hakanson@orstcs.UUCP (07/25/83)
#N:orstcs:11600006:000:3718 orstcs!hakanson Jul 6 11:16:00 1983 I've thus far received 3 letters regarding James P. Hogan, and more may be on their way. Some have asked for my opinion on his writing, so here it is (no spoilers, I think): Hogan doesn't have the smooth style of some of the "greats" such as Frank Herbert, et.al. (my opinion -- no flames please), but his works are of the type that I classify as having the world carry the story rather than the literary style. Anne McCaffrey & Stephen Donaldson are of this ilk -- they have good but not excellent writing style & skill, such that they are quite readable, but they are not as smooth as those authors whose prose is more pleasing. There are other authors whose styles capture us but whose "worlds" bite the big one. And there are the greats who do both very well. Personally, if I can't have "great," I'll settle for those with interesting, cohesive worlds over those with only pleasing style. Perhaps I went a bit far in saying Donaldson's style is "good," but I happen to think his world is interesting enough (in places) to keep me reading. After all, the interesting worlds are what separate F&SF from other fiction, right? Back to Hogan. As I said, I feel that Hogan's style may not be the best, but he is a relatively new author, and I think he'll improve with practice. Until then, I'll still read everything he comes out with as long as his worlds are as good as they have been, and they have been excellent. I'm not sure I have a favorite -- it depends on my mood. I guess that I'd place them all at pretty much the same level. For enjoyment, I really liked The Two Faces of Tomorrow. One of my favorite (funny) scenes occurs in the aftermath of the big battle, where one of the officers tells how Napoleon's officers wore red uniforms to keep the blood from showing if they were wounded (bad for morale). He said something to the effect that "I sure was glad I was wearing brown pants when we came around the corner and ran into all those (hostile) robots!" For comments on society, I'd have to vote for Voyage from Yesteryear. The society of the Chironians is admittedly impossible to consider evolving here on Earth. Only in the perfect isolation that Hogan provides could such a thing come to pass, and even then conditions would have to be perfect. I, for one, would really like to live in such a society. It seems to carry the notion of Freedom to its logical extreme, almost as if American society took another step, from where it is today, of the size it took when it split from England. Hogan even relates the Chironians to the Colonists in the New World, e.g. in a quote of some visiting British aristocrat commenting on Americans being "so disgustingly equal." Such freedom that the Chironians have is as nearly incomprehensible to us as that of our forefathers must have been to the British "establishment." It is difficult enough to understand that one almost has to reread the book from the societal viewpoint, rather than from the enjoyment angle. Yet only once did Voyage seem to lose momentum in the enjoyment department, and that was because it was difficult to follow the physics of "tweedles," etc. But that kind of thing can happen to any author, and I'd rather s/he at least *try* to explain things, instead of just making them happen magically. Even magic has to be explained to a certain extent (for me)! I also really enjoyed the Giants' series, as well as The Genesis Machine and Thrice Upon a Time (any book that starts over twice as well as this one does is remarkable). But I've run off at the keyboard long enough. I have to go to the bookstore to see if any new Hogan books have come out. Anyone heard of any? Marion Hakanson hp-pcd!orstcs!hakanson