• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot. More details on our policies, especially our Own the Source rule are available here. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Favorite Edit of the Year (FEOTY) Nominations for 2020 are now open! Submit your entries here.

Book Reviews

The Scribbling Man

Tenant of the Tower of Flints
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
2,744
Reaction score
117
Trophy Points
93
1620483240081.png


This was a slow, casual re-read in the form of an audiobook. The narrator sounded like an AI and had the most stilted voice, but I tried not to let that mar the experience too much.

I initially read this 6 years ago and still agree with most of my qualms from back then. Here are my original scores for the individual stories though:

City - 3
Huddling Place - 4.5
Census - 3.5
Desertion - 4
Paradise - 3.5
Hobbies - 2.5
Aesop - 1
The Simple Way - 2.5
Epilog - 2


(I think these have changed a bit, but not by much. It's not fresh in my mind, so I'll leave them be.)

City has a great premise, but you do have to suspend your disbelief. It is a collection of stories that can stand alone but essentially function as a novel, having an overarching narrative/themes/characters that occur throughout. It progresses chronologically over a span of many generations, and I would liken it to something like Asimov's Foundation - although this is certainly not hard sci-fi and much more whimsical. The premise is simultaniously epic and quaint, Simak often being credited as the father of "pastoral" science fiction. It's small-town, soft and fluffy sci-fi, but taken to a grand scale. It's the fall of man, with the rise of dogs, ants, and remnants of robots left behind to aid the former.

All the stories are connected to each other and are divided by "notes on the text", where we have canine philosophers speculating on the story's origins and whether or not "man" as a species is more than a myth.

There are two main narrative problems I have with City: So much hinges on something called "The Juwain Philosophy", this moral plan that is supposed to carry mankind to the next age. I won't go into detail, as I'm keeping this relatively spoiler free (or at least vague), but the stakes of this fall apart both due to aspects that are dated, as well as by what can only be regarded as either incredible character incompetence or the author's own negligence. There is also a certain character who is practically made out to be the hero of the novel, and yet could easily be traced back as being single-handedly responsible for the destruction of mankind. Again, I put this down to an oversight of the author's.

My other issue is that, while the first half of the book is pretty solid, things meander a lot toward the back end, eventually becoming overly pensive and indulgent. Characters wandering around, speculating on life, the universe, everything... it's very tiresome and more than a little pretentious since the execution is verbose and repetitive. It's not often I say these things of a man like Simak, who I believe was a humble and modest man, and generally wrote some very short, tight stories that touched on profundities quite naturally. But there you have it. This, easily his most acclaimed work alongside Way Station, is not his best in my book.

However, I do think City has its moments and is worth reading. At the very least, I would recommend "Huddling Place" as a standalone short story.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
2,298
Reaction score
52
Trophy Points
48
9780553378498


This is a book that was recommended to me many years ago but I’m just now getting around to it. I wish I hadn’t put it off. The title is a clear reference to Doestevsky’s The Brothers Karamozov. I read that book way back in high school (and I’m 50 now), so I’m sure I missed some parallels. But the main themes are obvious. Particularly those about religion and god. Doestevsky’s story-within-a-story “The Grand Inquisitor” remains a favorite of mine and is something I reread from time to time.

The title also alludes to baseball (for those not aware a K is how a strikeout is scored on the scorer’s sheet). This book is also heavily about baseball, at least in the first half. That may be a turnoff for some but as a baseball loving American it was welcome for me. Baseball is a romantic sport in America and this book does it justice.

Finally, this is a story about family. Namely a family at specific time in American history: the 60s (defined here incongruously as 1963-1973). The family itself represents parts of America at the time (the counterculture, the eastern-religious philosopher, the all-American who goes to war, the traditional America that was opposed to war and questioning religion, the traditional America that supported the war and religion, and the seeming bystander that just wanted everything to work out for the best for those they care about). But it’s not that simple at all. These are rich characters and the story is not simply a metaphor.

The one thing not represented very well is women. Sure there are female characters who play important roles in the story but they are more foils for our male characters. It is called The Brothers K after all so I guess I was warned. Still the lack of development for several key female characters is disappointing at the least and severely detrimental to the themes in at least one case.

Also, lest you believe this is simply an anti-religion, anti-war story that elevates and romanticizes the brothers who opt for eastern enlightenment or hippy radicalism, this book gives equal rebuke to all. I loved the portrayal of hippy Everett getting out debated by his older professor or eastern philosopher Peter enduring a rude awakening in India. This book doesn’t posit easy answers. It mirrors the 60s in that half a century later we’re still trying to figure it all out.

One of my favorite books and authors is A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving. That book I read in college. This is a book much more suited to my current station in life as a father of two eight year olds. If I can get them to sit for it, I’m hoping to read this book aloud with them when they reach their teen years.

I laughed; I cried. Cliche but true. And every word grabbed me. It’s a book I’ll revisit and think about for a long while. And it was immensely entertaining.

Given the reminders of John Irving, I wanted to revisit that author next. I’ve read most of his work, but there’s one glaring omission: Garp. I never read it because I had seen the movie. Every other Irving novel I’ve read before the theatrical adaptation. So it’s been about 30 years since I’ve seen the movie and the time seems right to finally read The World According to Garp.
 
Top Bottom