The Sword and Laser discussion
This topic is about
Casting Off
2013 Reads
>
Wool: Discuss Book 3: Casting Off
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Rob, Roberator
(new)
Apr 30, 2013 03:29AM
Mod
reply
|
flag
I didn't care for the first two books but finally book 3 pulled me in. I actually care about Juliette as a character.(view spoiler)
I think that the first couple of stories where there to introduce us to the world, introduce us to Juliette and hammer home the idea that this is a world where good people don't last long. The way the story comes together with each of the first sections having characters pushed on to try and uncover the truth of the silo by the death of someone close to them makes you wonder if this is how the whole book will progress. Each time a new character taking the lead, standing on the graves of those that came before in the hope they will eventually be able to see the truth.
"Silo 1, this is Silo 18. We may have a problem over here." I don't know what I expected at the end of book 3, but definitely not this. This really ramped up the undercurrent of mystery surrounding the world of Wool and made me feel like I have only just barely seen the tip of the iceberg of what is to come.
Aaron, exactly. The final two segments I have more mixed feelings about, but up to this point, I was glued to the book.
Neil, I don't think it's about a world where good people don't last long. Up to this point, Howey has painted a rather black and white picture: you are on one side (discover the truth, perhaps?) or the other side (maintain peace/status quo, maybe?) and we're lulled into this false dichotomy. In reality, we know that people aren't simply good or evil, there's a whole lot of gray in between depending on our circumstances, training/upbringing, and expectations.
I mean, at the end of Book 2, I was like, REALLY? Is IT that much of a dick? What is going on? Book 3 continues this suspicion.
I do like how you expressed it though: standing on the graves of those that came before. That's a very serious, dark, dystopic image.
I really enjoyed book 1. It felt like the tight novella that it was. Book 2 was not quite as good, though I attribute that to the author quickly transitioning from a one-off novella to a full "novel". Therefore, he needed to do quite a bit a world building. The only reason I liked it less than #1 was that it changed the pace from #1, though understandably so. Book #3 I really enjoyed as we get much more of the protagonist and it starts to feel like more of a normal novel. The ending of #3 was excellent. I'm now very much enjoying #4 though not very far into it.I'm really glad S&L decided on this book because I'd never heard of it nor would I likely have read it on my own.
I think part of the magic of Wool is that he killed off the characters early on. However I think it was more accident than design. When Howey wrote the first part he didn't really have plans for more. So considering that it makes sense for the purposes of the first part as a stand alone to kill off the protagonist. Ditto for the second. By that time he had the beginning of a runaway hit which led to longer term protagonist in Juliette.
"I think part of the magic of Wool is that he killed off the characters early on. "I see people cheering this here and in GRRM's work and, on the one hand, I acknowledge that it's a brave thing since it runs counter to so much fiction. However, I'm not sure I see it as anything to cheer except if it's used well. That is, simply being ruthless with your characters seems like it could be just a check box feature of a book. The thing about killing characters isn't simply that it's edgy, but that it introduces some real stakes and uncertainty. However, if a work gives you a sympathetic character and then, at the end of the section, kills them and repeats this as a pattern, it's not edgy, it's boring.
DAMMIT people, I wasn't going to read Wool...
Rick wrote: "I think part of the magic of Wool is that he killed off the characters early on."I see people cheering this here and in GRRM's work and, on the one hand, I acknowledge that it's a brave thing since it runs counter to so much fiction.
Is it a counter-movement, or does it call back to genre's mythic/legendary roots? How many named characters with lines of dialogue are killed in The Iliad? How many ancient Greek heroes die peacefully in their sleep? How many Knights of the Round Table are still alive at the end of Le Morte D'Arthur? Maybe it's just more and more modern authors waking up to what authors of earlier times knew first hand: when the stakes are that big, where the fates of whole societies hang in the balance, people are probably going to die.
Leesa wrote: "Neil, I don't think it's about a world where good people don't last long. Up to this point, Howey has painted a rather black and white picture: you are on one side (discover the truth, perhaps?) or the other side (maintain peace/status quo, maybe?) and we're lulled into this false dichotomy. In reality, we know that people aren't simply good or evil, there's a whole lot of gray in between depending on our circumstances, training/upbringing, and expectations."Good wasn't the best word for me to use there. I was thinking along the lines of the Good being those trying to uncover the truth or at least curious about what the world was like out of the silo, the bad being those trying to keep it hidden with everyone else being somewhere in between. It's not good people that don't last long but more the 'Good Guys' as in the heroes or potential heroes of the silo that got dealt with before they became a problem.
Leesa wrote: "I do like how you expressed it though: standing on the graves of those that came before. That's a very serious, dark, dystopic image. "
Thanks :)
I liked the third story more than the second, but I started to wonder how powerful Bernard could be. So far he's (view spoiler). Shouldn't there come a time when the rest of the population in the silo gets suspicious? The last chapter was interesting, and I liked the shift to Bernard's POV. As Aaron said I didn't see that last line coming at all.
I also like the juxtaposition of the industrial revolution machinists with the information technology machinists. The latter ruling over and looking down on the former. At the same time, the only hope for seeing through the illusions perpetrated by IT comes from the former, who are more grounded in reality.
I just finished the 3rd part and loved it. I really liked part 1, then I wasn't super fond of part 2 so I took a many month hiatus and read other things. I'm really glad S&L inspired me to pick it up again. Can't wait to see what's next.
Also, does anyone else feel like Holston's experience in part one and this chapter seem inconsistant. Holston didn't seem to know anything about the screen in the helmet until the very end. Did he just not understand what was in his wife's data? Did she go out knowing about the screen? Why? Hopefully this will make more sense later, but I'm afraid that their portion of the story is over.
Shaina wrote: "Also, does anyone else feel like Holston's experience in part one and this chapter seem inconsistant. Holston didn't seem to know anything about the screen in the helmet until the very end. Did h..."I think that Holston's wife found the data and understood what it showed, but didn't understand that it was a projection in the suit's visor. I believe both her and Holston thought that the image was a reflection of what the real world looked like. That is why she wanted to go outside. She believed that IT was hiding the real world from the Silo and projected a false image of a gray, destroyed landscape on the walls.
Holston's wife didn't know. She only knew parts of what the restored data showed. She thought it was all a lie, thats why she wanted to go outside. Holston found almost the same data but didn't make the connection to the screens until the end. The Silo 1 story is explained in the Shift series that is a prequel to the Wool stories. I would recommend reading those too because they are very interesting and show why the Silo came into existance. I am going to read Dust once it comes out to get a conclusion to the story, especially Juliette's.
I rather expected the ending. One of the first thoughts I had was wondering how many other silos there were. Which made me wonder if they talked to each other. Which made me wonder who would do the talking. Which led me to IT since they are obviously the ones who seem to be in control of the silos.
Mod
I haven't read any of the things in this thread marked with spoiler tags because of that but I have a sneaking suspicion some of these things are only spoilers to those who haven't read Book 3.
OK, on to my thoughts. I cannot put this down. Juliette is a very interesting character and the fact that we *know* at the beginning she's going for cleaning is very compelling. Howey spoiled the ending!!! But we still want to know how she gets there. It's especially tense because every other main character has died up until now. So the reader is left to wonder if she will too.
Also, Howey must have had a really bad experience with an IT department at some time. Wow. Maybe they deleted his hard drive or something by mistake. Heh heh.
The world si really well revealed in a way that always makes you want to learn a little more about the next secret. And just when you think you know where it's going, it all changes.
That's the brilliance of killing the characters. You don't expect it as a modern reader. And it's motivated not random. And just when you begin to expect it you're left wondering if Juliette is alive or dead with no clear idea which it has to be.
Finally I'm gratified a few of you were surprised by the ending here because someone very angrily accused me of spoiling that part in the podcast because of something I read out of wikipedia.
I'm really enjoying this omnibus! Probably one of my favorite picks so far. I love that we don't know who will live or die. I read a lot of crime thrillers and my constant complaint is Im not worried about the main character. On to part 4
Here's my 2 cents worth. After IT poisoned the water at the end of Book 2, I found this one entirely to predictable. Nobody else feel that way?Still enjoying it so far though.
AndrewP wrote: "Here's my 2 cents worth. After IT poisoned the water at the end of Book 2, I found this one entirely to predictable. Nobody else feel that way?"Yes. A lot of cool twists in the first two books. But at least I didn't know it was predictable until it was.
Mod
Yes. A lot of cool twists in the f..."
Well considering you're given the end at the beginning I don't think the point of this one was all suspense. It was about how you would end up there. For me this was more about character exploration than event-driven plot suspense. I enjoyed that.
Mod
That plan was all well and good until I finished this part. I couldn't put it down and have already started the fourth book. I plan to finish the whole thing before starting my other book.
I was annoyed at the start with the flashback thing. I think it's way to overused these days.
In retrospect however, I think it's a good fit here. After two books of killing the protagonist he starts you with things looking pretty bleak and a sense of 'here we go again'.
I know I wasn't surprised she didn't die like the rest, but he left me unable to stop to see what would happen next. Would her survival be short lived? And what is beyond the hill?
Perhaps suspense was the wrong word:) I have probably read to many detective books, but the whole "anyone who starts to get near the truth dies" seems a bit to obvious for me.
Ok, my biggest problem was how come Bernard was completely ignored as the prime suspect, yet Juliet was arrested and banged up every time the wind changed direction, with no charges even being brought. Nobody has immunity, she went to some pains to say at one point. But we're not even going to *try* to bring in the bad guy???I was reading this thinking she damn well better survive, or we'll be o for 3 and I won't even bother with part 4. It was only when it became obvious they were going to switch good tape for bad that I started to feel better about it.
Of course, if she dies just over the hill in part 4, I shall be reenacting that Hemingway scene from Silver Linings Playbook.
I still don't see the point of what is effectively a Rube Goldberg killing machine. I know it's a standard megalomaniac trope, but it's so doomed to failure. "No Mr Bond, I expect you to look helpless for a bit then struggle valiantly and finally escape just as the laser beam gets to within two millimetres of your nuts while I stand here with my pinkie finger between my teeth and laughing maniacally."
It would be *so* much simpler and cheaper and less prone to failure if they simply killed the people they wanted to kill, and have a regular tech clean the lenses in a regular safe suit. Big sanity fail for me, that.
Mod
This is something I felt better about after reading book 5. I'll be curious if you feel the same way.
Tim wrote: "I was reading this thinking she damn well better survive, or we'll be o for 3 and I won't even bother with part 4."That was me too.
I assume Bernard wasn't hauled in because at that point, he was kind of a dictator. It doesn't make any sense and seems to be convenient for the story though, like Howey just didn't want to bother with common sense there. Their water was fine before they got to IT. It was poisoned after. 1+1=2, right?
I'm with other commenters on this thread. I was not surprised by the ending at all. the first time I expected something to that effect was when they describe the inscription on the back of the sheriffs badge having three triangles. On one level that could have meant one triangle for each of the deputy offices spread throughout the silo. In my mind, however, it was an immediate red flag that there was more than one silo complex.There was only one thing that mildly surprised me at all in this particular story although it shouldn't had I picked up on the clues in the second story. That was exactly just how many deaths were attributed to IT. Especially the death of the person down in the mechanical area that was the only person that Juliette had ever loved. It made me wonder if they were behind Marnes' suicide. Another could have easily been forged.
apart from that I agree the story was incredibly predictable. The ending still reminds me of Logan's Run.
