Neal Stephenson's "Anathem" Due In September 248
Alexander Rose writes "Neal Stephenson's new novel, ANATHEM, germinated in 01999 when Danny Hillis asked him and several other contributors to sketch out their ideas of what the Millennium Clock might look like. Stephenson tossed off a quick sketch and promptly forgot about it. Five years later however, when he was between projects, the idea came back to him, and he began to explore the possibility of building a novel around it. ANATHEM is the result, and will be released on September 9th, 02008." Read Rose's complete posting for more information about the release of the book, which he describes as set "in a genre bending alt-future-retro world where mechani-punk technology meets space opera in a blend of the best of Snow Crash and the Baroque Cycle."
The only question that really matters (Score:3, Insightful)
Urgh... (Score:5, Insightful)
GAH (Score:5, Insightful)
Read Rose's complete posting for more information about the release of the book, which he describes as set "in a genre bending alt-future-retro world where mechani-punk technology meets space opera in a blend of the best of Snow Crash and the Baroque Cycle."
My god, I've gone cross-eyed.
Re:Temporal sickness? (Score:1, Insightful)
Why would we? We don't prefix years before 1000 A.D. with a 0.
Re:Temporal sickness? (Score:3, Insightful)
Padding years with a leading zero isn't forward-looking, it's naively self-centered, assuming that people will still be using our silly "Anno Domini" year-counting system eight millennia from now. (I mean... don't you people even watch Star Trek?)
Re:I have nothing useful to contribute, other than (Score:3, Insightful)
But the Baroque Cycle was nearly flawless.
Having enjoyed Snow Crash and Cryptonomicon, I really wanted to like the Baroque Cycle. After trudging through the first 200 pages that practically dared the reader to continue, I gave up on it. Where was the hook that made Snow Crash and Crypto such page turners?
(and don't say page 201)
Re:Temporal sickness? (Score:2, Insightful)
Stop wooshing. If that many people didn't get 'it', you had to be clearer.
Jesus fuck... (Score:3, Insightful)
Will all the leading-zero whiners please take 0.5 fucking seconds to think about what a "millennium clock" might be?
Seriously, get your act together, people. This is supposed to be news for nerds, here.
Re:GAH (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The only question that really matters (Score:3, Insightful)
Nah, it was just fucking postmodern. That's one of the rules of postmodern writing: Don't resolve anything.
The secret to reading postmodern fiction is trying to figure out what he was really talking about. The gold was a metaphor: if they were really trying to remove the gold from the mountain, that was about the worst way to do it, and, on top of that, remember that there were jewels and artwork in there as well, which would be destroyed by such a method.
The "pumping the mountain full of gas" thing was reminiscent of Bobby Shaftoe's death (with him pumping the bunker full of gas and lighting it), so he was probably drawing a parallel there.
Re:Temporal sickness? (Score:3, Insightful)
No one now writes 100 A.D. as 0100 A.D. Why do you predict they'll change this in the future?
Neal Stephenson doesn't DO endings. (Score:4, Insightful)
The Diamond Age had the same problem.
Reading a Neal Stephenson novel is like strapping yourself into the back seat of a converted jet trainer to tour the Grand Canyon. For a lot of people, by the time they've gotten used to dodging pillars of rock at half the speed of sound and they're really enjoying the view the pilot flips over the rim and... that's all, tour's over.
I get used to the view pretty quick, and I've come to accept the endings, so I'll be picking up ANATHEM anyway.
Re:The only question that really matters (Score:4, Insightful)
What's wrong with the ending of Snow Crash? Do you really need spelled out what happened after that, like in a fairy tale? And if you do, I figure you find little enjoyment in most novels that were written after, say, 1870.
Re:Neal Stephenson doesn't DO endings. (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes he does.
Read "The Big U".
It has a very nearly perfect ending, after being hundreds of pages of crazy raving that only a very bright writer desperately homesick for dorm life would find worthwhile.
And then this wonderful ending.
I think he spent his lifetime supply of wrapping-up on that one book, and now he's stuck with the rest of his books ending like life: just sort of wandering off aimlessly.
Re:less is more (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, no. He's got a publisher with the balls to let him write what he wants to, and willing to sell it to people who appreciate it. I would have missed any single paragraph removed from the Baroque Cycle, and remain grateful that he won whatever stare-down might have been necessary to get an editor or publisher to let him have it his way. It's wonderful work, and if you're in such a hurry to get back to your Wii, just limit yourself to comic books or something you can handle while in the bathroom. I hope that he doesn't give a moment's thought to lightening up. 960 pages? What's the big deal? Maybe for people with gnat-sized attention spans and shallow vocabularies. It's not meant to be fast - his stuff is meant to be savored.
Re:less is more (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:GAH (Score:5, Insightful)
A Canticle for Liebowitz is probably one of the top 20 or so true science fiction classics (as opposed to fantasy or weird) and is worth a read (and a reread).
Re:less is more (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, no. He's got a publisher with the balls to let him write what he wants to, and willing to sell it to people who appreciate it.
I don't buy it. Although I loved Snow Crash, I think there were editing problems all over that thing. And for Diamond Age, any editor with starch would have looked at the last chapter and said, "Seriously? That's how you're going to end this? Take two weeks of vacation and then we'll talk." That wasn't meant to be savored; it was meant to get him done with the book ASAP.
The upside of a weak editor is that we get a lot of nice bits that another editor might have cut. The digression in Diamond Age into the label of the steak sauce in the pub during lunch with Napier and the Duke was one of those that pleased me particularly.
However, at some point one has to trim enough to get a manageable book out the door. A fine French meal is meant to be savored, too, but there's a reason none of them run to a 230 courses over a continuous 48 hours at the table. I know a lot of heavy readers, serious readers, and 75% of them didn't even bother starting the third volume of the Baroque Cycle. After two volumes, they'd had more than their fill.
just limit yourself to comic books or something you can handle while in the bathroom
Was there some particular need to be a prick about this? The other guy's comment seemed like a reasonable statement of personal preference.
Re:less is more (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe not. I guess I'm tired of people who see a long book (which they haven't even bothered to pick up!) and simply default to saying it, or the author, or editor have failed. It's what's wrong with a great deal of our culture these days, and speaks volumes (if you'll pardon the pun) about the diseased state of our collective attention span. It's why people can't get through a two-page science article and draw some useful conclusions. It's why people can't vote sensibly. It's why so much potentially great entertainment - in all media - is chasing its own tail down the drain, searching for the lowest common denominator. Spanking Neal Stephenson and his editors for the length of the Baroque Cycle is to utterly, completely miss the point of that piece of work (and indeed of Stephenson's purpose for writing it and his choice of style).
I loved Snow Crash, I think there were editing problems all over that thing.
Yup. Likewise with Cryptonomicon. By the time he got to the B.C., he'd come a long way, I think. Greatly improved. I'll always admire T.S. Elliot for saying, "I'd have written you a shorter letter, but I didn't have time." Brevity - well used - can be a delight. But that isn't the only delight. People who don't like the Baroque Cycle probably couldn't make it through a Dorothy Dunnett novel, either (to say nothing of the series of them needed to actually tell a complete tale). It's a style one likes, or one does not. But not liking something meant to last you through many long evenings of reading doesn't mean that the author or his editor have somehow failed.
Climax without denouement (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Waiting for a review of the ending (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The only question that really matters (Score:5, Insightful)
As for me, Snow Crash is the only reason I buy any of his books.
I've bought every stinking thing Neal has ever written simply because he wrote Snow Crash, and I have this weird, vain hope that he might again someday write a book even half as brilliant. So I'm out a couple hundred bucks, and have a lot of disappointment sitting on shelves in my library, but I'll likely buy Anathem the day it comes out, too.
Just in case it's another Snow Crash. Please let it be another Snow Crash.