unlike so many others) utterly fascinating, it's like reverse Science Fiction. It's the story of how humans dealt with and brought about the birth of modern science and the culture and the ways of thinking that went along with it.
I just finished Anathem this past weekend as well..
I understand the views of the reviewer / though i thought it was a better read (after getting through the first 200pages) than the Baroque Cycle or Cryptonomicon
there much of angst buried in there & i thought the ending was rushed .. .. where was the editor .. ??
so it was a good question
The correctness of the statement varies with the time of day?
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Once an author becomes really successful, as Stephenson rightfully is, editors refuse to push hard enough for cuts. Instead, like the later works of Dickens, we get overbearing and flabby books. Unlike the reviewer I stuck with the Baroque Cycle, after begging my local bookshop daily for an advanced copy. But by book three I was just in 'what's the point' mode, as it went on and on with no conceivable point. Stephenson needs to tighten up his writing. Zodiac was a beautifully crafted bit of work, and Snow Crash too. Cryptomonicon, while high on the favourites list, suffered a bit from Dickens Syndrome (Turing's bike chain) but this was occasionally worthwhile due to humour (Captain Crunch). So I've held off on buying this one and ordered it from the library to see if it's worthwhile before investing in a copy.
I thought the book was very good. I thought the made-up words were absolutely essential to the basic idea of the book, that there is a type of "universal knowledge" that any intelligent culture would have to understand to even call itself intelligent. This meta-knowledge took the specific forms described on Arbre and is explained to us in the terms used by the avout. I enjoyed the philosophical discussions very much, although I agreed the ending was rather unsatisfying.
Regular Meta Moderators are not more likely to get mod points.
He has written sharp books, but there is no doubt that he has a penchant for details, minutiae even. This is the guy who required an entire, extra large Wired magazine edition to postulate the thesis "Laying fiber optic cable under the ocean is difficult, but it is also important. It has been done for a long time, and will continue to be done thanks to demand for Internet access."
60 pages of text? Really? What could you possibly take away from that.
Indeed, Snow Crash probably would have been more effective at half the length, and that's probably his most popular work. It's extremely self-indulgent, and if it weren't for the heavy tongue-in-cheek humor that runs through the whole thing, I doubt it ever would have made it. Zodiac and Diamond Age are probably his most focused works. I faced Anathem with some trepidation, even though I generally like Stephenson, because his last couple of works have been so totally random and wandering (I struggled with Cryptonomicon, and barely finished the Baroque Cycle), but to my surprise, once you get past all the made-up language (which he introduces slowly, gradually, and relatively painlessly), it's really a solid and fairly tight work--for Stephenson. I think it may be my second-favorite Stephenson ever.
What I find really fascinating, though, is the wide range of reactions to this novel.
A review already? Nah, not possible. The book only was only published in September. That's nowhere near long enough to read A Neal Stephenson.
"If you think the problem is bad now, just wait until we've solved it." --- Arthur Kasspe
I read Snow Crash at least three or four times and I think it is a great book. The last book of his that I read was the Cryptonomicon. It was good and I enjoyed the parallel stories that took place in different time periods and the way that he tied them all together in the end. However as I was slogging through the 1000+ pages of the book I came to realize that Stephanson writes the equivalent of verbal ejaculate. He makes things needlessly complex. He uses so many metaphors on top of metaphors laced with adjectives contrasted by similes... He seems to be the literary equivalent of the Rube Goldberg machine, using so many devices for the simple sake of using them, as if he's challenging himself to see how unnecessarily verbose he can be. The guy simply has too much going on in his head. Reading a Stephanson book is like being plugged into the mind of a schizophrenic idiot savant.
Neal lost a lot of cred from me when he used Finux because he, "Didn't want to deal with Linux fanatics complaining that he got some detail wrong." So... rather than deal with a few fanatics, he decides to get it wrong for everyone? EPIC FAIL.
His gift is prose. Not story, not structure, not idea, but prose. He is very talented in that area. That singular talent is almost -- but not quite -- enough to carry him. Not quite.
The first time I picked up Cryptonomicon I kept saying "WOW, this is really well written"... I actually carried it over to a friend and had him read a passage just to share the imagery... but at about 150 pages I put it down and really never had much desire to finish. I've read the first 100 or so pages of several of his books. I finally went back and re-read Cryptonomicon because I wanted to suggest it to a friend. I read it, wondered why, and loaned my copy to my friend. He gave it back a little while later saying he stopped reading half way through.
I can think of no other author who combines so much talent to create such... not unreadable, but un-readworth, books. I liked Snow Crash well enough. I actually finished it in one go without even having to convince myself I should. Not exactly high praise... "This book was worth finishing." It's sad that such an obviously talented author can't write a book that is worth reading all the way through. Editing would only help if Neal actually had a full story to tell. I suspect that's why he doesn't get edited down: the editors realize his books are read for the prose and editing would only reduce without giving any compensation.
So much promise, undelivered.
I love the allusions, ties to earthly terminology, familiar yet alien setting, deep history and constant geeking out. It's a tremendous book so don't listen to the reviewer. Imagine it as an alien story that someone actually translated/localized in every way possible, then consider what math and theory as a fundamental religion might do for long term stability.
I agree with the OP that the Baroque Cycle was a disappointment. I tried several times to get into it. I'm only half way through Anathem, so I won't read the rest of the review, but it's grabbed me. He definitely has his buzz back. It's the best a novel can be by taking you into another world. I really don't wasnt it to end at this point.
What Neal Stephenson thinks about Linux is of absolutely zero relevance here. If you have a problem with what he thinks about Linux and that affects what you think about his novels, then you are the people he is talking about.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
Not much happens in the first 100 pages or so
Yeah, that happens a lot in his books. Also for other blocks of 100 pages scattered throughout.
I find much of this review to be spot-on but for two big points:
religious orders have provided a certain amount of continuity, and have pursued theoretical scientific research
My own impression is that religious orders have pretty much receded to the fringe, but theoretical science morphed into a religion-like institution.
My other nitpick with the review is the criticism of the use of made-up words. Considering that the book is about parallel universes, and Arbre is an ever-so-slightly-alternate version of Earth, then it supports the story that there would be alternate words for everyday things.
It's all been downhill for him since Snow Crash.
Snow Crash should have been a movie, but now it's too dated.
for those that are curious, and especially for those that have read the book you should check out the Clock of Long Now project. Stephenson contributed to this and it is where he got the inspiration for Anathem. Reading about the project after finishing the book really gives you some insight into how the world of Arbre came to be.
When I started reading the book, the made-up words irritated me at first, but once I'd read a little further and started to sort out their meanings I took a step back to consider what effect all these unknown terms had on my experience with the book.
Some of the unknown words described concepts that were new to me, others represented things that I'm totally familiar with. Removing my ability (initially, anyway) to distinguish the two dramatically intensified both the alien and the mundane aspects of Arbre. It was a little bit like reading sci-fi for the first time - as I gradually absorbed these new words I kept getting surprised both by the ways this futuristic world was the same as mine, and by how it was different.
The initial frustration totally paid off for me.
Why does it stop 120 pages in? Because the next page is where the plot starts. Everything up to then is just world building.
But it still had enough atmosphere and detail that I, after a while, bought the other two. I now find the series on my shortlist.
A great read.
Max M - IT's Mad Science
Compare to other geek favorites Stephen R Donaldson, Robert Jordan and George R. R. Martin. Unlike them, Stephenson finished an entire story in a single book. How terse of him! I have read everything Stephenson has published, and Anathem is my favorite (loved the Cycle and Snow Crash, not too fond of Cryptonomicon).
Am I the only one that remembers when this use to be NEWS for Nerds, Stuff that Matters?
Book Reviews != News
News = Man Bites Dog
!News = A Book review on the book "Man Bites Dog"
News = Guy gets shot in an alley
!News = A book review about a guy that gets shot in an alley
News = Real Michael Jackson found living in Guam with Elvis
!News = A book review on 1001 ways to prepare pork
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
I've read 'em both, and I can't believe you would make the "Crisply Written" argument using Vinge as your example. Are we talking about the same guy?
Asimov was crisp. Early Arthur C. Clarke was crisp. HG Wells was so crisp there aren't even words.
But modern Sci-fi? There is no one who comes even close. All the best are wordier, they add in exposition and scene setting that would have been considered frippery 50 years ago.
Stephenson's literary style is interesting. There is definitely some self-gratification there, but his writing is such that it's still pleasant (to me) to read it. His understated style of character development is very interesting.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
"During all these tribulations, religious orders have provided a certain amount of continuity, and have pursued theoretical scientific research."
Mathematical order would be a far more apt description.
I actually enjoyed the "made-up words", which actually were not that much made-up, but bear a strong resemblance to French (fraa == frère == brother, suur == soeur == sister, &c). For me as a Swiss with a multilingual education I had no problems following, and I wondered if Stephenson spent his last vacations in France or in some other francophone country...
Karma: none (due to not believing in reincarnation)
Anyone else feel like Stephenson is channeling James Michener? The only novel of his I've read all the way through was "Space", but I'm told his others are about the same. Overlong, full of alternate-universe-history, bogus technology, confusing characters, pages and pages of pointless exposition, and lackluster ending.
I did enjoy "Cryptonomicon", but I felt like I was reading "Space" again, and the dozen or so pages describing the preparation and consumption of Captain Crunch cereal just convinced me the man is being paid by the word.
First of all, here's my more detailed review of Anathem, including a latter half (with warnings) that is discussion of the ending of the book, which of course means spoilers.
http://ideas.4brad.com/book-review-anathem-neal-stephenson
But some short responses:
I guess you will either hate or love the made-up words. No questions they are not for everybody, and they do create a barrier to some who want to read it, but by the end you are enjoying them, even speaking them in your geeky conversations. I think you will find people in the nerd community using these words in conversations for years to come.
This book does indeed have the best ending of a NS work -- but that's not saying much. While now there is an ending, the question is how much the ending makes sense (see the spoilers for more discussion of that.)
However, one thing I will give the ending -- the very last 3 pages give you important realizations that reinform your reading of the entire book, and see it in a new light, and that's pretty high praise for an ending. However, not everybody gets these big revelations, I have seen, so see my spoilers as to why.
Clearly this book is only for those who like exploring philosophy and science. But for those who do like these things, this book is a must-read.
As for length, I agree somewhat, in that I think the book could have worked by removing the trip over the pole (moving the few plot-essential elements from that to other circumstances) but I don't think the beginning is slow. I think a lot happens in the beginning.
Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
something happens.
Throughout my youth and into my college years, I was a huge fan of fiction. First school, then work and finally changing tastes forced a change in my reading habits and now I only digest a half-dozen or so novels a year, not counting my annual and much enjoyed revisitation of Moby-Dick. I picked up Cryptomonicon largely based on recommendations from the Slashdot crowd and considered it time and money well spent. Based on that experience, I read all three books of The Baroque Cycle and found the three together to be even more interesting and enjoyable than Cryptomonicon.
Now, I'm not a fan of speculative fiction and found some aspects of these four books to absurd, but not enough so to greatly alter my opinion (high) of Stephenson as a writer. His earlier works, however? Completely unreadable. What fantastical and obnoxious crap. I made it a few dozen pages into Snow Crash, The Diamond Age and Zodiac before finding much better ways to spend my time.
I wasn't even aware that Stephenson had released a new novel, but I came across Anathem while browsing a bookstore on the eve of my Fall vacation and decided to pick it up, expecting it to be a fun read as I think Stephenson's writing skills increase with each new book.
Long story short (too late?), Anathem earned a spot on one of my more visible bookshelves. Speculative fiction yes, but at least Stephenson doesn't disguise it as anything else.
I'll try not to question too much those who give up on The Baroque Cycle and Anathem, but for those readers out there who come from a background of speculative fiction, might I suggest stepping outside of the bubble for a while? I think a wide range of genres can only help one's appreciation for fiction - I know I'm happy that I set aside my prejudices against speculative fiction long enough to enjoy Stephenson's later works.
Dickens was paid by the word
First, if you expect a retread of Snow Crash, go read something else.
I had a lot of "WTF!?" moments in reading Anathem. However, the book paid off. This is the next logical step in the progression from Cryptonomicon to the Baroque Cycle. In each book, he has tried to build a book around one or more important concepts. Baroque Cycle examined how the financial system (and the modern world) came to be out of the stew of European power struggles, the invention of advanced math, and the Reformation.
Anathem takes philosophy, physics and politics and blends them. If you have read some philosphy (esp. Plato), as well as quantum physics, it makes a lot more sense.
I read A Clockwork Orange, got all the way to the end, then realized there was a glossary back there. Ha!
I have read Anathem - it starts on page 185, many of the characters are not important to the plot. Glad i read it YES, but i am very glad i did not buy the book (library).
To judge a book on page size is wrong. The problem for me is the 'new planet' construct. If Stephenson trashed that then the book would have been different.
There are a number of extremely interesting bits of science in the book, that make it worth the read. They remind me of the Sumerian discourse at the heart of Snowcrash, and are just as stimulating -- Anathem will keep you thinking long after you read the final page.
But there are a few bits of orbital mechanics that are just wrong wrong wrong. And Stephenson would know that they are wrong. And any one of the scientifically literate reviewers would have known they were wrong. I just don't know why they were left in the book.
I do feel, too, that there was a bit of Harry Potter in Anathem too -- he would make up some completely ridiculous "technology" (at least in Harry Potter they call it magic) when it was necessary.
Nevertheless...these small flaws don't detract too much from the quality of the whole book. I would recommend it highly.
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
"The first impression of this book is its heft---at 935 pages in the hardback edition"
OK, that's all I need to know. Apparently Stephenson still doesn't have an editor willing to rap his knuckles.
Everything I've read of his has been an example of someone who needs external discipline in his writing, but doesn't get it. They're full of endless clever asides which do nothing but show how clever the author is for thinking of them, which is frustrating because he's very inventive, and can write brilliantly at times.
If someone releases a "good parts version" of this novel, I might be interested. Until then, I'll pass.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Stephensen has been stepping incrementally closer to being a literature author with each book he's written. Snow crash is fluff, Cryptonomicon is pretty deep, and the Baroque Cycle is a master work (in the original sense). Anathem is his first post master work book.
Many posters have made the claim: "It would be better if you removed X", for various values of X. What is instructive is that not everyone agrees on X. Stephensen had a lot to say in this book, on many topics.
I'll address a few things here, but this list isn't exhaustive:
* Unresolved plot elements are not bad. Only in very bad fiction does absolutely everything happen in service of the ultimate confrontation. Some things just happen, and we learn about the characters in how they deal with them.
* Characters exist for themselves, not the plot. If every character was there 'for something', this would be a (bad) video game, but it isn't, its a book.
