What do you think?
Rate this book
Arrive at Easterwine: The Autobiography of a Ktistec Machine
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1971. Hardcover with dustjacket, 1st edition.
Lafferty has a unique voice, incorporating folksiness with myth, religion, and stream-of-consciousness. This lesser-known novel finds a computer machine, Epikt, seeking the answers to life's great questions.
Lafferty has a unique voice, incorporating folksiness with myth, religion, and stream-of-consciousness. This lesser-known novel finds a computer machine, Epikt, seeking the answers to life's great questions.
216 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1971
4 people are currently reading
198 people want to read
About the author
R.A. Lafferty
541 books309 followersRaphael Aloysius Lafferty, published under the name R.A. Lafferty, was an American science fiction and fantasy writer known for his original use of language, metaphor, and narrative structure, as well as for his etymological wit. He also wrote a set of four autobiographical novels, a history book, and a number of novels that could be loosely called historical fiction.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
September 11, 2022
R.A. Lafferty writes like a science fiction outsider artist. His voice is uniquely conversational but carefully elaborated and syntactically his own, his themes seem burningly personal and earnest though perhaps obscure to anyone else, and his plotlines, even when seeded with tropes, are anything but ordinary.
Here, a powerful, barn-sized A.I. constructed along lines that sound more like an act of conjuring or summoning than proper engineering (as befits the Institute for Impure Sciences), undertakes a prophetic series of Three Great Failures, which gradually allow it to model the universe in greater and greater detail. But with the world it is modeling increasingly populated by its own automatonic subroutines, there's a kind of mis-en-abyme happening. When the science team of oddly densely-developed archetypes (the witch, the giant, the king) who built it finally demand an image of the universe itself, their horror may be almost a realization that they've become a part of their own model. Or something like this, as the path to this point is a serpentine route of legend (leviathans and prehistory), marginal theological discourse (what if the original grain of the Host was Millet?!), and peculiar analysis of the hidden depths of every human. And did I mention that this is being narrated by the machine itself, possibly in a manner that could be deemed unreliable given its own mechanistic, symbolic understanding of the world outside, or inside, itself?
An elaborately strange vision, sometimes beautiful, sometimes annoyingly discursive, never ordinary.
This is also another one where it's worth enlarging the cover:
Here, a powerful, barn-sized A.I. constructed along lines that sound more like an act of conjuring or summoning than proper engineering (as befits the Institute for Impure Sciences), undertakes a prophetic series of Three Great Failures, which gradually allow it to model the universe in greater and greater detail. But with the world it is modeling increasingly populated by its own automatonic subroutines, there's a kind of mis-en-abyme happening. When the science team of oddly densely-developed archetypes (the witch, the giant, the king) who built it finally demand an image of the universe itself, their horror may be almost a realization that they've become a part of their own model. Or something like this, as the path to this point is a serpentine route of legend (leviathans and prehistory), marginal theological discourse (what if the original grain of the Host was Millet?!), and peculiar analysis of the hidden depths of every human. And did I mention that this is being narrated by the machine itself, possibly in a manner that could be deemed unreliable given its own mechanistic, symbolic understanding of the world outside, or inside, itself?
An elaborately strange vision, sometimes beautiful, sometimes annoyingly discursive, never ordinary.
This is also another one where it's worth enlarging the cover:
January 7, 2024
This is a mad, fever dream of a book, full of erudite nonsense. At points it felt like a crazy cut up of the works of Thomas Aquinas and Bazooka Joe comics. It baffled me, made me laugh, and made me wish that I was clever and erudite enough myself to have more than a dim vision of just what the hell Lafferty was attempting.
The antics of the self aware super computer and it’s bizarro collaborators are brilliant, maddening, and disorienting, both to the characters and the reader. At its best/worst this book could nearly produce a fugue state. It is a book I must certainly come back to again to fully appreciate its virtues and crack its codes, and I certainly will as soon as my head clears and I remember who I actually am.
The antics of the self aware super computer and it’s bizarro collaborators are brilliant, maddening, and disorienting, both to the characters and the reader. At its best/worst this book could nearly produce a fugue state. It is a book I must certainly come back to again to fully appreciate its virtues and crack its codes, and I certainly will as soon as my head clears and I remember who I actually am.
