ChronoSpace 95
ChronoSpace | |
author | Allen Steele |
pages | 320 |
publisher | Ace Books |
rating | 1/10 Boo! Hiss! |
reviewer | Bonker |
ISBN | 0441008321 |
summary | A promising time-travel concept with a flawed and disappointing execution. |
It's an intriguing concept and one that the author explores with relish. Indeed, one of the two main characters in the story spends a great deal of his time exploring the social climate of pre-World War II Germany during Hitler's rise to power. After the initial concept is explained, however, the story starts to break down.
The author seems infinitely more interested in name-dropping other, more successful sci-fi authors and scientists. Steele has done his research on obscure historical persona, but he can't seem to fix the holes in his own story.
A good example in terms of broken plot is the fictional scientific principle the author uses to drive his time-travel ships. It's called the 'Morris-Thorne' principle in the story, obviously named after the scientists who discovered it. Since this *is* a time-travel story, when a character named Morris is introduced, the observant reader would think that the author is stitching his story together, trying to subtly explain things to the reader. The observant reader would be wrong, because this angle is never touched again. In fact, the author rather absent-mindedly contradicts the possibility later in the story.
Another good example is the date scheme that Steele uses to identify his chapters. After the inevitable 'uhoh, we caused a paradox' event in the middle of the story, one of the dates listed mysteriously jumps from Monday, January 14th, 1998 to Thursday, January 15th, 1998. (The latter is correct. Monday was the 12th in 1998.) In any other kind of story, this kind of discrepancy could be easily dismissed as an editorial oversight. In a time-travel story, it's *supposed* to be a dead giveaway, just like the next date problem, when it jumps from a correct day in 1998 to an incorrect day in 1997. It's not any kind of giveaway. It's an editing mistake, and a painful one at that.
What's really amusing about this is that, earlier in the story, one of the characters makes the case for having to know the exact time and date in order to time-travel correctly. Apparently having the wrong date doesn't make much of a difference to their calculations when they use it to time-travel because it's never mentioned again. Neither are the other limitations on time-travel the author introduces, such as the inability of time-travellers to breach the first millennium or earlier.
The book is ridden with inconsistencies like this. I'm not sure if it's laziness or incompetence on the part of the author or if Mr. Steele was stuck with a rhesus monkey for an editor, but in a story where incidental details matter so much, these otherwise trivial errors are hard to forgive.
The climax of the book is a first-degree act of Deus Ex Machina, perpetrated by judgmental aliens who are super-intelligent and somehow immune to paradox. It's hard to swallow by the time you've already waded through the rest of the story's problems. The cautionary ending is bitter and disappointing. Steele successfully deviates from formula in this respect, but only at the cost of making his painfully static, flat characters seem even more depressive and uninteresting.
I have to conclude that 'ChronoSpace' is simply not worth the time it takes to read, even for the most adamant of sci-fi or time-travel fans. Even if you completely dismiss the amount of smugness the author shows dropping modern and historical names, the story is rife with inconsistencies, errors, and writing blunders. The characters are flat and uninteresting. Any chance they have to grow is brutally crushed by this steam-roller of a plot that Steele's trying to push. The one thing that could redeem a story like this was if it were inspiring or offered some new insight on the philosophy of time travel. Instead, Steele tries to be cautionary. It's hard to convincingly cautionary when the moral of your story is, "Don't mess with time travel, or easily angered super-aliens will destroy your planet's civilization." In fact, if Steele has anything to say about inspiration in ChronoSpace, it's that inspiration is dangerous. Even carefully controlled forward advancement is harmful and should be avoided. I'm not sure if that's what he was trying to accomplish, but it's a major theme in the book nonetheless.
The hell of all this is that even up against the super-cautionary tone of the book, Steele could have easily done a better job with his story, even if it was just a quick read-through of his own work to correct some of the screaming errors he's made. He didn't, and it shows.
Don't waste your time with 'ChronoSpace'.
You can purchase ChronoSpace from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just my
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:4, Informative)
There are two examples:
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:2)
Sorry to pimp myself, but I think it's put best here:
Daikatana Review [gamerspress.com].
I also bought it for $5 - and found it was $4.99 too much.
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:2)
Good reviews... (Score:3, Insightful)
A good review will give you a fairly good indication whether you will like the reviewed work or not, regardless of what the reviewer thinks. I have read reviews of films where the reviewer goes all-out to show us his disgust for the movie, after which I immediately made up my mind about having to see it. Good reviews provoke some sort of emotion in the reader. A bad review makes a bland read, and it will not tell me whether or not to pick up the book even though the reviewer is trying to persuade me one way or the other.
Re:Good reviews... (Score:2)
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:1)
Due to the opinion of this book review, I got curious to what other people though of this book and took a look at their review. It seems more on the positive side at Amazon.com [amazon.com] (while still mixed), but I will let you be the judge of that.
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:2)
I don't think there'd be any point in a slashdot review of Business @ the Speed of Thought, but this is a book I might have bought otherwise, because the premise is interesting.
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:1)
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Is there time for negative reviews? (Score:2)
It's nice to know that the reviews do have a critical eye and that - yes, when they say a book is a 7/10, it means that it's pretty darn good, not at the bottom of the heap.
Sweet (Score:2)
I love the recent trend in book reviews. We either get "this sucks" or "this is a positive yet vague review and here's a link to purchase it." Woo-hoo!
Re:Sweet (Score:1)
Wow. (Score:2)
"You can purchase ChronoSpace from bn.com, but I don't know why you'd want to."
I did like the "From the
Re:Wow. (Score:1)
I did like the "From the ... dept." byline though.
Hmm, for some bizarre reason the byline hasn't come up on my generated (due to login) page for this story. I had to go back to the homepage to see what it was...
What's up with that?
Re:Hopefull (Score:2)
Would you change your mind if they have purple tenticles, 3 eyes, no sense of humor, and smell like methane?
Re:Hopefull (Score:1)
WTF (Score:2, Insightful)
If they do, they are frequently in the same boat as this guy--glaring inconsistencies. For me the biggest challenge is remembering what one has written about certain locales, which in a fantasy setting is devastating. In a real-earth fiction, it shouldn't be as hard--you go and visit the place you are describing.
Verbosity is no replacement for compentency.
Re:WTF (Score:2)
However, with things like mainstream fiction that don't require tons of research into technology or anything like that, you can write what you know, and hit the page running. The novel I am currently working on is like that...the whole thing spawned from a title. The title came from words spoken by an old cycling buddy. And within 2 minutes of him saying those words, the whole novel was formed in my head. Many of the places in the novel have only been visited once, some not at all. Anything can B.S.ed if you're a good enough writer.
Re:WTF (Score:1)
That said, assuming the reviewer was accurate (and I've no reason to doubt this), I would avoid the book based on that criteria, even though I generally love time travel stories - and I thank Bonker for posting it.
For good time travel, pick up any of Jack Finney's 'time' stories, and of Poul Anderson's or Simon Hawke's time travel adventure yarns (the Hawke books are light on 'science', but fun to read), and especially Gregory Benford's _Timescape_ and David Gerrold's _The Man Who Folded Himself_
Grammar Vigilante (Score:2)
http://www.asu.edu/duas/wcenter/apostrophes.
Re:Grammar Vigilante (Score:2)
Re:Grammar Vigilante (Score:2)
BTW, re your sig: "OOP is objectively better" than what? Happily, there's some objective, mathematical, prooflike evidence that functional programming is better, so I guess that debate is toast. ;)
Re:Grammar Vigilante (Score:2)
What, you don't think aliens have their *own* porn and trolls?
Happily, there's some objective, mathematical, prooflike evidence that functional programming is better, so I guess that debate is toast.
