The Long Earth
discussion
A disappointment
date
newest »
newest »
I have to agree with this one, whilst I am an avid fan of Discworld, if I had read this first I would probably never have bothered with them. This one really was a struggle to finish as it was so laborious and pointless. Please stick with the Discworld.
As a standalone book I agree, but as the start of a series it makes sense to get a lot of the exposition out of the way with early.
terahurts wrote: "As a standalone book I agree, but as the start of a series it makes sense to get a lot of the exposition out of the way with early."That's kind of what I thought, If this is a standalone book then it is best avoided but the ending did seem to leave open the possibility of a sequel and who knows maybe the 2nd book will go somewhere because this one certainly didn't and that's saying something since they flicked past about 1 billion different earths on there way to nowhere.
Terribly disappointing!As another review has put it - "You will NOT find Pratchett in this book".
So if you are an old Pratchett fan just ignore this contrived drivel with grand aspirations of study in evolution and save the money.
The story is meandering without any particular purpose with occasional melodramatic splashes - wile most of the character's behavior is either unnecessary and/or forced. The dialogue is frequently almost juvenile in it's simplicity or just 'half-baked' and oddly neurotic.
This is also a-typical for any T.P. works that are normally insightful, elegant and very tightly structured, where all aspects of the story and character development are highly relevant and always carry very specific purpose even when it may seem initially hidden.
The randomness of characters (aside from 2 main ones) suggest many high hopes for a sequel (perhaps a few - judging from the history of Baxter's works). What it fails to produce though is our interest in the characters Or the events, OR the future of both - which is ultimately imperative in the sequel-bound works.
Over all a remarkably poor attempt at 'scientific' take on possible parallel worlds theme.
Very sad.
This novel was clearly written mostly by Baxter--which is why I liked it as much as I did. This is a first-rate SF novel, but the previous commenters are correct: other than a handful of gags here and there, it doesn't read like Pratchett at all...truth is, though, I'm not a Pratchett fan. For the small handful of people like me who came to it because of Baxter, however, THE LONG EARTH is a gem.
Paul wrote: "As a standalone book I agree, but as the start of a series it makes sense to get a lot of the exposition out of the way with early."Oh dear, I really don't understand this kind of thinking. The first book in a series should still be worth reading, should still hold the reader's attention, and should be more than simply a container with which to set up the rest of the series. I know it's becoming more and more comon with these type of fantasy/sci-fi series to use the first X number of books to introduce the setting and characters etc, but it's not a good thing in my view at all. Any writer worth their salt will be able to do this AND keep the reader engaged. It shouldn't be one or the other, it should be both at the same time.
I agree that the book didn't live up to its potential. My initial excitement slowly changed to disappointment - especially somewhere in the middle with nothing happening but a slight change in the worlds and some dinosaurs roaming around - but recovered with Sally joining the main plot. The book was more science fiction than I had expected and the story also took quite a different direction than I had thought. Nevertetheless I enjoyed it. And the idea of a Tibetan motorcycle repairmen reincarnating into a computer is hilarious.I'm not sure though if they can come up with enough good/realistic material for a sequel. I feel like the setup of the Long Earth the book ended up with quite limited its possibilities. But then again, there could be a Long Mars or a Long Venus...
I both enjoyed it and felt frustrated by it. I was actually okay with the slow, exploratory pacing, and I confess the hard SF aspects made me want to try out Baxter sometime, but I still thought overall it was a patchwork job.The thing is, they had assistance and a alpha reader helping on this, if you read the note about the Madison convention at the back. Yet, before I got to that page, I was thinking while I was reading that this manuscript needed an alpha reader badly. Go figure.
I think it was just a dodgy collabaration - Terry Pratchett, from my experience, likes silly concepts and under-explained madness. Stephen Baxter does more precise work, explaining how everything would work to the nth degree.If it were just a Stephen Baxter novel, I may have enjoyed it more. It was just the fact there were too many little "Pratchett-y" moments which ruined it for me.
This is strange, because the general consensus is that there wasn't enough Pratchett and too much Baxter. You're the first person I've seen that has said the opposite.I, too, was quite disappointed by the book. I still enjoyed it enough to give it three starts, but it's nowhere near up to the standard I've grown to expect from a Terry Pratchett story. It was definitely an interesting concept, but not much was done with it considering most of the alternate world's have minimal difference to our own. It's a given that there's going to be a sequel, so I hope that they really explore the possibilities in that. I'm not sure I'd want it to turn into another never-ending Discworld style series, though... it seems far too limited an idea for that.
I don't know Stephen Baxter's work, but I was disappointed with The Long Earth because it had no character arc. It was all about the setting. There were lots of ideas, but no focus. A lot more madness and plot and less "how many variations of earth can we dream up" would have made a better book. Who would read a series that the first book disappointed?