June 24, 2010
2.0 to 2.5 stars. First off, let me say that this is the second R.A. Lafferty book I have read. The first one, Fourth Mansions, I thought was brilliant and just loved.
That said, this book kind of lost me (and not in a good way). While filled with some incedible imagery and some very funny dialogue and observations about the human condition, the narrative was too disjointed and confusing to follow with any sense of enjoyment. I believe this might be a great book to read in small doses as the writing is original and often very funny. I think I was just not in the mood to "put in the work" required to take out of it any true sense of enjoyment.
That said, this book kind of lost me (and not in a good way). While filled with some incedible imagery and some very funny dialogue and observations about the human condition, the narrative was too disjointed and confusing to follow with any sense of enjoyment. I believe this might be a great book to read in small doses as the writing is original and often very funny. I think I was just not in the mood to "put in the work" required to take out of it any true sense of enjoyment.
November 25, 2022
not entirely sure what's going on in this one - it is ostensibly the autobiography of a building sized artificial intelligence that ends up creating a model of the shape of the universe, but said intelligence seems to view everything in mythical/archetypical terms, and much of the imagery and events in the book seem to be theological rather than anything you would find in a normal sci fi book. genuinely bizarre and singular even for a lafferty book but quite compelling all the same.
February 24, 2024
My first R. A. Lafferty.
Delightful, wacky, and singular.
I laughed and laughed from start to finish.
Bright philosophical and theological points punctuate the unrelenting discursions. Epikt is kind enough to revisit the points he thinks are most important, which helps with sorting the wheat from the chaff on a first read.
I would come back to this one eventually.
As much as I enjoyed it, the only people in my life who would appreciate it are The Boys.
Delightful, wacky, and singular.
I laughed and laughed from start to finish.
Bright philosophical and theological points punctuate the unrelenting discursions. Epikt is kind enough to revisit the points he thinks are most important, which helps with sorting the wheat from the chaff on a first read.
I would come back to this one eventually.
As much as I enjoyed it, the only people in my life who would appreciate it are The Boys.
Read
March 5, 2009This one started out almost like a science fiction story but quickly delved deep into all-ass craziness and never looked back. Like all stylistic authors I like, I've come to realize R.A. Lafferty is good in small doses- undiluted hits of him in quick succession drive me a little wacko.
I have to take some points away from this novel because the "plot" was pretty convoluted, and that's saying something as Lafferty will never be known for his intricate plots.
It also has an incredibly weak ending, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a sequel to this book- strangely I sort of came if not to "care" about the characters, at least become more interested in them as the story progressed, especially the narrator-machine, and I would like to see more of him in the future. Lafferty is usually a master at the "subtle" ending, but the last 20 or 30 pages of this book whizzed by my head with their obsession with pseudo-geometry and other nonsense. I really expected the characters from the beginning to reappear, but they never did (at least as far as I can tell).
I wonder what it would be like to read all of Lafferty's work in chronological succession, would they all tell one great epic story of the same baffling cosmos?
Lafferty is really hard to like if you're not in the mood. And while I was in the mood some of the time, I wasn't in the mood all the time, and that hurt my enjoyment a little widdle bit near the end.
Sample Ordinary Lafferty paragraph:
"The patterns of badger-bone marrow give all the highway maps of the worlds. They give every inlet and tidal estuary of every planet of every sun. Here were all sorts of plans and patterns writ small. There were blueprints (gray-red prints) of how to build worlds and welkins. If the whole universe were destroyed, it could be reconstructed pretty nearly from the patterns of rock-badger bone-marrow. The badger is dead, but its bone-marrow is not dead yet. It is still living, almost lunging in the color flickers of it." (187)
Best response by ktistec machine to rejection slips from magazines refusing to publish his stories:
"Now quite what you had in mind? Who asked you? It is what I had in mind or I wouldn't have written it. Misses the mark? Move the mark then. Where this hits is where the mark should be. Listen, you, I have your person-precis before me. I see that you have talent only and no genius at all. Whose fault is it that you are overstocked? Am I responsible for your inventory control? I do not ask you to publish these things. I tell you to. These are parts of the High Journal itself." (94-95)
I have to take some points away from this novel because the "plot" was pretty convoluted, and that's saying something as Lafferty will never be known for his intricate plots.