Any decent evidence. It does not have to be mathematical. That would be nice, but probably not possible at this stage. Where is the top evidence, the best shot, so far? Just some way to demostrate that OOP is (allegedly) superior beyond "I like it therefore it is good for all" and beyond the typical brochure-level claptrap.
Hmmmm. I wonder if other civalizations use OO?
Re:Grammar Vigilante (Score:2)
Well, there are mathematical theories of objects, probably the most well-known of which is put forth by Abadi and Cardelli in A Theory of Objects [demon.co.uk]. Read the prologue for an overview.
However, as that prologue points out, procedural and especially functional languages have much better formal underpinnings than do object languages. The functional languages in particular, examples being Scheme, Haskell, and ML, evolved from mathematical theories like lambda calculus and type theory, which makes them much more rigorous than less formally founded languages, and therefore, by some measures, "better".
The existence of mathematical theories of objects primarily serve to demonstrate the ways in which OO languages deviate from those theories. This is not surprising, since OOP was developed on a mostly ad-hoc basis. No single definition of what OOP is exists, and different languages implement OO in different ways.
To provide "decent evidence OOP is objectively better", you would first need to clearly define what you mean by OOP. You would also, as my original post asked, have to answer the question "better than what", or more specifically, "better than what, for what purpose". For example, it's easy enough to make an objective case that many object languages are more expressive, in general, than most purely procedural languages. By "expressive" I mean capable of expressing the same program both more concisely and understandably. It's also easy to make the case that in many situations - such as implementing algorithms involving functions on relatively simple data structures - that a purely procedural language is no less expressive than an OO language. So, as with Deep Thought's answer of 42, a lot depends on the definition of the question.
My own take on this, which is based on having researched, developed and sold a commercial OO language product back in the early '90s, is that OO contains some very good and important ideas, but that they're rather arbitrarily lumped together as though they all inherently belong together, although they don't necessarily. Part of this lumping often involves conflating otherwise unrelated ideas, which can lead to design strategies that aren't as clearly decomposed as they might otherwise be. Language limits thought, and the limitations of OO languages tend to limit the thought of those who treat a particular OO language or design methodology as The One True Way to design systems. It's a variation on the old "everything looks like a nail" syndrome.
One of the better ideas which OO adopts - but did not invent - is that of subtype polymorphism, which aside from its useful properties from a type theory perspective, is a big enabler of reusability in real-world code. However, OO languages regularly confuse types with implementations of those types, i.e. they don't set up a sufficiently clear or enforceable distinction between interface and implementation. With class inheritance in particular, these boundaries are blurred to the point of causing confusion in the minds of many OO advocates.
Given the arbitrary and varying collection of features that usually consitute OO, I would answer your question of "I wonder if other civilizations use OO?" by saying that other civilizations with sufficiently advanced programming languages would almost certainly use many of the concepts inherent in OO, but that they may be organized in different ways, and an OO "purist" (a rather outdated notion, with what we know about languages today) would possibly not be inclined to call those languages OO. For example, neither Haskell nor ML are OO languages, but both incorporate many features that would be considered part of OO by most OO practitioners. OCaml explicitly incorporates OO, but it is necessarily a little different than in most other OO languages, because OCaml is a functional language.
To summarize, OOP arose to address certain problems in the organization and reusability of code, and in doing so adopted some important ideas, such as subtype polymorphism. It's certainly possible to demonstrate that a language with subtype polymorphism is more expressive than one without, so an OO language would beat out, say, BASIC, FORTRAN, or C in this respect. In that sense, OO languages tend to represent a step forward from what went before, but it was something of an ad-hoc step.
I have no doubt that future languages will take what's been learned about OO's various features into account, but will integrate them in a more rigorous and well-factored way. This can already be seen happening in languages like Java, which is the first mainstream OO language to introduce an explicit notion of an "interface", thus correcting a limitation in many prior OO languages. These baby-step improvements in mainstream languages are about the best we can expect, since it takes a long time to communicate academic knowledge about programming languages into the commercial world, and a similarly long time for the academic world to sift out the actually useful (or simply un-ignorable) innovations from the commercial world.
