The System of the World 140
The System of the World | |
author | Neal Stephenson |
pages | 892 |
publisher | William Morrow |
rating | 7, 5 for the trilogy overall |
reviewer | Shawn Stewart |
ISBN | 0060523875 |
summary | The Baroque Cycle crosses the finish line, but like all of Stephenson's books, finishes ugly. |
The third book in Neal Stephenson's epic Baroque Cycle shares its name with the third volume in Isaac Newton's Principia Mathematica; this is no coincidence, as a large part of this book deals with Newton himself. The vast majority of this volume follows Daniel Waterhouse, aging Fellow of the Royal Society, occasional foil and possibly the only friend of Newton, as he attempts to complete the charge assigned to him by Princess Caroline, his future monarch. Of course, Waterhouse doesn't really believe in the monarchy, but he has an agenda of his own, and can see the wisdom in trying to reconcile Newton and Leibniz.
The System of the World is the most chronologically compact of the trilogy. Quicksilver took place over a sixty-year time period and The Confusion over a decade and a half. Most of the action in this book takes place in the middle of 1714, as the ailing Queen Anne nears death, and the question of who should be the next monarch brings England near to another civil war. On one side of the debate are the Whigs, supporters of the Hanoverian succession, free trade, and industry. On the other side are the Tories, who would undo the effects of the Glorious Revolution and bring back the Catholic James III from exile in France -- supporters of landed aristocracy, unlimited monarchy, and slavery.
The Tories seem to be winning, due in no small part to the machinations of Louis XIV, whose support has allowed "Half-Cocked" Jack Shaftoe to build himself into the most powerful counterfeiter and criminal mastermind in London. Shaftoe has matured, though, and gained a powerful gravitas. Waterhouse also is not the indecisive young man or even the uncertain old man of Quicksilver; he has accepted his old age and his mortality and for once in his life shapes events rather than being borne along by them.
There is real pathos in Waterhouse's character. The choices that he has made will lead England toward steam and industrialization, and in two powerful scenes he has the chance to see the downside of the future he has made. At one point he visits a large-scale industrial operation that has left the earth around it poisoned and wasted, finding nothing to compare the scene to except Hell. At the other he witnesses workers toiling around a machine that might explode at any point, and wonders how many other dangers will be created by inventors simply trying to get things done a little faster. Still, he perseveres; for as near as the Baroque Cycle has one point, it is to explore how the nation-state, modern banking, and modern scientific method arose from the chaos of the 17th century.
In Stephenson's world, this is accomplished by plots, dueling, daring escapes, bribery, and the occasional disruption of orchestral concerts. As always, when writing a thrilling action scene, he is second to none. When this book is moving, it moves really well.
Stephenson's writing style is essentially the same as in the first two novels, although he does seem to be engaging in more deliberate anachronisms here (I counted two Monty Python references, and what I'm fairly certain is a scripting language joke). This makes his constant use of Inappropriate Capitalization and Barock Spelling somewhat more tedious to me, but I phant'sy any reader that has gotten this far will probably be able to overlook it. He still has the ability to make the reader smile once per page, and his meticulous attention to detail shows. It's clear that Stephenson is fascinated by the period, and indicative of a good writer that he actually got me to care about it as well -- his books motivated me to read some of his references, and others besides. There are also some classic hilarious scenes, chief among them a duel fought with naval artillery.
The typical flaws of a Stephenson novel are also present, unfortunately. A rather large number of characters are built up for dozens of pages and are then abruptly killed, never to be mentioned again -- and a fair number of established characters meet the same fate. This volume also contains the worst sex scene Stephenson has ever written, which is saying something. And, as is typical of Stephenson, the book goes until the end, and then just stops, after another Deus Ex Aurum ending. This time he's included a few short codas as a postscript, but be warned now: there are many unanswered questions left at the end.
In fact, the ending of the book made me somewhat angry. Fully explaining why would spoil everything, so I will tread lightly. Let me instead go back to Isaac Newton. Newton is a tragic figure because he was a bridge between two eras; he possessed one of the finest rational minds the world has ever known, and yet he spent the majority of his long life with alchemical and mystical researches. Stephenson is too lenient on Newton with regards to his paranoia and murderous rage, but curiously lessens him by suggesting that Newton simply failed to accomplish some of the things he set out to do.
I have been an avid reader of each Neal Stephenson book, and I will probably read the next book he writes. Still, I hope that his editor cracks down on him in his next endeavor, and that he doesn't allow his fondness for some characters to override the point he's trying to make.
You can purchase The System of the World from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Huh? (Score:5, Funny)
Welcome to Slashdot, may I take your order?
Holy Crap! (Score:1)
That said, according to this review it looks like it will be a disappointment. Ouch. That disappoints me...I'll read it anyway though.
Re:Holy Crap! (Score:2)
Re:Holy Crap! (Score:2)
Re:Holy Crap! (Score:1)
Re:Holy Crap! (Score:2)
Re:Holy Crap! (Score:5, Informative)
it comes out tomorrow (sept 21)
I'm still waiting (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I'm still waiting (Score:5, Funny)
HTH HAND
You joke... (Score:1, Troll)
Fondness for characters (Score:5, Funny)
>
> I have been an avid reader of each Neal Stephenson book, and I will probably read the next book he writes. Still, I hope that his editor cracks down on him in his next endeavor, and that he doesn't allow his fondness for some characters to override the point he's trying to make.
Ah, don't worry. Half the fun of a Neal Stephenson novel is knowing that all the characters he abruptly kills off get to come back to life in the next series.
Re:Fondness for characters (Score:2)
I like the mounting tension as you wonder who'll get the diarrhea in this book.
Bonus points if the same guy gets covered in shit.
FP (Score:5, Funny)
So, he means he's got first post!
Sidetracked... (Score:2, Interesting)
I liked Zodiac, I found Snow Crash interesting and funny, Interface was workmanlike but engaging, and The Diamond Age is one of the books I have re-read most often.
But I just didn't "get" Cryptonomicon. Yes, lots of running around, intrigue and so on. But in the end I didn;t find it satisfying. I'm afraid that, for the Baroque trilogy, I haven't even made it past the cover blurb.
I'm sure many others will disagree (and I apologize to
Re:Sidetracked... (Score:2)
Re:Sidetracked... (Score:2)
Similar experience here. After reading about 600 pages I just couldn't read any more. The cryptography and the math were interesting but the characters were just so cold. Lots of gory, senseless death, which I don't seem to enjoy as much as most, but without much examination of how these things would/should affect the characters. Most of the characters had the emotional dep
Re:Sidetracked... (Score:2)
Snowcrash was good, but it read more like a Hollywood Action movie. Ditto for Diamond Age, lots of cool tech stuff, some nice action and the like.
But Cryptonomicon - it was his first piece of work that was deep - so many different things, and they all come together in the end. His analogies to various things (deities, science, tech) and his narrative that aptly fit in with the times they were set in, was simply beautiful.
And
Re:Sidetracked... (Score:2)
Indeed! (Score:1)
It got me really interested in my economics classes...
Re:Sidetracked... (Score:2)
I'm not a hacker, or a guy. His previous books nevertheless had characters that I could relate to and find interesting. In Cryptonomicon, when the hero saves the day and receives the dreadful wounds of carpel tunn
Stephenson went downhill... (Score:1, Interesting)
The first book by him that I read was Snow Crash. Pretty good book with lots of cool ideas. I really liked the idea of burbclaves but I thought that the rollerskates and skateboards were kind of stupid.
Then I checked out The Diamond Age. I loved it. The idea of the primer was really cool as was the world that he described. I must have read that book a dozen times at least and it is easily one of my top twenty favorite SF novels.
In the Beginning was the Command Line was a cool little book.
Unfortunately
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course what you mean, is that he started writting about stuff that you dont care about. That is to say that his books do not nessesarily suck, just that you are not interested in them. This is a very different kind of statement.