By this story Howey had actually hit his stride and drew me into the point where I did not want to stop reading the story and I didn't. I read it all in about three hours.
This one flows really well, I saw the ending coming pretty early on however. (I think he needs to shield his plot lines slightly more, I've felt a bit spoon fed at times).
Aaron wrote: ""Silo 1, this is Silo 18. We may have a problem over here." I don't know what I expected at the end of book 3, but definitely not this. This really ramped up the undercurrent of mystery surrounding..."Yeah that was awesome.
I'm with those who didn't see that particular outcome until the talk about the tape, especially once Juliette read Walker's note. Actually, through most of book 3, I was seriously considering stopping. The whole silo existence is so depressing. Juliette seemed powerless to stop IT from killing. Although she did put everything together, she felt more like a pawn throughout most of this book.However, I now think that she - and Holston, his wife, Mayor Jahns and Deputy Marines - are really changing things in the silo. I want to keep reading to find out if their actions will lead to an uprising.
When she talked to walker about everything I knew what was coming
People have mentioned enjoying this much more than the second part, but for me, the great thing about the second part was that the whole journey was like pulling back on an elastic band, slowly, slowly stretching it out. This part is the elastic then snapping into action. It's great, but it would have been nothing without that build up. But then, I'm a fan of beginnings.That said, I thought this part did a great job of realising the things set up in the first two stories. The manipulations of IT seem to increase at an unstoppable pace in this book. I think it is obvious to us as readers that Bernard is guilty, because we are sharing the perceptions of those who suspect him, but I don't question why no-one else is pointing the finger. Didn't he throw about a cover story that the mayor's death was by natural causes? Also, just how many people knew the particulars of the case? He quickly assumed the position of acting mayor when he was already in a powerful position as head of IT, a department which appears to have considerable influence few dare question, so he could have easily kept things hushed up. Given all these things, I can completely see why no one would outright accuse him of anything. Only a select few had clear reason to suspect him, and the silo seems to be a place where people learn to keep dangerous thoughts to themselves.
The only part of this section that interrupted my suspension of disbelief was when Juliette didn't twig right away how the suit had been fixed for her. The note made it plainly obvious, and she was supposed to be extremely intelligent, so I felt like the note should have been no mystery to her. In the end, I put it down to her emotional state.
I was surprised by the mention of other silo's at the end too. I had assumed that there would be other people outside in some way, possibly in a similar situation, but hadn't imagine any sort of conspirational communication going on anywhere. My spoiler earmuffs must have kept out whatever spoiler Tom gave, probably because neither one of us knew much about the story at the time.
Struggling to put this book down now. It's proving to be a quick and enjoyable read.
Maybe I'm crazy, but I liked Wool much better until Part 3. It was slow, but I liked that there were no clear correct choices, that there was no clear right and wrong. I may have been reading too much into it, but I loved the Major's moral dilemma that she had one of the most peaceful reigns, but she did it by enforcing laws and customs she didn't necessarily agree with (the cleanings, turning a blind eye to IT).But then Part 3 becomes so clear cut. IT=nefariously evil. Mechanical=Disney movie good, to the point of literally being one big happy family. I mean, I still like the world, it's just reminding me more and more of Jericho, that marginally silly, oft-cancelled, small town Apocalypse show--especially with that "twist" ending
So far I have enjoyed book 3 the best. It finally hooked me. I really enjoyed piecing together what was going to happen as I read. We already knew she was going to go to cleaning, and so my brain just went ahead and figured some stuff out. Like mechanical giving IT supplies that weren't going to fail. First suspected that was going to be happen when she was fixing the pumps and spent over a paragraph reflecting on a piece of tape.
I would have enjoyed it even more if it have been more subtle though. For example I feel I should have been shocked by the last line about the different silos, but as soon as he got out a head set I knew he was contacting someone else. Also I had flicked through the book and seen Silo 18 mentioned in chapter headings.
