Serendipity
A Traditional Eccentric!
This is a lovely sciency science fiction story, written with a literary technique that comes across as easy prose. It has the advantage of being based in England - a plausible near future Reading and White Cliffs of Dover. This makes it feel simultaneously familiar and with the future's science inserted, strange.
Behind it is a political message about the impact of the development of various technologies on society - exactly why science fiction should be written and read. Given the humour splattered throughout the novel, I would say this is the 'Yes Minister' of the future, which in turn allows the reader to quietly and subconsciously absorb the message.
So what are the downsides? Firstly, two crimes of technological omission (not commission). One of them could easily be worked round out of book so to speak. But the other is a crucial subplot point, that makes the whole plot of the novel a little shaky. Yes the technical points in the novel are valid - it's what's missing that's the problem. Secondly, I got confused between Lester and Ernest. Are they the same person getting himself mixed up? Or is it an editorial error? Or something in between? Or is it a literary ploy to leave the reader confused? Whatever, it left me puzzled.
Behind it is a political message about the impact of the development of various technologies on society - exactly why science fiction should be written and read. Given the humour splattered throughout the novel, I would say this is the 'Yes Minister' of the future, which in turn allows the reader to quietly and subconsciously absorb the message.
So what are the downsides? Firstly, two crimes of technological omission (not commission). One of them could easily be worked round out of book so to speak. But the other is a crucial subplot point, that makes the whole plot of the novel a little shaky. Yes the technical points in the novel are valid - it's what's missing that's the problem. Secondly, I got confused between Lester and Ernest. Are they the same person getting himself mixed up? Or is it an editorial error? Or something in between? Or is it a literary ploy to leave the reader confused? Whatever, it left me puzzled.
