"Altered Carbon" Problems with the Story, Setting, Characters, etc? **Spoilers Allowed**

[stormhawk]

Kristen suggested that I start this thread ...

I haven't read any of Richard Morgan's other books, and I still haven't finished Altered Carbon, but some things have been nagging at the back of my head since I started ...

The relocatable personality process seems too cost prohibitive to be viable on anything other than a governmental/military or really rich guy level. It doesn't make sense, to me anyway.

I also don't get the idea of Kovacs being contracted ... he's clearly a loose cannon, and was incarcerated. This isn't a scifi version of 48-hours here, with him being an engaging conman like Eddie Murphy!

I'm starting to get into some of the backstory (Riker), but it's not really gelling for me yet.

And with the meths ... how does inheritance work if the progenitor never dies? How does wealth transfer?

Morgan seems to reach, sometimes, to establish his futuristic setting ... changes in terminology, calling glasses "External Eyewear," for example. I thought language tends to contract rather than expand. it comes across too stilted, for my taste. There's a couple of other linguistic issues I noticed ... Seattle is still Seattle, New York is New York, and even Ulan Bator retains it's original name, but they don't know that their city is called San Francisco? And yet, women still wear espadrilles? I know it's not a big thing, barely even a little thing, but it stood out enough for me to notice.

[stormhawk]

Oh, yeah, and why isn't Mr. Bigshot Detective Envoy guy starting by reconstructing the missing 48 hours? AND why hasn't anybody taken notice that the RD happened just prior to the known schedule upload, which speaks of planning rather than impulse. There are no coincidences in mystery novels.

[KristenR]

I felt the same way about Kovacs being hired - it didn't make much sense and I didn't particularly like him for most of the book. But by the end of the book I understood more about his character and why he was hired.

I liked the relocatable personality, however. I think Morgan came up with a system that could work economically, even though I think it's creepy (having someone pay to walk around in your body while you're incarcerated.) And when you die, if you can afford a new body you get one. If not, your personality is put in storage or in a virtual condo until someone in your family can buy you a sleeve. Perhaps the technology would have started as military only and then rolled out to the rich, and then out to the general public (the technology is over 300 years old at this point in the story). I think some of the characters talked about how they had never been sleeved because they're not rich and not criminals.

One problem I had with the book is that some characters seemed to come out of nowhere. At a couple of points I was just a bit puzzled at the abrupt change in the plotline.

[Richard]

stormhawk wrote: "The relocatable personality process seems too cost prohibitive to be viable on anything other than a governmental/military or really rich guy level. It doesn't make sense, to me anyway. ..."

I agree with the technical criticism, but I think scifi has often explored how technologies might impact society if only they were widely accessible. Down And Out In The Magic Kingdom had something quite similar; and think of all the books that have relied on the sure-to-be-absurdly-expensive technology of interstellar travel.

stormhawk also wrote: "I also don't get the idea of Kovacs being contracted ... he's clearly a loose cannon, and was incarcerated...."

Give the author some room to breathe, eh? Or: try to think of reasons why you might want a detective who's prone to violence and has a nasty reputation.

On the San Francisco question: I'm with you. Hell, I live in the city. All I can imagine is that he's setting up another story. Perhaps there was a colony world named "San Francisco" and they went all mutant-alien and tried to kill everyone? I could see how the local chamber of commerce might want to nix the name.

Definitely a chaotic book. But some of us like that :-)

[Chris]

What made no sense to me was the incarceration "on stack" in the first place. To be placed "on stack" there would be no perception of time passing, and for those used to the technology no real impact. What clearly would have made more sense with this technology and the compressed time in virtual space would have been to keep the persons body around on ice for a few days while they spent 200 virtual years in prison being reformed by a team of AI constructs.