* The ultimate conclusion of the book is that intellectuals have a duty to the world to remain engaged. The first half (roughly) of the book exists to convince you that being segregated would be lovely, while the second half drives towards the negative consequences of that approach. The character development and the plot both work to develop this theme over time.
-- Crutcher --
#include <disclaimer.h>
I too would agree with Max. I just finished the book and was also left with the impression that Stephenson could have benefited from an editor on this one.
250 pages for the ten commandments? pfft,
Proust took seven books to say some cookies reminded him of something he couldn't quite remember.
(I also have read em more than once.)
I *loved* "Have Spacesuit Will Travel" when I was a kid. Heinlein's juveniles are still top notch.
The Baroque Cycle is just an utterly different (huge) work to anything like Snowcrash or Diamond Age. It needs an editor who isn't scared of Stephenson in places but it is one of the most fantastic feats of human imagination I have ever read. If you can only deal with sci-fi then clearly a novel about Baroque England with Isaac Newton, a half-dicked pirate king and a fabulous ex-Hareem girl turned Duchess with diverse characters and fantastical imaginings isn't going to be your thing. But I can hardly remember a book that left me more open-mouthed with the sheer imagination and achievement of the author. The B.C. is a book that will never leave me.
And if you don't like Dickens, try Dumas (who had a lot more debts to pay off). Don't get me wrong, though -- both authors are great, and even Dumas' most sprawling books rank among the most entertaining novels I've read.
Breakfast served all day!
I generally agree with your statement regarding making up words. Typically, it is a sign of sloppy cliche thinking and someone trying to dress it up in semantics.
But I think you have to recognize that depicting a believable future sub-culture in a novel that you want to stand the test of time - that's a special case. You need to use language that won't become dated over time - eliminating the possibility of using current jargon. You also cannot use standard English because it misses conveying how differences of this future sub-culture. So, you have to make something up - particularly because standard concepts don't tend to cover what authors are trying to convey in this context.
Clockwork Orange is an excellent example of the technique. Even novels like Stranger in a Strange Land do it with some degree of success - and grok is a good addition to the language. On the other hand, using a cliched abortion of a word like Islamocfascist, deserves the limited lifespan it gets. It's a fine line, and we won't know whether authors that attempt it like Neal - whether they walked it successfully for a decade or two.
... of NOT reading Stephenson's earlier books. This enabled me to enjoy greatly The Baroque Cycle, which I've read twice. FWIW, I don't think that Anathem is as good as The Baroque Cycle, but I may change my mind on a second reading.
At any rate, I'm glad I passed on Snow Crash, The Diamond Age, and Cryptonomicon. If I'd read them, I'd probably be another one of those purists who can't stand it when the object of their fanboi enthusiasms has the audacity to actually change and grow and not continue to be what they were.
In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
If you don't have both people that love and hate your work, then you're not doing anything interesting. Haven't read it yet, since I've got a few other books in my queue, including Sytem of the World, which is next on my list and will probably take me at least 6 months anyway. But I am LOVING the fact that there is a significant group here complaining it's overlong, wordy, etc., because while those books can be challenging and tedious at times, they often pay off. So far the Baroque Cycle has done that for me, and I'm hoping for more of the same with SOTW and Anathem.
There are also a lot of uncompleted story lines and plot holes. ... Time and time again, Stephenson introduces an interesting concept, or an intriguing subplot, only to drop it without any follow-up.
I would think that this is actually on purpose. If you read the last few chapters, it makes sense why the rest of the narrative might have incongruities...
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
Don't read Tolkien's less common stuff. By less common, I mean, haven't had a movie made out of it yet. I've been working on the tales from middle earth/unfinished stories boxed set...
A lot of tolkiens work wasn't really meant for publication. Choosing to read it is like digging through an authors rough drafts, background notes, story ideas... bits that hit the editing room floor, etc.
Woah, talk about a lot of propper names! Names for places, elves, dwarves, dragons, etc... Add to that the fact that one person may have 5 names over time (big characters like gandalf have more.)
Tolkien was an english professor, with an interest in language, etymology, linguistics, grammar, etc. Middle Earth for him was as much a personal playground for him to play with language as it was a vehicle to deliver a narrative. Because it was his interest and vocation, he spent more time on the languages themselves in Lord of the Rings, how they sounded, how they related to each other, how ideas were expressed in them, how they were written,... he spent more time on THAT then most authors spend writing their entire books.
This might seem self indulgent to an extreme, and in a sense it is, but its understandable and forgivable, because, as I said, Middle Earth was really his personal linguistic playground.
That's what makes Tolkien's "made up" language so eminently tolerable, where from most authors its grating, and stupid. Because even if you aren't a linguist, you can appreciate the authenticity and cohesiveness of it. And if the subject interests you, you can spend hours peeling away the layers and exploring the ideas Tolkien put together. Its not just a bunch of gibberish.
Add to that the fact that one person may have 5 names over time (big characters like gandalf have more.) AND that he'll throw out a name, expecting that you know it, even though it may be the first/only time ever used, or you would have had to read a previous/later work to know it.
Mostly he just expected himself to know it. These works were not intended to be published as-is. The stuff that actually did go through a normal editing process introduces characters reasonably well.
The Enemy of Sauron
Gandalf - name given by the Men of the North, the Dunedain.
Gandalf the Grey
Gandalf the White
Gandalf Greyhame - name given by the Rohirrim
Grey Fool
Grey Pilgrim - translated from Sindarin
Grey Wanderer
Incanus
Lathspell - "Ill News"
Mithrandir - Sindarin Elvish name "Grey Pilgrim"
Olorin - name in Valinor
Tharkun - name given by Dwarves
White Rider.
You missed "Stormcrow". ;)
That's sort of the linguistics game that is part of Lord of the Rings. The idea that names are not absolute. They they are relative to who you are within a context, within a culture, within a language, and change over time and with history. For Tolkien the language was as important, if not more important, than the plot.
Tolkien's work can almost be considered an epic of fictional language.
Gandalf is lingustically like Constantinople (er should I say, Konstantinoupolis (by the Greeks) or Constantinopolis (in Latin) or Konstaniniyye in Ottoman Turkish...which was the imperial capital of several empires.. and had several names... Byzantium, and Nea Rhome (Greek) or Nova Roma (Latin) (both "New Rome"), Stamboul, and of course, Constantinople. And of course today, its Istanbul.
Even cities with much shorter histories... New York, The Big Apple, Gotham, The City that Never Sleeps, Metropolis, and formerly Nouvelle Angouleme, and later New Amsterdam, before being named New York.
Or how "Germany" is known as Germany, Allemagne, Druitsland, Deutchland, Germania, Alemania...
That sort of thing interested Tolkien, understanding of the when and who and why of this progression (and often simultaneous use of names) as language and cultures change over time, how some of them had common roots and others didn't, etc.
Being French myself, I had no difficulty understanding these words -- I just found them pointless and annoying. New words make sense if you're describing concepts or objects that do not exist in real life, or if you're trying to create a certain atmosphere. It didn't work for me.
-- Max
While it's not exactly paced to keep the MTV generation glued to their seats, I adore Stephenson's writing style. Postulate: Maybe he's INTENTIONALLY making you go slowly, providing you with a surfeit of information, and making your brain work to place those made-up words. Maybe, by complaining about having to actually take time and experience the novel instead of flying through it like a Heroes marathon, you've identified yourself as...Extramuros. I enjoy the first-person viewpoint of the open-minded-and-curious-yet-emotionally-retarded main character, as he fumbles his way through profound events in his life. Not that it reminds me of anyone I know personally, mind you... Few writers actually USE language as deftly and deeply as does Stephenson. He gives me hope, and reminds me that we're not ALL illiterate yet. :)
Of course, I haven't finished yet. If a Shaftoe character crops up, I officially withdraw the nice things I've said about Anathem.
