Has Neal Stephenson become too accessible?

http://www.salon.com/books/science_fiction_and_fantasy/index.html?story=/books/2011/09/18/stephenson_reamde

by _kate_ • 15 years ago

32 46 15 years ago

wccrawford2• 15 years ago

And thus a new class of hipster was born.

Don't get mad that your favorite author produced a work that is 'more accessible' or that it isn't what you wanted. Blindly buying because of brand name has always been a bad idea.

tptacek• 15 years ago

I don't think hipsters spend much time obsessing about the accessibility of genre fiction authors. People call Stephenson "Pynchonian", but Pynchon wrote a whole bunch of books --- is still writing them, in fact --- and just 2-3 of those is a lifetime supply for any hipster.

anduril66• 15 years ago

Yes; being the focus of a salon.com article is an indicator.

CWuestefeld3• 15 years ago

Speaking of being a salon.com article... what the heck did they do to the behavior of the web site? It refused to let me read the whole article. Every time I clicked (FF6) the "Continue reading" link, it expanded the text but then immediately re-loaded the whole page. I had to quickly click the "Stop" button before it could reload. This is an unfriendly feature.

mnutt• 15 years ago

It's probably a javascript error. They probably have javascript that hides the full article, but then adds a "Continue reading" link and attaches a click handler to it. If the click handler throws an error and fails to stop event propagation, it actually follows the link and reloads the page.

RickHull• 15 years ago

Same. And the "print" link seems designed to defeat a full page load as well. I got around it by middle-clicking the print link to open in a new tab.

_delirium• 15 years ago

The subtitle is a better way of framing it than the title, I think. Being accessible, all else being equal, isn't really inherently bad. For example, you can increase the accessibility of a poorly written physics textbook by just making the prose better.

The more interesting question they seem to be getting at is whether he's sacrificed something that was interesting about his writing out of a desire to increase accessibility. You could even just leave accessibility out of it and ask: are Neal Stephenson's most recent novels as interesting as his older ones, and if not, why not? I do think there's something to the hypothesis that he used to build these intricate, complex worlds with a lot of depth to them, and is doing so less in his more recent novels.

edit: Come to think of it, doing it accessibly sort of is his thing to begin with. I've heard Snow Crash described as a more-accessible reimagining/retelling of Gibson/Sterling style cyberpunk, which isn't too far off.

sid02• 15 years ago

Out of all his books I've read (Snow Crash, Diamond Age, Cryptonomicon), the world in Anathem is by far his most complex.

bergie2• 15 years ago

All of these were great, but I think I enjoyed the Baroque Cycle the most. Comes probably from the long-time passion of reading (and re-enacting) history...

betageek• 15 years ago

what a hipster - "Yeah, he's ok but I prefer his early stuff"

Reamde seems like a trip back to the style of the Stephen Bury books he wrote with his uncle, The Cobweb & Interface, both enjoyable reads.

henry5013• 15 years ago

I'm assuming there are many NS fans on HN, so I'll ask this here.

The only NS book I've read is Anathem, and while I enjoyed the story his writing style seemed too self-indulgent for me to really get into. Renaming/redescribing major mathematical and philosophical theories in a parallel dimension? Look how smart NS is. Quantum monk space ninjas? Oh man that's so cool can they be pirates too?

That being said, he's been lauded so consistently that I'd like to read more of his work and figure out what I'm missing. What would HN'ers recommend?

sid02• 15 years ago

Don't worry, Anathem's the only book where he renames things like that, and that's mainly because his construction necessitates it. He is rather self-indulgent though. Snow Crash or Cryptonomicon are good starts, and if you like them you should then upgrade to Diamond Age.

corvuscorax• 15 years ago

Well, I found the renaming of Linux to Finux pretty annoying, I must admit. Really liked the book otherwise, but that was grating.

mquander2• 15 years ago

If you're turned off by that, then you're probably not going to like his other books. Snow Crash, in particular, is even further along the spectrum of self-indulgence and geek wish-fulfillment (although I personally like it for what it is.) I'd recommend you go read a subtler author.