That all said, I think it's dangerous to dismiss OO as being hype or whatever. That's why I asked "better than what". If you were trying defend pure C against OO, for example, then I think you have something yet to learn, not about OO necessarily, but about programming languages in general; but once again, it depends on the exact question.
Sorry for the essay; brevity and conciseness takes more effort.
Do some research (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Do some research (Score:1)
Re:Do some research (Score:2)
Re:Do some research (Score:2)
Re:Do some research (Score:2, Informative)
Which Facts Were Missed? (Score:2)
The reviewer writes:
The author seems infinitely more interested in name-dropping other, more successful sci-fi authors and scientists. Steele has done his research on obscure historical persona, but he can't seem to fix the holes in his own story.
And then:
A good example in terms of broken plot is the fictional scientific principle the author uses to drive his time-travel ships. It's called the 'Morris-Thorne' principle in the story, obviously named after the scientists who discovered it.
So to me it seems that the reviewer is saying that Steele has named the fictional principle after the real scientists. Albeit leaving out Yurtsever, as the Morris-Thorne-Yurtsever Principle doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.
So which fact was missed?
Steve M
Herman comic strip (Score:3, Funny)
There was a Herman comic strip -- oh, about 3 or 4 years ago -- where the characters are discussing UFOs. One of them says something like "I think they're time travellers from the future." When asked what they're doing, he answers "Buying up real estate."
Star Trek (Score:1)
Re:Star Trek (Score:1)
Re:Star Trek (Score:1)
masochistic tendencies??? (Score:2)
Did I spell masochistic right?
Re:masochistic tendencies??? - Pretty Much. (Score:2)
(No, I didn't know about the *real* Morris-Thorne research, but imagine including a character named 'Einstein' in a book about relativity and then *not* having that character be in some way responsible for the plot device.)
By the last fifty pages of the book, it was like watching a train wreck. I wanted to put it down, but I couldn't. I had some vague ray of hope that it would turn out well. Just like aforementioned trainwreck, there's always the hope that the train will right itself before it derails completely. In this case, the train didn't just derail, it slid off the tracks and rolled across the station.
Re:masochistic tendencies??? - Pretty Much. (Score:2)
Re:masochistic tendencies??? - Pretty Much. (Score:1)
Even if that's the case, it's baaaad writing...
More like *sadistic* tendencies (Score:1)
That sounds more in line with sadism than masochism in my opinion.
I recognize the symptom - this is not unlike the way married people always try to fix others to get marred :)
Re:More like *sadistic* tendencies (Score:2)
Re:masochistic tendencies??? - Pretty Much. (Score:1)
Maybe they created a change in the time continuum (Score:1)
If It Looks, Smells and Walks Like Journalism.... (Score:2)
Pretending that it's just a big talkfest for geeks is a copout. That doesn't absolve the "staff" from their responsibility to be accurate and professional. Nor do claims in the FAQ that Slashdot doesn't verify or check anything -- leaving that to the (anonymous or disguised) readership -- can't negate the fact that much of what's going on here is, in fact
What if the Author reads /. (Score:1)
My mom always said "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."
I hate it when my mom is right.
Re:What if the Author reads /. (Score:3, Interesting)
On that note, I always love reading negative reviews. I like them because you don't learn anything from good reviews. Good reviews are usually quick to gloss things over and give the reader this "just trust me *nudge* *wink*" kind of impression. Negative reviews are treasure trove of detailed expectations and how the subject missed meeting those expectations. If you're an artist/content developer, there is so much to be learned from negative reviews about how to do things right.
Of course, all of this describes a good review written by a good reviewer. Now, who's going to review the reviewers?
Re:What if the Author reads /. (Score:1)
I think you just did... =)
Sounds like it's already been done (Score:2)
Written any Star Trek scripts? (Score:1)
You didn't write scripts for ST:Voyager, by any chance?
