Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Fourth Giants book out
From: potter@csusac.ecs.csus.edu (Carl Kolchak)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 05:57:31 GMT
Followup-To: alt.dev.null
Distribution: usa
Organization: INS, Inc.
Keywords: Analog, Digital, Trinary, neural-net
Summary: haw!  NOT quite....

Matt Austern did, yea verily, forbulate in public, thusly:

> From: matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
> Subject: Re: Fourth Giants book out
> Date: 10 Sep 92 10:59:29
> Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
> In-reply-to: swf@teradata.com's message of 10 Sep 92 00:27:06 GMT
> 
> In <1029@tdat.teradata.COM> swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen) writes:
> 
> > The Giants trilogy was complete as it stood.  No sequel was either 
> > needed or desirable.
> 
> Actually, _Inherit the Stars_ was also complete as it stood, and _The

Bite your tongue, mon!   If you're a physics major, how come you haven't
noticed the rather capricious and offhanded disregard for the reality
we all know and love, in even that first book?  
"Ye canna change th' laws of physics!"

> Gentle Giants of Ganymede_ almost so.  Each of the two later books in
> the "trilogy" spent the first chapter or so creating puzzles where
> there had been none before, and then spent the rest of the book
> solving them.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.  The first book had plot, logic, and 
scientific holes you could drive double-width semi's through,
and the next two were simply extensions of the plot structure of
the first, new material generated to support the presentation of the 
various explanations.   Bear in mind that Hogan had NOT envisioned
sequels when he wrote the first one; he just found that they became
necessary as he went along!

Hogan's gut-level feel for physics and technology is topnotch; his 
background among computer people is excellent, and his own education,
specialized and focussed as it was, was sufficient to provide him with
the basic research technique to go out and learn whatever he needed
...or was just interested in.... to use in the next book.   He does
a LOT of studying and reading, and is capable of producing some of
the most entertaining and cogent treatments of technical subjects 
that we've seen in a long time.  (The opening of "CODE OF THE 
LIFE-MAKER" is the best treatment of machine evolution I've ever
seen in an SF story, and this specifically includes Campbell's 
and Anderson's stories in the area.   Incidentally, I once asked
Hogan if he'd ever seen Anderson's "EPILOG," and he said he wasn't
aware that Anderson had ever used the idea.  < No sweat.  Hogan
started from the same kernel idea, and told an entirely different
story with it! > )
 
But during the creation of his first few books, he hadn't yet 
consciously realized the sheer *breadth* of general information 
necessary to generate a solid SF milieu.   His technical/electronic
stuff is great, and his particle and quantum physics is plenty good
enough for the job; but he'd never worked with the astronomical
math for orbital captures, insolation and heat transfer effects in
atmospheres, or even paid much attention to simple biochemistry
and evolution.   Far too much of the "science" in these three 
books is simple hand-waving to generate some factoid to support
the plot, or to *move* the plot.... it's not part of a coherent 
whole.  (Although if you read it superficially, it makes passable
sense.)
I thoroughly enjoyed all three of these books, even while muttering
"WAIT a minute, here.... evolution selects *against* unnecessary
 complexity......."   and things like that.... 
 
Hogan was a refreshing breath of originality and enjoyment in a 
field subsumed under ratty little elves, execrably conceived and
written "magic worlds," and the whole fantasy schtick that requires
so little of the writer (or of the reader.)
Hogan is a good engineer, with the right background and feel for 
*real*  SF, and it's been a long time since we had a man of his
predilections and demeanour appearing on our book racks;  I'm 
glad he's here. 

> I haven't read the fourth book yet (and I'm not sure that I will), 
> but it is entirely conceivable to me that if someone started 
> reading Hogan right now, without any knowledge of the history 
> of publication, they might see the fourth book as no more unnatural
> than the second or third.

*Shrug*   The second and third books were necessary to wind up the holes
he'd left; and he pulled it off nicely, with a lovely E.E. Smithian 
climax that I wouldn't have expected a contemporary writer to attempt.
(Of course, he may not have read E.E. Smith, either;  a great deal of
 Hogan's work seems to be independent re-invention, but tends to be 
 used much differently in his work!)   I was particularly tickled by 
Hogan's description of an interstellar battle between two computer
networks, using *information* as ammunition.)
 
I was delighted with "CODE OF THE LIFEMAKER," and consider it his best
book to date; and I'm just waiting for someone to have an attack of 
intelligence and put "THE PROTEUS OPERATION" into movie production, 
because it was a damn good job.  (If you haven't read it, get hold
of a copy and take a look.  Hogan apparently had a *lot* of fun 
doing the historical research for that one, and went to a lot of 
trouble to get all the details right.  In terms of research and 
execution, quite professional.   Since Hogan was born in the U.K. in
'42, he may have actual memories of part of the WWII era, which would
explain some of the effectiveness of his evocation of those times.)

I encourage any readers of this topic who haven't seen much Hogan
to get hold of and read, "CODE OF THE LIFEMAKER,"  "THE TWO FACES 
OF TOMORROW,"  "THE PROTEUS OPERATION," and a story/essay 
collection, "MINDS, MACHINES, AND EVOLUTION," which contains 
some of his very best (and some of his least best!) writing.
The information, humor, and cogency in the essays would make 
it a bargain at twice the price.


-- 
=======================================================================
||  "C" gains much of its vaunted efficiency by employing a very     ||
||  powerful pre-processor, normally referred to as a "programmer."  ||
||  rem: "Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn."       ||
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.bio,soc.culture.british