I don't particularely like mystery novels (lets say). that doesn't mean that the whole genre of mystery sucks -- just that it doesn't appeal to me, personally. In fact, becuase i don't like the genre of mystery, i am even less qualified to make statements concerning the quality of any particulare mystery novel. I just don't have the knowlege of the subject, the exprience, nor love of the genre to make statements about them that would matter to those who would be interested in the book.
He also really really needs an editor. His latest books could be, no should be, trimmed down to at least half their current size.
Again, this is a personall prefference. You are saying that you do not like reading books that are that long-winded. Stephenson has just changed his writting style (really apparent starting with cryptonomicon). He is much more wordy now than he was earlier in his life. Is this inherintly a bad thing? Of course not. He is changing and maturing as a writter. As such, his style and genre is changing with him.
I don't really mean to pick on you here, it is just that all to often, i see people making absolute statements (ei. that movie sucks) when what they really mean to express is an opinion (ie. I didn't like that movie). It is just somewhat annoying. Espcially, when poeple don't seem to realize that they are just expressing an opinion.
How do i konw that what you stated was just an opinion? Well, for one I liked the book. And i know many people that like his barouque cycle so far. I also like the fact that Stephenson is changing. Personally, I don't really like reading the same type of thing all the time. that is one reason why i can't read anymore asimov, heinlien, anthony, ect. After a while all the books start to be the same old same old. Dispite the fact that i really enjoy the way the author expresses himeself.
I am simple delighted that I have found an author (stephenson) who changes. That way i can enjoy the expression that that author has, but not be bored to death by the same type of story all the time.
but then again, that is just my opinion :)
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:2)
"Of course not"? Hold up there, pardner. It may not be "inherently" a bad thing, but I'm sure the parent and many other people would agree with me that it's definitely a very bad sign.
Speaking as an editor myself, "wordiness" all too often obscures the point, leads the reader astray with needless details, bogs down narrative pacing, and generally distracts from the point of the book. This isn't alwa
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:2)
You have some serious professional jading there.... Stephenson is wordy, not because he is trying to fill a book, but because he is exploring ideas. Reading cryptonomicon was a wonderful tour of a huge number of topics technical and non-technical alike. It's not that it was a bad story, but some of us aren'
Re:Look here fanboy (Score:2)
"I suggest you need to read more historical fiction to see what a cliche his recent books have been"
I suggest you need to read Stephenson without pre-conceptions. I've read a great deal of historical fiction, and I find the vast majority of it dry and uninteresting because it fails to explore the elements that *I* find m
Re:Look here fanboy (Score:2)
My problem with that is that, you're exactly right, it sounds more like your story (or Stephenson's idealized story) than that of anybody living in the historical period being described. Stephenson's so-called historical fiction just strike
Re:Look here fanboy (Score:2)
Well, I for one couldn't put a pipe organ together to save my life, and I'm not sure, but I'm guessing Stephenson couldn't either.
Stephenson's books are about the wonder that those who "need to understand" find in every-day tasks and ground-breaking discoveries alike. That's not "joe average", so sure, it's not everyone's story. It is, however, quite certainly the story of
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:2)
If evolving as a writer means having a terminal case of Diahrrea of the Pen, leave me out of it.
I'm a pretty calm guy, but the 200+ pages of meandering (although the description of the experiments were interesting) in Quicksilver made me want to break something. How anyone could get past that and even onto two
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:3, Funny)
Stay away from Foucault's Pendulum [amazon.com]. You have been warned.
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:2)
But really, in a series that is going to be over 2,500 pages long, having the first 200 pages be slow is not that bad. 10% of a book devoted to a introduction is not all that bad. And historically, it has been hard for me to get into Stephenson's books. But once i am, oh man, it is worth the payoff. In my opinion, the baroque cycle has been no exception. Once i w
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:1)
I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion considering that the Baroque Cycle is essentially the same story (with the same characters!) as Cryptonomicon, only told wit
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:1)
That being said, it's been fascinating to read Stephenson because you can really see his evolution as a writer.
I actually have really enjoyed Quicksilver and The Confusion as they deal with historical fiction in a way that I like (James Michener and Umb
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:2)
The longer the book the better if it's a good story, but he really does need an editor. It's not that he's too verbose, it's that he loses focus. Most of his recent doorstops could use some tightening up, plotwise. For an author who can crank out the pages while keeping tight reign on his characters, see Tad Williams [amazon.com].
Re:Stephenson went downhill... (Score:1)
He came out of the gate very strongly, but then went into these really indulgent, slow paced heavy volumes.
His attention to historical detail was fascinating and was really the only thing keeping me reading (besides a chuckle every 25 pages or so). But, like the time i tried to read "It" 15 years ago, I g
Abridged audiotape... (Score:2)
Re:Abridged audiotape... (Score:1)
Re:Abridged audiotape... (Score:2)
The whole book is about the systems and social processes at the time - How fatal disease was common and the way people reacted to it, the role of revolution in the growth of economies, etc. There was this problem at that place and time with bladder stones. They killed a _lot_ of people. Today, there's none: Why[0]? It's just something jarring that he can bring up to remind you that the characters aren't modern people in funny clothes. The central thrust of the series, to me, is an atte
I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:5, Interesting)
I admit that I haven't been following what's going on with Stephenson's writing plans, but it just seems to me that there were so many loose ends at the end of Cryptonomicon, all of them fertile ground for more work...
I don't even feel like I scratched the surface with this list.
Cheers,
Richard
they went the way of the Chapter 11 creatures (Score:2)
They filed for bankruptcy while the founders ran away to spend idle lifetimes sipping margueritas in the Bahamas.
Sorry, couldn't resist, but it's obvious that Cryptonomicon was written during the dot-com bubble. We all know what happened to that bubble, therefore all follow-ups must depict a technology-pessimistic view.
Well, unless said follow-ups are set in a distant future.
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:3, Insightful)
The ending is just like the endings of all other great works -- Asimov's Foundation, Herbet's Dune, Scott Card's Ender's Game and what not.
The ending is left at a point with infinite possibilities, and most of them good. And I sincerely hope he leaves it that way, especially since my mind has come up with some pretty nice scenarios of what happened next
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd agree with this, but for different reasons all around. The Foundation series never ended because (a) Asimov had painted himself into a corner, and (b) he believed that he wouldn't die until he finished it. Thank god he was wrong. Sorry, no tears for Isaac; he was a fucking horrible writer.
The Dune books finished in part because Herbert died not long after
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:1)
Also, maybe you know this, but there are now nine books [wikipedia.org] in the Ender saga.
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:2)
Seriously, Card has two storylines: the one where trusting in Jebus is the answer to everything, and the one where Russians want to take over the world. Sometimes (see "Ender's Shadow") it's both.
The ending of Ender's Game *SPOILER* (Score:2)
The final sentence of Speaker for the Dead is one of the greatest I have read in any genre.
"The sunlight on her back, the breeze a
Before the sixth, actually (Score:2)
I'm fairly certain that Herbert died before finishing the last book. The plot was outlined in relative depth, and much of the prose was written, but not all of it.
His nephew finished it. If you're really careful, I hear you can spot the point where the writing changes. I've not tried finding it myself.
This is the same nephew that went on to write the prequels. They suck, of course, but that's not so much the nephew's fault as it is Kevin Anderson's, who has the God-given ability to come into any ru
Re:Before the sixth, actually (Score:2)
Brian Herbert, the talentlesss waste of oxygen currently raping the Dune franchise is Franks's son. How sad is that? Frank and Brian wrote one book together before Frank's death. I d
Re:Before the sixth, actually (Score:2)
I could well be confusing them, since I've never read the other series. Have to go look at them now.
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:1)
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:4, Insightful)
But I don't think any of your loose ends are particularly loose:
"What's to become of the Epiphyte corporation and its data crypt plan?"
Having aquired the requisite huge pile of gold, they establish the crypt, and it's chief initial application, secure digital cash.
"The relationship between modern-day Waterhouse and Ms. Shaftoe?"
Goes swimmingly, but probably isn't so interesting to read about. Their kids may have interseting adventures, being the unification of the technologist and adventurer archetypes.
"The impending creation of the NSA under (recently-post) WWII-era Waterhouse and the evil, scheming ex-IBM-er military intelligence officer?"
It gets created and is headquartered at Fort Meade. I didn't think he was necessarily evil though. Perhaps from Douglas MacArthur Shaftoes POV. In the WWII timeline I don't see it though. Sure, he tries strenuously to kill a bunch of our heroes, but they are aboard an enemy submarine at the time.
"What's up with Grandma Waterhouse, who is spoken of reverentially by modern-day Waterhouse? "
Where's the mystery? She groes up on a sheep farm in Australia, meets and maries Lawrence, has a very nice, if boring life in Washington State, is well loved by her Grandchildren. Sounds like a nice lady, but I don't want a novel about her.
"Gotta be more good stuff with (WWII) Waterhouse and Turing"
That was really good stuff, but it's not really a loose end. It would be fun to read more of it, but I think I'd rather have something different that Stephenson chooses to serve up. variety is the spice of life and all.
"The rebuilding of Japan under McArthur and Goto Dengo?"
It gets rebuilt.
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:4, Insightful)
I find your reply not to be very helpful. Allow me to push the envelope in the same vein...
Well... umm... yes, I suppose. But I figure there's some good (and not entirely obvious) stories that could be told about what happens along the way.
Cheers,
Richard
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:2)
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:2)
I actually quite liked the ending to Cryptonomicon -- I thought it was the best o
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:2)
You mean besides:
"but it just seems to me that there were so many loose ends at the end of Cryptonomicon"
Anyway, I'll admit I'm quick to jump on criticism of Stephensons endings, because I have no idea what people are talking about. It's like they picked a criticism at random, except that a lot of people seem to pick the same one. I don't get it.
I'm not privy to Stephensons writing plans either, but if the past is any guide, the direct seq
Re:Uhm ... (Score:2)
"Waterhouse did *not* go to work in the new NSA under Comstock."
Uhm, true, and I don't think I implied he did.
I don't beleive Rudy actually endowed a chair for Waterhouse; indeed I beleive it's pretty clear he did not survive the submarine incident. Didn't he intentionally incinerate himself? Or was that Bichoff? In any case, the other makes it out the hatch, but based on the depth we know (from the moden day timeline) the sub was at, survival should have been impossible.
Waterhouse has already been offe
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:3, Interesting)
Stephenson never ends a book, he just stops writing them.
I always end up turning the last page and being surprised that there's nothing else...
Re:I might one day read the Baroque cycle... (Score:1)
Stephenson's endings (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the only Stephenson ending I like is from Jipi and the Paranoid Chip.
However, he can come up with great stories which I enjoy very much, despite the ending (which is not much of a letdown now, because the moment I start reading a Stephenson book I expect the ending to suck but it doesn't bother me).
Re:Stephenson's endings (Score:1)
Re:Stephenson's endings (Score:2)
In the light of the sex comparison, Stephenson seems kind of frigid to me.
Re:Stephenson's endings (Score:2)
In Snowcrash he saves the world and gets the girl, what more? In Cryptonomicon, he gets to be a big man and gets the girl. In Diamond Age, he resolves the central plot, and that's all that's needed.
See, what makes Stephenson awesome, as you rightly said, is that his books are a journey. He never goes in for the cliched, "... and they lived happily ever after" kinda ending - his endings leave room for anything to happen, a bunch of open possibilities. And that is w
Stephenson's books end like a Kung-fu Movie. (Score:3, Interesting)
they roll credits.
Stephenson's endings are like that, after the story is resolved they just end with no post to wrap things up with the characters.
Re:Stephenson's books end like a Kung-fu Movie. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stephenson's books end like a Kung-fu Movie. (Score:2)
It was perfectly clear; Enzo was partially deaf, bleeding profusely, but survived. Raven hopped away, jacked a Deliverator car, and escaped.
Editor (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Editor (Score:5, Interesting)
Books too Long
There is a Cult of Brevity that holds a certain amount of sway in the writing world. Some of its devotees are teachers (and students) in formal creative writing programs where the coin of the realm is short stories, or fragments thereof. Others are editors and journalists who, as a condition of their employment, must produce work of fixed length. Among people who follow the Cult of Brevity, the ability to write pieces that are not very long is thought to be the mark of the competent, well-trained, disciplined writer.
So you can imagine what such people think of people who write longer pieces, such as myself!
Many of the Cult of Brevity's more hard-core believers feel that writing long stuff is a sign of disgusting incontinence, egomania, pusillanimous editors, the decline of Western civilization, or all of the above. As must be obvious, I am not an adherent of the Cult of Brevity. Personally, I am delighted to read extremely long books, or series of books, as long as they hold my interest. To me it seems self-evident that the Cult of Brevity is grievously mistaken, and am not inclined to dispute it here.
At first, I agreed with him and then I started reading Quicksilver...
Re:Editor (Score:2)
Re:Editor (Score:1)
I do love writers who can write long and stay interesting. Dan Simmons Hyperion series was a blast and I also enjoyed his recent Ilium.
Brevity isn't the problem... (Score:2)
And, as is typical of Stephenson, the book goes until the end, and then just stops, after another Deus Ex Aurum ending.
The problem is that Stephenson doesn't seem to know where to end a story, short or long. I sometimes think he ends them too soon, rather than too later, and he may actually be better off leaving the real climax and denoument for the reader to fill in if he can't drag one up from his digital well.
Of co
Re:Brevity isn't the problem... (Score:2)
The problem with Piers Anthony is that he's discovered it's vastly more profitable to write a story over and over again. But at least he's got more than one story in him: some authors (Chalker, for example) don't just grind out lots of repeats, they only have one formula.
It's a shame, really, because Anthony has done some good stuff. Macroscop
Deus Ex Aurum (Score:1)
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:1)
It should thus read "Deus ex auro." - cfr. the medical term "ex vivo," as opposed to "vivum."
Pretty naive mistake on the author's part (I'm assuming it's in the book).
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:1)
Er... Let's say great minds mistake alike... I meant to say it expresses an idea of sudden appearance, or a motion from the inside to the outside of something.
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:1)
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:2)
So, most likely, Deus Ex Aurum refers one of two things:
1) The sudden and inadequate resolution of all outstanding affairs upon the conclusion of the stor
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:1)
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:2)
Armchair etymology is fun!
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:2)
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:2, Insightful)
Since Cryptonomicon basically had this type of ending, where instead of a god, it was a massive amount of gold that basically made everyone's problems go away, I'd assume that's what they were referring to.
Re:Deus Ex Aurum (Score:1)
oh the irony... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm desperately resisting the temptation to place my own AWS id in here...
Lucky error (Score:5, Insightful)
Lucky for us Amazon's shipping error resulted in the book being sent to someone actually capable of writing a cogent and coherent review.
Deus Ex /huh/? (Score:2)
I agree. It's even going to be an educational review for me, because I don't know what "Aurum" means. I've heard a lot of Deus Ex phrases, but this is a first.
So, "deus ex aurum" is...? Anyone?
Weird... (Score:2)
There's a shocker... (Score:2, Funny)
After reading Cryptonomicon I thought that was the whole point of the man. To make cool works of fiction and then have them end in arbitrary and sucky ways. The ol' "Set-em up and fail to knock-em down" technique.
-Pinkoir
The Point (Score:3, Insightful)
>Still, he perseveres; for as near as the Baroque Cycle has one point, it is to explore how the nation-state, modern banking, and modern scientific method arose from the chaos of the 17th century.
Indeed, the trilogy is the story of how modern money and banking arose. The protagonist is capital, and how it arose from its former life as coveted metals, like silver and gold. Empiricism is seen as being dragged along by the pragmatic bankers (and hustlers like Shaftoe and the Duchess of Several Places.)Watered steel blade (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Watered steel blade (Score:2)
Ah... they're joking right? This has got to be the single most suspicious auction I've ever seen, and I've seen some doozies.