[Richard]

I agree; the passage of time needs something extra to make it punishment. Oddly enough, another scifi-hard-boiled-detective-story-set-in-the-SF–Bay-area also used the idea of long-term cold storage as punishment, but there you don't get a new body and don't have any prospect of living forever. So in that case, it works: breaking the social networks that let people profit from illegal activity should help quite a bit. E.g., the fence you used before being put in storage is now an eighty-year old guy and doesn't even recognize you.

Yeah: since here they can run the people in software, there is a very low cost to experimenting with different rehabilitation techniques. Commit a crime: go to seminary for twenty years, with zero chance of escape!

[Jed]

An airplane ticket used to cost the equivalent of $10K for the same ticket you can now buy for $300.

The first flat screen TV advertised was $25K.


Richard wrote: "stormhawk wrote: "The relocatable personality process seems too cost prohibitive to be viable on anything other than a governmental/military or really rich guy level. It doesn't make sense, to me a..."

[Richard]

I'm sure the cost of an executive jet aircraft has also come down, but it still isn't within range of the masses.

[Jed]

Well, add another 40 years and it very well might be something you get your kids for Xmas.

Almost everything you use or live with today was Science Fiction 100 years ago and as unaffordable as a private jet when it first developed.

Imagine this. A phone the size of a hot dog that uses no wires and will let you call anywhere in the world instantaneously. Magic! And they give them out FREE with a 2 year contract...


Richard wrote: "I'm sure the cost of an executive jet aircraft has also come down, but it still isn't within range of the masses."

[Richard]

My point was and is: just because some very visible things have come down dramatically in price doesn't mean that all things do.

I've been in the technology industry for most of the years those efficiencies took place, and a common platitude is to contrast the reduction in prices in technology to the lack of those in the automotive field. As in: if cars had gained in efficiency at the same rate as computers, you'd cruise the freeways at 200mph, getting 400mgp, using an engine the size of a walnut.

The thing to note: it *didn't* happen with cars, despite one hundred years opportunity to do so. Or airplanes, despite your flippant comment. I'm pretty sure executive jet aircraft will be obsolete long before they become "something you get your kids for Xmas".

A cheap pair of blue jeans or shoes used to cost two dozen bucks of so. Today, a cheap pair of blue jeans or shoes costs two dozen bucks or so. According to your logic, they should cost a nickel.

Some products do go drastically down in prices, others a little, others not so much at all.

[Phoenixfalls]

Richard wrote: "A cheap pair of blue jeans or shoes used to cost two dozen bucks of so. Today, a cheap pair of blue jeans or shoes costs two dozen bucks or so."

Just to, you know, play the devil's advocate. . .you've gotta keep inflation in mind. $2.00 in 1900 = $41.26 in 2000 (according to this neat calculator: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/). :)

[stormhawk]

I think Richard is talking about 1980s (nondesigner) blue jeans instead of 1900 dungarees.

[KristenR]

I don't think you can compare this to something like jets...perhaps cars and telephones - and medical technology. When automobiles came out, not everyone could afford them, and few people at that time would have been able to fathom having 2 or more cars per family. Cell phones are everywhere (even children get them now) though it's far different from the availability/cost of early telephones and telegraphs before that.

Just like communication and medical treatment I can definitely see this being a technology that in general people would feel entitled to - not a luxury - we would find ways to make it cost effective.

[Richard]

Phoenixfalls wrote: "Just to, you know, play the devil's advocate. . .you've gotta keep inflation in mind. $2.00 in 1900 = $41.26 in 2000..."

I prefer the official calculator at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but the results are about the same. I did keep inflation in mind: as Wikipedia cites:

In 1885 jeans could be purchased in the US for $1.50 (approximately $34 in 2007). Today, an equivalent pair of jeans can be purchased for around $30–50, but more stylish pairs can cost much more...

KristenR wrote: "Just like communication and medical treatment I can definitely see this being a technology that in general people would feel entitled to - not a luxury - we would find ways to make it cost effective."

My point is that our feelings of entitlement have nothing to do with whether something is eventually priced for the masses: it has to do with the technology of production and factors of production. Solid-state technology is marvelous for bringing costs down; the volumes involved in consumer electronics complements that. Other products that require large amounts of labor (human or robotic) can't benefit the way solid-state stuff can. A car is less complex than a state-of-the-art central processor, but has a more expensive production chain. Airplanes are worse, and more so due to smaller production runs.

Some products do go drastically down in prices, others a little, others not so much at all. How much we want any product has little to do with whether it's price goes down tremendously. What it is made of and how it is made matter much more.

We'd all love anti-cancer treatment, for example, to become "cost effective", but today it requires huge investments of very specialized labor. We can hope that someday we'll understand it so well that it becomes cheap, but that's still science fiction at this point.

The cortical stacks that Morgan (and Doctorow) envisage are arguably more complex than that.

My guess would be that if we ever get to the point we could make such devices at all, they'd definitely be solid state and self-implanting, so would probably be prime candidates for the cost decreases we see in consumer technology.

[KristenR]

Richard wrote: My point is that our feelings of entitlement have nothing to do with whether something is eventually priced for the masses: it has to do with the technology of production and factors of production.

ok - good point

Richard wrote: My guess would be that if we ever get to the point we could make such devices at all, they'd definitely be solid state and self-implanting, so would probably be prime candidates for the cost decreases we see in consumer technology.

Even though I'm not well versed in economics and so can't explain myself well, I think we pretty much agree :)

[Cathy]

I'll just add to the argument that "resleeving" may involve costs beyond the price of the stacks. There are doctors with expensive training involved, complex operating facilities, etc. Even transmitting Kovacs's mentality across the star systems presumably involved large expenses in both equipment and energy.

I thought some of the arguments in the book about people/bodies being cheap and technology more expensive were interesting to consider. What if we lived in a world where that became true, such as in this book? How would that change our views of morality?

[Weenie]

I read Altered Carbon a while ago, loved the concept of stacks and sleeves, have read the sequels. I tend to concur with those that think that if available in real-life, more of the well-off people would be able to do the stacking and resleeving but I can see there being 'affordable' services for the masses, kinda like how anyone these days can have plastic surgery whereas years ago, it was just for the rich and famous.

[Jed]

Altered Carbon is set in the year 2550 which means that it is a world at least as different as our own world is from the year 1560.

To be able to read and enjoy Science Fiction, you have to let go of your everyday present. If you took a contemporary novel today and sent it to someone in the year 1900, they would view it as Science Fiction.

[Tom]

I thought is was said that common people paid Sleeve Insurance which could get them re sleeved maybe once before they ran out of money and lost interest in living. Plus, most average people are re sleeved into very bad synthetics

[Kaion]

I didn't really enjoy Altered Carbon. Too often it felt like he was dressing up a noir with a sci-fi "sleeve" as an excuse to not make as much character/plot sense. (No matter how many he explained his super-skills or lack thereof on how the neuro-chem was working at that particular point, it doesn't make the fight scenes, etc, more interesting or realistic.)

Also, the sex and drugs scenes were downright CORNY, the sex-and-drugs scene downright abysmal.

[Jed]

It's definitely a love or hate book. I thought it was fantastic but I was confused on the first reading and re-read it with great pleasure and increased comprehension.

The sex scenes were pretty annoying but I thought the violence was excellent.

[AJ]

Hi I just joined - hope you don't mind me jumping in.

First, let me state that I love Morgan's writing. I really could read his style for books and books.

That said, I thought his sci-fi concept was extremely weak. His world, even though it was the USA in 500 years, was flimsy and not fleshed out. The idea of sleeving - to me - would incorporate a huge shift/paradigm of the sense of individualism, aesthetic qualities, or perpetuate a distinct rift in organic vs. sythesized bodies which accentuated both. None of this was addressed and in fact sexism and racism were still prevalent (there was mention of a white sleeve returning to a black family). If you look back on racism and how far the mentality has changed in a generation I find it un-buyable that it did not shift in all the years of sleeving.

