srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (07/01/85)
Not to interrupt the raging discussions of Space 1999 and the Covenant
books (*) but I thought I'd comment briefly on two books I've recently
read, _Null A Three_, A.E. Van Vogt and _Between the Strokes of Night_
by Charles Sheffield.
_Null A Three_ is the long-awaited threquel to _Players of Null A_ and
_World of Null A_. The introduction briefly discusses the history of
the series and recaps the action in the first two books (necessary for many
readers, since it has been a 20 year gap between the 2nd and 3rd books).
Overall, I wasn't too pleased with this book. It seems quite perfunctory
and mechanical. I was much impressed with the earlier Null A books, though
that may have been my fascination with the idea of General Semantics, which
seemed much more revolutionary to me as a high school student than it does
now as a worldly, jaded grad studetn.
At some point this third book becomes a sort of space opera (so much so
that you wonder if EE is back). Worse, it doesn't draw any particular
conclusions, or milk the possibilities inherent in General Semantics or
Gilbert's extra brain. Instead it is mostly an action book, with
confrontations between the main characters from the other books and TWO new
alien species, neither of which is particularly well drawn or studied.
There are also quite a few new characters with deus ex style powers to confuse
things further.
All in all, a fairly mechanical sequel. Buy it and read it if you're a Null
A fan, but don't expect anything exciting.
_Between the Strokes of the Night_, on the other hand, is an interesting
hard-science style book. I haven't read any of Sheffield's other books
(_The Selkie_ and _Sight of Proteus_ are mentioned on the cover), but the
back cover blurb from Analog says "...(delivers) a steady stream of the mind
stretching ideas Sheffield is noted for." I can't speak for his work in
general, but this book at least presents some interesting ideas (not all new)
worked in interesting ways.
A caveat at this point: I'm only about half-way through, so I may end up
disappointed if the ending sucks.
Sheffield's writing style is somewhat reminiscent of Niven at his better
moments (i.e., 10 years ago). His characters are somewhat better drawn,
but it is mainly the force of ideas and inventions that drive the story.
Briefly, BTSOTN is about the development of Mankind over the space of some
20,000 years (anyone else like these eternity spanning plots?), mainly through
his development of new technology and his adaptation to new environments.
There is less light given to psychological changes in the race (the humans
of 20000+ seem no different from the humans of 2000, though there are
segments of the population that are vastly changed [I'm just getting to that
part]).
All in all, a good, absorbing read. I stayed out too long in the sun because
of this book, which is, I think, a fairly high recommendation.
-- Scott Turner
(*) Which isn't to say that we don't need a good raging discussion of Covenant
going. What would SF-Lovers be if we didn't have one of the following going:
(a) Covenant discussion. ("He's depressing", "He isn't", "He's
depressing", "He isn't"...)
(b) Star Wars discussion. ("The other hope is Leia", "No, it was
Hans", "No, Leia", "No, Hans"...)
(c) Star Trek discussion ("The said kilometers", "No, they said
krullmetters", "I have the video tape", "So do I")
(d) Space 1999 discussion ("She could shape-change", "She couldn't")
(e) LOTR ("Gandalf was the other hope", "No, he could shape change.")
(f) Argument with our token author, S. Brust ("You meant for Jaweh
to appear evil", "I did not", "You did", "Hey, _I_ wrote the
book", "So what? You also like Zelazny.")JAFFE@RUTGERS.ARPA (07/08/85)
From: ucla-cs!srt
Not to interrupt the raging discussions of Space 1999 and the Covenant
books (*) but I thought I'd comment briefly on two books I've recently
read, _Null A Three_, A.E. Van Vogt and _Between the Strokes of Night_
by Charles Sheffield.
_Null A Three_ is the long-awaited threquel to _Players of Null A_ and
_World of Null A_. The introduction briefly discusses the history of
the series and recaps the action in the first two books (necessary for many
readers, since it has been a 20 year gap between the 2nd and 3rd books).
Overall, I wasn't too pleased with this book. It seems quite perfunctory
and mechanical. I was much impressed with the earlier Null A books, though
that may have been my fascination with the idea of General Semantics, which
seemed much more revolutionary to me as a high school student than it does
now as a worldly, jaded grad studetn.
At some point this third book becomes a sort of space opera (so much so
that you wonder if EE is back). Worse, it doesn't draw any particular
conclusions, or milk the possibilities inherent in General Semantics or
Gilbert's extra brain. Instead it is mostly an action book, with
confrontations between the main characters from the other books and TWO new
alien species, neither of which is particularly well drawn or studied.
There are also quite a few new characters with deus ex style powers to confuse
things further.
All in all, a fairly mechanical sequel. Buy it and read it if you're a Null
A fan, but don't expect anything exciting.
_Between the Strokes of the Night_, on the other hand, is an interesting
hard-science style book. I haven't read any of Sheffield's other books
(_The Selkie_ and _Sight of Proteus_ are mentioned on the cover), but the
back cover blurb from Analog says "...(delivers) a steady stream of the mind
stretching ideas Sheffield is noted for." I can't speak for his work in
general, but this book at least presents some interesting ideas (not all new)
worked in interesting ways.
A caveat at this point: I'm only about half-way through, so I may end up
disappointed if the ending sucks.
Sheffield's writing style is somewhat reminiscent of Niven at his better
moments (i.e., 10 years ago). His characters are somewhat better drawn,
but it is mainly the force of ideas and inventions that drive the story.
Briefly, BTSOTN is about the development of Mankind over the space of some
20,000 years (anyone else like these eternity spanning plots?), mainly through
his development of new technology and his adaptation to new environments.
There is less light given to psychological changes in the race (the humans
of 20000+ seem no different from the humans of 2000, though there are
segments of the population that are vastly changed [I'm just getting to that
part]).
All in all, a good, absorbing read. I stayed out too long in the sun because
of this book, which is, I think, a fairly high recommendation.
-- Scott Turner
(*) Which isn't to say that we don't need a good raging discussion of Covenant
going. What would SF-Lovers be if we didn't have one of the following going:
(a) Covenant discussion. ("He's depressing", "He isn't", "He's
depressing", "He isn't"...)
(b) Star Wars discussion. ("The other hope is Leia", "No, it was
Hans", "No, Leia", "No, Hans"...)
(c) Star Trek discussion ("The said kilometers", "No, they said
krullmetters", "I have the video tape", "So do I")
(d) Space 1999 discussion ("She could shape-change", "She couldn't")
(e) LOTR ("Gandalf was the other hope", "No, he could shape change.")
(f) Argument with our token author, S. Brust ("You meant for Jaweh
to appear evil", "I did not", "You did", "Hey, _I_ wrote the
book", "So what? You also like Zelazny.")brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust) (07/10/85)
> > -- Scott Turner > > (*) Which isn't to say that we don't need a good raging discussion of Covenant > going. What would SF-Lovers be if we didn't have one of the following going: > > (f) Argument with our token author, S. Brust ("You meant for Jaweh > to appear evil", "I did not", "You did", "Hey, _I_ wrote the > book", "So what? You also like Zelazny.") This isn't to imply that I don't think the above is funny (I do), or that I didn't enjoy the comment (I did), BUT. . . Does this answer whoever it was who didn't understand why I felt recluctant to answer criticism? On the other hand, I do object to being called a "token" author. I haven't toked in over a year. These days I drop acid. -- SKZB