Re:Watered steel blade (Score:2)
Nonetheless -- point taken. I'd never dream of bidding on this (or any other antique) without being able to inspect it in person. So look -- don't touch -- and thereby get some value out of the scam.
Re:Watered steel blade (Score:3, Informative)
I can't remember what Stephenson wrote about it, but the whole layered steel method is a way of taking two different types of very crappy metal to make something very good. You take something very hard that cracks easily and layer it with something very soft that doesn't crack easily, and make the layers very thin by pounding it a lot. With modern steel production we can get something just as good (effectively the same thing only in micros
Re:Watered steel blade (Score:2)
ortho/paradoxy (Score:3, Interesting)
There's no contradiction in a rational mind researching alchemy and mysticism. Especially in the 1600-1700s, when science was built on a the techniques and pursuits of those prior investigative models. Four centuries from now, quantum mechanics will be indistinguishable from alchemy in "rationality", or whatever mental mode practiced by generators of new information about systems of events. It will either seem too deterministic, or clumsy guesswork, depending on future evolution of science. Newton applied his fine instruments to fuzzy material, both from his lab (and orchard
Re:ortho/paradoxy (Score:2)
Well it can't suck as much as System of a Down (Score:4, Funny)
Encrypted message in Cryptonomicon (Score:4, Funny)
And while I remembered a lot of typos in that book, I wondered what would happen if I made note of them. I mentioned this to my friend, and he naturally had already written them all down. Between first and next e-mails on the subject, he'd done a bit of experimenting.
"I find deliberate errors on pages 43, 86, 129, 155, 283, 319, 341, 342, 357, 385, 430, 437, 462, 477, 479, 481, 483, 526, 534, 535, 539, 574, 585, 611, 620, 887, and 918. Hope I didn't miss one there.
"take the delta between each page number and run it through a mod 26 function - like solitaire, from the book? - there's first a block of 16 seemingly garbage letters (two bytes?) beginning with a Q, followed by three Bs in a row (spacing characters?) and another Q, then the words HADIK ZIMTER. whattf?!"
Another friend of mine, Douglas Barnes, read the first draft of Cryptonomicon, which had a lot more text than the final printed copy. The eerie thing is, and this is what makes me think it worth mentioning to the slashdot crowd, early drafts had none of the typos that the first-printing hardback ended up with. Doug swears that the text was actually very clean, and that he wondered what was up when he saw the first edition, as though the typos had been inserted on purpose.
Enoch Root care to weigh in on the matter? Any budding young crytologists think they can answer Mr. Stephenson's message? Who or what is HADIK ZIMTER?
energylad
Re: Encrypted message in Cryptonomicon (Score:2)
I asked Stephenson at a signing after _Quicksilver_ if he had hidden messages in the text. He said he hadn't. (I could ask him again when he passes through the Bay Area next week, though.)
I wondered this because of Eliza and her letters; it turns out that one crypto system she used was dependent on handwriting quirks that weren't reproduced.
I'd check the line numbers of the typos next, by the way.
Never trust anyone's review... (Score:3, Insightful)
...when it comes to Stephenson. Many people love him and don't even *see* those flaws as flaws, and many think he's just an overblown researcher with diarrhea of the pen. Read him for yourself, but don't expect a Hollywood ending.
I, for one, love his endings, beginnings, and middles. As the about reviewer said, he makes me grin like a maniac on a very regular basis. But hey, to each their own -- I hear Pam Anderson book is positively scintillating. Or you could pick up a Dan Brown and relive the stress of hundreds of events and encounters packed into less than a week. Neal's not for everyone, but he *is* an excellent author.
Bah humbug (Score:1)
finishes ugly .. like all of Stephenson's books?!? (Score:1)
"but like all of Stephenson's books, finishes ugly."
Hmmm
As for The Baroque Cycle