The Golden Age (Golden Age, #1) in Beyond Reality

Sep 20, 2011 Jason rated it it was amazing

Shelves: e-books, read-2013

5 Stars

The Golden Age is a gem of a sci-fi. It does not even matter that it is the first book in a trilogy; it is still worth a read. I want to say Thank You! To all my friends here at Goodreads that reviewed this book and put out the warning that although the beginning of this book is extremely difficult to get through, the persistent reader will be rewarded with a remarkably written hard science fiction mystery novel. This was my first exposure to John C. Wright as an author, but now I will se ...more

25 likes · Like · see review

Oct 29, 2009 Stephen rated it it was amazing

Shelves: science-fiction, far-future, award-nominee-campbell, award-nominee-locus, 6-star-books, cordwainer-vance-zelazny-and-esque, multiple-award-nominee, 2000-2005, to-re-read

6.0 stars. Absolutely mind-blowing science fiction debut novel. I do not know how best to describe this. In tone, it reminds me of some of the "golden age" science fiction classics like The Stars My Destination by Alfred Bester and The End of Eternity by Isaac Asimov. However, the book is written in a very contemporary and highly "computer literate" style (think cyber punk) that reminds me of William Gibson. Absolutely incredible and very unique. I can't wait to read the sequel. HIGHEST POSSIBLE ...more

22 likes · Like · see review

May 05, 2014 Matt rated it it was amazing

Shelves: philosophy, literature, science-fiction

In my original review I wrote, "The four stars are probably conservative. I’m loath to bump this up to five until I give it at least a second reading, but my gut instinct is that it would not only survive one but a second read through benefiting from hindsight would be enriching. Ultimately, I found this more satisfying that the original Foundation trilogy, and it should definitely rank highly among any sustained science fiction stories of similar length."

Well, we are now on the third reading an In my original review I wrote, "The four stars are probably conservative. I’m loath to bump this up to five until I give it at least a second reading, but my gut instinct is that it would not only survive one but a second read through benefiting from hindsight would be enriching. Ultimately, I found this more satisfying that the original Foundation trilogy, and it should definitely rank highly among any sustained science fiction stories of similar length."

Well, we are now on the third reading and while the story isn't perfect, I still think it among the best sustained science fiction story of all time. It's certainly the best far future science fiction work of all time, and one of the best works of the last two decades. Since I've indicated in other reviews that I consider the mark of a five story work that it begs to be reread, I'm bumping this up to five stars.

It’s hard to talk about this work without drawing some point of reference to similar works by writers that might be more familiar. To begin with, it’s obvious within just a few pages that John has read Gene Wolfe and like so many that have read Gene Wolfe is adopting his style and tropes as the best form of flattery. What’s amazing is that unlike almost every other imitator, he almost pulls it off. Please do not read that as damning with faint praise. It’s more like saying he’s almost pulls off as great a command of the English language as Shakespeare, and has almost as great of mastery of plot as Victor Hugo. Almost pulling off Gene Wolfe is so amazing, that if you have read Wolfe you’ll almost certainly think I’m exaggerating. But JCW isn’t Gene Wolfe, because who is, he is still clearly ferociously intelligent from page one with an imagination that rivals the very best in the business. He not only imitates Gene Wolfe on a superficial level, he is also imitating Wolfe’s layers of meaning, deft sleight of hand, and rich allusions.

Where the style will seem familiar from Gene Wolfe, the adventures in a far future setting with its sufficiently advanced pervasive technology and hyper-competent AI will remind the seasoned reader of science fiction of Iain M. Banks and his ‘Culture’. But where Banks is goofy and fun, or cynical and jaded, or both at the same time, Wright’s passion comes from deeper and more serious places. And perhaps even more strikingly, Wright's super-science for me never descended to mere magic but was grounded deeply in science. OK, so not all of the science is exactly plausible, but it’s mostly at least theoretically possible using mostly what we know at present, and it’s certainly believable extrapolation of what we know into the unknowably distant future. Wright refuses to push aside the speed of light as if it was an annoyingly inconvenient plot element. He eschews action at a distance unless he can explain the mechanism. Most incredibly of all, he seems to pay attention to the fact that technology of any sort needs energy to work. Alone of all the far future science fiction writers I can think of, he’s trying to work out where all the energy for this bling is coming from. I feel that in comparison to Banks, Banks was making the technology serve his desired plot, so if the plot and the physics are in a contest, the plot wins and it just happens as if by magic. Wright on the other hand is actually making his plot follow from or at least be constrained by the physics. Some of it may literally be unobtianium – imagined far islands of super stability in super-heavy virtually unsplitable isotopes for example – but at least it’s clearly science fiction and not merely a fantasy story wearing a lab coat. There are at least some reasons to believe it beyond wanting it to be true or needing it to be true for the purpose of the story, and I can’t help but think that in Wright’s case, knowledge of the science came first and the thought, “How can I use this in a story?” came second. Much like how I found the hard science fiction of ‘The Martian’ refreshing, so I also found the relative discipline of having a far future setting that was still constrained by reality as far as we know it refreshing. Some of my favorite science fiction is soft sci-fi, but over the past few decades hard science fiction had increasingly dropped into disrepute and so slightly rebellious reaction to that is very endearing.

The other author that he reminds me of is somewhat more regrettable, because he reminds me more of this author’s flaws than his strengths, and that is Robert Heinlein. While most of his story is thick in the layers of narration and imagination of Gene Wolfe, right down to the highly unreliable narrator, every once and a while Wright allows his inner pedagogue to the surface, gives his author’s voice too much freedom, and he gets a bit preachy. In my case, he’s preaching to the choir so this is mostly just a bit boring, but I’m willing to bet that if you don’t largely agree with Wright he’s going to be more than a bit abrasive at times. And this is my biggest worry. Because I don’t know one science fiction author in the history of the art form that didn’t get worse and worse in this regard as he got older, and I’ve seen links to his writing since I started reading this that suggests he’s no exception to the rule. My wife hypothesizes that write good science fiction, you’ve got to be a little bit weird in the first place, and that eventually they all go nuts. So with Wright I would say, “Hear ye! Hear ye! Early works by a Grand Master!! Enjoy them while it lasts; because it inevitably won’t.” ...more

6 likes · Like · see review

Sep 26, 2012 Kerry rated it liked it

Shelves: 2005, sf, 6-out-of-10

The protagonist of this novel is Phaethon of Radamanthus House on an Earth many millenia in the future where humanity is immortal and the people of society come in a range of material and mental forms. As the book begins, Phaethon discovers that there are large holes in him memory, ranging back through at least the last 250 years. As he tries to discover the truth, he begins to learn that all is not perfect in paradise. Civilisation has become stagnant and focussed on the safety of now, rather t The protagonist of this novel is Phaethon of Radamanthus House on an Earth many millenia in the future where humanity is immortal and the people of society come in a range of material and mental forms. As the book begins, Phaethon discovers that there are large holes in him memory, ranging back through at least the last 250 years. As he tries to discover the truth, he begins to learn that all is not perfect in paradise. Civilisation has become stagnant and focussed on the safety of now, rather than the possibilities of th future. Phaethon has threatened that stability and great measures have been taken to neutralise him. This first book of a trilogy focusses on Phaethon's attempts to rediscover the memories he has lost while avoiding exile from the society that sustains him all while learning what kind of man he had been before and how that compares to the man he is now. Which does he want to be?

I'm having real trouble working out what I thought of this book, as it felt something like a bipolar reading experience. There were parts that dragged me in and pulled me along and places where I felt like I was trying to wade through a bog.

As a far future novel, it was full of new technical terms, but these didn't particularly worry me. I loved one of the main themes, that is summed up by a quote from Babylon 5 where Sinclair says that "all of this was for nothing unless we go to the stars" which has always resonated with me. (And to say any more out that would introduce spoilers, which I'm trying not to do.)

But all the same, now I've finished it (and also while I was reading it) there was some kind of weight that dragged me down and made it a struggle. I'm not sure what it was though. There was a certain feeling of "just get on with it already" I think. I alternated between desperately wanting to read the rest of the story and deciding I couldn't face it. I'm still not sure. I expect I will read the other books, but not just yet as I want a few easier reads (especially since I also worked hard to read Kushiel's Dart and had a similar ambivalent reaction to that) in between.

[Copied across from Library Thing; 27 September 2012] ...more

1 like · Like · see review