I debated whether to write a review of Revelation Space on its own or wait until I finished the Revelation Space trilogy and write a single review of the whole story. This is a debate that goes on in my head any time I read a multi-book series and I haven't established a blanket policy one way or the other. For me, it depends.Take, for example, Dan Simmons' Ilium and Olympos. They are really one book that was split arbitrarily because it was too long to publish in a single volume. Think LotR or Connie Willis' Blackout/All Clear series. In the case of Ilium and Olympos I chose to write one review of both books since the storylines couldn't be separated; that is, neither book stood on its own as a complete story. My review, which I placed under Olympos on GR, discusses the entire story and differentiates between the two books where appropriate. (In that case, mainly, the differentiation involved quality. Even though they encompass a single story arc, Ilium was simply the better book.)On the other hand, consider Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax series. It's a trilogy comprising Hominids, Humans, and Hybrids. While they also encompass an overall story arc, the first and third books in that series also make decent stand-alone stories, so I wrote separate reviews for Hominids and Hybrids.The Revelation Space series, in my mind, is more like the latter example, where the books have an overarching theme and storyline but still make good stand-alone stories. (The comparison only goes so far, though; in particular Revelation Space is better writing.) As I write this review, I have finished the first two books in the series: Revelation Space and Redemption Arc, and I'm working on the third. Revelation Space in particular deserves its own review because, not only does it make a good stand-alone book, it also expertly sets up the framework for a universe that Alastair Reynolds will use for five novels and two short-story collections (indeed I hope that's just the start).Revelation Space is not perfect by any means. There is the occasional bit of overly dramatized cheese and some characters are oh-come-on too obvious. But I don't want to focus on the negatives. The positives far outweigh the few things I don't like.For starters, Revelation Space sets up an entirely believable future universe within the bounds of physics and, just as important, within the bounds of human nature. There's no warp drives or transporters, just like there's no loss of all high technology, and there's no utopian or dystopian extremes in society. The technology of the future human civilization falls within imaginable limits—maybe stretches the limits a little, but what good sci-fi doesn’t? The important thing is that it still has limits and things like relativistic effects and time dilation play a role. The technological limits that Reynolds places upon his universe also have practical effects on the human societies he built within its framework. Sub-light travel (near-light speed, but still not FTL) has limited the growth of human civilization to a reasonable degree, say a few dozen light years in any direction, and the limits of sub-light space travel result in human societies growing diverse through their isolation. The ships which travel the space lanes between worlds develop a society and culture of their own, as their lives are so much different from those who live on or around planets. Even within systems, there are societal differences between the planet-side cities and those in orbit. In essence, human civilization and society are not one, big, happy "Federation." Another thing Reynolds does well, and along similar lines to the things mentioned above, is his projection of contemporary human society on a future, higher-tech, space-faring framework. Call it the holographic principle at work—the projection of a planet-bound society into the depth and breadth of space—and it's a projection I can believe. Like any good sci-fi work Reynolds' writing isn't merely predictive, but descriptive. In Revelation Space you'll find all the familiar human attitudes and motivations, which makes the characters much more relatable than they would have been had his work pushed the utopian or dystopian extremes. (Think of Star Trek and The Road, both of which have relate-ability issues because people are too good or too bad, respectively).Speaking of characters, they are, for the most part, pretty three-dimensional. There is the depth and realism to the major characters that is required for a epic space opera to really take hold in the reader's mind. I don't know about you, but epic-scale adventure and big boobs and big booms is not enough for me; that stuff is great and all, but only if I can believe what's happening. The major characters in Revelation Space each have their own life histories that brought them to this point, and I really felt as though Reynolds drew up their life histories in advance, thinking about how each person's history affected his or her personality and attitudes. The characters' histories aren't revealed to you all at once, but rather layer-by-later. You learn more about them as you get to know them, as you would any friend or enemy. I'm not saying there are no cardboard-thin characters in Revelation Space; there are, but the big ones are sufficiently deep for me.Let's stay on the character theme and talk about the women: Pascal Sylveste, Ilia Volyova, and Ana Khouri. For a long time, sci-fi lacked female characters who were both strong and believable. Too many male sci-fi writers created fantasy women with big tits and big guns … Laura Croft in space … women who were "strong" insofar as they threw a good punch and played dominatrix in the bedroom. Reynolds doesn't fall into that trap. He creates women that I can believe, and believe in; women who are real leaders and exhibit real strength of character and will. It's not that he's a pioneer in that area, but