I found the few new words to be no problem at all, in fact there could have been more, and I liked some of the new ideas there (like the "Steelyard").
Methinks the review is just getting lazy and doesn't want to be inconvienced.
What a bunch of sissies! This was an easy book to read. No problem with the vocabulary at all. I suspect most of the people on /. are just pissed because it isn't about some bad smelling sys admin.
btw - I read the baroque cycle too, an it was much more difficult to read, but still worth it.
Fermat called, with the help of a medium. He wants his cryptic margin annotations back.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary to separate your comments from the rest of the thread, and to assume among the SecondPosters and savants an independent thread, a decent respect for the Flesch ratings of your meta aggregator compels you to declare the reason for your syntax.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Or just skim over it? "The first impression of this book is its heft---at 935 pages in the hardback edition, you'll need strong arms, or a good support, just to read the thing. But otherwise, this is a sharply printed, well-bound book. The official retail price is $30, but you can find it for around $24, less if you buy it used. Anathem is set on a fictional planet called Arbre, which is very similar to Earth, in a fairly distant future. Much has happened, as we discover during the course of the story. World wars, revolutions, climate change, etc... During all these tribulations, religious orders have provided a certain amount of continuity, and have pursued theoretical scientific research. They still live like monks and nuns, even though there are occasional glimpses of highly advanced technology (materials, genetics, etc...). " That whole description is just wrong... Well not all of it but its such an over simplification, and the fact that you called the 'Concents' religious orders goes to show that you didn't understand some of the fundamental premises upon which the story is built... Im sorry but this review is quite lacking. I really can't believe this was posted.
If we ever solve this NonProfit=NonPirate mess, then users could post their own edits, like radio DJ's do for music. Don't like the original? Chop it & Mix it!
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Snow Crash was sharp and fast-paced.
Man, that must be some good stuff you're smokin'! Pass it over here! :)
Snow Crash is one of his most self-indulgent, aimless books! Yes, it's also very entertaining, but when he started going on for page after page after page about the ancient Sumerian gods, it became blatantly obvious that this was a very good short novel hiding inside hundreds of pages of sheer, over-the-top auctorial rambling. Of course, that was part of its charm; it takes real skill to turn a hundred-page novel into a four-hundred page monstrosity without losing your audience, and Stephenson did (and does) fairly well at that, but SC was, if anything, more self-indulgent and meandering than Anathem. If Snow Crash was sharp and fast-paced, Anathem was a mono-filament blade traveling at supersonic speeds! (But IMO, neither of those statements is even remotely true.)
Offtopic, but: What's up tags like "!itsucked"?
I'm the least among programmers, but even I know that ! is for negation.
Are you saying "not it sucked?" or maybe "It didn't suck?"
If you just want to exclaim something, the exclamation point goes at the end. (Unless you're writing in Spanish, in which case it goes in both places and the first one better be upside down.)
Dammit, more things to do with digital files. If this was text one of you whippersnappers would have a script inside of twelve minutes that could answer this.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I found the first third perhaps a little slow going,
and he pretty much said exactly that himself. The first 150 pages are almost painful, but it does get better towards the end.
Deleted
Editors just gave up editing.
Amusing story is that when editors tried to cut Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Heinlein just crossed out all of the "the"'s. That does may the computer character sound more like a computer or Russian (which does have definite articles).
For some reason my tolerance is far higher with SF made-up-stuff than the High Fantasy version. I always found Tolkien pretty tough, but *because he's THE legend* I dutifully bought a semi-complete set of his stuff and one long vacation-spread I'll churn through it.
But for anyone else who tries the same trick it instantly falls flat and I am completly unable to read it. I basically never through out books but I am unable to even look at anything Dennis McKiernan writes. A lot of it has to do with incredible magicians who don't have a watch. Such a waste of magic.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I can see why the books Neal Stephenson has written over the last decade may not appeal to those with short attention spans; there are long stretches where there's a lot of talking and not a lot of action, or where the action seems tedious (Half-Cocked Jack trekking through Asia), but every page is packed with the sort of thought and humor and detail that makes his books so highly anticipated by many of us.
These books are the antithesis of the hastily written, action-packed-but-ultimately-vacuous page turners that dominate the spec fic and thriller shelves in bookstores. I'd argue that his books are even be better read out loud, as my wife and I have read all of his books together, since they contain much that's provocative.
What's especially interesting is how I've seen the books derided by some here as indulgent and slow -- Cryptonomicon and The Baroque Cycle -- be loved by people across generations. I read them, my wife and I read them, her parents read them, and a friend and his teenage son read them. All of us have been waiting Anathem with great anticipation.
My wife and I are not quite done with Anathem, so we haven't decided whether it actually beats the Baroque Cycle -- Stephenson's best books to date -- or merely equals it. We think it has all of the charm of the Baroque Cycle, but is certainly a faster read. We found his introduction of new terms to be perfectly appropriate in this context, since the things to which he is referring have no direct analog in modern English, and Stephenson clearly wanted to free his readers from preconceptions.
I believe Stephenson is one of the best spec fic authors of our time, that his books are classics, and that he keeps getting better. My only lament is the four-year wait until his next one.
At least stuff actually happens in the first few pages of Snow Crash. The first 50 pages of Anathem has less going on in it than appendices of "Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics". That's right, steam tables are more interesting than this book.
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
Okay, I have read most of Stephenson's stuff. I absolutely LOVED SnowCrash--to me it had just the right blend of geekery, cultural commentary, science, action, and character development in a shortish package.
Diamond Age was also fun, but I also noticed that the discardable character was more prevelant here--as was quite a bit of ink spilled on sex, consensual and otherwise, than I would have thought.
Cut ahead to Cryptonomicon, which I loved because it managed to keep a brisk pace despite its size-and despite the fact that once again for whatever reason some rape and an unplanned pregnancy, and other random sex had to be thrown in for no particular reason.
(note: at this point, I begin to wonder if we he will ever write a main female character who does NOT get raped, have sex with another main character, get pregnant, or any combo of the above).
Soo...then there's the Baroque cycle. After Cryptonomicon I launched into it full-charge. And then...it dragged on...and on...after the first book I strongly considered not continuing, but in a perverse way I kept reading hoping that at some point the pace would pick up. I LOVED the descriptions of the various cities and attention to detail, but after a while I felt like I was on a forced walking tour where I just wanted to go back to my hotel and drink straight from the bottle and watch cartoons for an hour, you know?
Finally I finished the trilogy (again, which just wouldn't be complete without some rape, sex, and unplanned pregnancy thrown in).
I almost didn't get Anathem, but then I saw the trailer and figured hey, this seems like a departure from the Baroque cycle, maybe it'll be a longer Snow Crash with cooler science and better characters.
Ooops.
I liked the overall idea and storyline, but as per other reviewers, it was just too damn wordy and long. The details and extra bodies added confusion, not clarity after a certain point.
Oh yeah and let's not forget at least one unplanned pregnancy. At least he managed to not include a rape and kept a lot of the sex to a minimum, but still, I almost dare him to write a book without one.
While paying attention to those details, though, he left a lot of really good characters dangling AFAIC. Fraa Jaad? The Inquisitors? One thing that Stephenson seems to do a lot of is either just ignore wrapups for key players, or just kills them off.
OTOH at least Enoch Root didn't make an appearance.
I'll buy his next book as long as he promises to keep it under 500 pages.
>> All in all a very good read, but perhaps not for everyone.
yes. for me, the made up words really added to the _experience_ of the book. once I got them in my head. they were very cool. I even found myself thinking in those terms on the way to work in the morning. nerdy, yes, but it was that absorbing.
the book reminded me of what it was like to be in grad school, and a little of what it could have been like to be an early philosopher like aristotle/plato/etc... basically monks standing around and discussing really interesting technical topics.
I at first skipped the baroque cycle because of how boring it was to me. after reading anatham and loving it, i'm now reading baroque cycle, and love it too for the same reasons
anathem and baroque are both different than his other works, I think. more historical and researchy oriented. more of a thinking man's book. I love them for this.
the ending, as usual for stephen, sucked. no surprise there. but don't read the book for the ending, read it for the meat, the huge glut of interesting ideas presented in the book as a whole.
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
Funny, I liked his stuff, including cryptonomicon, up until the Baroque cycle. I actually read the whole cycle, and there were some good bits, and some interesting bits, but so much fluff...
You got me into this! You were the ideologue! I'm only a poor assassin! - Twenty evocations, Bruce Sterling
(Grandpa)
Yea, what's wrong with a little wandering? From this entire thread it sounds like we're itching for an accessible book. Why, George Landow in Hypertext 3.0 stressed the bursting possibilites of accessibly hypertextuality.
I did okay with most of Cryptonomicon, but then I don't think I really recall the last 100 pages, because I'm too feeble to survive 1000 page tomes in one sitting. I do try to survey books though because my personality won't let me "just not bother finishing a book". Look at the poor thing, just batting its Lolcat eyes at you, begging to be read? I glanced at the Baroque books in the store, and declined to buy them. It's sounding like I might not need to buy this one either.
There's both a page-count freedom and a Value-Per-Money issue combining to make for longer books. (Ends discussion like Stephenson without even bothering to close the Grandpa tag.)
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
i did think the ending of anathem was hacked off. they totally skipped the cool plot line of fraa jad going off on the ship... and basically ended with very little conflict. it was just weak. basically everyone hugs and is friends. it kinda sucked. though the alternate endings were neat, and perhaps it should have ended after one of the "bad" endings to make the book "good". then follow up with an epilog about the happy ending... (surprise, it's ok)...
the made up words to me made the whole work as if I was an archeology student discovering some ancient book and having to learn a whole now language and new ideas... the use of little dictionary segments splattered throughout the book from the orth dictionary was neat and added to this affect. i think use of strange words added to suspension of disbelief and really immersed me in the "otherworld"-ness of this book...
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
If you like his stuff, they just recently found a completely unknown novel no one ever knew existed. THAT's just awesome in this age of Known Things.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
For other books, where they make up new names for periods of time, like "cycle" instead of "day" or make up a new word that replaces "hour", there's no reason to do so.
The only place I've seen this done effectively and usefully (different words for "day", "sunrise", "sunset", etc.) was in Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun, where the new words are actually an important clue to the nature of the world it's set on.
*** SPOILER FOLLOWS ***
The protagonists are living inside a hollow cylinder, a generation ship bound for the stars -- but their culture has completely forgotten that they came from a planet, so they don't know there's anything unusual about their world. Figuring this out as a reader, then watching the characters figure it out as well, is one of the great pleasures of reading Wolfe.
... but I am enjoying all the posts in which people try to show how smart they are by extolling its cumbersome literary devices.
it's a mental challenge to get through, and the amount of new interesting ideas that i get out of his books as a result is worth it. very cool stuff.
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
>> "The first impression of this book is its heft---at 935 pages in the hardback edition"
at first glance, I thought you were going to discount the reviewer for judging a book by its heft instead of on it's content... i.e. "well if he's going to talk about the weight of the book, then fuck him, he obviously doesn't think very much and probably has little of value to say..."
but you said the opposite of what i expected. which is interesting.
i guess you and he would live outside of the math then? some speelys of the book might be better... ?
i think there are two audiences for this book. and it depends on attention span and love for details...
reading this book is like reading through some really interesting source code. not everyone will like it, or even be able to comprehend it, but those who do like it, really really connect with it...
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
The Baroque Cycle (yes, awfully long, but I enjoyed it) has a great ending! The third book is the best of the three, the last half is the best sixth, and the last 100 pages are terrific. The escape from jail, the trial with Newton and the Solomonic gold, and then Jack's hanging - my gracious that was good stuff.
Every part of it is as interesting as the whole. I actually thought the beginning of the book was the best part. There are a lot of ideas in that "filler" and "world building" that others are complaining about. I understand that other people may not get excited about interpretations of Socratic dialogues featuring pink nerve gas farting dragons but man it's all here for those who do!
That's the only explanation for it starting so badly and ending so strong. It also explains the open plot holes and the characters that randomly appear without resolution later... just justification before.
Brilliant! Good job Stephenson.
The alt-text on the xkcd comic in question says, specifically:
Except for anything by Lewis Carroll and Tolkien, you get five made-up words per story. I'm looking at you, Anathem.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Fraa Erasmas: "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
That line, and everything after that point, made that book worth reading. It was frankly uninteresting until that it was suddenly made clear that the next 500 pages would involve defeating the opponent using applied and weaponised platonic epistemology.
I agree with the review to some extent, but having read the book three times at this point, I put this up with Snow Crash as an example of what Stephenson can do. Now can someone make a mini-series or movie out of his books already!
Yes, I wrote the TVTropes.org entry of Anathem and I stole some of it.
You think that's a building. Now this is a building.
I agree that it's a hell of a good book, but to be honest, it's extremely similar to Gene Wolfe's Litany of the Long Sun. I'm not sure whether Stephenson had read Wolfe's book and it stuck in his unconscious for a while before he wrote this one, or whether it's just zeitgeist, but the similarities are too many to not note:
In Gene Wolfe's Litany of the Long Sun, Patera Silk, a young "cleric" from a science-based "religion" that has outlasted governments for generations, has to go forth into the world outside, and becomes an important chess piece on a global scale.
In Stephenson's Anathem, Fraa Erasmus, a young "cleric" from a science-based "religion" that has outlasted governments for generations, has to go forth into the world outside, and become an important chess piece on a global scale.
Fraa = Patera ... and so on.
Suur = Matera
Avout = Augur
Arbre = Whorl
Math = Manteion
I do not think it's plagiarism, but the similarities are so great that I'm fairly certain that anyone who has read Wolfe's book can't help but think that this is a very close relative.
And while Stephenson might be more popular these days, I still think Wolfe is the better writer. Perhaps they're not as engaging, but I find that his books stands up to re-reading more than Stephenson's novels.
Anyhow, I recommend that people read both. They're very similar, yet different. Where Stephenson has more of a technical point of view, Wolfe appears to me to have a deeper psychological insight, and characters with more grit to them. Again, read both.
Is there no one selling these things as plain vanilla PDFs? Or maybe even text files?
I've got a laptop I wouldn't mind reading this on, money to spend, and time. And the only things I can find are DRM'd to the point where I wouldn't even be able to read them (I'm on Linux).
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Maybe having long airplane trips helped to keep me concentrating on it.
The beginning is slow. Slow wouldn't be so bad if you didn't have to deal with the words and dictionary definitions. For those that haven't looked at the book yet, history of the planet is divided into different epochs, mostly separated by civilization destroying wars and catastrophies.
Some of the words have very similar meanings in each epoch. Some have quite different meanings. the dictionary definitions give all the meanings. Sometimes you have to remember the context to get the right meaning.
Initially (first few hundred pages) its a pain to deal with, but towards the end of the book I think you come to the conclusion that it adds to the book.
I found the "after dinner discussions" to be the weakest part. They imparted detail quickly, but I could have lived without the exaggerated interpersonal crap.
The end wrapped up the main story quite reasonably, but didn't really cleanly end it for the characters. It was sort of a "and they all live happily ever after" sort of ending.
Do read it. Stick with it. Its worth it.
The funny thing is that after I read, Snowcrash, my reaction was almost exactly like yours is to this new book. The book seemed painfully sloppy and ultimately pointless.
This was a disappointment, because my first introduction to Stephenson was also his essay, "In the beginning was the command line", and I was similarly impressed with it. The essay arrived at my home in paper form; my room mate had printed it out at work and brought it back to share.
But Snowcrash just annoyed me. I thought it was full of clever ideas and wonderful passages, (The bit at the beginning describing the net speeds using the analogy of a 747 filled with encyclopedias dive bombing into his house every twenty seconds, forever), but sloppy, emotionally weak, and sloppy. I remember finishing and wishing out loud that the man had a better editor. I didn't bother with Diamond Age because somebody told me it dealt in a large part with a nanotech revolution of sort. I've never been impressed with the idea of nanotech, which seems like an over-blown and generally uninteresting sci-fi idea. (Our current biosphere is already built out of nanotech, except nature always does it better, faster, smarter, and so basically what we're talking about is genetic manipulation but not as good.)
It wasn't until just a year ago when I picked up Cryptonomicon on a lark that I was suitably impressed again. "Wow. This book ISN'T ultimately pointless. Neal Stephenson has grown up. Cool!"
I tried reading the Baroque Trilogy, but was stumped at my local book store. (--It's a used book store. They only had one of the middle books from some version where they'd broken the trilogy up into a half dozen or more smaller episodes. No thanks. I'll find a copy of the first one eventually.)
But this new one sounds interesting. I'd love to have a nice big book to curl up with when it gets dark and cold. Thanks for the heads up. When it comes to current literature, I'm hopelessly out of touch, it seems.
-FL
Diamond Age is somewhere in between Snow Crash and Cryptonomicon. It's more original and less cliche than Snow Crash, it's filled with some of the most brilliant ideas you've ever seen on paper, but halfway through, he doesn't know how to get to the end of the story, and when he finally gets there, he doesn't know what to do with it. It is in many ways the most typical Neal Stephenson book: brilliant ideas, vibrant world, no ending.
Cryptonomicon is much more well-rounded. Every single one of its 1100 pages is filled with excitement (except for the two arrivals in Manilla in a row), it's full of interesting and complex logical and mathematical ideas, many of them explained very well, and it even has some sort of an ending.
Cryptonomicon has dethroned Lord of the Rings as "Best book ever" in my opinion. I haven't read the Baroque cycle yet.
Most people here are programmers (broadly speaking). They like Cryptonomicon, it's about programmers. I found it long-winded and sub-par.
I'm a physicist. I (and other physicists I know who have read it) *loved* the Baroque cycle, even though it's far longer than Cryptonomicon. It's about physicists!
Keeping to this theme, Anathem is about intellectuals. If you live in the ivory tower (as I do) you'll probably understand right away why all the made up words are in there and find it entertaining.
I'm not sure how this applies to his earlier works. My wife is also a scientist and finds Snow Crash and Diamond Age unreadable, but likes his more recent work.
I finished the book, thought a bit about what he said in it and picked it back up for a second read to see what I missed the first time through. I liked it that much.
The made-up words? Big deal - he was just illustrating how we imbue meaning into symbols that we've never come across before. Sometimes we guess wrong, sometimes we're right. The book in a sense is recursive in the way it describes how we figure things out - the reader is actually engaging in the same process the story's characters are.
It's a 935-page novel that should be 600 pages or less.
You do know who wrote the book, right? He can't type out the 10 commandments without 250 pages, an epilogue,
An epilogue? From Neal Stephenson? He'd probably leave the tenth commandment out completely. But the first three commandments will be absolutely brilliant and will fill half the book and all your mind with their exciting implications.
Compare to other geek favorites Stephen R Donaldson, Robert Jordan and George R. R. Martin. Unlike them, Stephenson finished an entire story in a single book. How terse of him!
He's terse when you compare him with second-rate geek favourites. Try comparing him to first-rate writers like Asimov, Pratchett, Clarke or Tolkien (ooh, bad example that last one).
I've read 'em both, and I can't believe you would make the "Crisply Written" argument using Vinge as your example. Are we talking about the same guy?
Asimov was crisp. Early Arthur C. Clarke was crisp. HG Wells was so crisp there aren't even words.
But modern Sci-fi? There is no one who comes even close. All the best are wordier, they add in exposition and scene setting that would have been considered frippery 50 years ago.
It's still frippery, but everybody believes himself to be the new Tolkien. Look at fantasy books of the last 20 years. With the lone exception of Terry Pratchett, everybody wants to write big, epic, overwrought trilogies that grow way beyond their original intentions. Hell, even Pratchett's books have slowly been growing in size.
I have to disagree, my droog. Proctolexicogenesis is doubleplusungood. Any muggle author or holodeck scenarist worth his quatloos should be able to make do with the words that exist in plain frakking English.
Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
I'm pretty sure this is the first SF book I've read that in the largest part is based on the philosophies of Edmund Husserl (he's regarded as the founder of phenomenology).
And I'm dammed sure that Husserl's "The Phenomenology of Time" is Stephenson's inspiration for "The Book"! FWIW, I have never ever come across a book that even remotely challenges TPOT for the title of most densest, most opaque, most unreadable book ever. (The wikipedia link, as turgid as it is, is barely a 'Family Circus' synopsis of Husserl's prose).
Kudo's to Stephenson for even attempting to incorporate Husserl into SF!
I think of Cryptonomicon and The Baroque Cycle as
all one book -- the best book I've ever read. I've read the whole works seven times.
Anathem doesn't even come close. It's a perfectly good science fiction novel but his Cryptonomicon and The Baroque Cycle are a hard act to follow and set so high a hurdle that even the genius of NS failed to upstage himself. But he's so great that I willingly forgive him this misguided effort and still eagerly await his next opus. - Mike Spencer
they like the short ones the best. That's what they tell me anyway.
"The Time Machine" - short. Classic. Great.
"War of the Worlds" - same thing. Short. Great.
"Of Mice and Men" - short. great.
See the pattern here?
I wish more writers would take their 750+ page tomes and publish three different 250 page books, written more tightly. They'd sell more books, and they'd sell BETTER books.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
I have to agree. Unlike lots of other people, I thought the book started well, and ended less-well. It wasn't a terrible ending, but I was really interested in the history of the scholars and their sects.
It was still a good book, but a bit disappointing.
Fermat called, with the help of a medium. He wants his cryptic margin annotations back.
I want some more annotations myself.
Specifically, on the Cryptomnicon/Baroque scale, which one is this closer to? (It doesn't matter which you consider the high end of that scale.)
One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
Oh well. It seems to me that in writing In The Beginning was the Command Line Stephenson has suckered us all in to hoping that some lighter intellectual entertainment is to be had elsewhere in his writing... eventually. With Snow Crash he sealed the deal. Now we're in for the long haul, despite everthing else. I feel a little ripped off. I must stop buying the damn books, get a library card, or something.
It may not be his intention but it's how I feel.
If you're the sort of person who likes plot-focused fiction, you probably won't like Anathem. It's a book about ideas, and the search for truth in a seemingly meaningless universe.
Pratchett has always been as bad, he just publishes every 200-300 pages because he needs the money. Haven't you noticed he tends to stick with a character for a few books? Instead of paying for one mammoth book like the others, he's got you paying for 4 or 5!
Clever, innit.
The reviewer is an intellectual liteweight, in other words a clueless fuck-wit without the ability to create, but literate enough (barely) to string words together into a critique.
Ah, Critics......
This is perhaps one of the finest pieces of speculative fiction I have read in the past 40 years. It ranks with Herbert's Dune, and shares many qualities with that masterwork. I will be surprised if it is not the Hugo winner.
---SPOILER ALERT---
The Reviewer gets it wrong from the beginning.... This is not about "religious orders", in fact a great deal of time is spent dealing with the difficulty (impossibility?) of establishing the existence of a god. Further, it's not set on a world "very similar to Earth, in a fairly distant future", but on a world in a parallel cosmos, probably not more than 100 years in our future, if that.
The "made-up words" factor that he takes to task is critical to the whole book. To a reader with a classical education, most, if not all, of the "made-up words" have roots that are familiar. When this fails, a trip to the provided references is sufficient. The fact that these words are just on the edge of understanding is subtle evidence of the "hylean flow".
Yes, it is "wordy". Welcome to Stevenson. If you're here, you're expected to bring enough wit and dedication to understand.
I wonder if the fuck-wit even finished the book. It's certain he did not understand it.
Red
For other books, where they make up new names for periods of time, like "cycle" instead of "day" or make up a new word that replaces "hour", there's no reason to do so. If an author makes up a word, let's say "klek", and then defines it as "60 minutes", they've lost a lot of credibility with me and made it so that I'll almost certainly never recommend that book to anyone else again.
Too smeggin' right. Couldn't frackin' agree more.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Ultimately, I think that the criticisms of Stephenson (or indeed any author) boil down to one unique aspect of why we read: what entertains us. For some people, they just want to take their mind off the hook and let the story make its points in an entertaining yet open way. If that is the type of story you enjoy, Stephenson is not for you. For others, however, the relaxation comes in the being challenged and forced to reconcile idiosyncracies and/or counterfactual/counterintuitive leaps of faith/logic that the author uses to move the story along.
You were not alone in enjoying the Baroque Cycle, I enjoyed it immensely as well. What made that series and Anathem work (as well as Snow Crash and Cryptonomicon) was Stephenson's commitment to thoroughly understanding the background material and presenting what one might consider droll subject matter in an entertaining and creative way.(e.g. 17th Century european politics of science, ancient Sumerian mythology, the evolution of cryptography, and/or philosophy of knowledge itself.) For example, depsite the Baroque Cycle being a work of historical fiction, I learned a huge amount about 17th century Europe that I otherwise wouldn't have known (not being a history buff). I for one like learning something while being entertained (the Discovery Channel has made a business of it).
Finally, the criticism regarding making up words is ridiculous when you put it in this context - who can say that they know all of the terms used to describe any subject. For those unfamiliar with a given subject matter, for example logic, if you call a "tautology" a "selftruth" what does it matter as long as it is internally consistent? Using Anathem as the example, the use of similar words (or often times second/third meanings of words) is a useful device to remind the reader that it is not English (it's Fluccish), it is not a political system that was invented on Earth, it is not a future Earth, etc. That the words have more commonly used English analogs does not mean that the author should use them, especially if it defeats the purpose of keeping the reader cemented in the "other" world. A "Fraa" is certainly not a "friar" in the sense of how we define a friar in English - the use of Fraa reminds us that the character's world is not our own.
Just my $0.02
-- Max
The book was definitely worth reading, but there were some definite weaknesses.
I felt that the book was more about the ideas than the people. Part of this stems from the fact that stephenson never describes the appearance of the characters in detail. This may have been necessary to not giving away elements of the plot (think of that twilight zone episode where everyone has pig faces) but it means that Stephenson doesn't get to bring out one of his strongest abilities, his strength as a visual storyteller. Part of what brings his other characters alive is his lively description of the, which is hampered if you can't even say what their face looks like.
Also, for some reason Stephenson started without a strong hook. I think part of that is the barrage of new terms, which makes the book difficult to read at first, and obscures the plot.
Aside from that, I felt like Stephenson didn't bring to bear one of his primary strengths. One of the things that hooked me in snow crash, the diamond age, cryptonomicon, and even the baroque cycle, was his excellent action writing. His ability to describe a firefight and really engage the reader on the level that a movie or a comic book might, with stories of heroism and derring can take what is at its core a heavily conceptual novel, and make it not only interesting, but entertaining to read.
Yet, the action scenes were a bit sparse in Anathem, and those that were there felt a bit weak. The scene where the Ringing Vale rescue Erasmus seemed like the primary action scene of the novel... and I didn't feel like it compared favorably with Stephenson's other action scenes. In parts the Ringing Vale came off as fairly generic shoalin kung fu masta movie martial artists, doing lots of unnecessary backflips and jumping around. Normally, Stephenson fight scenes feel more chaotic and real.
Even with those failings though, it's probably one of the better books I've read this year, and I don't regret reading it for a minute. The concepts, which the story stays focussed on for the most part, are where it is at. The extended discussion of physics and multiple universes was cool.
I was also interested in seeing Stephenson write a straight up old school hard sci-fi novel. Most of his books are equivocations of sci fi. Snow crash and Diamond Age were both cyber punk. Cryptonomicon was only *secretly* science fiction, as in, virtually no one who read it noticed the sci fi elements, and they could have been discarded easily. In the same vein, the baroque cycle was more historical fiction than anything else, with some Enoch Root mixed in.
Anathem on the other hand, is hard sci fi. Think Arthur C. Clarke, Larry Niven, Stanislaw Lem, and the awful novelist of the Foundation series.
I don't think Stephenson is really at his strongest in this genre. Maybe because a space adventure isn't even fun unless you are willing to stoop to putting some sexy alien babes in your
book *cough* Niven *cough*.
I actually like long books. I read pretty fast, and a nice long hardcover seems like better value for the money, quite frankly.
I also had a bit of a chuckle over some of the "technical" definitions in this book. Particularly "bullshyte". Sounds a lot like stuff I have to read at work every day.
It is very irritating to the reader, especially when you know the author is making relatively big bucks (in the book authoring world) for the works. It would not be so bad if he were authoring for fun... but at today's prices for books, I refuse to pay by the word count. It is the quality, not the verbosity, that matters.
"If I have written such a long letter, it means that I did not have enough time to make it shorter." - Blaise Pascal
I have to disagree with your review. I think Anathem is one of Stephenson's most thought provoking and inspiring works to date. I found the world(s) he created for it to be extremely refreshing and the dialogues and ideas to be stimulating great fun. The book does start slow but that is totally appropriate for establishing such a complex and interesting setting. I thought the ending was one of the strongest of all of his novels.
I have read Snow Crash, The Diamond Age, Cryptonomicon, The Baroque Cycle and Anathem. I love all of these stories but I would say that Snow Crash and The Diamond Age were a little weaker than the others. Again, I love those two books, I just think they aren't quite as good as his later works.