It's a little too predictable for my liking, but I am still enjoying the mystery. The more I read the more I like it, which is always good.
Yeah, I agree with you Eleanor. I think that everything came together much faster than for the characters. I would have preferred for a more gradual approach to the uncovering of the silo societies.
Maybe I'm a little more dense than most of you but I was pretty surprised by a lot of what's happened so far.
The twist at the end of book 1 caught me by surprise but it didn't really grab me.
Mayor Jahns's death caught me totally by surprise. I was really drawn in by both Jahn's and Marnes. I felt like they were really well developed and I was invested in their journey to find a new sheriff and to find eachother. It felt like a shot to the gut at the end of that book.
I do question though, why would IT try to poison Marnes when Jahn seemed the most obvious target? She was the one with the real power there. She was the one defying Bernard. Sure it was Marnes suggestion but I just don't think removing Marnes would have changed the situation much whereas removing Jahn obviously did. But I digress.
I was surprised by the reveal at the end of book 3 but I felt like it was tacked on and unnecessary. Kind of a "Come back for more!" For me, book 3 wasn't about surprises. By then you know what IT is capable of, you know what outside is like and right away you know that Jules is headed there. What holds that book together for me is the tension of when is she going out and how much will she do before she goes and who else is going to have to die?
Every page I turned I was waiting for it all to end for Jules. Every time she connected to someone I found myself hoping they didn't end up with a belt around their neck. By the time she talked to Walk I wasn't thinking "oh, here it comes" I was screaming "NOT HIM TOO!".
TL;DR I loved it. Most of the dots may be connected for us but it's still fun to watch Jules try and connect them too, before it's too late.
The twist at the end of book 1 caught me by surprise but it didn't really grab me.
Mayor Jahns's death caught me totally by surprise. I was really drawn in by both Jahn's and Marnes. I felt like they were really well developed and I was invested in their journey to find a new sheriff and to find eachother. It felt like a shot to the gut at the end of that book.
I do question though, why would IT try to poison Marnes when Jahn seemed the most obvious target? She was the one with the real power there. She was the one defying Bernard. Sure it was Marnes suggestion but I just don't think removing Marnes would have changed the situation much whereas removing Jahn obviously did. But I digress.
I was surprised by the reveal at the end of book 3 but I felt like it was tacked on and unnecessary. Kind of a "Come back for more!" For me, book 3 wasn't about surprises. By then you know what IT is capable of, you know what outside is like and right away you know that Jules is headed there. What holds that book together for me is the tension of when is she going out and how much will she do before she goes and who else is going to have to die?
Every page I turned I was waiting for it all to end for Jules. Every time she connected to someone I found myself hoping they didn't end up with a belt around their neck. By the time she talked to Walk I wasn't thinking "oh, here it comes" I was screaming "NOT HIM TOO!".
TL;DR I loved it. Most of the dots may be connected for us but it's still fun to watch Jules try and connect them too, before it's too late.
Matthew wrote: "I do question though, why would IT try to poison Marnes when Jahn seemed the most obvious target? She was the one with the real power there."He very much intended to poison Jahn. He had seen on their trip down how they would each drink from each other's water pack, so he knew she would be drinking his on the way back up.
Weren't they both drinking from the same water jug on the way down? And when one ran out they both switched to the other? And then on the way up, because they were holding hands and standing side by side, not in line, they started drinking eachother's. So either Bernard made a mistaken judgement that was coincidentally correct or he just figured he'd poison them both at the same time
Even though I expected Juliette to live at the end of this part, I think the author should have not revealed the note from Walker until she was outside. Then have her recognize the significance of the message. It would have kept the suspense a little bit more. The cross silo communication at the end, has me intrigued. Loving this so far!
This chapter left me wondering how and when Bernard was going to get his. Well onto book 4!