Your points above are also valid.

In short the overall element is intriguing but he spent almost 600 pages of action (in which most fantasy writers create a world for you) that could have been situated in San Fran 2010 with a few alterations.

[Phoenixfalls]

So I don't remember the book particularly well, which is why I haven't done a lot of discussing with you all (didn't have time to reread it!) but I'm surprised no one has mentioned the element that stands out in my memory as the most enjoyable part of the book and world-building: the Hendrix! That hotel reminded me a bit of the AIs in Iain M. Banks' Culture universe -- a comparison that can't be anything but good, IMHO. :)

[KristenR]

Oohh...thanks Phoenixfalls - How could I have forgotten about the Hendrix - I'm going to start a thread about it now :)

AJ, you bring up some good points about sexism and racism. Resleeving would reduce the role of appearance as identity, and so skin color would be less important in society. I can see sexism sticking around a good long time, though, since gender is intrinsic to identity. I don't think sex/sexuality and prostitution/exploitation would be affected too much by the technology since you wouldn't have people resleeving as the opposite sex.

[AJ]

Good point Kristen. Identity is so tied to gender that it is a constant and therefore sexism might fall outside of that. When Kovacs gets placed in a female sleeve I found it very interesting how he recognized immediately the physical subtlety of the female hormones.

[Phoenixfalls]

I think sexism might take a bit of a hit though. . . I think there would be enough people that would be curious to try out the opposite sex that it wouldn't be totally unknown. . . of course, depending on how visible those people are, that might simply lead to a particular prejudice against people who swap genders. . . I don't remember how long the resleeving technology had been around, but unless there were rules built into the system preventing people from swapping genders (which would, of course, bring all sorts of issues to the fore) I think the tech would eventually lead to people viewing gender as more fluid than we currently do. . .

[stormhawk]

Wasn't there a comment in there somewhere about the sleeve affecting the consciousness? Consider Kovacs smoking because his sleeve did, not because he did.

[AJ]

Phoenixfalls - Good point, I agree. I think regardless it's an area that Morgan could have explored more since he was so willing to introduce the concept to us (ie torture scene).

Stormhawk - yes, the smoking piece and also the physical reactions of attraction, which I thought was one of the things done really well.

[KristenR]

that's right, I forgot how he delved into the physical reactions of attractions being tied to the sleeve. Hmmm...I don't completely buy it. The smoking was because of a physical nicotine addiction, I think gender and attraction is in the brain - oh crap....the brain is still there in the sleeve...

I get how a synthetic sleeve would work if we could figure how to digitize personality...everything digital. But when being resleeved in a human body is the brain bypassed? If it isn't, wouldn't the original brain influence the new personality since the synaptic structure of the brain is the basis of it all (just like he would be limited by any other physical reaction/capability of the host body)? If that were the case, then you would not be the absolute same person if resleeved in a human body.

I think I'm over thinking this :) But, yes, as Morgan has written it I can see how gender could end up a bit more fluid and sexism would take a hit.

[AJ]

KristenR wrote: "I think gender and attraction is in the brain - oh crap....the brain is still there in the sleeve..."


Oh my, you are right. What happens when a very smart person goes into the sleeve with a damaged brain? There are are lot of problems here!

[Elena]

Jed wrote: "It's definitely a love or hate book. I thought it was fantastic but I was confused on the first reading and re-read it with great pleasure and increased comprehension.

The sex scenes were pretty a..."

I am trying to read it but it is confusing to me. I am just at the part where he comes back from being a woman and confronts Jerry. Jerry goes over a lot of events and people's fate and I am completely lost at what he is talking about. It is like I missed part of the book and feel like starting the book again, lol. I think I better wait for the movie.