Cauldron
category: science fiction, author:Jack McDevitt
book 6 of The Academy Novelsoriginal copyright 2007,
read in September 2010
Agamedes' opinion: 6 out of 10
This book in one word? "Slow."The cover says, "The logical heir to Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke." But then, Stephen King knows all about dead slow writing... Like King's own books, Cauldron is slow, slow, slow.
Is it "hard" science fiction? Well, the "slow" may be because it's a story of the development of new space flight technology. Technology -- and space flight -- first, action and adventure come a slow second. Yet there is no explanation for the new space drive: it's just faster than the old. So it's not Asimov or Clarke foreseeing new technology; it's McDevitt imagining that some unknown and undescribed new technology will be developed.
The actual theme of the book is the difficulty of getting people to accept new and exciting opportunities. We have a new and faster faster than light drive! But let's just stay at home... McDevitt is keen to see humanity expand out into the stars -- and he sees caution and cowardice slowing down the expansion. All very current, I support the idea, it just hasn't made for a very exciting story.
The pace of scientific development is -- realistically -- slow. Does the test flight work first time? No. Second time? Not immediately. I'm reminded of an old Readers Digest article on pulp magazine writers...
The writers were paid by the word: more words, more pay. So a gunfighter -- for example -- would never kill his opponent with the first bullet. "Bang!" was not enough. "Bang! Bang! Bang!" etc -- all the way to the very last bullet -- earned more income. Just like those pulp writers, McDevitt prefers the sloooow plot development.
Then there's the science.
As I mentioned, McDevitt has new technology but no explanation of its theoretical basis. No worries. It just means that this is not -- according to my definitions -- "hard" science fiction. Then there is the obvious oversight -- something that clashed even with the light level of scientific explanation.
The galaxy, it seems, is littered with unstoppable interstellar objects which destroy anything which has regular, rectangular outlines. Civilisations, for example, are regularly shaped and regularly destroyed.
The heroes are setting out to visit the source of these killer objects. The source is near the galactic centre. So the spaceships are built up with extra, external anti-radiation armour. And that armour -- is like a box: regular, rectangular... just asking to be destroyed by the killer objects that are produced at the spaceships' destination!
Ah well. It's a fun book. It may make more sense if you read the previous five in the series. Still...
Science fiction, grand scale, a message for today. Not too bad. Really.
===
re-read in September 2018:
All of the above. Plus: How stupid are the characters ?!
The approach to spaceflight is a bit like Doc Smith's approach: here's a spaceship, hop aboard, take-off. Except that Doc Smith's characters are competent. Strong, intelligent, capable. McDevitt's characters have more depth, yet none of them are particularly likeable. And none are particularly competent.
Let's all go into this hole in the ground ! No need to leave anyone on watch. When radio contact is lost: Let's all just keep going ! No need to keep in touch with anyone who can see if danger approaches... All this on a planet which is absolutely teeming with vicious predators.
Then the remaining characters reach the centre of the galaxy. There's an intelligent being there, it's been there for a billion years or so, it's millions of light years from Earth. And it speaks English... Good grief. I suspect that logic was thrown out so that the final chapters could make a point.
And that's like a lot of this book: unrelated incidents, each there to make some point. It's readable but oh so slow. The book really needs a more coherent -- and more interesting -- plot.
For an independent and thoughtful review of your processes, problems or documents, email nickleth at gmail dot com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment