The Sword and Laser discussion

I just loved it. I love the blending of history. I love how they explained they way they time traveled-how old buildings and places provided a link to a time in their past- even though it wasn't super sciency for our sci-fi pick. I would never have picked this book up on my own, but am so glad I had a reason to. Thanks Sword and Laser!

I really enjoyed it. Intrigue without a depressive tone. The characters were well formed, the settings masterfully set and the story had me from the start.

I really enjoyed it as well. It took me a little bit thought to really like. The beginning was a bit slow.

I also wouldn't have picked up this book on my own. For one, no one I know has read this book and I often get recommendations through friends and family.

This is a full spoiler:(view spoiler)[ I particularly like the ending. I thought that it was really clever of Si to make it so that Danzinger's parents never met.

And the fact that the next logical step of the project was to go and alter history which is just egocentric and selfish. To imagine that we could back in time to make it so that our current times were better off is just awful. I thought that Si's speech about it was poignant and I found myself nodding in agreement with him. I probably would have stood and clapped if I wasn't reading it in bed and my fiance sleeping next to me. (hide spoiler)]

I think that the ending was worth slugging through some of the more boring parts for sure.

I liked it, but thought it was a little clunky at times. I thought some of the foreshadowing was a little heavy handed, like (view spoiler)[how the corrupt inspector is mentioned pretty prominently and then later Si and Julia end up running from him (hide spoiler)].

I also had problems with the science backing up the time travel. (view spoiler)[Coming back to his time in the Statue of Liberty arm bugged me two, because that was not just traveling in time, but space as well (hide spoiler)]

Who doesn't enjoy a good time travel story?

I listened to the Audible version of the book, and have to say that I enjoyed the experience. I instantly felt 'at home' with the conversational story telling style and was quite happy to be swept along wherever the story went - listening whenever I could until I had finished the whole thing.

That said, the story is not hard hitting, nor does it try to address big issues. The mechanics of the time travel, don't really bear close scrutiny. It just is what it is - a cleverly plotted mystery where the action happens to be taking place 90 years in the protagonist's past. I can see why some people could have been frustrated by the overly descriptive writing, but the richness of the text is really what sells the time travel aspect. The author must have researched it very closely - or he at least gives that impression.

(view spoiler)[The ending was slightly unexpected, but quite satisfying - where Si realises that no good can come of the experiment - although I did feel a little sorry for the soon never to be born Dr Danziger, who was never really one of the bad guys! (hide spoiler)]

I just loved it.

It was one of those books that draw you in in a soft and cozy way, yet grab you with an ice cold fist round the heart a key moments.

I wouldn't say that it was brilliantly written or that the characters are particularly three dimensional, or that the plot is especially innovative - but I would say that it just somehow hit a sweet spot for me.

I think this is one where the imagery and feel will keep returning to me. One to reread sometime I think!

I found it kind of sleepy until I hit somewhere around 60%, and the Pickering plot picks up. For most of the book I was wondering if the author forgot about the (view spoiler)[fact that Dazinger had asked Si to see his parents meeting, but then it got addressed in the very end. (hide spoiler)]

Joanna wrote: "I found it kind of sleepy until I hit somewhere around 60%, and the Pickering plot picks up. For most of the book I was wondering if the author forgot about the [spoilers removed]"

I pretty much figured out that that little off-hand comment was going to be really important later. For some reason, I just didn't think that was how it would be used.

I enjoyed it. You're right, it wasn't hard hitting, but it engaged me nonetheless.

I skimmed over some of the endless descriptions, but overall I enjoyed it. (I found some of the period sexism and racism annoying, but was able to put it in context and move on.)

I saw this more as a historical fiction/fantasy novel. Historical since the focus was on 1882, though the "modern day" parts were also historical too - what it was like in the pre-politically correct days of the 1950's and 60's (notice all the references to "girls" when he was describing women, but men were never called "boys", etc...). Fantasy because the method of time travel described in the novel really had no science backing it up at all IMHO. It was more like the "time travel" I sometimes experience for a moment when I hear a song from my childhood/teen years, or eat comfort food like my mom used to make.