RB
Time-travel paradoxes... (Score:5, Funny)
How can time-travel get old?
Re:Time-travel paradoxes... (Score:2)
"looked like an interesting time-travel thriller-- something we've seen many of, but not a story that gets old due to its variations"
Re:Time-travel paradoxes... (Score:2)
Re:Time-travel paradoxes... (Score:2)
Something about the disintegration of the tech economy has got a lot of people very testy lately.
Re:Time-travel paradoxes... (Score:1)
Re:Time-travel paradoxes... (Score:2)
Pastwatch (Score:2, Informative)
It's a very good read.
You want time travel novels? (Score:1)
Slow day? (Score:1)
The more you drive, the stupider you get.... (Score:3, Informative)
Repo Man, 1984.
Oh... (Score:1)
Time travel for dummies ;) (Score:1)
http://www.biols.susx.ac.uk/home/John_Gribbin/t
It wouldn't surprise me if it were this bad... (Score:3, Informative)
On another note, having doen CD reviews for many years now, I like to see negative reviews of this type - pointing out the actual problems, rather than just saying "this sucks". I think with the growing amount of media contesting for our attention out there, a negative review can help people decide NOT to read/buy/listen to something, therefore not wasting their time, and generating feedback to the work's creator.
Hope for amateur authors? (Score:2, Funny)
I reckon to those of us who have a half-decent plot idea but not the skill to build a storyscape around it could be in with a chance.
If it was truly that bad I'm sure some of the extremely short stories that I write then delete as rubbish from my hard disk would have made it past a publisher. In fact anything with a good plot idea and nothing else should suffice.
Now where did I leave that data recovery software?
How to avoid time travel paradoxes (Score:1)
"I suggest you don't worry about this sort of thing and just enjoy yourself. That goes for you all, too."
You can purchase a worthwhile book at bn.com... (Score:1, Offtopic)
Thanksh.
Shincerely,
The sloshdot team
-Adam
The book is pretty good. (Score:2)
I enjoyed it. I was surprised at how negative the review was... it is entertainment, not science. I didn't take it too seriously and I enjoyed the book.
Lately I've been reading some heinlein I missed when I went thru the obligatory hienlein phase in high school. Of course, some of what I'm reading was written in the 50s, and the science is just plain wrong. OK, fine. The science isn't that critical for a story-- and I'm someone who hates stories where the science is wrong. But you can't expect someone to predict science accurately 50 years into the future and then be unhappy when they are wrong. you have to suspend some disbelief.
IF you went into a time travel story without suspending disbelief, no wonder you were unhappy! By its nature, time travel stories are always going to be incorrect
Anyway, I'm not saying this is a golden book. The ending wasn't the greatest, but it was entertaining and thus, worth my time reading it.
Best book by steele (I think it was steele, it was a long time ago) is Kaleidascope Century. Really good book.
Chronospace is a good weekend read when you want to get away from reality for awhile.
Not Steele's best book, but not as bad as this (Score:4, Informative)
I will say this; I was disappointed with this book when I read it. I've read most of Steele's other work, and this was not one of his best. But it definitely wasn't quite that bad. It had some interesting premises in it: and it didn't quite come through.
Having said that, I will say that this book is not reminiscent of his best work, by far. When he's off, he's off -- but when he's on, he's stellar.
If you're looking for his best work, check out Steele's short story work, Sex and Violence in Zero G, Rude Astronauts and All-American Alien Boy. The short stories in those books by far outstrip this book, and build an amazingly neat background for his "Near Space" series. Orbital Decay and Lunar Descent are great; I personally like The Jericho Iteration, because he writes about some of my old stomping grounds in St. Louis.
Also, check out the short story he was just put up for: Stealing Alabama. Very neat premise.
Obscure B Movies (Score:2)
Re:Obscure B Movies (Score:1)
Re:Obscure B Movies (Score:2)