I'm glad to see another writer continue the trend of producing quality, equal-opportunity hard sci-fi.The quality of the underlying storytelling I thought was excellent and on par with what I've come to expect of Alastair Reynolds. My first experience with Reynolds was House of Suns, which was all the rage a couple years back. That book was alright—pretty good but not great. Then I tried Terminal World, which was not great at all and lost my interest less than a hundred pages in. And then I read The Prefect, which really impressed me, making me think Terminal World was probably an aberration. I didn't know it at the time, but it turns out The Prefect also is set in the Revelation Space universe. Fortunately The Prefect is a completely self-contained story (not part of the Revelation Space trilogy), set in only one corner of Reynolds' fictional future universe, so I had no trouble understanding it. I wanted to mention The Prefect because of something I wrote in my review of that book, to wit:"… The Prefect … has its subtleties and complexities [and] has some unique angles on classic sci-fi themes that I enjoyed immensely. But The Prefect is anything but frustrating to follow; it weaves many threads and then brings those threads together at the end, tying them up in a neat and satisfying conclusion that leaves no questions unanswered. This is an impressively well executed book, gratifying from beginning to end. And it was worth my time, which, ultimately, is one of the best compliments I can pay."That is exactly how I feel about the storytelling in Revelation Space and I don't think I could say it any better now. It's just a darn good, solid, well executed work of hard sci-fi. The "Big Idea" itself isn't original (the idea of a powerful alien intelligence trying to wipe out other space-faring civilizations) but Reynolds' specific take on it is, and he gives us some very human characters and storylines to drive the underlying big plot forward.Finally, I really appreciate that Revelation Space ends in a satisfying and self-contained way. Obviously the ending leaves open the possibility—even need—for a sequel, as I assume it was always his intention to write a trilogy. But one can still read Revelation Space by itself and feel satisfied. Of course, if you enjoyed it as much as I did, you'll want to pick up the sequel and get started straight away.
i suppose you could call Alastair Reynolds the Bad Twin of Peter Hamilton. both write space operas that come complete with mind-boggling concepts, galaxy-spanning adventures, bizarre aliens, space politics, love stories, and eons-old mysteries. but Hamilton writes about a future that despite having its ups, downs, and various inequities, is mainly Bright & Shiny, full of possibility. on the other hand, Reynolds' interests arise from the basic idea that the universe is a cold, scary place, full of dead things and barely-understood terrors. Hamilton's characters run the gamut of loveable to outright villainous; Reynolds prefers to write mainly about self-absorbed killers and assholes. one writes about factions of humanity trying to come together to fight off threats; the other depicts humans turning on each other and how things fall apart. so i guess it depends on your perspective: do you want your space opera glass to be half-full or half-empty?overall, i think this is a pretty good first novel. it is certainly an elephantine one; fortunately, the size didn't seem unecessary and i was aborbed by the ideas and narrative from beginning to end. Reynolds' background as a scientist is evident in spades, and i'm happy to report that my right-brained self didn't suffer at all when reading this - concepts were explained carefully and clearly, in a way that didn't make me feel particularly stupid and never felt didactic or condescending. characterization is certainly striking - if you are looking for characters that are charming or sympathetic or likeable, look away! you will not find that here. instead prepare to read about insanely arrogant scientists, vicious politicians, cold-blooded killers, and even more cold-blooded spaceship crews. it can get a bit oppresive at times.there is an interesting theme that slowly rises up through the narrative: the obsessive-compulsive nature of humanity. this is depicted within a military mind-set that views all outsiders as potential threats and a scientific mind-set that views exploring even the most awful and potentially threatening of things as the only option. characters in this novel don't just live with their obsessions, they are defined by them. characters don't make decisions based on anything resembling empathy or humanism - they are compelled to continually repeat and expand upon their compulsions, no matter what the cost. it is certainly a dark perspective on the nature of mankind.but that darkness, that oppressiveness, is really at the heart of this novel's appeal. the back cover quaintly describes this novel as "CyberGoth", which of course is a pretty stupid moniker... but it also makes some sense. imagine a gigantic spaceship crewed by five misanthropes, haunted by voices from outside of time, full of enslaved rats and unimaginably deadly weapons, captained by an unconscious individual whose plague symptoms include the transformation of all materials around him into a vaguely disgusting, tendril-y mess. imagine two planets: one whose decadent citizens while away the time playing assassination games and another whose berserk citizens seem to be engaging in relentlessly bloody revolution every couple years. imagine a culture where marriage includes a "wedding gun" that shoots dna of your spouse directly into your forehead. imagine a horrific version of the end of 2001: A Space Odyssey, one where the unknowable enigma wants to kill you and all of your stupid little species. imagine Lovecraft in Space. there, now put that all together and you've imagined Revelation Space.
