Science Fiction Aficionados discussion

Generation ships-yay!
Artificially terraformed planets-Yay!
Super sentient Spiders----Well, ok?

Really, what a fantastic concept!

I am in.
However, they way my life is going, I should be finishing the book around June :(

I really want to participate, but have other reading obligations. So much to read....so little time.

I really want to participate. So I will. My copy is due to arrive March 6. Incidentally, the sequel to this book came out just last year: Children of Ruin. It's just 608 more pages.

I read it in January. It was decent. Lots to think about.

My copy of the 600-page doorstop arrived yesterday. Finishing up The House on the Borderland and then will begin. It has a very impressive book cover. I wonder what that spaceship by the planet is all about. It doesn't look like it's ready for interstellar travel. Where are the nacelles? It's sort of primitive looking.

Sorta reminds me of this.

https://youtu.be/7wKu13wmHog

Haha!!

This is the 3rd group that I'm in that is reading this book. For the first one, I couldn't find a copy in any bookstore. For the second group, I bought the book but was daunted by the length. Now, on the 3rd try, I've actually cracked it open. I'm really enjoying it so far.

I loved this book-- I read it last year and gave it five stars. Since this group is reading it, I may have to read it again. Yes, it is that good, and now there is a sequel out.

I'm halfway through. Really enjoying it. It goes off in lots of different directions. Often I will criticize a story for lacking focus, but in this case I think the different strands do pull together.

I was hoping that this book would be a distraction from the current viral fears, and it is, but still there is a plague story in here as well. That only lasts for a few chapters, though.

Does anyone know: when he published this book, was he already planning to have a sequel?

I am about 30 percent of the way done and will try to finish up this week (so I can start to tackle Perdido Street Station next week). I am greatly enjoying the story about what is happening to these remnants of human civilization. It's very imaginative and sort of sad. There's a sad mood to Tchaikovsky's writing that well fits this subject matter. I've never read anything quite like it before.

I do find the passages about the nanotech-enhanced spiders and ants rather dull though and there are too many of these. They last too long and are repetitious. I hope they become less gross and more interesting as the book proceeds.

I finished rereading this and the sequel (not nearly as good IMO). What stands out is the awesome world building and details of the spider civilization's evolution, which closely follow the evolution of Western Europe, including (a few spoilers here) the mongol invasion, the plague, the protestant reformation, the enlightenment and so forth, all though the multiple eyes of spiders.

I think it’s brilliant. The sequel is quite good but suffers from the lack of novelty of alien uplift but has some interesting twists (the conflict in “Ruin” is between 3 groups and not just 2 as in “Time”).

I agree about the sequel. The entire uplift with spiders was excellent, but reading about another species undergoing the same process seemed like a bit of a rehash. I still enjoyed it, but not nearly as much.

I am so excited to read the sequel already!

Dan wrote: ".. I do find the passages about the nanotech-enhanced spiders and ants rather dull though and there are too many of these. ..."

Wow. I found those very interesting. But we are all different.

Century ships have been done before, so that is a bit old hat, but the spiders were new. None of the century ship stories I've read ever really explains how they got by after they ran out of toilet paper.

Greatly enjoyable book. I probably won't read the sequel.

Meh. I found CoT to be tedious (unlike most who have read it). I reckon the spiders are the best characters. The humans are unbelievable, and IMHO there is no way they could have maintained their technology under the conditions given in the story line.

I finished the novel at long last. I'm having a hard time deciding between three or four stars. There was much I really liked about it, including the final message or point of the book. There are wonderful and grand ideas contained in the book about destinations of species and what creating artificial intelligence will ultimately lead to.

On the other hand, there are so many pages of repetition, so many (150-200 or so) dull pages of narrative saying basically that the spiders' civilization is progressing, when all that is needed is a paragraph or two instead. It's 200-250 pages worth of material packed into 600. And now there has to be a sequel. I think I'll pass for now. Maybe if the story grows more on me over time.

Wow. I think CoT is brilliant—a 5 star for me.

You have a point. The book has some really wonderful parts and an exciting plot. I subtracted 1.5 stars because he took 200 pages to say the spiders built a civilization when he could have said it in a sentence like I just did. Maybe over time I'll raise it to four stars. I sometimes get over my pique at some particular feature and raise my evaluation a month later. Conversely, I sometimes am less excited about a work at some later date and take it down a star.

I am only one third the way through this book. I am the slowest reader here and should be done sometime in June.

So far the books theme seems to be all creatures are war like. The more advanced beings are, the greater the destruction. Everyone wants to expand their territories in which they live. All forms of expansion is usually at the expense of someone else or nature. Currently the spiders are living in a beautiful green lush world, but for how long. The more technological humans have destroyed their home planet and moving on to human terraformed worlds. To me the spiders are also headed down this route also. As for social development, the bugs all seem to have a cast system that is trying to reform their social development similar to the humans.

As for the term “Civilization”, I wonder if this word is changing over time. To me a world that has electric power is a civilized world. In today’s world, get rid of electric power and the civilization will collapse. Electric power also for the most part, is also destructive to nature in most of its forms. The balance between nature and having a peaceful civilization, can it even exist? But then is a “Civilized” world always war like and can never be at peace?

I will keep chugging along with the book and hope the book has an unpredictable “moral of the story” ending. If not I will be disappointed in this book.

A footnote: I am also finding I am losing my taste for science fiction, especially dystopian science fiction as it seems I am currently living in a dystopian world. Now where did I put my bio suit to go grocery shopping.

The general definition of civilization is much broader than you suggest - IIRC, historians agree civilization first arose in Mesopotamia, thousands of years before electricity. A sudden loss of electricity would certainly cause a collapse, but I imagine humans would rebound. Many civilizations have been kind to nature, but you're right that in general they are destructive to the environment - more as a result of allowing the human population to increase than anything else, I think.

Why did you bring this up?

Ryan wrote: "Why did you bring this up? ”

Yes, my error, I should should have listed a reference posting:
Sometimes I use the app which is limited in functionality and get lazy, where the goodreads web site has greater functionality of making postings. Therefore:

From Message #21 by Dan.
Dan used the term “Civilization” and I have my doubts about that term. I was thinking of the spiders and ants as tribes and not a civilization.

The Children of Time story seems to have a dystopian future of the human race. Where the Earth is no longer inhabitable and the last remnant of the human race struggling to survive.

I am sure there is a well defined definition of the term: Civilization. I see the world differently as a pessimist and a skeptic, It’s in my nature and I have little hope that the human race will survive the next two hundred years. You may find this odd, as much as I like science fiction novels, I prefer novels with a positive outlook, such as Jack McDevitt. I see CoT as a dystopian universe where everyone is trying to kill each other and struggling to survive. So far this book not appealing to me, but I will finish it someday.

I hope this answers your question.

Mickey wrote: "Dan used the term “Civilization” and I have my doubts about that term. I was thinking of the spiders and ants as tribes and not a civilization."

Native Americans were tribal, and had civilizations. Many modern day Arabs too (https://www.encyclopedia.com/humaniti...). I think the definition for what constitutes a civilization is wider than electricity-user and not eliminated from consideration for being tribal.

Tchaikovsky's entire point (it seems to me) in writing those long drawn-out sections of nano-virused bugs advancing their civilization is to show the ants, and especially the spiders, reaching "a relatively high level of cultural and technological development" (Webster's definition for the term). I won't give examples of how high for sake of avoiding spoilers, but our real world didn't attain the spiders' technological level until about seventy years ago, and we arguably (Tchaikovsky certainly does) are not at their cultural (i.e. social) level even yet.

I recommend finishing the book. It's not total gloom. I mean, you know already he had to leave room for a sequel. Right?

Dan wrote: "Mickey wrote: "Dan used the term “Civilization” and I have my doubts about that term. I was thinking of the spiders and ants as tribes and not a civilization."

Native Americans were tribal, and ha..."

That was a very interesting link. I never really thought about tribes feeling that they were superior to one another, just different parts of a group, like in an Orchestra. I have more to think about in my old age.

Most books these days always have a sequel and I tend to get burned out on them. I will continue the book.