I've not read T.P or any S.B books but I liked the idea of the storyline and gave it a go.What annoyed me what the story like really picked up then just dropped of when we met the First Singular blah blah. Then it picked up again at the bomb in Madison...then the book ended. It was like what the hell was the point of that. I did like the descriptions and the thought that went behind the Long Earth concept. I do however feel cheated out of £8.99 and that is on a Kindle...should have been £5.99.
Oh and I also hate that my name was used in this book again...I hate it, just making it a common name now.
Christopher wrote: I know it's becoming more and more comon with these type of fantasy/sci-fi series to use the first X number of books to introduce the setting and characters etc, but it's not a good thing in my view at all. Any writer worth their salt will be able to do this AND keep the reader engaged. It shouldn't be one or the other, it should be both at the same time.The biggest problem that I have with the novel is that NOWHERE in the book does it say "Book One Of a Long Boring Series"
Nowhere.
I was expecting a stand alone novel, I paid for a stand alone novel (hopefully still in the second hand book store- I wouldn't want anyone else paying for it) not for the tedious novel with a somewhat truncated ending.
Unlike most of you guys my ideas are that this books is perfect in a sense. The idea depicted in the books is one of the best I have encountered and the real human nature is clearly shown in this book. How human act in a situation where another fellow member of the society exceed their abilities and how human curiosity always drag them to the edge. So my full credit goes to both the authors. And I see no hole in the plot or character arrangement. PS: This is my first book written by anyone of them
I too assumed that this was a one-off novel. I found it too long and was really starting to get bored, but wanted to see it through to the end. An awful lot of stuff was unexplained, and I suppose that's understandable if it is the first in a series, but no way am I going to plough through more of these. And frankly I think it's inexcusable - other books in trilogies or series stand on their own, and make you want to carry on reading. Very disappointed as I loved all the Discworld books.
Hmm. I thought the book was great, and I loved it. I didn't go into it looking for a Discworld book, and I discovered a wonderful, well-contained adventure story with some fun and interesting elements.
Lucy wrote: "I think it was just a dodgy collabaration - Terry Pratchett, from my experience, likes silly concepts and under-explained madness. Stephen Baxter does more precise work, explaining how everything w..."Actually no, Discworld is a incredibly detailed and well planned out universe to the extent that there is an official dictionary Pratchett himself uses when writing.
Where the confusion comes in for new readers is if they don't start at the beginning as he will often explain things/people/places in minute detail *once* in one story (of in fact dedicate a whole book to it)and then maybe six books later will bring whatever it is up again, with a short paragraph if whatever it is is going to play a role in the book, or more often than not you will get a name or a sentence with no explanation whatsoever as a sort of a reward to the people who have read every book.
As an obvious example people who have read all of them without exeption grin like lunatics WHENEVER WE SEE ALL CAPS APPEAR ON THE PAGE. Where as someone who has only read guards guards may smile a bit but not truly Get It Yet.
I thought this book was epic. I've read all of the discworld books, and am a huge fan of the Neil Gaiman collabs (by no means do they feel like anything else TP writes either) but I had not yet dived into Baxter's style. It felt as though Douglas Adams and HG Wells worked together to come up with a brilliant new concept for interplanetary exploration, and all the problems that occur when it is overly accessible.
I think a lot of people might have started reading this expecting it to resemble Terry Pratchett's discworld Fantasy novels.Ignoring the discworld, I think it's great as a sci-fi book, my other half likens it to Azimov. I can see what he means by it. It has a similar easy to read text with a slow build up to an event.
Was way too long. I listened to it as an audio book and it was excellent at putting me to sleep when I listened to it in bed.
Way too long? Wow. I blew through this book in less than a week I was so into it and enjoyed it. My only annoyance was the sudden ending. I prefer books and movies to work as standalone, even if they intend sequels. Once I'm done these next few books, I'm heading straight into the sequel for this one.
Chris wrote: "Way too long? . My only annoyance was the sudden ending. I prefer books and movies to work as standalone, even if th..."My point exactly. I didn't know that i was going to put up with all that world building, explaining, story arc and build up for a SEQUEL!
Disagree with most of the comments here.I really enjoyed this book! I thought the character development was a little on the slow side, however as an introduction to a series it sets the world (or worlds) in order and we get some introduction to the main characters and I think, some important places in the universe, "Happy Landings" and "Reboot" being two of them...
I must admit I was surprised to fine the ending the way it happened, however I am keen to see how it is going to develop in the next book, "The Long War"
I'm guessing the "War" is not going to be with the giant thingymabob that they found but rather the war is going to be between the steppers and the "Phobics" ....
Yeah, sorry guys. I'm with Graeme on this one. I loved it....and will most definitely continue reading the series!
I loved it. I think it's actually now my favourite Pratchett book right now (thats after 20 years of reading him,including having done his books 4-5 times a year for the last 7 years, and I also do the Pratchett panels at Dragoncon every year)For those who've only experienced his Discworld stuff, yeah, it's not Discworld. Then again, it's not all he's done. You probably hated Nation too ,or The Dark Side of the Sun
For all you that think he's just a comedy writer in a funny hat, when he started work on Discworld, he was working at nuclear power plants (albeit as a Press guy)
I didn't mind it was a bit slow, I loved it was slow in fact (but then I also loved Red Mars despite also being slow. It gave me a full, fleshed out world to inhabit. And now I've started book2, it's more I'm looking forward to
I've also been disappointed in this, being a long-time Pratchett fan. But I can recommend reading a short story by Pratchett from which the idea originates (The High Meggas - it can be found in the Blink of the Screen collection), and it is better worked out and delivers more punch in twenty pages than this long-winded thing does in three hundred...Also, just throwing the remark in the air:
did anyone notice any resemblances with the later books of Azimov's Foundation? Such as Foundation and Earth, this endless search for something/nothing, these artificial intelligences/hiveminds, etc...
I had noticed Nente, it's paced the same as Azimov too, but I still loved it, not quite as much as I loved Azimv though.
I, personally, thought the book was a very interesting read. What people are suffering from is a grandiose case of over expectation from an author whose firm foundations are within the fantasy realm. Baxter's influence will, of course, shine through as his main genre is Science Fiction. Pratchett, whose Discworld series is outstanding, isn't "Known" for his Science Fiction stories. `Only you can save Mankind' was, in my opinion, a great book, but really displayed his lack of power within the Science Fiction world.I think the OP has over reached in his own "Review" of the book, being rather critical when it's a perfectly good read, but just isn't Pratchett in all his glory.
Leonard wrote: "I, personally, thought the book was a very interesting read. What people are suffering from is a grandiose case of over expectation from an author whose firm foundations are within the fantasy rea..."I think that may be something to do with it. I quite liked it, but when it came to the second one I was certainly hoping for something to actually happen. So far, not much.
Another Discworld fan, also disappointed. I think it was designed to be a YA novel - it's pretty shallow and there's far too much of the "feel-good life lesson" stuff. I did quite like Nation. I had quibbles but they were quibbles that would have been interesting to argue about.
Picked both the first and second one up, both based mainly on the strength of Pratchett's name.Disappointed in both. :(
Mind you, also haven't been overly impressed with the last couple of Discworld books either - think Pratchett's (very sad) condition is beginning to tell ...
I did enjoy the first book, but was totally disappointed by the 2nd. In fact, I could barley finish it. There is obviously going to be a third book.This would have been a much better 1 booker as opposed to a long dragging series.
I agree with Leonard about both authors being inhabitants of different branches of the same tree. I realize that they both have their strengths and weaknesses and unlike me, they are not perfect.I wasn't disappointed in that. I was disappointed in the fact that NOTHING EVER HAPPENED! The book was a long essay about this and that, pages long explanations about how this fiddly bit or that fiddly nut worked but mostly about NOTHING. I can remember just one character sticking out and I trudged though the book to see if anything was going to be done or happen to the one character.
I gave up two thirds of the way through.
Zack wrote: "I agree with Leonard about both authors being inhabitants of different branches of the same tree. I realize that they both have their strengths and weaknesses and unlike me, they are not perfect...."
I read this one and quite liked it thinking that mayhaps there was a long term storyline but, as the next one was also a continuation of nothing much, I gave up.
I admit to feeling the same I've read Tp but not the collaborator I liked the concept but it felt stitched together and soulless.
Mark wrote: "I admit to feeling the same I've read Tp but not the collaborator I liked the concept but it felt stitched together and soulless.""stitched together and soulless"
You took the words right out of my wherever they were hiding and wrote them down.
Thank you.
Paul wrote: "As a standalone book I agree, but as the start of a series it makes sense to get a lot of the exposition out of the way with early."I don't disagree with you, but I'm 200 pages into the book (as far as I'm going to go; the book goes back to the library tomorrow) and I still don't understand what exactly is going on. If this is exposition, it just ain't working for me.
What are all these "stepped" worlds? If it's earth along different evolutionary lines, why are they always nearly deserted? Even millions of years ago, the earth was teeming with animal life; where is it on these alternate worlds? I don't know, the premise is good but I don't feel like I know what these guys are trying to say about life on earth--as it is or as it could've been. And who are these characters? I haven't seen the police detective for 20 chapters; what's her role in the story? What about Percy? And why is Joshua such a snotty little punk?
I've read a lot of Discworld, and I have to believe this book is way more Baxter (whom I haven't read) than Pratchett. There's no discernable plot, it's peopled by humorless and undeveloped characters, and halfway through the book I still have no idea what in the world(s) is going on. I mean, what exactly are Lobsang and Joshua doing out there? If this is exploration, what are they finding? They're lucky to spend on hour in any one place; most places they slip through without even a second glance.
If this is the first in a series, it's off to an uninspiring start.
I really liked the book as a whole. I agree that towards the end Lobsang began rambling on, and there was a bit too much literal Deus Ex Machina, but it didn't spoil the entirety for me.I haven't read Baxter before (though now I definitely plan to), but am a big Pratchett fan. Others in this topic have called The Long Earth a humourless book, and I have to disagree, I found it a very funny book.
British humour congregates at the two extremes. One the one side you have the Monty-Pythonesque, the farcical, like Pratchett's Discworld, which uses absurd plots, characters and comparisons to bash the reader over the head with teh funny. If you want a Discworld-style humour in Science Fiction, look no further than Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, or The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
At the other end of the spectrum, you have the complete deadpan, where everything is played straight. Wry humour. This book is absolutely full of it. No, there's no laugh track to tell you where the jokes are, but it's nonetheless dripping with irony, and, as some of my fellow London Underground commuters will tell you, at times laugh-out-loud funny. The subtlety of the humour really suited the tone of the book, which otherwise looked at a number of serious topics. I would say that The Long Earth is the dry British sense of humour at its best.
I've read all three, ratings did decline overall, but it was still a decent read.I understood the LONG parts, as to the why and wherefore of the long earths and long Mars. It's explained several times.
Certainly there were weak points... Perfect books don't really exist, though a few come close ;)
I was disappointed mostly because I like to real the whole series... And by the end of the third, I discovered that two more books were contracted! Now, with Pratchett's advancing disease, they're going to have to write these pretty fast. Mind you, they've not been slackers at putting these out, so they could probably do them... But yeah. There've been a LOT of very excellent books turned out in singles, or the by now old fashioned trilogies. I'm getting very tired of the open ended, heavily marketed, over written (and yet poorly written), series being turned out nowadays! I admit that I am now looking critically at the books I'm buying, looking for (and going by) these Long Books.
I was disappointed.. but I don't think that had anything to do with being a Discworld devotee (I loved Nation, The Johnny books, and Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch, too). I don't think it has anything to do with humor/not (I also love the aching darkness of a Charles de Lint novel). And it wasn't a fantasy vs. Sci fi element, either (I quite like Asimov, too).Frankly, it was almost a case of "not enough fantasy" AND "not enough sci-fic", rather than too much of either one. I got the sense that BOTH authors tried to come to some middle point, but ended up glossing over their own talents to do so (although I'm not overly familiar with Baxter). Almost like they were too nice to each other... and therefore ended up with a story that is, largely, just nice. And, honestly, that makes for a shallow tale indeed.
As I said in my review, this is would be a great book for the YA market (and delightfully 'G' rated). But for an adult who is used to books that provide food for thought? Not so much.
I've read all three. Maybe I'm a glutton for punishment, but then again, they were free downloads from the library. Anyway, for each subsequent book I kept hoping for answers, but never got them.As for Long Earth itself, there's one part that really doesn't make sense.
(view spoiler)
Also, (spoilers for the rest of the series)
(view spoiler)
Christopher wrote: "This novel was clearly written mostly by Baxter--which is why I liked it as much as I did. This is a first-rate SF novel, but the previous commenters are correct: other than a handful of gags here ..."I'm really surprised at the unconstructive criticism this series is getting through here. I'm currently finishing The long Utopia and already bought the long Cosmos and thoroughly enjoying the lot!
Having gone in with no preconception of what it should be I have found every next* book to add to the already mind-blowing proportions of this universe/multiverse. With a little imagination, you can be transported to worlds beyond marvellous.
WOULD RECOMMEND 4-5 Stars.
John (Taloni) wrote: "I've read all three. Maybe I'm a glutton for punishment, but then again, they were free downloads from the library. Anyway, for each subsequent book I kept hoping for answers, but never got them...."
They couldn't take the brother, because not only could he not use the stepper himself, he also became much more sick than the others, as shown in the nuke scene, if there wasn't a doctor on the other side he'd probably be dead after just one jump. Interestingly it is unclear if the family has even tried it though...
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch (other topics)
Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency (other topics)
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (other topics)
Nation (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Nation (other topics)Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch (other topics)
Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency (other topics)
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (other topics)
Nation (other topics)
More...
Where was the editor? How did anyone allow this to become such a rambling, over explained pontification?
This one failed to hold on to a concept, it became a series of concepts out of which no one could write their way out of. Sir Terry, please, leave the mediocre "collaborations" to James Patterson and his book machine. I'd rather not EVER read another one of this kind.
Really.