Interesting, but slow. I expected more of a how-to manual with best practices, enhanced by the occasional personal story to drive home a point or illu...moreInteresting, but slow. I expected more of a how-to manual with best practices, enhanced by the occasional personal story to drive home a point or illustrate a principle. Instead it's mostly random personal recollections that the author associates with archery, but on the whole have very little to do with conveying anything useful to the reader. The tone is overly nostalgic to the point of annoyance, and language seems far too formal and flowery for the content of the phrases.
The appendix at the back does contain useful information for the archer.(less)
I cannot apply a sixth star to this book, which prompts me to seriously consider re-normalizing all other ratings in my library to accommodate the fac...moreI cannot apply a sixth star to this book, which prompts me to seriously consider re-normalizing all other ratings in my library to accommodate the fact that I was forced by the design of this site to apply only five.
The tone and vocabulary are fairly intellectual and elevated, and as a consequence the book may seem initially too dense to be of any profound value. I would recommend at least a basic awareness of the major subjects in American history (particularly Civil War and immediately following), post-Enlightenment philosophy (Kant, Hegel), theories of jurisprudence, the social impact and context of Darwinism and Determinism, and the development of subcultures in America as pre-requisites for a more complete reading of this book and what (I believe) it implies.
This is a fantastic introduction to the foundations of what I would consider modern progressive thought in America.(less)
With the flood of fantastic reviews, I suppose I expected more. An interesting and enjoyable novel, and well worth reading -- not captivating, however...moreWith the flood of fantastic reviews, I suppose I expected more. An interesting and enjoyable novel, and well worth reading -- not captivating, however.(less)
While based on a very interesting premise and clearly the product of a creative mind, Derick Katzman's debut novel Redhand disappointingly falls flat ...moreWhile based on a very interesting premise and clearly the product of a creative mind, Derick Katzman's debut novel Redhand disappointingly falls flat on structure. The weakness may be attributed to one question: why? In everything from the big picture of the character motivations down to the details of a chase scene, things often simply happen for no reason aside from convenience and without explanation or reasonable a priori construction.
Now, on the scale of hard to soft science fiction, I tend to take a pretty hard line (on the scale at Grading SF for Realism, I would prefer “Plausibly Hard” or harder), so maybe this is just my view. But to me, good science fiction is at its core a character-driven story set in the context of one, or at most two, key “what if”s. Naturally, the central tenant of science fiction is that something about the science of the world is fictional; the trick to good science fiction is knowing what limits to place on that fictionality such that the story is both imaginative and actually plausible.
This is unfortunately not the case in Redhand, in which arises, very quickly after each other and with little explanation or connection, several articles of faith in the first Chapter. Now, some of these are great premises and also explained further later on in the story, but the sheer quantity of circumstances on which we are obliged to suspend disbelief so early, some of which seem so mundane, severely distracted me from any attachment to the plot.
The first taste of action is a hugely implausible chase scene in the vein of the most inane action flick. It's actually very creative is the thing, just structured so incredulously that I just couldn't buy it. Especially considering how early it took place in the novel, it did a solid job of setting a fairly skeptical mood for the rest.
This skepticism was not without foundation, as time and time again (I'll refrain from inundating the review with specific examples), I was perplexed as to how something either happened or failed to happen given the established circumstances (or lack thereof), motivations (or lack thereof), and technologies involved.
Much of the backstory (in the first half of the novel anyway) is provided to us almost entirely through the contrived device of a journal, into which Jack pours highly descriptive narration for which only a very loose motivation is established. Most of the key elements of the plot (for example, the mythical Amarinthene Estuary) which are not conveyed through the journal are revealed to the reader in conversations apparently constructed specifically for that purpose.
Character backgrounds become somewhat clearer as the novel progresses, but scene by scene there is little in the way of a clear and immediate objective for each character beyond being required to move the plot along. The result is that many if not most scenes smack at least slightly, and often strongly, of cliché.
I actually almost stopped reading, BUT... one passage (on page 236 of 294 of the .epub ebook) saved me:
How did this happen? Anton thought to himself. Everything could have gone so smoothly.
Here. You do not need anything prior to this point to make the rest of the novel interesting, so long as you start here and skip any dialogue from Jack, Vanessa, Alex, or Desmond. Really, try it.
Ok, so I have been ranting and scathingly critical for several paragraphs, mostly because I have tried to hold even a first novel by an emerging writer to the same standard that I would apply to Phillip K. Dick. I'll end with the good, which is almost entirely concentrated in the last two-thirds of the novel.
Katzman has created enough enticing backstory to potentially seed several novels and short stories. Though the Dark Gentleman is the most fascinating character of the seven (meaning effectively the whole book) the backstory of any of the seven Gentlemen would be an interesting read in its own right. These ethically conflicted, all-powerful-yet-tortured characters with haunted pasts are orders of magnitude more interesting than Jack and his friends - cut the dead-weight and let the good stuff shine.
Since Katzman has created a world of several cities and countless Geniuses in hiding, the possibilities of prequels or alternate-viewpoint re-tellings abound. In this sense Katzman exhibits the grand sense of place that the most epic authors of the genre have displayed.
In his best moments, Katzman's detailed accounts of events, particularly those related to combat and violence, are highly descriptive and viscerally jarring. These were the segments during which I felt the most engaged with the material (at least until it became absurd). Though still riddled with logical and physical inconsistencies, any scene involving Jack's transformation into a vampiric beast is truly epic, on a level with “300” or “Sin City”. This is not an exhortation to more graphic content (which would take space away from an already thin plot), but an acknowledgment of a notable strength in visceral writing.
The overall effect is a very intriguing blend of the graphic-novel, cyberpunk, high fantasy, and noir genres. Perhaps a more focused embrace of one these elements would provide more thematic consistency in future novels, while also playing to Katzman's strengths.
Lastly, particular praise is also due for the imaginative premise and setting. Katzman clearly has both a vivid imagery of this world in his head; I love the idea of a city made of tiered rings surrounding a powerful central tower. The powers of some of the Geniuses are also very inventive. Katzman also has much to say about the contemporary culture of his readers; this is in keeping with the purest aims of good science fiction.
I would recommend to the author that he continue writing, whether it be on future versions or offshoots of this story, or delving into wholly new ones. A more urgent suggestion would be to invest in a good, professional editor. I believe that this would go a long way with regard to the inconsistencies in structure, logic, plot, word usage, and voice that I believe have unfortunately prevented this novel from living up to the potential of its ideas.(less)
As much as I admire H.G. Wells, I still always find myself struggling to finish utopian novels. Despite his interesting ideas and the honorific of "...moreAs much as I admire H.G. Wells, I still always find myself struggling to finish utopian novels. Despite his interesting ideas and the honorific of "classic" and "canonical", I'm afraid that I fell into the same complaints with A Modern Utopia as with many others: it is dry, overly-reliant on description instead of humanity, and prone to far more hastily-accepted assumptions than the bulk of the rest of the genre.
Wells does, to be fair, answer the question that is skirted in most utopias, but central to my distaste for them: If we live in a utopia, for what shall we strive?
Worth a read for the clarity of thought and excellent writing, and for its own sake as a member of canonical collection of classical science fiction. I probably will not read it again or refer back to it, however.(less)
Loading...