However, from reading several post, it seems I am not the only one who is not enthusiastic about reading this book. Yes, it is long, but I would not say it is filled with lots of useless filler. The author is building up to a conclusion to which I am only one third the way. Perhaps it is because nothing is new to me in this book, so far same topic, everyone fighting for survival. Like in so many other books.

From message 19: Even you seem to be struggling to give this book a rating of three or four stars?

For what it's worth, I rate the last 170 pages fours stars, the first 170 pages 3.5 stars, the middle 260 pages 2 stars for the spider sections and 4 stars for the human sections, coming to an overall conclusion of a strong 3 leaning towards 4. I write all this detail to hopefully make the main point that the last 170 pages were pretty decent.

I also have rating system.

One point for readability, does it flow from page to page.
One point for the world build.
One point for character builds, are the characters rememberable.
One point for unpredictably, if can predict the ending, I may deduct one point.
One point for innovation, I want something new, learn something new.

Two points so far, going into one third the way:
Readability and a good world build.
I need more time for character build. So far, it is for the spiders, Bianca and Portia.

Spring and summer is coming on fast. Trying to get my yard cleaned up and my seed kits going for the summer garden. Finding time to read is getting shorter. I got allot of reading in during the winter months.

The book never really builds on spider characters, since they're different each chapter, despite sharing the same names. Sometimes they have some common characteristics, but they're clearly different. This was something of a weakness imo.

That was unusual--how Tchaikovsky treated species name as character name.

It was unusual, but it arises from the unusual structure: time passing so quickly between chapters that all the characters die and must be replaced by subsequent generations. If you think about it the naming scheme was probably the best decision. The spider chapters are too short to name each spider character separately: there would be too many names for too little screen time each. But they clearly need names. So using the same name for characters with somewhat similar traits makes the most sense.

Ryan wrote: "The book never really builds on spider characters, since they're different each chapter, despite sharing the same names. Sometimes they have some common characteristics, but they're clearly differe..."

I was wondering about that so early in the book. I imagine I would come to same conclusion as the more I read. I am now halfway through the book.

Trying to read more by reading myself to sleep in bed. It does hurt when my iPad hits my nose when I doze.

Yea.... A world slow speed reading personal record! I finished the book in three months! Wow! Fifty years ago, I use to knock off a novel a week.

The book to me was uninspiring. I gave it three stars.

I give a point for readability, the book was well written.
I give a point for the world build.
I give a point for the social makeup of the Spiders World.

Yes, the human race is a despicable race that destroys everything it touches. It actually has de-evolved to a dystopian level. This is in almost every science fiction novels these days... blah. It seems the only way for the human race to succeed is to have an alien overlord.

I am not saying these are true statements. I want something that inspires the human race. Something that shows intelligence, compassion and goodness for all species of this planet. That is probably why I am the only person on the planet that actually liked the movie Tomorrowland.

Well, it was not your typical Bug hunt story that popular movies are made from.

After three months after everyone has read the book, no one left to read my cheap review 😏

Mickey wrote: "Yea.... A world slow speed reading personal record! I finished the book in three months! Wow! Fifty years ago, I use to knock off a novel a week.

The book to me was uninspiring. I gave it three s..."

Interesting review, Mickey. (Some of us are still around after all.)
I also was unimpressed by CoT.

Clyde wrote: "Mickey wrote: "Yea.... A world slow speed reading personal record! I finished the book in three months! Wow! Fifty years ago, I use to knock off a novel a week.

The book to me was uninspiring. I ..."

Thanks, I am not alone after all 😌

I'm still reading a book that I started last August. It's not bad enough to quit, but I can't stand it in large doses, so I read a short chapter here, a short chapter there. I have to refresh my pallet with whole books in between.

Congrats on finishing CoT. Aren't you glad you stuck with it? I am undergoing a similarly long read with Perdido Street Station in which I read 100-200 pages per month of it. How do you feel about reading CoT's sequel? Ha!

Tchaikovsky's portraying the despicability of the human race did not trouble me as much as it did you, apparently. I am reading an Andre Norton duology currently in which an alien civilization which has a mostly peaceful hegemony over the universe, has diagnosed the human race, and decided the only thing it's good for is being hired out as mercenaries, that its goals of interstellar travel must be otherwise tamped down. For someone who was supposedly writing for a YA audience, Norton's backgrounds are surprisingly dark.

We have seen a lot of evidence of human nature in the two world wars last century, the still frequently occurring genocides, or domestically speaking in the selfishness on display and indifference to standards of decent human behavior by the choice made in our last election and that polarization, as well as in the resistances to the steps needed to protect our most vulnerable (which affects our own families) in the current pandemic.

I am okay with the realistic portrayal of a human nature that so consistently falls short of its stated goals as Tchaikovsky (and Norton) offer us because its truthful. When I want a fairy tale, and I sometimes do, I crack open another Star Trek book.

Final note: my computer tells me that 96% of google users liked CoT. "Liked" is not a verb or adjective I would use to describe my experience with the book either. How strange so many of us are in a minority then.

Dan wrote: "Congrats on finishing CoT. Aren't you glad you stuck with it? I am undergoing a similarly long read with Perdido Street Station in which I read 100-200 pages per month of it. How do you feel about ..."

I am definitely not in the majority and it does not bother me too much. I am tired of the violence and sex filled movies and books. I often wonder, does the entertainment industry follow society or does society follow the entertainment industry? I lean towards the latter.

My next book will probably be another violent filled book on our next members read Thirteen. Although I do like Jack McDevitt books that contain far less violence.

I do prefer Star Trek over Star Wars, the so called Liberal vs Conservative viewpoints. Star Trek almost socialized utopian world build over Star Wars self preservation where the government is an evil empire world build. Although both worlds tend to be violence filled.

As for the current pandemic, I am stressed out. I am doing my best to protect my 93 old mother who could easily live to be 100. I have my doubts in our current social environment.

A google ranking of "liked" is probably based on a simple numerical ranking, such as those who rated the book 3, 4, or 5 stars (which, I might add, includes you). For most people, a 3 star indicates a book they generally liked.

Ryan wrote: "A google ranking of "liked" is probably based on a simple numerical ranking, such as those who rated the book 3, 4, or 5 stars (which, I might add, includes you). For most people, a 3 star indicate..."

Another good point of view. Three to me was blah. One and two points would be close to awful. Again CoT was well written, I did not not care for the storyline.

I have read some books that was like eating gravel. When I have to reread a paragraph several times to understand what is going on, that book will get no rating from me.

I will often not give a rating for a terrible book out of having to defend myself. Also low ratings of books or products will often be deleted by our overlords as it will effect sales of a product.

Therefore a rating of three to me is a blah. It just makes a rating system go higher.

I agree that a rating of three is not "liked" so much as "didn't dislike." A three typically has a plot, consistent characters, builds some suspense, and the writing is at least decent. It's a book some (in this particular case, people with a lot of patience or fast readers) could give more stars and I wouldn't question their taste.

If you look at Goodreads' suggested ratings (when you hover over a star count on a book's page) it says the following for one through five stars, respectively: did not like it, it was ok, liked it, really liked it, it was amazing. So I would guess most people roughly follow these guidelines.

Mickey, there are plenty of one star ratings/reviews that stay on book pages. I don't think they are deleted. I do not hesitate to give out 1-2 star reviews for books I didn't like much.

Ryan wrote: "... I would guess most people roughly follow these guidelines. ..."

I do follow those guidelines for ratings on here. But from more than a few discussions with others on this site, I believe more than half make up their own meanings for the stars.

Anyway, I liked this book a lot. Not as much as some of my friends who loved it, but I definitely liked it. Particularly for the spider society. The human part of the story has been done enough times that I'm tired of it.

It's was my selection in the poll but I JUST got around to reading the book 😅

I enjoyed it thoroughly. I liked the dynamic of the chapters alternating between the different viewpoints, and I really liked seeing this little species evolve.

Nevertheless, I settled on 4 stars, because even though it was an easy read full of interesting ideas, I don't feel like coming back to it at any point in the future. Not sure I'll read the sequel based on the comments on this thread and on the reviews.