But if you want to give Stephenson a second shot, I suggest Diamond Age.

wisty• 15 years ago

Diamond Age is also my favorite. I think Snow Crash is a satire, given that the hero / protagonist (named Hiro Protagonist) is a programmer, extreme pizza delivery boy, and the best swordsman in the world. I read it once. It was kind of fun.

I've read The Diamond Age about 30 times. The world is very deep, and the characters are mostly interesting (if a little hammy - NS's characters are all just a little one dimensional).

elliottcarlson2• 15 years ago

The thing about Stephenson is that he takes a lot of time to do proper research in to his topics, and with his parents both being in academia (fathers side is electrical engineering with physics, and mothers side is biochemistry) he has excellent knowledge sources as well as learned how to do proper research (this is what he explained at a book signing for the Boroque Cycle's first book), and it shows in all his work.

The problem, as I see it with Stephenson, is that he goes in to such detail that he always needs to build up the world in such a depth that it can make the opening to his books long winded. Any time I have recommended a Stephenson book (and I've read them all, and recommend them all) I warn people to get past page 100, because that's when you will get sucked in to the story. His writing style can be a little unsettling until you get used to it (IMHO), but once you are in there you won't want to put the book down.

As for recommendations - Cryptonomicon, Snowcrash, Diamond Age are all great - the later two are far easier reading but still show the great depths of knowledge and research put in to the books. And once done with those - read the rest.

onosendai• 15 years ago

That's Stephenson in a nutshell: long winded openings and abrupt endings. I haven't read any of his stuff since Cryptonomicon (have them all lined up though) but the single glaring flaw I always found in his books was how rushed the endings were. I don't need all the loose ends neatly tied up, but always got the feeling he was using some sort of lossy compression scheme for the last few pages.

henry5013• 15 years ago

Thank you. I think I'll try Diamond Age -> Cryptonomicon -> Snowcrash based on the recommendations here.

ryandvm• 15 years ago

Agreed. I recall being annoyed at having to read 3 pages of some guy eating Captain Crunch in Cryptonomicron. You could tell Stephenson was particularly enamored with his own writing style - to the point that reading some of his passages is like watching him jerk off.

davidw2• 15 years ago

Cryptonomicon is a bit more down to earth. I liked Anathem, but there are certainly long bits of 'blah blah' that Cryptonimicon lacks, and seems no worse for it.

arethuza2• 15 years ago

What were the "blah blah" bits for you?

anigbrowl2• 15 years ago

The Diamond Age is by far his best work. I think you'd prefer Greg Egan.

henry5013• 15 years ago

Any in particular? I see The Clockwork Rocket for $3.99 and Zendegi for $0.01 on Kindle.

horser4dish• 15 years ago

I actually enjoyed that part of Anathem. I was in highschool when I read it, so a good portion of that book was actually teaching me concepts. His use of alternate universes was pretty fascinating, and having science to back it up (real or otherwise) just made it that much better.

(Side note: I don't know the names of a good amount of those things in the real world. I could explain the HTW theories, Lorites, and whatnot to an average person, but the real terminology escapes me.)

chernevik• 15 years ago

The renamings and new vocabulary are clues to the nature and depth of the relationships among the book's various groups. Another crucial clue is the complete familiarity of one character's name. I can't say more without spoiling.

Really great fiction leverages the reader's powers of construction and imagination. Stephenson gives indicators of the world he's describing and leaves the reader to construct it while he gets on with other matters. If nothing else it's a better use of bandwidth. Ayn Rand lays it all out, does anyone seriously enjoy reading that? The reader's participation in construction gives them an ultimately better grasp of his idea, and a better foundation to think through the implications. Better yet, it opens the possibility of imagining worlds consistent with the plot but different from the author's imagination.

The downside is those readers who haven't time to figure it out, or miss the clues. Or maybe miss some of the background reading, which provides templates for a lot of what Stephenson's getting at. There is a lot of philosophy embedded in the book, if you aren't acquainted with it you're moving without some crucial maps.

So no, the style isn't "self-indulgent". It's a tool for communicating and working with some really complicated ideas. I'm sorry you didn't like the book, but you could just say you don't get it without assuming the author is just showing off?

