The Sword and Laser discussion

I just finished today and I enjoyed the book all the way through. I thought that the setting was not too far off from a believable future and the characters and writing style made it a unique story. I was, however, surprised by the sudden ending. I felt as though there were a lot of unresolved story lines. Granted, one could infer the results of most of them, but I was surprised at the lack of closure.
What did you think of the ending?

I agree with you. I also felt the ending was rushed. I remember thinking with 50 or so pages left that there wasn't going to be enough space to end this book.

Agree. It was OK but the ending was a bit abrupt.
I felt like someone found the manuscript and was told to finish the story. In one chapter.

Ending was a bit rushed but I was glad to see it end.

My one word review: Meh

My theory of the clipped ending is that Stross is developing a world and the characters in this novel aren't important. The world setting and the fact that (view spoiler)[an amoral AI has just been released into cyberspace (hide spoiler)] is what he was emphasizing. The implications of that will be developed in the next installment. Just my two cents.

@Jonathan, I get where you are coming from in your opinion, but I think that if this is the case that is a pretty shitty way to treat your reader. You should not sacrifice the characters in order to build a world. The reader deserves a little closure on the lives of the characters to whom they were introduced .

Books don't have endings anymore. They have to continue the series after all.

I quite literally just finished. I agree with Tassie Dave, I was glad to see it end and the one-word review would be "meh."

I'll have a full review up on GR later tonight, once I've digested it a bit. I will say, re: some of my comments in the podcast 87 thread, Cory Doctorow seemed to like it, but it's another that I thought was middling at best.

Okay, so was there any point to the 2nd person narrative, or was it just a gimmick?

I enjoyed the book and it's quirkiness. I agree that the ending wasn't the best ibn literature, but it wasn't a complete insult to the reader like the shower scene in Dallas.

As for the second person perspective thing, I think it was just a writing style that he chose to employ. I don't think there was any particular point he was trying to make.

terpkristin wrote: "I quite literally just finished. I agree with Tassie Dave, I was glad to see it end and the one-word review would be "meh."

I'll have a full review up on GR later tonight, once I've digested it a..."

Doctorow!!!

AndrewP wrote: "Okay, so was there any point to the 2nd person narrative, or was it just a gimmick?"

It made some sense for the Toymaker parts. Maybe not as much for the other parts. (view spoiler)[It could be a representation of the AI scamming everybody, kind of telling the story from the AI perspective...but that's a bit of a stretch. (hide spoiler)]

Also, I was surprised by how many "SAT words" that Stross used. I had to use the dictionary feature of my Kindle significantly more often than I usually do when reading. Some of terms I had to Google, as they weren't dictionary words.

I finished the book last night, and I agree that the end felt a bit rushed. I did very much enjoy the setting, as well as the story overall. I would have liked a little more detail on some of the characters (e.g. Dorothy, or the fabber from chapter 3). Even Anwar, despite being a main character, could have benefited from a little more growth and enlightenment. He seemed to be going into the right direction, but never really arrived (at least not on his own).

Finished today as well. I liked what the ending revealed, but it still wasn't quite enough, and agree that it was unsatisfying with regards to the overall characters and story. Still, I'm glad I read it - not a favorite, but an interesting take on a near-future, kinda-cyberpunk-y noir/murder mystery.

terpkristin wrote: "AndrewP wrote: 'Okay, so was there any point to the 2nd person narrative, or was it just a gimmick?'

It made some sense for the Toymaker parts. Maybe not as much for the other parts. (view spoiler)[It could be a representation of the AI scamming everybody, kind of telling the story from the AI perspective...but that's a bit of a stretch.(view spoiler)[" (hide spoiler)] (hide spoiler)]"

Yeah, I wondered about that, too. (view spoiler)[It would have been cool if the second-person narration was revealed to be part of the AI's 'personality projection' and the social engineering that it did with the people (the characters of the novel) it had targeted through its web of connections -- that it was viewing each of them as 'you'. But I think there's just a hint of that, and the second-person was mainly an exercise on Stross's part.) (hide spoiler)] I did get used to the second-person much quicker than I thought I would.

