An important book that communicates effectively to a mainstream audience. You have to admire the courage of the author. Another one where I have tons An important book that communicates effectively to a mainstream audience. You have to admire the courage of the author. Another one where I have tons of thoughts and not sure if it is worth writing about at length. ...more
Civilisation is much older than it appears, or as Hancock loves to point out "stuff just keeps on getting older". If you are familiar with the researcCivilisation is much older than it appears, or as Hancock loves to point out "stuff just keeps on getting older". If you are familiar with the research of Hancock, John Anthony West and geologist Robert Schoch this will come as no surprise. If you are not, watch the documentary "The Mystery of the sphinx" on Youtube. Other than a highly unfortunate detour into "the face on Mars" it remains an excellent documentary, narrated by Charlton Heston. Also worth watching are the "Magical Egypt" series from JA West and "The Pyramid Code" on Netflix that features Hancock.
The premise of West and Schoch's research is that the body of the Sphinx and the Sphinx enclosure bare the unmistakable marks of rain erosion not sand erosion and thus that the Sphinx could not have been built in 2500BC as conventional Egyptology tells us but dates to a much older time when Egypt was rain forest, to at least 9700BC. There is also plenty of evidence showing the sphinx was being restored in 2500BC when it was supposedly brand new. The continued excavation of the greatest modern archaeological discovery, the temple Gobekli Tepi in Turkey (built around 12000 years ago), at a time when humans were supposed to be primitive hunter gatherers only supports this theory further.
Hancock's previous book "Fingerprints of the Gods" expounds on the research of John Anthony West, that Egypt is much older than previously believed. If you've ever watched an episode of "Ancient Aliens" you know that the further back we go in Egypt's history, the more advanced the architecture and craftsmanship were, while in dynastic Egypt the buildings and art were much cruder. Cue Georgio - "IT WAS ALIENS BRO".
A much more logical interpretation is that civilisation did not evolve linearly. That humanity had achieved a certain level of technology before the end of the last ice age and that rising sea levels and climate change decimated this society and forced it to slowly rebuild. We might as well use "the A word" and say Atlantis. The keepers of this ancient knowledge are Hancock's titular "Magicians".
Hancock is a skilled writer and endeavours to take the reader along with him as he visits these ancient sites, Gobekli Tepi as well as sites I had not heard of such as Baalbek in Lebanon and Gunung Padang in Indonesia. He writes a sort of first person travelogue as he investigates, drawing the reader in to the discovery. Hancock is a passionate writer and reader of his writing in the audiobook. He practically sneers every time he says the words "mainstream archaeology" or "mainstream Egyptology". He is certainly right in questioning Egyptology, a branch of Science so closed off and unaccountable it barely deserves to be called as such. While Hancock's fervour is understandable it comes of as somewhat unprofessional when he uses favourable adjectives for scholars he agrees with and stops just short of name calling for the mainstream. Hancock never misses an opportunity to trumpet all the occasions in which he has been proven right since "Fingerprints of the Gods"
I enjoyed Hancock's accounts of the various sites in south America, Baalbek and Gobekli Tepi. I thought one of the most interesting things I learned was that the Egyptian God of wisdom and writing Thoth was given his teachings by 7 men, the Magicians. The book does get a bit tedious and overlong at times, particularly in the sections on comets and geology.
I did note that Hancock has replaced his "Polar shift" hypothesis for the mass extinction event of 12000 years ago to "comets". While no doubt comets did hit the earth and have an effect in this time period I found it surprising that the geologist Hancock frequently sites the "esteemed" Robert Schoch of Boston University recently said on a podcast that he does not support the "comet hypothesis". Schoch instead believes it was a series of "solar events" that both effected the climate and left a series of "stick figure like" streaks across the sky. Schoch believes these patterns displayed in the sky account for their representations appearing on cave art around the world.
My strongest disagreement with Hancock comes with his conjecture that Gobekli Tepi was buried by its builders as a "time capsule" for modern man to discover. What about the simplest explanation, that after Gobekli Tepi was built, the religion it was based on fell out of favour? Surely a massive change in climate, animal behaviours and possibly even a series of "solar events" might cause early man to conclude that the gods were displeased and that the previous religious system should be abandoned.
Not without it's flaws but an enjoyable read for anyone interested in hearing the latest critiques against the accursed "mainstream archaeology"....more
I was attracted to this book by Gary's review and the premise of a first contact story combined with a generational colony story, two of my absolute fI was attracted to this book by Gary's review and the premise of a first contact story combined with a generational colony story, two of my absolute favourite SF setups. In the first chapter the colonists encounter two competing sentient plant based life forms and with all the trepidation and foreshadowing of teens entering a spooky house in a horror flick, choose their botanical side. The second chapter moves forward a generation and unearths a major cover up. At the end of the second chapter about 3 hours into the audiobook I was absolutely HOOKED. I was finding excuses to walk around at work so I could listen to just a few more minutes, I was in a minor state of shock and doing first pumps at HOW GOOD THIS BOOK WAS.
Unlike most of the other books I've read or listened to lately this was an absolute page turner I devoured in a few days. The pace is incredibly fast with each chapter (about 90 minutes of audio) representing one generation of the colony. At this pace I expected the story to cover hundreds or even thousands of years like "Foundation" but it is actually only the story of the beginnings of the colony.
The original setup is incredibly effective at hooking the reader in, so much so that I was constantly imagining my own story of what was going to happen and where this all was going. It is a credit to author Sue Burke that "Semiosis" stimulated my imagination so thoroughly. It is also somewhat inevitable that the climax couldn't live up to my own expectations.
I'm going to keep this part of the review spoiler free but I will say that while the middle and end of the book weren't a total bummer, I couldn't help but be a bit disappointed that the wrap up was so...conventional when there was potential here for something much more strange and spectacular. Like the giant foot statue in "Lost" I didn't feel all of the enticing bread crumbs were paid off or explained to my satisfaction - even though I enjoyed following them immensely.
The audiobook was fine with chapters from a female perspective narrated by Caitlin Davies and the male chapters narrated by Daniel Thomas May. The one issue I had was that May had to find a voice for the plant intelligence "Steveland" and went with "overacting Shakespearian guest actor on Star Trek" voice. This was OK for most of the book, since a clever plant is a hard voice to come up with. At the end of the novel where the climax is narrated by Steveland for chapters at a time, it got to be over the top and annoying.
I did enjoy the ride "Semiosis" took me on and recommend it to fans of the first contact/space colony genre. It has certainly inspired my first feature length review in QUITE some time. Now to the spoilers:
(view spoiler)[ So I had a few issues with this book. In Chapter 2 we find that the first generation knew about the rainbow bamboo but chose to live in their decrepid camp basically because..."drugs are bad...mmkay". Well..I expected that this was done for a more legitimate reason and that in Chapter 3 (or anywhere else) we were going to flash back and read about the first generation's interaction with Steveland and that this decision was not as stupid as it seemed on the surface. There had to be a reason for the cover up! Instead this first generation who were adventurous enough to want to sail across the galaxy in the first place chose to hide in their tents and cover up the glassmaker city and actively blindfold the 2nd generation. I'm not buying it!
Pour one out for Julian. this death and the revenge murder were absolutely shocking to me and even thought I don't know anything about Julian other that that he was infertile this combined with the cover up of an alien city made me want to join the murderous revolution with Katniss Everdeen or whatever her name was.
A lesser problem but their spaceship has the computing power to get them to a distant sun but not enough to survive even one generation of landing on the planet. their hard drive barely had enough space for a few books. The satellite system was a problem. Got it up and running....oops it doensn't work now...we can't do anything...back to the stone age. OK! Lucky we have all those books...nevermind.
The glassmakers. We don't get any explanation or clues as to how their civilisation fell apart. This is the central mystery surrounding them....and nothing. When they first burned the bamboo I expected a rich history of interaction with evil Steveland that led them to abandon their city and strike out on their own. Some central conflict between Steveland and the glassmakers. Nope. Story goes - they were smart now they are dumb and dying...OK
I feel like a huge opportunity was missed with the character of Steveland, he legitimately could have been one of the greatest SF villains of all time. I was imagining a "black mirror" like scenario where subsequent generations of humans grow more and more dependent on him until cycles of rebellion and Steveland reasserting himself come into play. Eventually the humans think they have him under control but they are actually doing what Steveland wants via the mindfruit.
We are told at the start that Steveland is out for himself, this is followed through with the next generation who reinforce this, then when the pacifists are totally under his branchy thumb, it turns out the humans have been the ones who domesticated Steveland! Happy ending! This was like pointing out Chekov's gun in the first act, reminding us about it in the second and never firing it in the 3rd. I just didn't buy any of this, it almost felt like Burke changed where the story was going half way through. We have this power hungry, manipulative, ego maniacal, spacefaring aspirant plant who wants to have it all - then suddenly feels sad he couldn't make it work with the glassmakers and gets emo he had to kill a few. I really couldn't get on board with the end where the glassmakers are waging war and everyone was so desperate to protect these stinky leeching murderers. Steveland could have been an amazing, powerful villain. Instead he ends up like a lovely old pacifist human.
I think if any one of these 3 points conspiracy/glassmakers/Steveland were nailed it would have been a 5 star story. Maybe I was just disappointed that the whole time it felt like this was going to be a darker story with the rug cleverly pulled out from the reader. Instead in the end the ewoks and the Jedi and the stormtroopers had a big bonfire and sang songs together. (hide spoiler)]...more
This book is trying to cover a lot of ground, namely the entire history of homo sapiens. It follows that it doesn't have time to get into any one aspeThis book is trying to cover a lot of ground, namely the entire history of homo sapiens. It follows that it doesn't have time to get into any one aspect of our history in depth. Harari covers our emergence from other homo species, the rise of agriculture, writing, commerce, religion, individualism and empire, only briefly touching on each.
There is a certain level of trolling going on. Herari considers all idealogies to be religions and consistently refers to humanism as a religion. He also does things like refer to Christianity and Nazism in the same sentence without any qualifiers. The type of thing that will make a certain percentage of reader throw their books across the room in disgust.
I was surprised that tby far the most interesting section of the book to me was the part on commerce and capitalism. The anecdotes on how completely imaginary any financial system is, that it is all built on the idea that "someone else" values these cowrie shells or bank notes. I loved the anecdotes on how the gold hoarding cultures quickly saturated their own markets with gold from the new worlds, lowering its value while the cultures that gave gold little value like the Incans and Indians quickly saw it gain value because the foreigners sought it above all else. The part on how the Dutch rose to power, by mastering the banking system, gaining the trust of creditors and cementing their trade routes - while Spain lost its power by investing in the military and defaulting on its own loans was fascinating. I had never appreciated what a breakthrough the concept of the first loan was and how that became such an integral part of modern society.
Harari also offers a word of caution on capitalism, that the slave trade was not started because of one single "bad" country or racism, it was a practical response by companies to the European craving for more sugar cane. Herari questions whether capitalist market will actually regulate itself ethically.
Overall there is plenty to think about and discuss at your next dinner party without actually taxing your brain too much....more
A lot of the information in this book on how and where to get published is now as relevant as a Windows 95 manual. It is certainly worth the price of A lot of the information in this book on how and where to get published is now as relevant as a Windows 95 manual. It is certainly worth the price of admission for the section on the types of SF stories though. When you have written books as good as "Ender's Game" and "Speaker for the dead" I am going to pay attention to what you say. A lot of the "how to write" books have me questioning how good the author actually is, which isn't a problem with OSC. I will probably hav another skim over the body of this book in another month or two. ...more
I have had this book on my "to-read" list for a long time and with the release of the Netflix show I bumped it up to the very top. I look forward to nI have had this book on my "to-read" list for a long time and with the release of the Netflix show I bumped it up to the very top. I look forward to now being one of those annoying people who keeps comparing the TV show to the book when I watch it. So by now you know the setup - its a noir detective story in a cyberpunk universe. I felt like all of the tech and world building ideas were things I had read before but the world was vividly portrayed and Morgan developed an interesting story with the stack and sleeve ideas. The mystery part of the story was also very well done and I never felt lost or confused, right up until the very end when everything was explained and I realised I actually WAS a bit confused. There is a lot of sex in this story and it is of the male-centric, objectification of women's bodies type that is generally frowned upon in 2018. I secretly enjoyed much of this rather purple prose. There is also a lot of graphic violence and disturbing imagery. It felt like Morgan had an alert set up that he couldn't get through an hour of the story without some sort of lengthy fight scene which in my view wasn't totally necessary. The highlight of the book to me was Morgan's lyrical prose. It wasn't quite the poetry of William Gibson's take on cyberpunk but there was plenty of wonderful imagery and clever metaphor. A couple that stand out to me are "I yawned like a reptile engorging an egg" and describing the feeling of his nose being broken as "the sensation of biting into celery". I enjoyed the performance of narrator Todd Mclaren, His voice was perfect for Kovacs dry dialogue and his handling of the female character's was excellent. All of the ingredients for a fantastic, thrilling TV series are here. I am going to be very disappointed if it doesn't live up to the book....more
I really only got one thing out of this, which was the exercise in asking "what if" questions about the premise of your book. Obviously I know what thI really only got one thing out of this, which was the exercise in asking "what if" questions about the premise of your book. Obviously I know what the main "premise question" of my book is - but using this technique I was able to generate two typed pages of additional "what if" questions based on the subplots in my outline. This gives me a map for the "unique" features of my story, the things to emphasise. The great thing is that i know the "answers" to all of these questions except for one and that one unresolved issue gives me something to stew on as I write. I think this exercise was very beneficial for me.
For the most part this book was incredibly repetitive given its brevity and overly simplistic. Some of the suggestions like conducting interviews with characters just seem downright ridiculous to me. At the start of each chapter we are presented with an interview asking the same questions to various authors who give variations of the same answers over and over again. By the 9th interview I definitely got that outlining is good and "pantsing" is bad. Whenever the author turned to her own fiction to cite examples in plot and characterisation the examples sounded terribly boring and the characters a pile of cliches. I have no interest in reading any KM Weiland ficiton. The narrator has a lovely voice. ...more
Stephen King is a "pantser", he writes by the seat of his pants without knowing where he is going. This is probably why his endings are mostly bad. I Stephen King is a "pantser", he writes by the seat of his pants without knowing where he is going. This is probably why his endings are mostly bad. I was hoping for a bit more practical advice but this was entertaining enough. The biography and "rags to riches" sections were interesting. Writers should always be reading and writers should always be writing is good advice but about the only thing I took from this...more
Loading...
