Une lecture très intéressante qui préfigure des histoires post apocalyptiques parues après. Verlanger a clairement été lue par les auteurs de livres et bandes dessinées du genre. Je pense en particulier à The Walking Dead qui a parfois copié carrément certaines mises en scène. La façon dont les survivants s’organisent entre eux est particulièrement similaire.
Le livre est très violent, mais c’est dispersé. Les hommes sont souvent des brutes, les femmes subissent beaucoup, mais elles sont plus compétentes et intéressantes que dans les autres ouvrages de l’époque que j’ai lu. C’est agréable de lire l’œuvre de science fiction d’une femme.
Verlanger offre un style très direct qui nous mets directement dans la peau du personnage. Ce livre est un recueil de trois petits romans et de quatre nouvelles, ils sont tous rédigés de cette façon. Le niveau de langue change selon le cas et c’est très vivant.
Un livre dur mais intéressant et bien construit. Je le recommande.
I really enjoyed this book. It has its flaws of course, but I was a fun and light read, unlike some other Heinlein works.
His politics and gender roles are very 1950s, but it is what it is. That’s who the man was and when he lived. But he did craft an interesting story, well paced, with an excellent main character and good support cast.
It is more a comedy than a true sci-fi book, but Heinlein knows his sci-fi and uses to good fun.
An interesting read although not as mind blowing as Forever War. It does have a good core concept and Haldeman is an excellent writer. The “thriller” parts of the book are especially well executed.
The sci-fi elements are not as deep or well handled as in Forever War in my opinion, although they still are very good.
I might be a bit hard on this novel because I prefer Haldeman’s previous work, so don’t let my review discourage you from reading it. It is rewarding and captivating, I just don’t think it’s a masterpiece. But not every book can or should be one.
A fine story for Star Trek fans, but really not great. The tales are pretty unequal and the characters even more clichéd than in the series or movies. Some good parts, especially Kirk’s and Scott’s tales. Chekov and Sulu’s were pretty sluggish.
An interesting premise, beautiful art, but an average story. It’s well paced, but not very original. Besides the facts that it’s squirrels instead of people, the character’s’ behaviours are predictable and “by the numbers”. The book is worth reading for the art though, really superb and detailed. But I don’t feel compelled to read the rest of the series.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.75
It feels like I've read a novel-long poem. It's beautifully written and makes great use of Indian mythology (among others), but it is also a bit hard to follow and the author's point is not always clear. It is certainly one of the most original Hugo winners I've read, but it can be challenging and it certainly isn't light reading (not that it's a bad thing per se).
I'd never read any Zelazny before so I didn't know what to expect. It has a vast and complicated cast of characters, who change form and names along the way, and their goals are not always clear. It is certainly rewarding language-wise and it contains philosophy as well as nice fantastical concepts, but I cannot say that I loved it.