It also has an incredibly weak ending, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a sequel to this book- strangely I sort of came if not to "care" about the characters, at least become more interested in them as the story progressed, especially the narrator-machine, and I would like to see more of him in the future. Lafferty is usually a master at the "subtle" ending, but the last 20 or 30 pages of this book whizzed by my head with their obsession with pseudo-geometry and other nonsense. I really expected the characters from the beginning to reappear, but they never did (at least as far as I can tell).
I wonder what it would be like to read all of Lafferty's work in chronological succession, would they all tell one great epic story of the same baffling cosmos?
Lafferty is really hard to like if you're not in the mood. And while I was in the mood some of the time, I wasn't in the mood all the time, and that hurt my enjoyment a little widdle bit near the end.
Sample Ordinary Lafferty paragraph:
"The patterns of badger-bone marrow give all the highway maps of the worlds. They give every inlet and tidal estuary of every planet of every sun. Here were all sorts of plans and patterns writ small. There were blueprints (gray-red prints) of how to build worlds and welkins. If the whole universe were destroyed, it could be reconstructed pretty nearly from the patterns of rock-badger bone-marrow. The badger is dead, but its bone-marrow is not dead yet. It is still living, almost lunging in the color flickers of it." (187)
Best response by ktistec machine to rejection slips from magazines refusing to publish his stories:
"Now quite what you had in mind? Who asked you? It is what I had in mind or I wouldn't have written it. Misses the mark? Move the mark then. Where this hits is where the mark should be. Listen, you, I have your person-precis before me. I see that you have talent only and no genius at all. Whose fault is it that you are overstocked? Am I responsible for your inventory control? I do not ask you to publish these things. I tell you to. These are parts of the High Journal itself." (94-95)
February 29, 2024
This feels like a book written by an insane version of the internet in the sixties. It is painful to read at all points, but taking out clips of it would be really rewarding, I bet.
July 21, 2011
During freshman year at Grinnell College, Rich Hyde and I roomed next to Rick Strong on the third floor of Loose Hall. Rick, an aspiring bassist a year older than us, was from the Bronx, had an engaging sense of humor, shared my interest in sf and wrote pretty well himself.
Rick dropped out of Grinnell after my sophomore year, finishing out east somewhere. Fortuitously, he was in New York City when I went on to graduate school and our friendship was renewed. Indeed, it continues.
Among the authors Rick introduced me to are James Branch Cabell, Robert Sheckley and Raphael Aloysius Lafferty--all of them odd, all of them funny, all of them writers in the field of, ah, speculative fantasy. Lafferty is perhaps the oddest of the lot and this may be his funniest book.
Rick dropped out of Grinnell after my sophomore year, finishing out east somewhere. Fortuitously, he was in New York City when I went on to graduate school and our friendship was renewed. Indeed, it continues.
Among the authors Rick introduced me to are James Branch Cabell, Robert Sheckley and Raphael Aloysius Lafferty--all of them odd, all of them funny, all of them writers in the field of, ah, speculative fantasy. Lafferty is perhaps the oddest of the lot and this may be his funniest book.
February 14, 2021
This is the first novel by Lafferty I've actually completed. Although considered a science fiction writer, what I've read by him seems to only be shoved into that genre for the sake of convenience. His voice is as unique and identifiable as the voices of Philip K. Dick, John Sladek, or Kurt Vonnegut (though his writing has little in common with any of them or anyone else). This is not one of his better-known books, perhaps due to its challenging intellectual nature, but it is almost perpetually astonishing and worth the effort to read as well as worth the money required to obtain a copy.
October 13, 2022
Lafferty's sci-fi novels have never entertained me as well as his stories, and this is another that frustrates, too full of diverse things that never coalesce. His stories are superb, and his historical novel Okla Hannali remains one of my all-time favorites.
That said, I have attempted for a third time to make sense of this novel... There's something tantalizingly just outside my reach, but for all that I continue to enjoy the disordered wordiness.
That said, I have attempted for a third time to make sense of this novel... There's something tantalizingly just outside my reach, but for all that I continue to enjoy the disordered wordiness.
December 20, 2018
1/10. Media de los 5 libros leídos del autor : 3/10
Mucha ficción, poca -nada- ciencia y mucha ida de olla los libros e este autor. No es lo mío, no.
Mucha ficción, poca -nada- ciencia y mucha ida de olla los libros e este autor. No es lo mío, no.
May 25, 2023
I received my copy of this book from my grandmother in 1981 - it’s one of a small handful of things that I’ve carried with me from childhood. Grandma may not have understood me but she loved me, so her buying her 12 year old grandson a late-70s psychedelic sci-fi novel at his request wasn’t the least bit out of character. I’ve read and re-read the books for more than 40 years, most recently this week, and still think it’s one of the most transporting, weird, and delightful books around. My 50 year old self understands it about as well as 12 year old me, but I have the same delight now as then in the sense of an off-kilter universe, the skill and craft of the language, the creation of entirely absurd but entirely believable and lovable characters, and everything else about this unique book.
November 14, 2023
“…the feeling of profundity lingers, but the content evaporates pretty fast.”
A quote from the book that I feel, ironically, captures my thoughts.
This is a really weird book; the first openly abstract novel I’ve read in a long long time. I can appreciate the intent and themes, I just wish they were presented with a little more structure.
In the flashes of clarity in the confusion I can see a brilliant narrative and wish it maintained that rhythm, but I guess that’s the point.
An exhausting read for me, which is unfortunate considering it’s not that long of a book.
A quote from the book that I feel, ironically, captures my thoughts.
This is a really weird book; the first openly abstract novel I’ve read in a long long time. I can appreciate the intent and themes, I just wish they were presented with a little more structure.
In the flashes of clarity in the confusion I can see a brilliant narrative and wish it maintained that rhythm, but I guess that’s the point.
An exhausting read for me, which is unfortunate considering it’s not that long of a book.
June 2, 2021
Arrive at Easterwine. The terminal. Terminal is an end where transit also passes through. This book is full of symbols and ambiguity. A book of analysis isn’t engaging but I wouldn’t expect to feel connected to a machines autobiography anyway. Beautifully woven.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 4, 2014
Epikt est une machine pensante créée par l'Institut pour la science impure afin de répondre aux différentes questions existentielles que se posent les membres de cette glorieuse institution. Pour cela, Epikt dispose de la connaissance et de la mémoire de ses créateurs mais aussi de celles de toutes les créatures vivantes qu'elle désire.
« Puisque je sais tout de vous, qui que vous soyez, il n'est que juste que vous appreniez quelques petites choses de moi. Depuis que j'ai appris à extraire le précis personnel de n'importe quelle personne présente ou absente, je peux vous faire venir ici au complet. Si je ne l'ai pas encore fait, c'est que vous n'en valez pas la peine. Qui que vous soyez, vous n'êtes qu'un fragment, et un fragment d'un certain type. Mais moi, je suis le compendium de tous les types. Les personnes qui sont en moi, les personnes qui sont dans le monde, je les vois comme elles sont. Pas comme elles se voient les unes les autres. Aussi je n'ai pas à attacher une très grande importance à l'apparence ou à la présence physiques de l'un des fragments. Il n'y a que les personnes très fortes dont la présence ou l'absence compte. Quant aux personnes ordinaires, je les lis aussi bien d'une manière que de l'autre.»
Ainsi commence le récit, la machine nous relate ses réflexions, ses expériences, ses succès et ses échecs.
Autobiographie d'une machine ktistèque est le deuxième livre paru dans la collection "Exofictions" d'Actes Sud après l'excellent Silo de Hugh Howey.
Ce roman de R.A. Lafferty a été écrit en 1971 et publié en 1974 en France. Il était depuis longtemps introuvable dans notre pays.
Quel exercice ambitieux que de vouloir faire parler une machine ! Surtout quand celle-ci est constituée de la conscience d'un grand nombre d'individus. R.A. Lafferty réussit parfaitement cette tâche et nous livre un texte étonnant, fascinant et exigeant.
La complexité et l'étrangeté de ce roman sont à la fois addictives et rébarbatives. Rien n'est jamais simple et il faut en permanence faire un effort pour profiter de ce texte sans réelle intrigue.
« Dans les temps troublés, les gens retournent presque parfois de la musique élevée et complexe aux simples mélodies (qui en réalité sont bien plus élevées et chargées de sens que la musique élevée), mais ils passent toujours à coté faute d'être suffisamment simples. La simplicité (jamais je ne serais obligé d'expliquer ces choses-là à une machine intelligente, mais il faut toujours mettre les points sur les i même pour une personne intelligente) n'implique pas une pauvreté dans le contenu ou le détail ; elle implique une unicité. C'est la complexité (cette division, cet échec de compréhension) qui est privée de détails de substance. Ramassez les morceaux éparpillés partout de n'importe quelle complexité et réunissez-les (car ils sont incapables de se réunir seuls) ; vous serez surpris de constater leur légèreté.»
