Flowers for Algernon (novelette), by Daniel Keyes

[Omphalos]

When people say that SF is a gloomy body of literature, I think that they have stories like this week's in mind. Flowers for Algernon is not a tale of the failure of science to make people's lives better. The operation that was performed in this story was expected to fail, so what it really is about is how science and scientists treat other humans like lab rats, and the effect that experiments that are not wisely performed can wreck havoc on the lives of the participants. Five out of five stars...Please click here, or on the book cover above, to be taken to the complete review..

 

[j d worthington]

I can't quite agree that this was what the story was about, though it is certainly one valid interpretation. To me, it always seemed much more about several other things: the fact that it is as often -- if not more so --through failure that we learn and grow, and that such losses are inevitable if we are to grow; it is about courage and sacrifice and, ultimately, optimism (even as he is regressing, Gordon recognizes the importance of this step and that it does open doors to learning more about increasing intelligence); the precarious balance between intellect and emotion; loss and grief and recognizing your ineluctable demise (even if not physically -- though that, too, seems to be a side-effect of the operation)... just an entire load of very powerful things are dealt with here, in quite small compass, and with amazing skill. Even after having read and reread this story over the past 40 years (minus two), it can still raise a lump in my throat and bring tears to my eyes... but that isn't just because it is bitter, or a tale of loss; it's because of all the many, many emotions and issues the tale deals with, with consummate art. A wonderful, complex, touching, painful, and joyous tale, all rolled into one.

I agree: HIGHLY recommended....

 

[Jbshare]

I concur. One of the interesting aspects of Flowers for Algernon is that they are truly timeless. It is a story of how some humans have so much control over others, that they can become both superior, but at the same time, everything is equal.

I agree.

 

[Foxbat]

One of my all-time favourites. I agree that reading it is a truly moving experience.

 

[Omphalos]

You know, I usually take a much more optimistic view of SF stories that I read than I did with this one. I frequently get into debates about whether or not the genre is a gloomy one or not. In fact, I just got into one on a friend's blog recently about whether or not Octavia Butler was a gloomy writer. I took the con position, because I think her books are about transformation (as the good Mr. Panshin likes to say), and that is almost always positive. But with this one, I have never been able to see it. In the novelette the most terrible, horrible thing has happened to Charley. Ive tried, J.D. I promise you I've tried. I just don't see it though. I cannot say that I think Charley is any different at the end of the story, save that he knows he has to leave because he cannot make people happy any longer by acting like a buffoon. That is something that even pre-operation Charley could have seen.

 

[mosaix]

The one thing that hasn't been mentioned is that this story is one of the greatest expositions of the axiom 'show don't tell' ever written.

 

[HardScienceFan]

Often *rightly* touted by those who claim that SF CAN be about people,and CAN be skilfully,nay,MOVINGLY,written

 

[AE35Unit]

Just added this to my wishlist on bookmooch

 

[Omphalos]

Just added this to my wishlist on bookmooch

The novel is not as good as the novelette. If you want to read the novelette it is in The Hugo Winners, Vol 1, edited by Asimov.

 

[Omphalos]

The one thing that hasn't been mentioned is that this story is one of the greatest expositions of the axiom 'show don't tell' ever written.

I was just thinking something along those lines yesterday.

 

[AE35Unit]

The novel is not as good as the novelette. If you want to read the novelette it is in The Hugo Winners, Vol 1, edited by Asimov.

Oh right so the nevellete was expanded into a novel by the same author.
Thanks for the info!

 

[Omphalos]

de nada, amigo.

 

[HoopyFrood]

The novel is not as good as the novelette. If you want to read the novelette it is in The Hugo Winners, Vol 1, edited by Asimov.

I'm one of those who think differently, as mentioned around here. It seems it might be the case of which you read first -- I read the novel first and absolutely adored it and when I read the short story it seemed rather condensed and didn't have all the back story that I enjoyed in the novel. But I know that some people who read the novelette first feel that the novel is too drawn-out compared to it.

I personally absolutely adore the novel and it's one of those books that I can read in one sitting, again and again. The last four pages or so are some of the saddest in literature...

 

[Ian Whates]

The novel is not as good as the novelette. If you want to read the novelette it is in The Hugo Winners, Vol 1, edited by Asimov.

From my point of view, Omphalos is entirely right. The novel is not as good as the novelette. The novel is merely extremely good. I read the novel first and it immediately nestled into my top 10 all time favourites. I then read the novelette and realised it was even better, with all the emotional impact of the longer version but condensed.

Both are outstanding.

 

[HoopyFrood]

Well, that's my theory trounced, then...!

 

[Ian Whates]

Well, that's my theory trounced, then...!

Hey, Hoops, we're all entiled to our own opinions, 'tis what makes the world go round (forget money, which is highly over-rated!).

 

[Omphalos]

Oh right so the nevellete was expanded into a novel by the same author.
Thanks for the info!

I just looked in my collection, AE-35, and its also in the SFWA's Science Fiction Hall of Fame, Vol 1 (the short stories), edited by Silverberg, which is actualy currently in print. You will probably have an easier time finding that one.

 

[Omphalos]

Hey, Hoops, we're all entiled to our own opinions, 'tis what makes the world go round (forget money, which is highly over-rated!).

And quite scarce these days.

 

[Contrary Mary]

I have read both the novelette and the novel and both are outstanding.

I feel the extenede back story in the novel--epescially the parts about Charlie's childhood--enhances the story.

Treat yourself, people and read both if you have not--you will not be disappointed.

 

[j d worthington]

I agree that both should be read. While I prefer the original short story, nonetheless the novel is an exceptional piece of work as well.

And Omphalos: I think here it's just a case of it hitting different people differently. It's a painful story, no matter whether you see it in a positive or "negative" light (I qualify the term because I think very few will feel negatively about the quality of the story, only about the "downbeat" feel), as it really gets to the heartmeat of being human. Certainly one of the best sf stories ever written, and frankly one of the best stories I've come across, period.

You can also find it in various other older anthologies, as it quickly caught attention far beyond the world of sff when it was published, being recognized as one of the best stories of the year, highly acclaimed both critically and popularly....