ZacharyPitts• 15 years ago

I've read most of Reamde already (have an early access copy from a bookstore book buyer friend). I'm nearly done (800 out of 980 pages). It simply is not a good of a book as the Baroque Cycle volumes or Cryptinomicon. I actually did not like Anathem all that much, as it felt too contrived.

That said, Reamde is a fun read. I suppose it could be put into the book category of Thriller as the article suggests. I'd give it a 3/5 stars, as in, I liked it, but won't bother reading it again. Which is how I feel about most decent thrillers. But then again, it appears that it will have an actual climactic ending to the story/book, which Stephenson has failed to do many times as his other books just peter out without ending properly (Snow Crash, Cryptinomicon, etc).

It is more accessible. It is a thriller, and could be easily sold as airport pulp. There's a few descriptions of unix commands that various hackers are taking that would be skipped in a normal thriller, which does make it a Stephenson book. But, I am glad that Stephenson is experimenting with writing styles. Why would I want to read the same book over and over, just with different characters (which is all too common for writers)?

CWuestefeld3• 15 years ago

I already thought that Anathem was way more accessible than previous works. I recall reading in Cryptonomicon two pages of some strange event before realizing he was showing us a different view of the Hindenburg disaster. I can't think of any example in Anathem where it wasn't immediately clear to me what he was trying to show.

On the other hand, if Stephenson has a fault as a writer, it's the way he writes books' endings. The ends of Snow Crash or Diamond Age were just a mess. He skirted that in Cryptonomicon by just not really having an ending. I confess to not having been able to make it to the end of The Baroque Cycle, so I can't say. But then Anathem had a real, if rather out-of-left-field, ending.

So I think that while he may be trending toward greater accessibility, he's also trending to writing better endings.

joeyh2• 15 years ago

Anathem's first few chapters require the reader to learn about 100 made-up words via immersion. Throughout the book major points hinge on various scientific and philosophic theories, which are given different names (like Hylaean Theoric World) than they are on earth. So no, not really that accessible.

This review for REAMDE is the first Stephenson review I've seen that didn't pan the climax, which might say something. BTW, did you notice that REAMDE is designed to make unix people's eyes cross?

CWuestefeld3• 15 years ago

Anathem's first few chapters require the reader to learn about 100 made-up words via immersion.

True enough, but that's quite common in science fiction.

scientific and philosophic theories, which are given different names (like Hylaean Theoric World)

That's also true. But if you're already familiar with the concept, then the nomenclature shouldn't bother you too much (it didn't me). If you're not already familiar with it, then you won't know it's any different (until you're at a dinner party trying to talk philosophy with someone, and are met with blank stares).

ChrisBanner• 15 years ago

>> "Reamde" is disposable Stephenson. I'll take disposable Stephenson over no Stephenson at all.

TYPE_FASTER• 15 years ago

"Snow Crash" and "Cryptonomicon" seemed pretty accessible to me, much more so than "The Baroque Cycle." I think it's marketing aimed at getting readers who were turned off by TBC to pick up the new book.

arethuza2• 15 years ago

I've found The Baroque Cycle to be an awful lot easier to get into through the Audible audiobook version - they are unabridged so it's not that!

chris11• 15 years ago

I'll try reading it then. I got the audio books, but only made it partly through the first one.

atourgates• 15 years ago

You know, as I read through the comments on this story, I'm struck that the concept of accessibility is quite personal.

I'm pretty sure I've seen every single one of Stephenson's books been called his "most accessible" somewhere in this thread.

In my experience, "The Baroque Cycle" was Stephenson's most accessible, while "Anathem" and "Cryptonomicon" were the hardest to get my mind around. However, I don't think this has as much to do with Stephenson's writing, as it does with the fact that I was an English Lit major, and can barely wrap my brain around math.

E.g. - a complex web of semi-historical figures? No problem! Plot-lines that revolve around mathematical concepts? Oh god, my brain just exploded.

Apocryphon• 15 years ago

Going by the summary of the plot, it seems like Gibson and Sterling, Stephenson is also dipping into War on Terror as a setting.

Has Neal Stephenson become too accessible?

Related Stories