I read it when it came out this summer because I usually like about half of Stross's stuff and not the rest. This one was not one of the favorites and I really couldn't remember much about it except that it had some unpleasant parts. So I've started listening to it. I love the accents but now I remember the book and am not sure I want to go through the icky parts again. It reminded me a lot of Kraken by China Mieville, which I really liked.

Finally finished this. Overall didn't care for it. The 2nd person narrative really didn't bug me nor the language. It was the story in general. Some chapters I got into then some I didn't. It really wasn't until the 1/2 way point where I got interested in the story as things started to converge, but then there were some dull chapters which made me lose interest again. If Stross's other books are written like this, I'll be giving them a pass.

But it was something different though just not my cup of tea.

The Atrocity Archives is a better representation of Stross's writing. I really liked it.

I should note, by the end, the second-person perspective and the accent didn't bother me. But I had other issues with the book.

I was amazed at how many times I had to use the Kindle dictionary to look up words or look up stuff on the internet.

It was an ok book, I also agree the ending was abrupt and it got a little confusing when they were jumping forward and back in the time line.

Enjoyed it, solid book but nothing spectacular. Would recommend Glasshouse (haven't read The Atrocity Archives). Can read Halting State and Rule 34 back to back without too much trouble.

Second person shouldn't be an issue and the Scottish flavor is part of the reason we read books, right? (Unless you're Scottish.)

I must concur with many of you here. The book was adequate but not spectacular. The ending was not particularly satisfying. That said I did enjoy parts of it very much. The toymaker perspective chapters not so much. I liked the character he created in the toymaker, being in his head made my flesh crawl a little bit though. He probably meant to do that.

Yeah, it was mostly okay for me. I didn't mind the 2nd person perspective too much, it was more the story itself and the accent that occasionally threw me off.

Overall the book left me less than satisfied, partly because I'm not sure I got all of the story right. I also agree that the ending came pretty quickly and a bit deus ex machina like - as in not sure whether it was the resolution was introduced in a way that explained everything perfectly.

(But after all, I was kind of glad when the end came, since I was kind of eager to start the next book.)

It's a good book overall. Not great. I agree that the ending did seem rushed.

I sort of liked the abruptness of the ending, it felt very 'police procedural' in a sort of cheeky way. We've got our man, doesn't really matter if he's the man exactly, we got him. Job done.

In my opinion, the ending was paced perfectly. I thought it matched the overall tone of the book.
I've read almost all of Stross' books, and I go back to them simply because I love the way he plays around with the latest contemporary developments of culture, economics, and technology, and is always bubbling over with surprising ideas about the way these things could potentially play out in the not-very-distant future. However, he can sometimes disappoint, because you would often like him to go a bit deeper into his characters, and the initial setup of his plots is always better than their eventual dénouement. A perfect example of this is his fantasy series, The Merchant Princes, which begins with fascinating ideas and great characters and ends with one of the worst final volumes of a fantasy series I've ever come across(Volume 5 just feels like the author having one long temper tantrum). Since I've changed my expectations, I enjoy his books more. He seems to surf along the crest of an extremely rapid torrent of ideas, and that is what still makes his books fun and worthwhile for me.

While the ending was a bit unsatisfying, I think it would be even less satisfying if (view spoiler)[the AI were introduced as a character/being/whatever about 3/4 of the way through the book and then was shut down by the cops at less than 100 pages later. I guess my interest in the book peaked less from character development (just meh) and more from the worldbuilding sections. I count the existence of a crime-fighting (sort of) AI as worldbuilding.

Anyway, I think the existence/implications of the AI needed to be dealt with over the course of a much larger space then what at that point would have remained of a reasonably sized book. Waiting for the next one! (hide spoiler)]

As far as the second person voice goes, I actually thought it--as well as the present tense--really lent the writing a sense of immediacy. I actually started reading Empire State almost immediately upon finishing Rule 34, and the first 15 pages or so I felt strangely removed from the action because of the switch to third person.

As someone who really enjoys this type of book mystery/near future genre if you will, I found this very enjoyable. However, I agree with a lot of people that the ending seemed rushed, if not down right odd. And the second person narrative did at times sort of draw me out of the situation from time to time especially in the beginning but it wasn't such a detractor that I didn't like it.