I did find myself, about half way through, checking how many pages were left, not a good sign! But the fact that I wanted to read the whole book so I could take part in these online discussions got me through the slow parts in the middle and I am glad it did. The ending moves a lot faster and does pull in a lot of factors that might not have been evident to some readers. Such as the fact that this book was written during the Vietnam War. I remember that time period and it was a very down time in terms of morale for many people, which gave some explanation for the main character's choices at the end of the novel.

I am glad I read this book and I think I would have liked it better if I could have read it in one sitting, in order to really feel immersed in the NYC of 1882. It would have also pulled me into the story more if I knew NYC better than I do. I did like the part about the arm of the Statue of Liberty just sitting there in the middle of a park - it made me flashback to the first time I saw Planet of the Apes :) It is interesting that there is still such a strong emotional connection that so many people have to that statue. I feel that connection as well though I have not yet been to visit it. I felt that the author was clever in using the statue the way he did, with it being the location of "time travel" for so many immigrants to the US.

The benefit of book clubs is learning of new books, and I'm glad I learned of this one. As I've said in other threads the author went way overboard in his attention to detail in the first part of the book, and I'm glad I spent the first five hours or so listening to the audiobook while picking olives; I'd have had a lot less patience with it if I'd read the text (altough I'd have gotten the illustrations then).

However, while the focus on the description was overwhelming and a tad excessive, it also felt appropriate, it absoltuely brought the era to life, and it was nice to go along for the ride. Meditative in a way. I'd almost expected the whole story to pass in this calm, flowing manner, so the sudden pace change in the last part of the book was a real shock, but an exciting one!

As for the science of the plot, there is none, but I appreciated the government project aspect of the story, and I liked the way it wrapped itself off. By the conclusion I'd completely forgotten about the detail of Danziger's request, so that was a nice bit of foreshadowing.

I also feel that the author paints an idyllized picture of the past, but I get it; there are many reasons today for feeling pessimistic about the future, probably more than when the book was written.

Btw, did anyone else think the narrator seemed rather dense in not recognising the mysterious symbol as a heel-print when he saw it the first time in 1882? I understand being amazed with seing the symbols themselves, but from the text it seemed obvious where they had come from, and was puzzled about whether I'd misunderstood something when neither Simon or Kate drew that conclusion.

Snoozefest. I read, or I should say skimmed, 160 pages yesterday, putting me within 100 pages of the end. I think Bradbury covered more ground in the short story Tyme Safari.

This is less a time travel story than an endless paean to New York's history. Reading it felt like homework.

I will skim the remaining pages in the next few days, then get back to some more fun reading.

I enjoyed the novel and the descriptions of the environments in old New York. The science was a little soft, but this was not meant to be a hard sci-fi story. I both read and listened to the story and did enjoy the narration even if it was a bit dated. Very fun read, and I loved the twist at the end, definitely didn't see that coming.

"...As for the science of the plot, there is none..."

"The science was a little soft, but this was not meant to be a hard sci-fi story...."

And yet it took one of the six Laser slots. I get the advantage of exposing us to things we're not likely to have already read, but if a story only has a fig leaf SF covering why burn one of the slots on it?

Then again, I've never really been clear on criteria for choices, so... /shrug.

Rick wrote: ""...As for the science of the plot, there is none..."

"The science was a little soft, but this was not meant to be a hard sci-fi story...."

And yet it took one of the six Laser slots. I get the a..."

That's because the criteria for choices is basically arbitrary. Sometimes our Glorious Leaders pick something they think is going to be more clearly SF or F and then when we start reading it, we discover that it's not as close as we expected. I think we've just randomly had a short rash of those lately with Time and Again, The Traitor Baru Cormorant and a couple months ago, Station Eleven.

Rick wrote: "
And yet it took one of the six Laser slots. I get the a..."

Well, time travel isn't exactly hard science to begin with. Is crossing between time-lines by convincing yourself that time and space is relative any less fantastical than making a flux capacitor in your garage?

it's not just that, Frederik, it's that once you do the travel there's really nothing SFnal about the book. That, more than the mode of time travel, is what I meant by 'fig leaf.'

