Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.94 AVERAGE
3.94 AVERAGE
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I always enjoy Reynold's Revelation Space stories, and this one is good even if it rehashes a lot of the plot skeleton from another story.
Ten years later Reynolds wrote a follow-up novel. I have to wonder whether this and the previous novel were more for personal reasons than anything else. In terms of lore it added a new ability which felt out of place, but then I remembered the other nigh-magical stuff there was. A notable location from Chasm City, the book, was included as well. The scope was still entirely within Yellowstone and its orbit.
As with the first book, this was a thriller of mystery, investigation, survival, and conspiracy. The primary themes continued to be about ethics, governance, and politics. Unlike the first though, the point of view here was more diffuse, and followed the action more than the characters. Whichever character was most involved in the relevant action was the point of view, at least that's how it felt to me. The characters and plot were more in line with rest of the series as well, because it seems almost mandatory that at one least character has major memory and/or identity issues. The plot had twists this time, which I didn't care for as part of the narrative, but they were amusing for what I interpreted them as meaning.
I'm glad that I read this now rather when it came out because that allowed for me to appreciate it more. There were events whose seeming real-life counterparts had yet to occur and I didn't know if they were fictitious, a prediction, or based on prior events. Brexit seemed to be especially influential on the narrative. There was also irresponsible extrapolation of exponentials, which if this had been written a couple years later I'd have thought it was about COVID, but instead was probably a critique of sensationalism and catastrophizing. In another bit of prognostication, there was a scene that really seemed like it was about the storming of the US capitol.
Although this resumed a few of the problems that I have with Reynolds and quite possibly was an unnecessary sequel, there wasn't that much I disliked about it, but I also didn't like much about it either. If nothing else, it showed how committed Reynolds has been to his mosaic approach to the series, where he'll write about whatever he wants at whichever point in time he wants to.
As with the first book, this was a thriller of mystery, investigation, survival, and conspiracy. The primary themes continued to be about ethics, governance, and politics. Unlike the first though, the point of view here was more diffuse, and followed the action more than the characters. Whichever character was most involved in the relevant action was the point of view, at least that's how it felt to me. The characters and plot were more in line with rest of the series as well, because it seems almost mandatory that at one least character has major memory and/or identity issues. The plot had twists this time, which I didn't care for as part of the narrative, but they were amusing for what I interpreted them as meaning.
I'm glad that I read this now rather when it came out because that allowed for me to appreciate it more. There were events whose seeming real-life counterparts had yet to occur and I didn't know if they were fictitious, a prediction, or based on prior events. Brexit seemed to be especially influential on the narrative. There was also irresponsible extrapolation of exponentials, which if this had been written a couple years later I'd have thought it was about COVID, but instead was probably a critique of sensationalism and catastrophizing. In another bit of prognostication, there was a scene that really seemed like it was about the storming of the US capitol.
Although this resumed a few of the problems that I have with Reynolds and quite possibly was an unnecessary sequel, there wasn't that much I disliked about it, but I also didn't like much about it either. If nothing else, it showed how committed Reynolds has been to his mosaic approach to the series, where he'll write about whatever he wants at whichever point in time he wants to.
Great story but many grammatical errors that should have been caught in editing. Sentences missing words and extra words where they don't belong.
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
mysterious
medium-paced
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
adventurous
challenging
slow-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:
Yes