I finished it last night, and overall I liked it. I decided to get and read Halting State first, and so the second-person voice already seemed normal to me when I started it. The Scottish dialect didn't bother me; I had no trouble understanding it. And regarding the "abrupt" ending--I haven't read a lot of this particular sub-genre, but if three Stephenson novels (Cryptonomicon, The Diamond Age: Or, a Young Lady's Illustrated Primer, Snow Crash) and the previous Stross novel are any indication, I'd say it's not so much a flaw as a deliberate structural choice. All of these novels have the same structure--the traditional introduction, rising action, and climax, but then have only a very brief falling action, and no denouement. It didn't bother me in Cryptonomicon, probably because this structure is common among thrillers, but it left me royally P.O.ed in The Diamond Age. (I was first baffled, "Is there a sequel? How could he just end it like that?" and then furious, "WTF?! Deus ex Machina and a five-minute wrap-up and we're done here? I feel cheated!!") By the time I got to Snow Crash I was expecting it, and so it didn't bother me in that or in either of the Stross novels. Five books isn't much of a sample, but I'm starting to think that this is a standard feature of this sub-genre.

So most of the things that annoyed other readers didn't bother me.

I agree with Christopher that a lot of the appeal is in how Stross takes recent developments in tech and culture and extrapolates in interesting ways. And I agree with those who posted elsewhere that Stross's phrasing and way of describing things is also a big part of the appeal. The Toymaker's use of corporate-speak business jargon was highly entertaining (to me, anyway).

One thing I liked about the ending (view spoiler)[ is how we are lead to believe throughout the novel that the Toymaker's view that someone is out to get him, specifically, is the result of limited viewpoint (not knowing that similar murders are happening elsewhere) and paranoia. And then it turns out to be true. (hide spoiler)]

I did have one big problem with the ending, though. Not the abruptness of it, as explained above, but the implications of the last little piece. (view spoiler)[ We get a short bit from Dr. MacDonald about how "one of the standard features of general cognitive engines is that they're all hard-wired for mirrored self-misidentification. That is, they all project the seat of their identity onto you, or some other human being, and identify your desires as their own impulses; that's standard operating precaution number one. Nobody wants to be confronted by a psychotic brain in a box--what we really want is identity amplification." Stross doesn't provide us with any reasons as to why this constitutes an "operating precaution" or how it prevents a "psychotic brain in a box". In my mind, part of the point of AI is that lacking biological drives, it wouldn't have the irrational impulses that humans are so subject to. So hooking it up to mirror a human seems like the last thing we would want, not to mention that tying an incredibly expensive piece of software developed with enormous effort to a fragile human, who could die of illness or accident or violence at any moment seems like a risky proposition at best.

And then, even if I were willing to accept that having it mirror a human was a good idea, no one with an ounce of sense would pick the Toymaker as the person to tie it to. If I were making a list of all the traits I would not want to be had, under any circumstances, by person whose "identity" we would "amplify", it would pretty much look like:
Sadism
Sociopathy
Paranoia
Megalomania
Delusions
Narcissism
and the Toymaker has four out of six. Only someone completely insane, or out to destroy the human race, would have ATHENA identify with the Toymaker. And Stross provides us with no rational for this, so unless he intends to explain it in a later book, that seems like a pretty big flaw to me. (hide spoiler)]

This was a weird one for me. If someone had described to me the topic of the book, I would have found it right up my alley. Written by Charles Stross sounded like icing on the cake. But for some unfathomable reason I just couldn't enjoy this book. Reading felt like a chore, and even the wonderful Stross phrases like: "You say paranoia I say surveillance state." or "Although describing what you've got here as "Internet access" is a bit like calling a Bosnian War rape camp a "dating agency."" couldn't change the feeling that the book lacks some quality I can't pin down. Perhaps the whole problem is that I went in with high expectations. Perhaps it is just my current state of mind. I just couldn't enjoy it.

just finished, I didn't hate, but was verry happy when I finished. now I can move on to something else

felt like a chore to read evrrytime I picked up the book or rather kindle.

I just finished and I agree the book ended too quickly. It seemed to all come together too fast. Still not sure if I liked it, the sex parts were way too crazy and simply put there for shock value.

Neo: Why are you here?
The Oracle: Same reason. I love candy.

Make this into

Liz: Why are you here?
ATHENA: Same reason. I love candy.

Still a interesting story. Some interesting ideas to think about. Story was a bit of a mix on different AI stories ( I, Robot and with bits of Matrix).
(view spoiler)[
So at the end, was the whole thing a simulation or did the whole (ATHENA's ready to fight crime) bit just mean the test case for the software was over and it was ready to really start doing the thing it was made for? (hide spoiler)]

Going to be silly here for a second.

Everyone has already chosen whether or not they liked the book, they are just reading it to understand that choice.

Just finished the book this morning and my thoughts are a little bit torn. I had a bit of a rough time getting through the first part of the book, feeling like none of the characters were really fleshed out enough. About half way through, the stories started to intertwine a bit more and get a bit more exciting. Near the end though, just as I felt like I was starting to really gather a feeling for each of the characters, comes an ending that felt far too rushed. Overall, I wasn't a bit fan of the book, but I could tell it had a lot of potential to get into something much bigger, it just needed more time and patience.

I seem to deviate from the general consensus here as I really liked Rule 34. After the slow beginning the book completely grabbed me, and I found the different storylines and the twist towards an AI using social networking for manipulating quite interesting. I also have to admit that the setting grew on me - for a European, it was quite enjoyable for a change to have a Scifi story taking place in Europe, with an interesting vision on how the EU could develop, e.g. regarding Europol as major police force.

At the end, I also thought that the 2nd person drew me deeper into the story than a 3rd person perspective would have. It might be that as a RPG-player I am used to the 2nd person narrative, but it took me right into the scenes.

Finally I liked that Stross didn't feel the need to explain everything to his readers. Concepts such as the singularity, the Chinese room, social networks and so on, were just used in the conversations to make it a compelling narrative. In comparison, I am currently listening to the audiobook of Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon. And while it is a fantastic book so far, it is annoying for me that it sometimes feels more like a textbook as Stephensons explains every single detail about how computer work, how cryptography work, how mobile phones work and so on. Compared to this, Rule 34 felt refreshingly demanding but also accepting if you didn't want all concepts in it explained.

Overall, I therefore gave it 4.5 star.

I have to agree more with the people that put this book somewhere between meh and ok. The frequent changing of characters took me that much longer to gain interest in the characters. The end did rush right up on me. I could have used a bit more to the end. There was interesting aspects to the story but it just didn't get there for me.

I have to agree with many of the other comments. I felt the book was around a 3 or a 3.5 out of 5. I didn't have too much trouble with the second person perspective or the graphic nature of a few of the scenes.

To me, I didn't really connect with most of the characters... the only one I liked was Liz. The others were just not that interesting.

Couple that with the slow first half and you have a book that just doesn't draw you back to it. I didn't really start to like it until you start learning more about ATHENA, and by that time a good portion of the book has gone by. Then, by the end I was wishing that ATHENA had featured more prominently and that the story would continue, but it just ends abruptly.

Now, maybe Stross is just setting up yet another novel by introducing this plot point late in this one, but many other authors have both created a world and written a good story in it all in one book... after this one, I'm not sure I would take the time to give Stross another chance even if he did pen a sequel.

I'm going to echo the above reviewer regarding my connection to the characters. I had none. If they had all been brutally murdered by a machine intelligence which had gone on to enslave humanity that would have been fine. Possibly preferable.

2nd person was fine, but it went nowhere. There didn't seem to be any POINT in writing that way other than for Stross to stand around at cocktail parties (held in hishonor) phu-phawing about how he wrote a very artistic treatment of modernity, lambasting memes and mores, calling out the zeitgeist and generally being impressed with yourself AND he did it in 2nd person. Grats.

Ultimately that was my impression of this book. . . that Stross thinks he's pretty cool and assumes you do too. This book was weak and was, in the end, just a slightly better realized version of the Shia LasBouf vehicle "Eagle Eye" which underwhelms to this day.

Bring on the space ships, Tom.