Do You like book Revelation Space (2002)?
4.5 stars. I really struggled with whether to give this a 4 or 5 star rating. On the 5 star side (or even the 6 star side as I give those books I think are truly special) the ideas, concepts, technology, world-building (or better stated, galactic civilization building) and descriptions of the various factions of humanity are amazingly original and incredibly entertaining. Put simply, there are a lot of "WOW" moments where I said "this guy is brilliant." Also on the level of a 5 star novel is the plot itself, which is complex, slowly unfolding and very, very good. The only aspect of the book that kept it me from giving it a 5 star or higher rating was the characterization. The characters were a little hard to relate to in any meaningful way. Their interaction with one another and their underlying motivations were difficult to feel and so the reader (i.e. me) was not as emotionally invested in the plot, and thus not as interested in the characters' eventual fate, as I would have liked to have been. Still, overall, this was a superb 21st century space opera and the authors ability to wow readers with original concepts and amazing technology is as good as it gets. Definitely worth a read. Recommended!!!Nominee: Arthur C. Clarke Award for Best NovelNominee: Locus Award for Best Science Fiction NovelNominee: Locus Award for Best First Novel
—Stephen
Three surefire steps to ruin a good story: 1. Insert cardboard cutout characters that have the same personality over analyzing everything they can. 2. Include massive 20 minute info dumps every 20 minutes. 3. Have your book narrated by Ben Stein the boring teacher in Ferris Bueller's Day Off and The Wonder Years. This is literally how this book went:(very conservative mildly interested voice) "By George, Sam, I think someone just vaporized Joe, with a trans-numatic ray gun. Why isn't that strange, I never much liked him anyway, always taking too long in the bathroom, and leaving the toilette seat up."20 minute info dump about the technology behind the gun. (very conservative mildly interested voice) "Sally wasn't Joe your husband of 20 years? And didn't he discover the Polaris phenomenon, which allowed man to transmigrate his conscience awareness to the ocean of abysmal writing?" 20 minute info dump containing quasi-scientific speculation on transmigration of one's awareness to the ocean, which is far too vast and complex for human understanding (according to the author).(very conservative mildly interested voice) "Why yes, I did love him, he just insisted on having his own ideas about things, and was so cardboard that we won't even notice he's not around anymore, because we all act just like him. Well now that we don't have to worry about him, we can get back to analyzing why airlocks in the spaceship work how they do, all while being shot at by the same person that killed my husband." Good job, when it comes to amazing ideas, terribly executed, this book ranks right up there with Brent Weeks' Night Angel.
—Andrew Obrigewitsch
There is no getting away from Alastair Reynolds. In the sf book discussion forums I participate in (Reddit) his name is always cropping up. I keep putting him off as I have too many books on my list but the relentless mentions he gets is like he is tapping on my shoulder saying "When are you gonna read my stuff?"Like a lot of space opera this one is epic in scale, races and planets live and die at the drop of a hat. What makes Revelation Space special is the author's vast imagination, the scientific details and story telling skills. What let him down a little bit is the somewhat flat characters. Initially I felt like the characters are pancake shaped things pushing the story towards its conclusion. A few of them do develop into fairly interesting people later on, but the female protagonists tend to be of the tough as nails Ellen Riply type. Generally characters development is not a strong point of this book.More successful is the depiction of AI and aliens. I love the fascinating speculation on the nature of consciousness, and what constitute sentience. The concept of Alpha, Beta, Gamma classes of AI is ingenious. In fact the AI characters tend to be more interesting than the human ones for me. The aliens make more of a cameo appearance but their strange history and mystery surrounding them (kind of Cthulhu-esque) is very interesting. The aliens are satisfyingly alien, so damn alien that people need to have their brains modified just to communicate meaningfully with them, and I also love it when zones of reality, space and time get all bendy and weird.The prose style is functional and readable if a little prosaic, for a story of this scope there is surprisingly few characters points of view, which makes the complex story easier to follow. Initially I was concerned about the absence of humor, moments of levity is always good to balance the mood of the novel, fortunately Mr. Reynolds sneaked some humorous moments in later, especially with some snarky AI comments.This is a worthwhile read and I am interested to read more of Alastair Reynolds in the near future (within this epoch).____________________________________ Update: In August 2013 I read Redemption Ark the direct sequel to Revelation Space. It is massively better than Revelation Space, and it makes trudging through the dull bits of Revelation Space entirely worthwhile. Also worth mentioning is Chasm City which is set in the Revelation Space universe but is a standalone novel. Again, it is a tremendous read and highly recommended.The best Alastair Reynolds novel is (IMO) the standalone House of Suns.
—Apatt
