bondo_ba ([info]bondo_ba) wrote,
@ 2008-07-10 11:53:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:reviews

Revelation Space and the New Space Opera
Finished reading Revelation Space by Alastair Reynolds.  Enjoyed it for a number of reasons.  

In the first place, the book itself is a great book.  The universe in which the action transcurs is real, scientifically believable (not surprising, considering Reynolds' hard-science background) and gritty enough to give the reader the "used" universe feel of the first couple of Star Wars movies.  Very used.  And you get the feeling that it's a cold, uncaring universe as well.  And the playing field is teens of light-years across.  There is no FTL trickery, either.  You want to cross the gap, you need to be able to invest the time.

The overall tone of the book is dark, very dark.  You are never under the illusion that nice things have to happen to the main characters in the end. It works very well in a setting that makes it clear that the universe doesn't care.

It isn't perfect, of course:  one criticism I might give is that the characters are a bit flat.  You understand why some of them do what they're doing, but feel that others are being driven by the plot as opposed to the other way around (this did surprise me a bit, since my first exposure to Mr. Reynolds, and the story that led me to buy the novel, was "Zima Blue", in which the plot is driven entirely by the character, and can only be understood when the charater is understood).  But the plot of the novel is so compelling that you end up forgiving this pecadillo.  The reader really wants to know what the hell is going on.

The second reason I enjoyed it is that it is, to me, the novel that best symbolizes the New Space Opera movement, which signifies a return to the roots of the SF genre - but with a lot less innocence than that shown by the pioneers from the thirties (Buccaneers of Venus, anyone?).  It's a darker, grittier and less heroic space opera, which seems to be an offshoot of the Hard SF revival in Britain - both movements which I heartily applaud, and which threaten to take SF back to popularity among readers.

Read this book.  Even if you hate it, it's an important book in the genre: the first novel of the man who finds himself leading the move in a new and better direction.




(3 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]peadarog
2008-07-10 08:16 pm UTC (link)
He has written some great books and is an absolute gentleman besides. However, I'm more pessimistic than you are about the revival of SF as a result of the British movement of hard SF writers. I think the mass of modern readers would feel more comfortable with Star Trek level tech-speak than the more sophisticated stuff you find in Reynolds or Baxter.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]bondo_ba
2008-07-11 04:19 pm UTC (link)
Perhaps, but I always feel that younger readers are just a little more techno-savvy than ollder ones, and aren't quite as frightened by discussions of event horizons or brain uploading. Remember, what became Star-Trek speak (phasers, warp speed, hyperspace), oriiginally had to be explained to viewers, so there's still hope! Young people today are quick to assimilate technobabble.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]peadarog
2008-07-11 07:41 pm UTC (link)
I don't think anybody is particularly shocked by brain uploading now, as it's made its way into the zeitgeist. But other stuff, quarks, higgs-boson etc... yes, that stuff puts off a *lot* of readers, IMHO. Not me and obviously, not you, but lots. I think it's the main reason the SF section is shrinking and the fantasy section is taking its place.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(3 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…