Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.88 AVERAGE
3.88 AVERAGE
This is the first time I've had deja vu reading a novel. This feels like a prototype Stephen Baxter novel, the emphasis on particle physics, parallel universes, weird aliens, even the big cosmic reveal at the end. Unfortunately it never reached that woah moment Baxter usually achieves.
Divided into three sections, each follows different characters, as they grapple with the problem of an inter-universal "free energy" source which turns out to not be so free.
The first is the most heavily expositive, as it lays out the scheme by which elements are shunted between Earth and the "para-universe". Since each universe's heavy elements are unstable in the other, they are each able to extract free energy from their radioactive decay and the annihilation of electrons/positrons. Unfortunately, the discoverer of this process turns out to be a narcissistic fraud, who proves unsympathetic to the prospect that there may be deeper consequences to the exchange. This is a story of scientists not as enlightened truth seekers, but emotional animals, as likely to lie or pursue grudges as any politician. Even the protagonist, Lamont, who is proven right in the end, seems driven as much by anger that he is ruled over by a fraud, as by a desire to save the Earth.
Part two shifts to the para-universe, where semi-gaseous "Soft Ones" go about their affairs on their dying world. I both love and am disappointed by this section. It's about the three-way marital strife of gaseous aliens, and is at its best when describing the physical sensations of their lives and the stranger sides of their psychology. Unfortunately, this section is also a social satire as well. The Soft Ones are riddled with taboos against behaviour they all engage in in secret, and their own sex stereotypes. So rather than three alien sexes we have men, women, and mpreg chimps. This could have been alleviated by going the Greg Egan neopronoun route, but oh well. The culture as Asimov sketches it is also very thin. We see no art, no religion, nothing. The planet itself appears to be completely barren (which raises the question of why they evolved intelligence without predators or much scarcity). This is alleviated a little by the reveal that What's more, part two ends at almost the exact point in time as part one.
The Soft Ones contributed an entry to Barlowe's Guide to Extraterrestrials. There's very little physical description of them in the novel, other than that Emotionals are diffuse, Rationals are smooth, and Parentals are blocky. The dark areas are thickened pseudopods, and it's roughly oval, so I suppose it's meant to be a Rational? This is one of the entries that I appreciate more on a technical level as an adult, but it's still not one of my favourites. The gaseousness of it is well rendered, and it's very distinct in style from the Black Cloud of The Black Cloud, being, appropriately, much softer.
The last part follows a minor figure from part one to his voluntary exile on a Moon colony. Asimov explores the society of the Moon more deeply than that of the Soft Ones. There is a sense, however sketchy, of the culture and society of the Moon, and their separation from Earth, based on their unique physical condition. Unfortunately, Asimov has to wrap up the story, so that gets shoved aside to solve the original conundrum.
There is a thread of irrationalism running through the story. Even with how primed I am to consider the conscious mind overrated, the usage of the concept was closer to magic/parapsychology. I preferred it as a thematic element in part one over its plot use in two and three, where it was just there to solve problems that could not reasonably be solved otherwise.
Each part was an enjoyable read on its own, but the lack of direct connection between them, and the fact two of them never play out to their conclusion, disappointed. Unlike the Soft Ones, the three parts do not add to more than their sum. Part two or three could have benefited from expansion, and turning the other two more clearly into appendages.
Divided into three sections, each follows different characters, as they grapple with the problem of an inter-universal "free energy" source which turns out to not be so free.
The first is the most heavily expositive, as it lays out the scheme by which elements are shunted between Earth and the "para-universe". Since each universe's heavy elements are unstable in the other, they are each able to extract free energy from their radioactive decay and the annihilation of electrons/positrons. Unfortunately, the discoverer of this process turns out to be a narcissistic fraud, who proves unsympathetic to the prospect that there may be deeper consequences to the exchange. This is a story of scientists not as enlightened truth seekers, but emotional animals, as likely to lie or pursue grudges as any politician. Even the protagonist, Lamont, who is proven right in the end, seems driven as much by anger that he is ruled over by a fraud, as by a desire to save the Earth.
Part two shifts to the para-universe, where semi-gaseous "Soft Ones" go about their affairs on their dying world. I both love and am disappointed by this section. It's about the three-way marital strife of gaseous aliens, and is at its best when describing the physical sensations of their lives and the stranger sides of their psychology. Unfortunately, this section is also a social satire as well. The Soft Ones are riddled with taboos against behaviour they all engage in in secret, and their own sex stereotypes. So rather than three alien sexes we have men, women, and mpreg chimps. This could have been alleviated by going the Greg Egan neopronoun route, but oh well. The culture as Asimov sketches it is also very thin. We see no art, no religion, nothing. The planet itself appears to be completely barren (which raises the question of why they evolved intelligence without predators or much scarcity). This is alleviated a little by the reveal that
Spoiler
the Soft Ones are the larval forms of the Hard Ones, so it makes sense that they're one-track in their thinking - they're not even complete beings in themselves. Unfortunately the reason the Hard Ones don't explain this to the Soft Ones is poorly justified.The Soft Ones contributed an entry to Barlowe's Guide to Extraterrestrials. There's very little physical description of them in the novel, other than that Emotionals are diffuse, Rationals are smooth, and Parentals are blocky. The dark areas are thickened pseudopods, and it's roughly oval, so I suppose it's meant to be a Rational? This is one of the entries that I appreciate more on a technical level as an adult, but it's still not one of my favourites. The gaseousness of it is well rendered, and it's very distinct in style from the Black Cloud of The Black Cloud, being, appropriately, much softer.
The last part follows a minor figure from part one to his voluntary exile on a Moon colony. Asimov explores the society of the Moon more deeply than that of the Soft Ones. There is a sense, however sketchy, of the culture and society of the Moon, and their separation from Earth, based on their unique physical condition. Unfortunately, Asimov has to wrap up the story, so that gets shoved aside to solve the original conundrum.
Spoiler
Why just one para-universe? It's a fine solution to cancel out one side effect with another, but it feels too clean. If Baxter had written this, Earth would've been destroyed even after they found the solution. He also would've definitely had the pre-Big Bang universe be teeming with life (somehow), so that its destruction could be both tragic and beatific.There is a thread of irrationalism running through the story. Even with how primed I am to consider the conscious mind overrated, the usage of the concept was closer to magic/parapsychology. I preferred it as a thematic element in part one over its plot use in two and three, where it was just there to solve problems that could not reasonably be solved otherwise.
Each part was an enjoyable read on its own, but the lack of direct connection between them, and the fact two of them never play out to their conclusion, disappointed. Unlike the Soft Ones, the three parts do not add to more than their sum. Part two or three could have benefited from expansion, and turning the other two more clearly into appendages.
adventurous
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
10/10
pc: 288
Obsessed w this, I can see why it won best sci-fi novel in 1972. This story was set in 3 parts, first on earth with the discovery of a technology that generates completely clean energy but comes at the cost of exploding the sun (which no one will believe) by exchanging matter between earth & aliens on another planet, 2nd act is from the aliens perspectives, then the 3rd is from a colony on the moon. Asimov is such a creative & talented writer, and really weaved both imagination of parallel universes & the struggles of science so well together. Big focus on physics, rights of living beings/authoritarianism, and the issues of elitism in science as the underlying plots. Also amazing outlooks on what it means to have humanity, and responsibility/connection to the universe as a whole.
pc: 288
Obsessed w this, I can see why it won best sci-fi novel in 1972. This story was set in 3 parts, first on earth with the discovery of a technology that generates completely clean energy but comes at the cost of exploding the sun (which no one will believe) by exchanging matter between earth & aliens on another planet, 2nd act is from the aliens perspectives, then the 3rd is from a colony on the moon. Asimov is such a creative & talented writer, and really weaved both imagination of parallel universes & the struggles of science so well together. Big focus on physics, rights of living beings/authoritarianism, and the issues of elitism in science as the underlying plots. Also amazing outlooks on what it means to have humanity, and responsibility/connection to the universe as a whole.
One of the most interesting sci-fi tales I've had the pleasure of reading. Slightly unconventional in format, even more so in content.. it was like discovering an entirely new way of exploring the sci-fi genre (which is all the more impressive since it was published in 1972). I was full of wonder and awe the entire way through. Highly recommended!
