The Hitchhiker’s Guide of the Galaxy

This novel is a consensus top 10 sci-fi book of all time. It has sold millions of copies throughout the world and is cited by many smart people as among their favorites. Richard Dawkins dedicated his book The God Delusion to the author Douglas Adams. The movie, made after the death of Adams, featured Martin Freeman, Mos Def, and Zoey Deschanel. Sounds like an awesome cast right? With all this popularity among the public, celebrities, and critics alike, I was left asking myself: what am I missing?

Normally here I give a quick summary of the plot but in this case it isn’t necessary. For the sake of tradition: A man named Arthur Dent is scooped up from Earth a moment before it is destroyed to make some galactic superhighway. He goes on adventures with aliens and robots after that. The titular Hitchhiker’s Guide is featured as a book within the book, with Adams using third person omnipotent throughout. Some call this metafiction or postmodernism or whatever. There is a broader story with a smaller Arthur Dent story underneath it.

How could a science fiction fan and writer not love Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy? Let me explain:

First, it is essentially a comedy that just wasn’t funny to me. It is meant to be satirical or something but it feels very dated. From the start I got this sense there were topical jokes and references that were probably hilarious in the 1970s but really don’t make sense to someone who (1) is not British; and (2) was born three years after it was published. Right from the start, this book just wasn’t for me.

The weird thing is I generally love British humor, Monty Python in particular, but this book isn’t Monty Python. Adams has all these clever dialogue exchanges with characters going all literal on one another, poking fun at imprecise language. Today, some might call that grammar Nazism, which isn’t something that gets’em rolling on the floor laughing. Adams also uses all sorts of funny sounding names like Zaphod Beeblebox, Vroomfondel and Majikthise. Back when I read Dr. Seuss, this stuff would’ve been amusing.

According to the learned critical reviews, there are all sorts of profound intellectual questions addressed in the book like the meaning of life, the corruption of western society, and all these other things. Unfortunately, Adams doesn’t really hit on any of these deep themes in a very interesting way. It is usually nothing more than a few glib comments.

For example his reference to money:

This planet has — or rather had — a problem, which was this: most of the people living on it were unhappy for pretty much all of the time. Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movement of small green pieces of paper, which was odd because on the whole it wasn’t the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy.

This is a long and playful way of saying money doesn’t buy happiness. That is not clever or insightful; it is cliché. Also, his discussion of money ends with these two sentences. This is just one example but the others go the same way. I picked the money one because it is cited in the AP Literature analysis of the book. Also, it made me roll my eyes when I read it.

If the book were actually funny, I probably would have given it 5 stars but it isn’t. I am an American that loves satire and absurdity but it has to be good. Quality matters. There is a Dr. Who quality to Adams’ work but he lacks a character in this book with the presence of the Doctor. Arthur Dent is also a poor excuse for a companion. On numerous occasions I wanted his whiny ass to die.

I understand people are reading all sorts of things into this book that make it more profound but I just don’t see it. The witty remarks and commentary go no farther than the hipster smart ass making fun of all the “sheep” in society. The book likes to tease readers, demonstrating the authors is educated and has thoughtful and trendy opinions on these matters but he won’t bother exploring any of them.

It is a little like The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Stewart is a gifted comedian and the show is extremely funny. His knowledge of politics, history, and entertainment all serve the show well, providing unique depth to the jokes. However, Stewart himself would tell you he is not a journalist or member of the media elites. He is not an intellectual, he is the jester. If Stewart’s show wasn’t funny, it would’ve been cancelled long ago and no one would know his name.

I get the impression Adams is a very smart man and there is real substance somewhere in his works but it is not here. A lot of people find his work entertaining and funny but I’m not one of them.

There were some cool parts: The Big Question asked of the Deep Thought Computer, the whole story behind the legendary world of Magrethea, and Marvin the depressed robot. The mice were also a cool touch.

I fully understand I am in the tiny minority who didn’t like this classic and that this review will angry many but I simply won’t pretend to love something because it is popular.

The post The Hitchhiker’s Guide of the Galaxy appeared first on Jacob Foxx.