I really don't understand how a fan could dislike The Baroque Cycle in particular. It is just so full of sweeping swashbuckling geeky science social and economic historic hilariousness that I couldn't put it down. Just the name of Jack Shaftoe brings a smile to my face and a warm glow in my heart. L'Emmerdeur, the King of the Vagabond forever!
I think you make a good point. HOWEVER... keep in mind that books are meant to be read. In order to be read by a wide audience, they have to possess certain qualities. Chief among those qualities are education, inspiration of imagination, and entertainment.
Stephenson has chosen as his forte the "historical novel"... not only that, but a historical novel based on a fictional history. Okay. But one has to understand the difficulties of the genre:
(a) It is not very educational. It might contain some factual history but it blends in fantasy, often in ways that are hard to separate. So it fails on quality 1.
(b) One is reciting a history. In that sense, it is unlike most science fiction, in that it does not inspire images of the future, but explains images of a (fictional) past. This is difficult to do in a very entertaining way; The Difference Engine was the last novel I have read that successfully did this, and just barely, and it was one of a very few. So: this project is likely to fall down on quality 2 (and in fact that seems to be the biggest objection: too much explanation and not enough action). It does not inspire imagination, except in the narrow sense of imagination about how things might have been, not how they might be, which people tend to find more exciting.
(c) Entertainment. Hmmmmm. How entertaining did you find your history classes in school? This overlaps with (b) somewhat. The history of events must be explained before anything makes much sense. This tends to be a dry conveyance of information, and is almost antithesis to entertainment.
So I give Stephenson credit for doing his research, and presenting interesting facts and scenarios. But the rest of the formula must be maintained, and I am not convinced that he can hold them all together for such long works without losing his audience.
From the review: "Anathem is set on a fictional planet called Arbre, which is very similar to Earth, in a fairly distant future. Much has happened, as we discover during the course of the story. World wars, revolutions, climate change, etc... During all these tribulations, religious orders have provided a certain amount of continuity, and have pursued theoretical scientific research. They still live like monks and nuns, even though there are occasional glimpses of highly advanced technology (materials, genetics, etc...)." This sounds a little like Canticle, although not totally. Still, source of ideas maybe?
He writes at an amazing rate (or used to, at least), but I think it has ceased being about money a long time ago. I think he's one of the richest writers in the world, and second richest fantasy author after J.K. Rowling.
But while his books have grown a bit in size, each book is still a self-contained story that wraps up all its own story lines, unlike the mammoth trilogies from some other authors. But compare it to The Colour of Magic: that was a thin book that contained four reasonably self-contained stories.
in not reading the Baroque Cycle, since I found Cryptonomicon to be a good enough book, but at the limits of my tolerance for verbosity and dead-end subplots.
I saw the trend, and did not much care for it.
However, contrary to what another poster wrote, I do not believe a writer (a commercial writer, anyway) can afford to say "I will not go back to my old ways, I must progress and evolve to bigger and better things", in the face of all those former fans who say "Evolution, my ass! Jesus, the recent stuff really sucks!"
Which is pretty much what a lot of people are saying.
Maybe I am assuming too much, but I assume he still wants to be paid for his writing!
Anathem really is a dream of a book. Burying all the sense of technology so deep in history that it's irrelevant is a feat that's been attempted before but never so completely accomplished. And the geek who saves the world is such an archetypal fantasy. Even if Stephenson never gets rich, he'll inspire generations of writers to come.
Whoa.
Once an author becomes really successful, as Stephenson rightfully is, editors refuse to push hard enough for cuts. Instead, like the later works of Dickens, we get overbearing and flabby books.
I have three words for you: "M. Night Shayamalan" (Ok, two words and one initial.)
The Sixth Sense was a masterpiece. It's just a shame it was his first movie, not the culmination of a succession of slowly improving movies, because we're robbed of the product of his development. Everything MNS has done since 6th Sense needed to be dragged out and shot in a ditch in pre-production.
Having said that, I don't get the same sense from Stephenson's books. They continue to give. I'm prepared to let him run with it. I feared he'd jumped the shark with Cryptonomicon, but System of the World had plenty of thought-fodder, and Anathem has so much more.
"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order." Ed Howdershelt
Color of Magic is the best example of this! The Light Fantastic is his most direct sequel and they really should have been published as one book. As his works have gotten thicker, he's been better about keeping one complete tale in a book, although his Postal/Making Money pair are headed back that way.
I actually like his books, I'm being snarky since he really needs to kick out a dozen more before his Alzheimer's affects his writing.
Then again, some say it always has:)
Unfortunately, lack of comprehension, more often than malice, attributes to the consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity.
Those things you're doing with that stuff you just bought? That's not what it's for! -
I read one-half of a Stephenson book.
Four pages of detailed description of a parking lot that had no purpose in the story other than some characters walked through it.
Two pages of descriptions of some characters' watches.
Half a page of description of the hamburger bought at a drive-thru window (another half page description of that, too).
Its clear that Stephenson writes by voice-recorder. Walking through parking lots, buying hamburgers and then transcribing them verbatim and in detail to make absurdly long (and expensive) books. I do not see how anyone can read this junk. Do you LIKE being ripped off by this guy?
Yeah, yeah - I know. i "just don't get the wonderfulness of the style."
I would add Zodiac to Snow Crash, The Diamond Age, Cryptonomicon and In the Beginning...was the Command Line as great reads. Such that when I put them down I went looking for more. The rest of his stuff ahhh who cares. I couldn't even finish Quicksilver. By Cryptonomicon you started to see the germination of what would become the style of the Baroque cycle and evidently Anathem. It is really to bad because I do feel that it is just unfettered ego that has turned a once sharp witty intelligent writer into a ponderous one.
A good editing job would have turned a good novel into one that is worthy of him.
According to a friend of mine, who works in publishing, publishers no longer edit established authors. For that matter, they rarely sign authors whom obviously need editing or coaching. This both to save money and to reduce time-to-release.
Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
Hi AC.
In case you're not from US, here's a couple of hints in descending order of reknown.
1. Declaration of Independence.
2. Merge of FirstPost and Second Life
3. Flesch Rating = Rudolf Flesch - pioneer of readability metrics.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
The first page is a brilliant hook. But then it spends some 100 pages plotting the world-tapestry. In that plot diagram, it doesn't kick into the third gear until a ways in.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
You stopped reading Baroque after book 1?? WHAT? You don't get to talk to me about Neal's work any more. It is widely known that Quicksilver is a slow start. Too bad you weren't committed enough to read Confusion and System of the World. You can't, I repeat can't, CANNOT provide a real review of Anathem without knowing the stuff from those other two Baroque books (because you can't "get" everything in Anathem without knowing it). Does the name Enoch Root ring a fucking bell? How can true Stephenson fans possibly give ANY weight to your opinion now? You have failed terribly as a reviewer!
Sounds like he spent too much time reading Delany ;)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I am aware that there are different opinions. I was not aware, however, that his recent books were bestsellers.
But the vast majority of talk I have heard / read about them has been negative. And as you know, I have not read them myself. Given the information I had, I think it was justified to presume that he was losing a lot of his readership.
For one thing, she is not old enough to remember the Bobsey Twins (I am older than her, and I don't... but my parents do).
You can as easily say, as some philosophers have, that there ARE no new ideas: they have all been thought before.
But new generations think them in different contexts, and to them they are still new ideas.