I guess everyone else knew about the sudden, prolonged focus on three-way alien sex, but that was a bit of a surprise to me. I'm glad I forced myself to get through the first few chapters. There were a number of interesting twists and satisfying tie-ins by the end. The structure of the book was completely inconsistent and mildly annoying in the beginning. But by the end I was still impressed.
reflective
adventurous
challenging
informative
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
بخوایم رک باشیم فقط آسیموفه که میتونه سکس سهنفرهی سه موجود نامتراکمِ موازی با بشر رو روی سیارهای رو به موت به شکل علمی روایت کنه. مغزی که جمجمهی این بشر در خودش جا داده بوده؛ تعدادی از بهترین ایدههای تاریخ ادبیات علمیتخیلی رو تولید کرده. کافیه یکم شیمی و فیزیک اتمی (در حد دبیرستان) بلد باشید تا متوجه نبوغ عظیم و در عین حال منطقی بودن ایدهی «ایزدان هم» بشید. تکههای ایدهی این اثر، چه از نظر روایت و چه از نظر علمی خیلی خیلی فوقالعاده و مثل ساعت، کنار هم عمل میکنن.
اگر پایان کتاب و حدود یک چهارمش رو فاکتور بگیریم میتونست برای من یک تجربهی پنج ستارهی تکرارنشدنی باشه. منتها آسیموف همون حرکت همیشگی رو زده و پیچیده جاده خاکی. هرچقدر که ایده و مسائل متصل شده بهش شاهکار هستن؛ حواشی و مضامین فرعی داستان به شدت خوابآور و حوصلهسر برن. همین موضوع باعث شد «ایزدان هم» برای من روند نزولی داشته باشه و در انتها برسه به پایانی که عملاً برای من فانتزی محسوب میشه. از اعتقادات آسیموف این بوده که میتونیم دیتاهای علمی رو در قالب داستان علمیتخیلی به قشر ناآگاه آموزش بدیم. در مرحلهی اول یعنی تزریق کردن اون دیتای علمی درون داستان (و در واقع بنا کردن داستان روی دیتا) شاهکار عمل کرده. منتها خود داستان، خود داستان چیز ضعیفیه.
بخش اول کتاب برخلاف اکثر نظرات برای من بهترین بخش بود. تک تک کلمات در خدمت ایده و در راستای روایت داستان بودن. قسمتی وجود نداشت که حذفش کنی و ایرادی به داستان وارد نشه. کمال داستانسرایی.
بخش دوم خلاقانهترین بخش داستان و همچین اوج نبوغ آسیموف در ایدهپردازیه. مشکلات کتاب هم از همین بخش شروع شدن. مشخصاً آسیموف لازم داره گونهی زندهای که روی یک سیارهی دیگه و در جهان موازی ما زندگی میکنن رو به خوبی توصیف و توجیه کنه. مشکل اینجاست که درگیر مکررات میشه و انقدر روی موضوعات تاکید میکنه و مدام بهشون اشاره میکنه که دیگه ایدهی شاهکاری که تمام داستان در خدمتشه از چشم میفته. در نظر بگیرید در مواجهه با این ایده، ده سوال توی ذهنتون شکل میگیره. آسیموف جواب هفتتا از این سوالها رو چندین و چندبار میده و تکرار میکنه. در عین حال هیچ اهمیتی به اون سهتای دیگه نمیده.
بخش سوم، سقوط این کتابه. انقدر دیتای خارج از داستان و به دردنخور داخل این بخش هست که گاهی اون دیتا نسبت به موضوع داستان، شکل ارجحتر و اصلیتری پیدا میکنن. همچین از دید دیالوگنویسی ایراد بزرگی نسبت به این بخش دارم. ببینید طبیعیه که انسانهای مختلف در رابطه با موضوع یکسانی باهم صحبت کنن و به نتایج یکسان برسن. نکته اینجاست؛ منی که چندین مکالمه در باب یک موضوع در بخش اول کتاب خوندم و نتیجه رو میدونم به هیچ وجه دلم نمیخواد گونهی دیگهای از همون مکالمه رو بین افراد جدید با نتیجهی یکسان بخونم. انگار داستان معمایی بخونید و شما بدونید قاتل کیه ولی کارگاه داستان ندونه و بشینید و بخونید کاراگاه چطور قاتلی که شما از اول میشناختید رو پیدا میکنه.
آسیموف قطعاً چارچوب ادبیات علمیتخیلی رو به لرزه در اورده و چه خودش، چه «ایزدان هم» برای من بسیار عزیز و محترم هستن. مخصوصاً که فکر نکنم ایدهای به این زیبایی، عظمت و در عین حال علمی، توی هیچ کتاب دیگهای داشته باشیم. ایزدان هم اثر فوقالعاده ارزشمندیه که به نظرم مخاطب تیپیکال علمیتخیلی حتماً باید تجربهاش کنه. هرچند ایرادات ریز و درشتش اجازه ندادن تجربهای تماماً دلانگیز برای من باشه.
May The Winds Rise
اگر پایان کتاب و حدود یک چهارمش رو فاکتور بگیریم میتونست برای من یک تجربهی پنج ستارهی تکرارنشدنی باشه. منتها آسیموف همون حرکت همیشگی رو زده و پیچیده جاده خاکی. هرچقدر که ایده و مسائل متصل شده بهش شاهکار هستن؛ حواشی و مضامین فرعی داستان به شدت خوابآور و حوصلهسر برن. همین موضوع باعث شد «ایزدان هم» برای من روند نزولی داشته باشه و در انتها برسه به پایانی که عملاً برای من فانتزی محسوب میشه. از اعتقادات آسیموف این بوده که میتونیم دیتاهای علمی رو در قالب داستان علمیتخیلی به قشر ناآگاه آموزش بدیم. در مرحلهی اول یعنی تزریق کردن اون دیتای علمی درون داستان (و در واقع بنا کردن داستان روی دیتا) شاهکار عمل کرده. منتها خود داستان، خود داستان چیز ضعیفیه.
بخش اول کتاب برخلاف اکثر نظرات برای من بهترین بخش بود. تک تک کلمات در خدمت ایده و در راستای روایت داستان بودن. قسمتی وجود نداشت که حذفش کنی و ایرادی به داستان وارد نشه. کمال داستانسرایی.
بخش دوم خلاقانهترین بخش داستان و همچین اوج نبوغ آسیموف در ایدهپردازیه. مشکلات کتاب هم از همین بخش شروع شدن. مشخصاً آسیموف لازم داره گونهی زندهای که روی یک سیارهی دیگه و در جهان موازی ما زندگی میکنن رو به خوبی توصیف و توجیه کنه. مشکل اینجاست که درگیر مکررات میشه و انقدر روی موضوعات تاکید میکنه و مدام بهشون اشاره میکنه که دیگه ایدهی شاهکاری که تمام داستان در خدمتشه از چشم میفته. در نظر بگیرید در مواجهه با این ایده، ده سوال توی ذهنتون شکل میگیره. آسیموف جواب هفتتا از این سوالها رو چندین و چندبار میده و تکرار میکنه. در عین حال هیچ اهمیتی به اون سهتای دیگه نمیده.
بخش سوم، سقوط این کتابه. انقدر دیتای خارج از داستان و به دردنخور داخل این بخش هست که گاهی اون دیتا نسبت به موضوع داستان، شکل ارجحتر و اصلیتری پیدا میکنن. همچین از دید دیالوگنویسی ایراد بزرگی نسبت به این بخش دارم. ببینید طبیعیه که انسانهای مختلف در رابطه با موضوع یکسانی باهم صحبت کنن و به نتایج یکسان برسن. نکته اینجاست؛ منی که چندین مکالمه در باب یک موضوع در بخش اول کتاب خوندم و نتیجه رو میدونم به هیچ وجه دلم نمیخواد گونهی دیگهای از همون مکالمه رو بین افراد جدید با نتیجهی یکسان بخونم. انگار داستان معمایی بخونید و شما بدونید قاتل کیه ولی کارگاه داستان ندونه و بشینید و بخونید کاراگاه چطور قاتلی که شما از اول میشناختید رو پیدا میکنه.
آسیموف قطعاً چارچوب ادبیات علمیتخیلی رو به لرزه در اورده و چه خودش، چه «ایزدان هم» برای من بسیار عزیز و محترم هستن. مخصوصاً که فکر نکنم ایدهای به این زیبایی، عظمت و در عین حال علمی، توی هیچ کتاب دیگهای داشته باشیم. ایزدان هم اثر فوقالعاده ارزشمندیه که به نظرم مخاطب تیپیکال علمیتخیلی حتماً باید تجربهاش کنه. هرچند ایرادات ریز و درشتش اجازه ندادن تجربهای تماماً دلانگیز برای من باشه.
May The Winds Rise
Someone told me it’s their favorite book and certainly there are some aha moments but it’s all very abstract to me. Maybe I was disappointed because Asimovs other works eg foundation were legendary
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated