Scan barcode
jacobcarlmorgan's review
1.0
Lots of interesting sci-fi ideas, and seems like the universe has some potential. The plot is plodding and is only advanced when book's main character (who has achieved post-human intelligence) makes cripplingly idiotic decisions. Seems like the book actively avoided any interesting areas of the surrounding story and had them all happen off screen. None of the characters seem real, or even particularly interesting. Does "hard" sci-fi by name-dropping a million theorems for pages on end but never described how any of this matters. Ultimately you could just replace most of it with "magic" and you'd have the same grasp of the consequences of it all. I'm used to having to giving a book time to build and riding through some dull exposition so that you can understand the rules and bounds of the world that this is happening in, however this book has no payoff. If you get to the point where you're bored and would normally soldier through, just put the book down and move on. I wish I had.
rheren's review against another edition
3.0
I am a huge fan of John C Wright, so I was really excited to read this book. The first half of the book blew my mind with the out-of-the-box ideas worked in and the breadth and audacity of the imagination put into it. I absolutely loved the first half of the book, and would wholeheartedly recommend it on that merit. To my disappointment, however, I can't give the book as a whole more than 3 stars because of two things:
1. The whole book hinges on advanced math (it's about an interplanetary mission crewed by math geniuses, deciphering an alien code). I've taken math up through a year of calculus, and a lot of it was over my head: I would definitely say that anyone with less math background than me would have a hard time understanding what they're talking about in a lot of the dialogue, and I feel like I was missing a lot because I don't have more calculus knowledge than I do. Maybe a math or engineering major could grasp what he's saying but I felt like a lot of it was going over my head.
2. The ending is very unsatisfying, and feels rushed to me. We're on an epic arc talking about guiding human destiny through hundreds of generations, and then (don't want to give any spoilers, but let's just say) it's over, with no conclusion. In the end, after maneuvering his character through mind-bending intrigue and brilliant constructs, Wright has his main character get caught in a very juvenile, pointless trap and ends the book there. I was rather disappointed.
UPDATE: I finally, 3 years later, got a chance to read more of the series, and it definitely picks up pace, gets less cerebral, and is much more enjoyable. Don't give up after just reading this book! Read this and then give #2 a try!
1. The whole book hinges on advanced math (it's about an interplanetary mission crewed by math geniuses, deciphering an alien code). I've taken math up through a year of calculus, and a lot of it was over my head: I would definitely say that anyone with less math background than me would have a hard time understanding what they're talking about in a lot of the dialogue, and I feel like I was missing a lot because I don't have more calculus knowledge than I do. Maybe a math or engineering major could grasp what he's saying but I felt like a lot of it was going over my head.
2. The ending is very unsatisfying, and feels rushed to me. We're on an epic arc talking about guiding human destiny through hundreds of generations, and then (don't want to give any spoilers, but let's just say) it's over, with no conclusion. In the end, after maneuvering his character through mind-bending intrigue and brilliant constructs, Wright has his main character get caught in a very juvenile, pointless trap and ends the book there. I was rather disappointed.
UPDATE: I finally, 3 years later, got a chance to read more of the series, and it definitely picks up pace, gets less cerebral, and is much more enjoyable. Don't give up after just reading this book! Read this and then give #2 a try!
shadowhelm's review against another edition
2.0
I felt this was a book full of wasted opportunities. There were enough really interesting concepts to fill multiple books but the climax ended with a duel over a woman. Such a let down after all of the interesting build up concerning enhanced humans, extra-terrestrial intelligence, interstellar space travel etc. It is full of interesting and thought provoking concepts that just never pay off. What is frustrating is that this book is clearly a "Part 1" of a longer story. I enjoy epic storytelling but I really dislike it when each book of an epic story isn't a contained narrative within itself. "Count to a Trillion" is just a setup that leaves you unsatisfied. I have some minor interest in reading the sequel but not enough to actually pay for the book. If I come across it one day in a library or through some other outlet I might pick it up. Otherwise, I will be moving on to other books.
eeconley31's review
adventurous
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.5
luisvilla's review
3.0
Weird book - almost deliberately golden-age in language, plotting, "science", and character development (or lack thereof). But enjoyable despite all of that.
rossbm's review
adventurous
challenging
informative
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
I first read "Count to a Trillion" by John C. Wright around 2015, and for the past few years, I have been trying to recall the name of the book. It was only recently that I was able to find it again, thanks to the help of one of these “AI” (LLM) powered searched engines.
What I remembered from the original reading was:
- The story takes place in the near future, where the world is not much more advanced. The protagonist was a gunslinger in Texas.
- The protagonist was a genius and selected to go on a space mission to investigate a mysterious monolith.
-
The protagonist injects himself with a serum for intelligence, loses his mind, and wakes up years later after the end of the space mission with missing memories. - The protagonist needs to deal with the ramifications of the space mission to the monolith, and game theory is involved.
After reading it a second time, a couple of things stood out to me:
- The book is more about ideas and the setting than plot. The plot is slow and uneven, and the characters are not very realistic.
- There is a lot of techno-babble, which reminds me of "The Quantum Thief."
- Even if it's not as good as I remembered, it's still an interesting book that I read quickly.
Overall, I would recommend this book to people who enjoy science fiction that deals with big ideas and respects the speed of light.
mferrante83's review against another edition
4.0
Count to a Trillion by John C. Wright is the first in a new transhumanist space opera series. The novel follows Menelaus Montrose, resident of the war ravaged Texus and a lawyer (disputes are arbited via pistol duels so there is very little traditional law infvolved) as well as a math genius. Montrose is recurited for a space mission to investigate a mysterious alien monolith. It is on this mission that Montrose believing that only a scientifically accelerated mind, a posthuman mind, can decipher the artifact injects himself with a specially developed serum designed to unlock his mind’s true potential. Driven mad by the process Montrose awakens almost two centuries later to a world vastly different from the one he knew.
I feel obligated to confess that I am not well versed in Mathematics. I mention this because a large chunk of the novel involves a whole lot of math speak. I have no way to verify the accuracy or factual content here. My ignorance in this area didn’t really phase me when it comes to Count to A Trillion and I was willing to buy what was being said throughout the novel. Truth be told my lack of math knowledge was probably more of a boon than anything else.
Reading Count to a Trillion I realized that science fiction with posthuman/transhumanist themes is something I really enjoy. Starting as far back as Richard Morgan’s Altered Carbon I’ve always thought there is something endless fascinating about the questions that arise as humans use science to better themselves. In some cases authors look at these themes through a somewhat negative lens and indeed one of the primary arguments against transhumanism while Count to a Trillion takes a somewhat optimistic views it actually borrows from Dr. Nick Bostrum’s definitions of existential threats as defined in his paper Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards (from Journal of Evolution and Technology, Vol. 9, March 2002). I don’t for a fact if Wright read this article before writing Count to a Trillion but his novel fits in almost perfectly with a variety of the existential risk categories defined Dr. Bostrum’s article. Wright’s novel features threats in the form of “crunches” (human development is stymied), “shrieks” (a narrow development of posthumanity), and “whimpers” (caused by the limits of physical reality or other unknowns).
In Count to a Trillion, Montrose awakes centuries after his initial experiments to what at first seems to be an idyllic society. However, the more he sees the more he realizes that things have stagnated and development in certain areas have reached a state of “technological arrest” (a crunch). Montrose’s own experiments were partially successful and created a divergent somewhat mad entity in his own mind; a “flawed superintelligence” (a shriek) and at the same time the society created by Montrose’s companions has resulted in a “repressive totalitarian global regime” (a shriek). Of course as Montrose continues to unlock the secrets of the Monolith reveals another threat in the form of a whimper (I don’t want to spoil it). There’s more variations on each of the existential risks defined by Dr. Bostrum found in Count to a Trillion and in many ways the novel feels like an exercise in thinking of a way around the those threats; or at least how an exceptional individual can subvert those threats.
Count to a Trillion isn’t a novel for everyone but I absolutely loved it. While I can’t speak to the actual science and math behind Wright’s writing I found the philosophical examination of the existential risks in the novel completely fascinating and absolutely absorbing. While the treats are large and real Wright never veers into completely grim territory. Montrose, for all his superintelligence, remains a human whose outlook on the future is formed by his experiences with science fiction (a fictional show based on old school science fiction). Count to a Trillion is part, and really only the tip of the iceberg, of an emerging movement in science fiction leaning towards optimism over the grim, gritty, and despairing (see Sarah Hoyt’s “manifesto” here, or Neal Stephenson’s notions here). Count to a Trillion is only the beginning and I’m excited to see where Wright takes the story next and what wonders the plucky and resourceful Montrose devises to save the world.
I feel obligated to confess that I am not well versed in Mathematics. I mention this because a large chunk of the novel involves a whole lot of math speak. I have no way to verify the accuracy or factual content here. My ignorance in this area didn’t really phase me when it comes to Count to A Trillion and I was willing to buy what was being said throughout the novel. Truth be told my lack of math knowledge was probably more of a boon than anything else.
Reading Count to a Trillion I realized that science fiction with posthuman/transhumanist themes is something I really enjoy. Starting as far back as Richard Morgan’s Altered Carbon I’ve always thought there is something endless fascinating about the questions that arise as humans use science to better themselves. In some cases authors look at these themes through a somewhat negative lens and indeed one of the primary arguments against transhumanism while Count to a Trillion takes a somewhat optimistic views it actually borrows from Dr. Nick Bostrum’s definitions of existential threats as defined in his paper Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards (from Journal of Evolution and Technology, Vol. 9, March 2002). I don’t for a fact if Wright read this article before writing Count to a Trillion but his novel fits in almost perfectly with a variety of the existential risk categories defined Dr. Bostrum’s article. Wright’s novel features threats in the form of “crunches” (human development is stymied), “shrieks” (a narrow development of posthumanity), and “whimpers” (caused by the limits of physical reality or other unknowns).
In Count to a Trillion, Montrose awakes centuries after his initial experiments to what at first seems to be an idyllic society. However, the more he sees the more he realizes that things have stagnated and development in certain areas have reached a state of “technological arrest” (a crunch). Montrose’s own experiments were partially successful and created a divergent somewhat mad entity in his own mind; a “flawed superintelligence” (a shriek) and at the same time the society created by Montrose’s companions has resulted in a “repressive totalitarian global regime” (a shriek). Of course as Montrose continues to unlock the secrets of the Monolith reveals another threat in the form of a whimper (I don’t want to spoil it). There’s more variations on each of the existential risks defined by Dr. Bostrum found in Count to a Trillion and in many ways the novel feels like an exercise in thinking of a way around the those threats; or at least how an exceptional individual can subvert those threats.
Count to a Trillion isn’t a novel for everyone but I absolutely loved it. While I can’t speak to the actual science and math behind Wright’s writing I found the philosophical examination of the existential risks in the novel completely fascinating and absolutely absorbing. While the treats are large and real Wright never veers into completely grim territory. Montrose, for all his superintelligence, remains a human whose outlook on the future is formed by his experiences with science fiction (a fictional show based on old school science fiction). Count to a Trillion is part, and really only the tip of the iceberg, of an emerging movement in science fiction leaning towards optimism over the grim, gritty, and despairing (see Sarah Hoyt’s “manifesto” here, or Neal Stephenson’s notions here). Count to a Trillion is only the beginning and I’m excited to see where Wright takes the story next and what wonders the plucky and resourceful Montrose devises to save the world.
erichart's review
2.0
I have nothing against trilogies and series in general, I read a lot of them. Still, here Mr. Wright is guilty of two sins. First, while it's part of the deal to leave the reader wanting to know what happens next, there should still be a sense of conclusion to each part. We're left with a huge cliffhanger, and no sense of resolution of this first part. This in itself would't be too bad, if not for the second sin, which is padding out the story with endless talking, most of it doing nothing to either advance the plot or develop the characters. A good editor could have easily cut more than 100 pages out of this. Too bad, since the plot and worldbuilding are interesting. But as of now, with the series scheduled for six volumes, it's going to the end of my "to read" list.
josiahdegraaf's review
4.0
This is a book that's pretty similar to Orson Scott Card's Xenocide in its style: its pretty cerebral, very idea-focused, and a lot of conversations between really smart people trying to show their ultra-smartness. In other words, it isn't a book for everyone (hence all the negative reviews I'm noting here), but if you like this kind of story, it's good as what it's attempting.
I happen to really like this kind of cerebral, idea-focused style, so I enjoyed this book a fair bit. The fact that a lot of the story had to do with everyone being math-geniuses also intrigued me. The book kept my interest the whole time and I was fascinated by the way it explored humanity and its relationship to time, genius, and purpose. Wright is asking a lot of really interesting complicated questions in this book, and there aren't always easy answers to them. I was a bit disappointed by the ending, as it felt a bit anti-climactic after everything that came before it and I was kind-of confused about what all happened, but the overall story was good and probably a series I'll continue reading.
The duels in this book were also really cool. Even if you don't like idea-focused stories, the first duel in this book is very much worth reading. Wright's created a really fascinating and (probably) realistic duel system within the constraints of the futuristic tech he has created, and the duel system brings with it so many possibilities. Hope we get more of these duels in future books.
Overall, not a book for everyone, but a pretty darn good book for what it's trying to accomplish.
Rating: 4 Stars (Very Good).
I happen to really like this kind of cerebral, idea-focused style, so I enjoyed this book a fair bit. The fact that a lot of the story had to do with everyone being math-geniuses also intrigued me. The book kept my interest the whole time and I was fascinated by the way it explored humanity and its relationship to time, genius, and purpose. Wright is asking a lot of really interesting complicated questions in this book, and there aren't always easy answers to them. I was a bit disappointed by the ending, as it felt a bit anti-climactic after everything that came before it and I was kind-of confused about what all happened, but the overall story was good and probably a series I'll continue reading.
The duels in this book were also really cool. Even if you don't like idea-focused stories, the first duel in this book is very much worth reading. Wright's created a really fascinating and (probably) realistic duel system within the constraints of the futuristic tech he has created, and the duel system brings with it so many possibilities. Hope we get more of these duels in future books.
Overall, not a book for everyone, but a pretty darn good book for what it's trying to accomplish.
Rating: 4 Stars (Very Good).
yhtgrace's review against another edition
1.0
There are three broad things I look for in any science fiction novel a) the science, because in the same way that one might want to look at the coherence of a magical system in a fantasy setting or the factual correctness of minute details in a historical one, the mark of great science fiction is great science, b) the story and the characters, because we're talking about science fiction, and not a science textbook, and c) the writing, because that's the medium through which science and story are being communicated to the reader.
That said, I found Count to a Trillion...disappointing. There's an art to writing hard science fiction and the trick is to make it believable. Unfortunately Wright mistakes incoherence for complexity, resulting in pages and pages of what looks like SCIgen-produced gobbledegook. In contrast, see Charles Stross and Ted Chiang on How To Write Hard Science Fiction. There's a trick to it, some way of taking what we know now and extrapolating that to what we might know years and years into the future. One of the most gratifying moments of reading The Atrocity Archives was when Stross threw in a throwaway reference to Knuth. Similarly, Chiang and prosopagnosia.
Worse still, the book's central cast of characters (surprisingly small for a book this massive) is flatter than ancients once supposed the earth to be. The dialogue is cringe-worthy and doesn't in the least resemble normal speech patterns, which brings me to my final point: the book isn't at all readable, but it's so difficult to untangle the pseudo-scientific info-dumps and the protagonist's unilluminating ramblings from the writing that I hesitate to comment on Wright's prose.
Maybe Count to a Trillion was written for a more enlightened (ahem, post-human) audience. It certainly wasn't written for a casual reader like me.
That said, I found Count to a Trillion...disappointing. There's an art to writing hard science fiction and the trick is to make it believable. Unfortunately Wright mistakes incoherence for complexity, resulting in pages and pages of what looks like SCIgen-produced gobbledegook. In contrast, see Charles Stross and Ted Chiang on How To Write Hard Science Fiction. There's a trick to it, some way of taking what we know now and extrapolating that to what we might know years and years into the future. One of the most gratifying moments of reading The Atrocity Archives was when Stross threw in a throwaway reference to Knuth. Similarly, Chiang and prosopagnosia.
Worse still, the book's central cast of characters (surprisingly small for a book this massive) is flatter than ancients once supposed the earth to be. The dialogue is cringe-worthy and doesn't in the least resemble normal speech patterns, which brings me to my final point: the book isn't at all readable, but it's so difficult to untangle the pseudo-scientific info-dumps and the protagonist's unilluminating ramblings from the writing that I hesitate to comment on Wright's prose.
Maybe Count to a Trillion was written for a more enlightened (ahem, post-human) audience. It certainly wasn't written for a casual reader like me.