You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by sbenzell
Ilium by Dan Simmons
4.0
Another thrilling and insightful book from Dan Simmons. Like the Hyperion series, this book is concerned with the question of Deicide.
Here are somethings I thought about reading the book:
Like `Lord of Light' the book investigates the use of technology in order to impersonate gods of mythology. Like that book, it asks the question whether living as such a god (which necessitates the existence of mortals) would be a good way to live, and whether as a mortal it would be more meaningful to live in a world with such gods. Like that novel, the book argues that such a world might 'make more sense to live in', but would inevitably invite rebellion. I very much enjoyed how the novel ended with the protagonist turning the Trojan war against the gods themselves. Is the idea of a god who would not deserve rebelling against even coherent? What if the god ruled a world of perfect justice -- would we still rebel as Dostoyevsky suggests?
This leads one into thinking of the 'Last Men' or 'eloi' who are contrasted with the blond beasts of Achea. Could these last men have been satisfied indefinitely had their mortality been removed? This in some ways is the position of Ian M. Banks' Culturniks -- who seem to be doing pretty well. I would have loved to get Banks and Simmons in a room to talk about the possibility of indefinite utopia.
Both these types are compared with the `modern men' of the belt moroveks and the wandering Jew. (Does that make Zeus the Ubermench?) These are the most understandable and sympathetic characters. Are they living the best lives? It's hard to say, but I'd likely choose to be her rather than any of the other characters. I wonder too about how Judaism is presented in the novel -- what makes this religion different than the ones of Illium?
Lots to think about in a well paced, engaging, literary work.
Here are somethings I thought about reading the book:
Like `Lord of Light' the book investigates the use of technology in order to impersonate gods of mythology. Like that book, it asks the question whether living as such a god (which necessitates the existence of mortals) would be a good way to live, and whether as a mortal it would be more meaningful to live in a world with such gods. Like that novel, the book argues that such a world might 'make more sense to live in', but would inevitably invite rebellion. I very much enjoyed how the novel ended with the protagonist turning the Trojan war against the gods themselves. Is the idea of a god who would not deserve rebelling against even coherent? What if the god ruled a world of perfect justice -- would we still rebel as Dostoyevsky suggests?
This leads one into thinking of the 'Last Men' or 'eloi' who are contrasted with the blond beasts of Achea. Could these last men have been satisfied indefinitely had their mortality been removed? This in some ways is the position of Ian M. Banks' Culturniks -- who seem to be doing pretty well. I would have loved to get Banks and Simmons in a room to talk about the possibility of indefinite utopia.
Both these types are compared with the `modern men' of the belt moroveks and the wandering Jew. (Does that make Zeus the Ubermench?) These are the most understandable and sympathetic characters. Are they living the best lives? It's hard to say, but I'd likely choose to be her rather than any of the other characters. I wonder too about how Judaism is presented in the novel -- what makes this religion different than the ones of Illium?
Lots to think about in a well paced, engaging, literary work.