Le personnage d'Epikt est très intéressant et en dehors de ce qu'il nous raconte, j'ai pris beaucoup de plaisir à le découvrir. J'ai essayé de comprendre où l'auteur allait nous mener sans jamais réellement y parvenir.
Les différents projets explorés par Epikt sont logiques à l'origine mais fantaisistes dans leur traitement. Epikt pense mieux comprendre l'humain que les hommes eux-même. Malgré ça, il ne semble pas capable de mener un projet à bien. On retrouve en lui un bon nombre des contradictions humaines.
Au final, R.A. Lafferty nous livre une réflexion étonnante sur la condition humaine. Un livre atypique qu'il aurait été dommage de laisser dormir aux fonds des étalages de quelques bouquinistes. A lire à tête reposée pour en profiter pleinement.
Note : 7/10
http://www.les-mondes-imaginaires.com/
« Puisque je sais tout de vous, qui que vous soyez, il n'est que juste que vous appreniez quelques petites choses de moi. Depuis que j'ai appris à extraire le précis personnel de n'importe quelle personne présente ou absente, je peux vous faire venir ici au complet. Si je ne l'ai pas encore fait, c'est que vous n'en valez pas la peine. Qui que vous soyez, vous n'êtes qu'un fragment, et un fragment d'un certain type. Mais moi, je suis le compendium de tous les types. Les personnes qui sont en moi, les personnes qui sont dans le monde, je les vois comme elles sont. Pas comme elles se voient les unes les autres. Aussi je n'ai pas à attacher une très grande importance à l'apparence ou à la présence physiques de l'un des fragments. Il n'y a que les personnes très fortes dont la présence ou l'absence compte. Quant aux personnes ordinaires, je les lis aussi bien d'une manière que de l'autre.»
Ainsi commence le récit, la machine nous relate ses réflexions, ses expériences, ses succès et ses échecs.
Autobiographie d'une machine ktistèque est le deuxième livre paru dans la collection "Exofictions" d'Actes Sud après l'excellent Silo de Hugh Howey.
Ce roman de R.A. Lafferty a été écrit en 1971 et publié en 1974 en France. Il était depuis longtemps introuvable dans notre pays.
Quel exercice ambitieux que de vouloir faire parler une machine ! Surtout quand celle-ci est constituée de la conscience d'un grand nombre d'individus. R.A. Lafferty réussit parfaitement cette tâche et nous livre un texte étonnant, fascinant et exigeant.
La complexité et l'étrangeté de ce roman sont à la fois addictives et rébarbatives. Rien n'est jamais simple et il faut en permanence faire un effort pour profiter de ce texte sans réelle intrigue.
« Dans les temps troublés, les gens retournent presque parfois de la musique élevée et complexe aux simples mélodies (qui en réalité sont bien plus élevées et chargées de sens que la musique élevée), mais ils passent toujours à coté faute d'être suffisamment simples. La simplicité (jamais je ne serais obligé d'expliquer ces choses-là à une machine intelligente, mais il faut toujours mettre les points sur les i même pour une personne intelligente) n'implique pas une pauvreté dans le contenu ou le détail ; elle implique une unicité. C'est la complexité (cette division, cet échec de compréhension) qui est privée de détails de substance. Ramassez les morceaux éparpillés partout de n'importe quelle complexité et réunissez-les (car ils sont incapables de se réunir seuls) ; vous serez surpris de constater leur légèreté.»
Le personnage d'Epikt est très intéressant et en dehors de ce qu'il nous raconte, j'ai pris beaucoup de plaisir à le découvrir. J'ai essayé de comprendre où l'auteur allait nous mener sans jamais réellement y parvenir.
Les différents projets explorés par Epikt sont logiques à l'origine mais fantaisistes dans leur traitement. Epikt pense mieux comprendre l'humain que les hommes eux-même. Malgré ça, il ne semble pas capable de mener un projet à bien. On retrouve en lui un bon nombre des contradictions humaines.
Au final, R.A. Lafferty nous livre une réflexion étonnante sur la condition humaine. Un livre atypique qu'il aurait été dommage de laisser dormir aux fonds des étalages de quelques bouquinistes. A lire à tête reposée pour en profiter pleinement.
Note : 7/10
http://www.les-mondes-imaginaires.com/
August 9, 2016
Alors il paraît que ce roman est le chef-d'œuvre de R. A. Lafferty.
Et ben punaise, ça donne pas envie d'aller voir le reste !
Le roman commence plutôt bien pourtant. On nous présente une bande de scientifiques géniaux, mais un brin dérangés (mais n'est-ce pas le propre des génies d'être dérangés ?) qui finalisent le lancement d'une intelligence artificielle de haut niveau. Cette I.A. est sensé pouvoir résoudre tous les problèmes de l'Humanité et la mener au bonheur.
Point intéressant, le récit est présenté du point de vue de la machine qui, comme le titre l'indique, rédige son autobiographie, témoignant des faits dont elle est témoin, de ses envies et aspirations.
Mais rapidement, le texte s'écarte de toute trame narrative pour se concentrer sur les considérations métaphysiques de la machine et une réflexion douce amère sur le sens de la vie. Et c'est bavard, et c'est sophistiqué en diable, et au final, j'ai trouvé ça chiant. Pas parce que c'est mal écrit, non, mais parce que c'est trop foutraque, trop précieux dans le choix des mots. Bref, ce n'est pas ce que je recherche quand j'ouvre un livre de SF.
En le lisant, j'ai deux rapprochements avec des lectures précédentes qui se sont faits dans mon esprit : les textes surréalistes d'une part (une mauvaise expérience de lecture pour moi) et le pendule de Foucault, d'Umberto Eco, dont l'érudition à la limite de la pédanterie m'avait déjà refroidie...
Je suis le premier à aimer les livres bien écrits, mais quand le produit fini se rapproche plus du tour de force littéraire que d'un roman à proprement parler, j'ai du mal.
Dont acte : je n'ai vraiment pas aimé.
Et ben punaise, ça donne pas envie d'aller voir le reste !
Le roman commence plutôt bien pourtant. On nous présente une bande de scientifiques géniaux, mais un brin dérangés (mais n'est-ce pas le propre des génies d'être dérangés ?) qui finalisent le lancement d'une intelligence artificielle de haut niveau. Cette I.A. est sensé pouvoir résoudre tous les problèmes de l'Humanité et la mener au bonheur.
Point intéressant, le récit est présenté du point de vue de la machine qui, comme le titre l'indique, rédige son autobiographie, témoignant des faits dont elle est témoin, de ses envies et aspirations.
Mais rapidement, le texte s'écarte de toute trame narrative pour se concentrer sur les considérations métaphysiques de la machine et une réflexion douce amère sur le sens de la vie. Et c'est bavard, et c'est sophistiqué en diable, et au final, j'ai trouvé ça chiant. Pas parce que c'est mal écrit, non, mais parce que c'est trop foutraque, trop précieux dans le choix des mots. Bref, ce n'est pas ce que je recherche quand j'ouvre un livre de SF.
En le lisant, j'ai deux rapprochements avec des lectures précédentes qui se sont faits dans mon esprit : les textes surréalistes d'une part (une mauvaise expérience de lecture pour moi) et le pendule de Foucault, d'Umberto Eco, dont l'érudition à la limite de la pédanterie m'avait déjà refroidie...
Je suis le premier à aimer les livres bien écrits, mais quand le produit fini se rapproche plus du tour de force littéraire que d'un roman à proprement parler, j'ai du mal.
Dont acte : je n'ai vraiment pas aimé.
February 4, 2018
This novel turns a closer eye on the inhabitants of The Institute, first introduced in "Through Others' Eyes". It is appealing to have Epikt as the view point for this.
The narrative is loosely organized around the prophecy (made by whom it is never clear) that the Institute for Impure Science must be launched by means of "three great failures", but is more a series of vignettes than a coherent plot. So lovers of Lafferty's novels may be disappointed. But still worth the read.
The narrative is loosely organized around the prophecy (made by whom it is never clear) that the Institute for Impure Science must be launched by means of "three great failures", but is more a series of vignettes than a coherent plot. So lovers of Lafferty's novels may be disappointed. But still worth the read.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews