A criminal from the present flees into the future, then finds he can't escape his past.
The world in which Kitson finds himself is a progressive one, with feudal, retrogressive values. A world of fluctuating material values which, to a thief like Kitson, makes life very difficult.
The anomalies of time travel and the possible horrors of a soul-less future civilization are brilliantly combined in the first novel by a newcomer to the science fiction scene.
“A Bach cantata trickled and surged time-pulses from a concealed cabinet.”
Isaac Asimov and Clifford D Simak certainly understood it in the 20th century. In modern times, Robert J Sawyer, Andy Weir, Suzanne Collins or Ben Bova, to name only a few examples, understand it. Well written high quality sci-fi, aside from using science - either existing, projected or created - as a literary tool to further the plot and create a setting, usually has something to say about culture, society, sociology, anthropology, history, politics, law, government and so on. If that’s the standard by which most readers judge sci-fi to be top drawer, then it has to be said that Stuart Gordon’s Time Story doesn’t qualify!
The plot, such as it is, is certainly straightforward enough. Phil Kitson, a common thief, uses cryonic suspension and time travel to elude the long arm of the law. But when his efforts go slightly awry, he finds himself in a hard core right-wing religious dystopian future that is most assuredly not to his liking. Beyond making the simple prediction that Bach’s music will survive through the centuries and the tongue-in-cheek comment that rock and roll will be played as a means to irritate any potential listeners, Gordon contents himself with a plot driven story and the obvious paradoxes and anomalies of time travel.
The ending of the novel, if somewhat predictable, is satisfying enough and I closed the last page feeling that I was glad to have read it after it had languished on my bookshelves for so many years. At the same time, I knew that if it had been as little as 50 pages longer, I might have set it aside as a did-not-finish.
I love it when an author says the characters are speaking quietly than following their comments with an explanation point! How does that happen again? I understand emphasizing a point, but not every sentence requires an exclamation point without diluting the conversation. The story centers around Kirsten who has stolen moongems. They appear to be the power source of past, present and future. He is chased by the authorities and winds up taking refuge in water well. He believes his chances or survival are dwindling. He pulls on the old rope which snaps, trapping him the icy cold water until a rope magically appears. His savior Hawisa lets him know he isn’t allowed to ask questions and do what he’s told. Ahh, a marriage made in heaven. Not quite. They wind up taking a trip to the future and find themselves caught up in political upheavel. See, Hawisa came from the future where she is Hawinda, a power grubbing, conniving, opportunist. She has sided with Count Maurice who is planning on overthrowing North Thaemsside who is her father. How’s that for intrigue? More grammatical issues. Not a bad nor a great read. If you’ve got a few hours to kill and are looking for a decent read, give it a go.
A poorly written, nonsensical story, where the author has paragraphs or chapters in present tense, then changes to past tense. That's all well and good but as he goes on, he gets the tenses mixed up within the same paragraphs. A sloppily written, poor book. A waste of time. I gave up reading it,just couldn't get to the end.