When we've not touched on Neal Asher, Ken Macleod or the like this feels... lesser. But then Laser choices seem mired in past SF a lot, lately. All this is fine - I can and do read other SF, it's not like this is the only option. :)

I've read a stack of Dresden Files while working my way through this. I will say that the last 80-100 pages were interesting. Just, getting there was a slog.

First two thirds were boring and slow for me. With how long it took the plot to get going, I'd have expected the time travel to be better explained. I just basically took it as magic.

Once the mystery of the note was explored, things got much better. I really liked the ending too. I'm glad I read it, but it's not one I'll recommend.

I loved it as well. I'll agree the beginning was a little slow but the last third of the book, I could not put it down. Honestly, I cannot remember the last book that had that affect on me.

It was alright, particularly the second half except there was too much description of clothing and buildings. I also didn't like the anti-science message including the line "The moon landings lacked dignity because there was no point or purpose to them."
I'm a little surprised that there hasn't been more complaints about the seeming racism and sexism. I find it consistent with the time it was written but usually there's a couple people in the forums who get bent out of shape.
My big philosophical question is "would you worry about changing past accidently so much that you wouldn't risk going to the past? Or would you do it on purpose to apparently make the present better?"

Meh,

Just Lemmed this one.

As for the science. Please. If you are going to have a theoretical physicsist at least do some reading or research (not listen to one lecture on relativity and mash up the details and get the timeline wrong). 1/8th in and no plot to speak of.

I have to say other that other then the vivid descriptions of 1882 New York, I kind of hated this book. I grew to despise the main character, and in the last third of the book began to think of him as either, at best a well meaning idiot, or at worst self important anti-hero.
After reading another thread, I see the Social commentary the author is trying to get at with the architectural changes of New York, and the anti-"ends justify the means" style of government. However in the end I am left feeling dissatisfied.

Rick wrote: ""...As for the science of the plot, there is none..."

"The science was a little soft, but this was not meant to be a hard sci-fi story...."

And yet it took one of the six Laser slots. I get the a..."

Well, part of the issue is that we... well... how do I put this lightly...

Haven't read the books before we select them.

I'm happy Tom picked this, because I enjoyed it and never would have read it otherwise. Sorry if it wasn't hard-hitting SF enough for some of you, but I'm not sorry we picked it.

Veronica wrote: "Rick wrote: ""...As for the science of the plot, there is none..."

"The science was a little soft, but this was not meant to be a hard sci-fi story...."

And yet it took one of the six Laser slots..."

The problem with it wasn't that it was soft science, or the more conversational aspects. I loved Flowers for Algernon which has no real science and is a character study.

This book just took too long to get going and I was't interested in New York, the seventies, or the many different types of pie you could have.

The book seemed to be based on CP Snows " The Two Cultures " and the strange idea that scientists are not creative.

In the end... blah!

The ending, as in the plot of the story, saved the book. It was a period piece with little science fiction in it. The basic idea (from the 1970s) is that the mind controls the body and can make us travel time by convincing us that is when we actually are. The description of 1890s New York are fantastic, but distracting from the plot. Ultimately, I don't believe that the story lives up to what I was hoping it would be.

The fact is, most science fiction has shit science. Authors ignore relativity, thermodynamics and basic orbital mechanics on a regular basis, and poor biology is only let out of the basement on Christmas and Easter. And yet nobody ever says Foundation is fantasy because it has FTL, psychics, and its treatment of social sciences is handwavey nonsense.

Sean wrote: "The fact is, most science fiction has shit science. Authors ignore relativity, thermodynamics and basic orbital mechanics on a regular basis, and poor biology is only let out of the basement on Chr..."

I have a rule of thumb.

If I notice the bad science, it usually means the book is boring.

I happily cruise through most Star Trek movies. However generations had me commenting on the science in the first 30 minutes. If the story has not grabbed you then my brain has spare capacity for criticism.

Most SF science is of the nature of the Miracle Occurs variety.

My problem with this book was that it got basic science wrong. If you are going to do SF and quote every day science at least get that right.

He did all the research on the different time periods and skipped the science.

For the record, no theoretical physicist would ever say that photons have weight - sheesh (all mass is energy, not all energy is mass).

Iain wrote: "My problem with this book was that it got basic science wrong. If you are going to do SF and quote every day science at least get that right."

The Ringworld as described in Niven's original book is impossible:

After the publication of Ringworld many fans identified numerous engineering problems in the Ringworld as described in the novel. One major problem was that the Ringworld, being a rigid structure, was not actually in orbit around the star it encircled and would eventually drift, ultimately colliding with its sun and disintegrating. This led MIT students attending the 1971 Worldcon to chant, "The Ringworld is unstable! The Ringworld is unstable!"

That's basic Newtonian physics. Does that mean that Ringworld isn't real science fiction?

(And you don't even want to talk to a biologist about Niven's aliens.)

I'm only halfway through, and having problems like I've seen others post about - I really enjoy the story as I'm reading it, but I don't feel compelled to pick it up and tear through it.

I think I don't like the main character very much - he's just a little too bland and also a bit arrogant, which gets on my nerves.

Also I'm not a big fan of Victorian writers, and this reads like what I would call a Victorian novel, despite it's being written in the 70s. Almost like the author was overly influenced by the 1880s when doing his research.

Also, I've never been to New York - so even though I find the imagery very well done, and all the descriptions do fit into the plot - I'm just not in love with New York.

Anywhoo, I plan to finish it eventually, but probably not by the end of the month since holiday madness is kicking in at work (retail!) and I am mixing in some other books.

I really enjoyed this book. While I do not read every S&L "pick", I am glad that I read this one. I might not otherwise have read it, and that is the point of S&L, after all! I enjoyed that the method of time travel was not the typical one. I enjoyed the description, and the characterizations. Like all time travel stories, it isn't for everyone, but I enjoyed it. Also, as a lifelong Trekkie, I kept smiling to myself, and thinking "This guy is a natural Traveller."

I agree with Michele about the book's Victorian feel, as regards the intricate descriptive details of 1880's New York. I recently read The Victorian City: Everyday Life in Dickens' London, and found myself comparing the two cities. (The mention of spittoons made me smile, since they - and the need for them - were one of the things Dickens deplored about the America of the time.)

The book could have had a stronger plot, a better beginning and a more intriguing protagonist, but the travelogue style did hold my interest (for the most part) while Si was in 1880's New York. I do agree that his 1970's era felt far more 1950's era in its descriptions.

The time travel method felt very quantum to me, in terms of the effect of observation on subatomic phenomena. So while this version of time travel felt more like magic than science, no doubt there are those who might make the same argument about quantum mechanics. (He said, tongue-in-cheek.)

I did notice one error, which surprised me a bit since the author was so meticulous about all other details. It takes place when Si and Julia are inside the 1880's Statue of Liberty's arm. Here's the sentence:

We climbed the winding stairs fast and silently, and then at last we sat down, out on the circular railed platform at the base of the great metal flame.

As most students of Lady Liberty know, there is no stairway in the arm leading up to the torch platform, only a fifty-four rung ladder.

Agree with Colin's take on the ending in his spoiler upstream.

Glad I read it, and if one of my future novels takes place in 1880's New York, I might very well reread this one, but unlikely to do so otherwise.

Michele wrote: "I'm only halfway through, and having problems like I've seen others post about - I really enjoy the story as I'm reading it, but I don't feel compelled to pick it up and tear through it.

I think I..."

this summed up my feelings as well....my parents used to punish me by making me read Dickens novels, and this reminded me of that....

Michele wrote: "I'm only halfway through, and having problems like I've seen others post about...I'm not a big fan of Victorian writers, and this reads like what I would call a Victorian novel, despite it's being written in the 70s..."

I think you could be right, exactly because I had the opposite reaction.

I couldn't wait to get back to the book and I had one of those "Aww, it's over." reactions when it was finished, but you see I love old SF like Wells and Verne. Now you mention it, this did feel much more Victorian than 70s. Perhaps that's why I liked it so much.

I really loved this pick. I would not have picked up except for this bookclub. I'm going to read the rest of them.