10. Children of Dune 9. Ilium 8. Old Man's War 7. Blindsight 6. Anathem 5. Leviathan Wakes 4. Seveneves 3. Death's End 2. The Collapsing Empire 1. Project Hail Mary
It's the politics of the awards now. Its so convoluted and marred by certain people's personal politics an author can have their book discounted just through not agreeing with someone when they badmouth other authors.
The majority of voters, especially at that time, were Americans. Also at that time, many British works didn't make their way to America until a year or more after they are published. That contributed to several British books not making the ballot.
Jemisin's trilogy was science-fantasy, not epic fantasy or another fantasy offshoot. As the series develops we realize that. The third book definitely made all this clear, so it, and the series it concludes, is worthy of the Hugo, IMO.
The Hugo Awards should never have been changed to include fantasy. Fantasy should have its own awards and deserves to also. The Nebula Awards are even worse than the Hugos now, unlike back in 20th century.
Agreed, but unfortunately that was only part of the problem. Fantasy have had the WFA since the 1970s, but to be honest, they're in just a bad a state nowadays as the Hugo and Nebula! If you ask me there has been a common factor in all of their demise.
Get the five ppl in this thread to agree on a delineation and I'll agree with you lol. Examples to fight over: book of the new sun, inversions, viriconium, star wars, lord of light
The Hugo Awards seem to have discredited themselves in recent years to the extent that they have become anti-recommendations. I've been surprised that the Dungeon Crawler Carl series, although unconventional, has been completely off the radar for some sort of nomination for some award. It's impressive universe building.
Because it is considered LitRPG which is not taken seriously by the major awards. Similar to the way SciFi/Fantasy is not taken seriously by those that vote on the Oscars.
@@leonardhatcher3272 I'm thinking of when Babylon 5 (season 4?) won a Nebula. It was unconventional. First book of Dungeon Crawler Carl was a guilty pleasure. But by book 6 it had far transcended its genre.
Another great video, with the bonus of mentioning a few books I haven't read and feel I should. I don't think John Scalzi's Old man's War books deserve a Hugo; too light weight and Heinleinesque. However the The Collapsing Empire trilogy is stupendous. His writing has matured and the world building and plot superb. And now the elephant in the room. Iain M Banks never won a Hugo. I think Player of Games, Matter and the Hydrogen sonata all deserve them. And as for Use of Weapons, it's just blasphemous that this magnum opus didn't get the Hugo.
@@Clonetropper005 Sci-Fi Odyssey thought Old Man’s War should have won over Spin, but I love Spin and think it deserved its Hugo Award. But otherwise I agreed with all of his picks.
Neal Stephenson's "SNOW CRASH" was a magnificent romp that ought to have not only won a ton of awards, but it's a sin that it hasn't been adapted into a big-budget major motion picture by now. Any novel that has a hero/protagonist named 'Hiro Protagonist' just SCREAMS to be read and enjoyed by as many people as possible.
Agree - Illium. Without a doubt. I've read the Hyperion Cantos and Illium/Olympus both a couple of times, and I like Illium more. Agree - Seveneves. Easily the best book I read last year (not the Hugo year, but the year I read it). Qualified Disagree - Blindsight. I know it's a darling on BookTube and intellectually I can see it. But I found it impenetrable and unenjoyable. Disagree - Project Hail Mary. I DNF'd it. I found our hero insufferably cheeky. Basically the character from The Martian in a different setting. Which is fine, I enjoyed him in The Martian. But tired of him quickly in PHM. Did any of the Expanse novels ever win? Since the Hugo is awarded by industry folk AND readers, and since it was such a great series for all the reasons you list, I don't understand it not being awarded.
I’ve been reading SF since my first book “Space Cat” circa 1953. I think you have an excellent take on what should be winning. I find I have read all your choices and have passed on all the winners. This tells me I am no longer using the Hugo as a guide for what my next book should be.
I think it's been over 20 years since I've read them, but I think Ilium and Olympos are even better than the Hyperion cantos, mainly because it was a lot tighter both story and prose wise and I also have a weak spot for the Greek myths. Although thinking back now I do seem to remember a lot more cool stuff from Hyperion than from Ilium 😄
I liked them a lot more, but that probably had more to do with my love of all the ancient Greek literature, plays and mythology I could get my hands on since childhood, than it did any objective analysis of the two series.
Thanks for compiling this list. I haven't read most of the books you've mentioned, but I'll make note of them for future (😉) reading. I have read _Project Hail Mary_ though. I enjoyed it but couldn't shake the feeling that it was a re-hashed _The Martian_ (which I also enjoyed).
Like a lot of other things around the same time, it became extremely overly politicized, and rushed decades of long-built prestige, recognition and profit right over the proverbial cliff.
I think that at least one of big SciFi prizes (Hugo, Nebula, A.C.Clarke, Locus, PKD) should abandon "best of the year" format to "deserves" format, where more than one work can get it. There are weaker and stronger years, and in a stronger year some excellent works are bound to be skipped over. Heck, after 4 Hugos, 2 Nebulae and 5 Locuses (among others) Martha Wells started withdrawing her _Murderbot_ works from competition saying "hey, guy, there are new kinds on the block; read their works, too!"
Great list, and almost completely agree! Only thought was around Project Hail Mary. Absolutely loved it, but the roadblocks that kept being thrown at our hero(s) seem so contrived that it felt as if the author just sat down and made a list of what could go wrong and jammed everything possible in a really sloppy and predictable fashion. Of course you need stuff to go wrong to have challenges driving the story, but these just seemed too simple and sequential - like trying to hit a number of chapters needed as the main driver then reverse engineering in a set number of hurdles hoping the reader just goes with it. Towards the end, I kept thinking 'I bet this happens next', and sure enough, it does. That was the only one I thought from your list was not truly Hugo worthy. Great list!!!!!
Thanks for the list! I look forward to reading a few that I've missed. Though I'm a fan of Neal Stephenson, I find him uneven. I love Anathem, which as you said appeals at many levels. But I think Seveneves is one of his weaker works. I find the conflicts contrived and unsatisfying. One of my favorites is Termination Shock, which didn't even garner a Hugo nomination. While not as ambitious as Anathem, it's a great story with complex interlocking arcs, peopled with vividly, lovingly drawn characters.
I agree with your take on Neal Stephenson. I think Anathem is one of the best books I have ever read in any genre, while thought Seveneves was simply tedious and boring.
In 1983, I would have gone with Donald Kingsbury’s “Courtship Rite” over “Foundation’s Edge”. It has one of the most “alien” civilizations I’ve seen written - only in inhabited by humans and a central mystery of how did this world come into being. So well done.
Totally agree about Blindsight and Death's End. I DNF'd Jemisin's The Fifth Season with extreme disappointment. As with any award, personal judgement need not agree with the determining body's vote. We do well to remember that the Academy Awards are a systematic marketing ploy for the film industry in general. Likewise the Hugos for sf.
Terrific video! I had exactly 30 minutes in a bookstore for the first time in four years. Ah, buy some science fiction. Asked the staff who won some Hugos? Otherwise relied on blurbs, since they didn't have new books by favourite authors. Ended up with the Fifth Season, which I enjoyed, but it wasn't prize winning. By mail order I bought the Three Body Problem, which I felt even more negative about (the games). So I will take your advice, as I will soon be visiting an English speaking city for the first time in two years. As for Dune, I really enjoyed it back in the day, but just assumed Herbert was cashing in with sequels, so ignored them for the Silverberg and Aldiss books then.
Love Blindsight. Hard read but if you can hang in until the ending it will stay with you. Also, Echopraxia is a good sequel but the ideas seemed more inchoate compared to Blindsight.
What a great idea for a show. Sometimes we need to kill the sacred cows. I just had a look at my library and apart from Ilium by Dan Simmons which has been on my TBR pile for far too long, I agree with all but one of your choices. I don't think Old Man's War is better than Spin. I really like John Scalzi's work and 100% agree with your rating of The Collapsing Empire. A great series and contained one of the funniest, foul mouthed characters I have ever read. Apart from that one book and Ilium (I'm so ashamed I haven't got around to it as I loved the Hyperion Cantos so much) you were spot on with the 8 other books. However, not one Iain M. Banks book winning a Hugo is a damning indictment of the entire Award in my opinion! You have got me thinking of some of the other books on the Hugo list that I thought were a waste of time and there must be better books they could have picked: Dreamsnake by Vonda McIntyre in 1979 immediately came to mind. To say nothing of the Dog by Commie Willis in 1999 was not great and not a patch on the 1993 Doomsday Book or Blackout in 2011. Don't get me started on the 2001 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire which should have gone to Revelation Space by Alastair Reynolds 2023 Nettle and Bone - what the hell! You have really got me thinking. Great channel and keep up the good work.
Well done. Can’t argue with any of your alternative choices. I’ve read every one you mention, and share a lot of the excitement you express at their myriad virtues.
I have read the start of one of your two novels, which I sent myself as a sample of Black Milk, on Amazon. I have to agree with one of the comments in the Amazon store, for the Kindle version: 'The editor has done a very poor job as there are a huge amount of words which were either wrong or in the wrong context.' Just a heads up, since that is the reason I will not be bying it for now. If I were the author, I would correct those errors and then make a video informing my followers that the new version is available for the Kindle version of this book.
I'm not sure why I didn't know Simmons' Ilium and Olympos were sci-fi, but I'm now going to read them as soon as I finish Banks' Inversions. The Hyperion Cantos is still one of my favorites and I probably read that over twenty years ago.
For better or worse the Hugo’s have gone through a self-correction in the 21st century to ensure they include minority voices. I think this have played a big part in the selection of books (and many awards) in the awards areas. This is not a criticism, it is an observation. Of the books on your list that I have read, I agree they are wonderful books. Ilium was a fantastical book that I truly enjoyed. I have added a couple that were not on my radar, so thanks for the recommendations.
The problem with that self-correction, though, imo, is that in came in the age of social media, specifically an earlier age of social media in which it's users were less savvy of it's tendencies to polarize and isolate, and the obvious ways that could exacerbate things into a Good Intentions Paving Company takeover situation.
I read both Spin and OMW and have no problem with either books winning. Both were more than worthy but Spin stayed with me more than OMW did these many years later. I'm 69, if that makes any difference.
Weird -- this starts up right about the time when I stopped reading science fiction. I was expecting very different arguments when I clicked on this. Yes, I am old now. 💀
I loved Illium and this is on spot. Spin vs Old mans war both are great imo and it's difficult to choose one. Anathem over Gaiman definitely. I agree with you in nearly all.i haven't read seveness but fifth season was kinf of disappointment.
You got me interested in several of these titles, some of which I already own but have relegated. Great video. Will pass on Ilium, though, and I just cannot stand anything "dune," so that one is a pass, too. But the others I will read. Old Man's War I read in my twenties, so that was a while ago.
A couple of your suggestions I haven't read so will have a look at them, thanks, always interesting to hear peoples opinions on books. There are two suggestions though that I don't really agree with. I enjoyed reading The Expanse Series, its very much 4/5 level for me, its entertaining and easy to read and has some great ideas, it always felt just one rung below masterpiece levels, maybe just a little too cozy about "a crew" which made it feel like best seller mainstream books. I also felt Hail Mary Project was entertaining and had some great ideas particularly around problem solving and communication, but again I felt it was been written for a mainstream holiday-reads audience. It felt very disposable and hasn't left much of an impression on me, 3/5 score or thereabouts. I do read some fantasy stuff too and find Jemsin overrated, she isn't bad but it just feels very middle of the road stuff to me. It is disappointing that a Sci Fi award has lost its way a bit. I know it can be hard as each genre will have strong periods and fallow periods for good work but broadening horizons too far is for me just a route to a slow death by alienating all your original target audience.
Not sure what book won that year, but I thought Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars should have won, though they seem to have tried to make up for it by awarding Hugos to Green Mars and Blue Mars.
Jack Vance, all Magnus Ridolph stories. And I guess technically (some of) the Stainless Steel Rat stories by Harry Harrison could also be called a detective.
I can get on board with most of these choices but I thought Project Hail Mary was pretty bad. Sophomoric humor, weak attempts try and make the reader think the outlandish story is hard sci-fi, and an absolutely beyond Hollywood ending that had me rolling my eyes. I haven't read an ending that corny since The Girl With All The Gifts (it's basically the same ending). I guess it was meant to be "fun"?
Back in the day I heard there was an author that won The Hugo 3 years in a row. I was so excited. Then I started the first book. I thought I must be missing something. Why was I not liking it at least appreciating the first of three award winning books. I had to stop reading it. Then a year or so later I realized the agenda pushing the awards and it made me feel better.
Sorry, no. _The Fifth Season_ is a hard book to read, but not because it's inferior...there has just been a massive natural disaster, the main character(s) are all going through a bunch of nasty stuff, and it's overwhelming. But it's incredible world-building, and the story is ultimately satisfying for those willing to stick with it. (You might like her first series, _The Inheritance Trilogy._ It's more pure fantasy, with gods, demi-gods, and a shadowy enemy to defeat.) The fact is, many women SF writers were underrepresented at the awards because SF was considered a "man's world." Ursula Le Guin is the exception that proves the rule, and even she was pressured to use an initial instead of her first name when her story "Nine Lives" was published in _Playboy._ And then there's Alice Sheldon, who wrote under the pseudonym "James Tiptree, Jr." When she finally, after nearly 20 years of turning out amazing SF works, revealed her true identity, she _lost_ many of her male fans. And Octavia Butler, who was a genius writer, _period,_ only won a Hugo once... in 2021, for a graphic-novel adaptation of _Parable of the Sower,_ originally published in 1993. She had been dead for 15 years, so she never got to see that triumph. Marlin, who comments below, is right in that it's a self-correction. It will all balance out eventually. But don't ignore women SF writers or downgrade their potential; there are many. many great ones out there, just as there are some truly abysmal male writers.
@@lisagulick4144 Thank you for your comment. I'm glad you love the books. Please understand I have absolutely no qualms because she is a female writer. I could care less. I care about the Muse. The story, the characters, the glorious whisper of Truth in the storytelling... Just because I got nothing from the book doesn't mean it's bad. I was being snide because the shadow of the agenda under which the award was given was for what the person was and what they stood for..mostly and not because it was THE GREATEST #$&@ING BOOK EVER!!! Maybe not mostly but it was a part of it. All the awards have hints of agenda and I poo pooed a book because of it. That was poorly done by me. The scientist Stephen Meyer said, "Let us agree that everyone has an agenda. Now let's get on to the interesting parts." I have put the book up next on my Kindle list and I can't wait to have the interesting parts to jump out on the second reading. Also I am glad to see you read Butler and Le Guin. I have pushed Butler's books into so many friends hands over the years and Le Guin has been a treasure in my heart for over 40 years. All the best. Thanks again.
@@lisagulick4144 Is it just me or are there a lot of women in general on this list of undeserving winners? Also I agree that Jemisin's earlier work does not get enough attention!
Overall I think the video makes a good case for most of the books it discusses. I have minor quibbles (I like Blindsight, but I think Rainbows End was a better choice, for example). My biggest diaagreement is with Children of Dune. The first part of it is fine, but it then begins to fall apart. Dune is a very good novel; Dune Messiah is good, though not up to the original; Children of Dune is a step down. And God Emperor ... well, Herbert should have stopped sooner.
I take no notice of award winners for the reasons you expressed in your video. The majority of my favorite SF reads have come from books that have not won any major awards - & it does seem strange to include fantasy in the Hugo awards..... It is also strange that there is an apparent reluctance to consider high-concept, visionary (or awe-inspiring) SF for these awards - isn't that the reason we all started to read SF in the first place? & yet the too easy allegorical stories - that have a very low SF feel to them - seem to dominate. I'm a fan of Simmons, but I haven't read Illium, or Olympos, as yet. I haven't read Neal Stephenson, Joe Scalzi, or the Blindsight book as yet either - looks like I've got some ground to make up. & after reading a sample of M.K. Jemisin's The Fifth Season, I won't be proceeding with her The Broken Earth trilogy - despite the fact that every volume in the series won a Hugo - it doesn't give me what I'm looking for in SF.
I liked Reamde as well, His other more recent books, well, I can't finish them. I did finish Termination Shock, but it wasn't all that captivating to me. YMMV
It would appear that those running and voting on the Hugo contenders have mostly turned their back on hard science fiction, in favour of fiction produced by a more defined democratic, over the last 20-years at least.
I have to agree with you Daryl The Hugo winners (and nominations) also the Nebula Awards were always the go to for top quality SF through the 60's, 70's, 80's but recently with pure fantasy books winning they have lost a lot of integrity and credibility. The fantasy books themselves are all great books but they are not Science Fiction, I really struggle to understand the position of the SFWOA for doing this. In fact I am really saddened. One factor of course is that the writers and readership has altered dramatically in the last 20years. Science Fiction in the 60's was the domain of Male scientists (with notable exceptions like Ursula K Le Guin) and male teenagers and now the award winners are dominated by female writers, in fact the last 6 years all the winners of best Novel were female! All science fiction though and very good books apart from one fantasy novel. HUGO's 2019 - 2024 SCIENCE FICTION: Some Desperate Glory by Emily Tesh (2024) F FANTASY: Nettle & Bone by Ursula Vernon (2023) F SCIENCE FICTION: A Desolation Called Peace, by Arkady Martine (2022) F SCIENCE FICTION: Network Effect, Martha Wells (2021) F SCIENC E FICTION: A Memory Called Empire, by Arkady Martine (2020) F SCIENCE FICTION: The Calculating Stars, by Mary Robinette Kowal (2019) F
Wow. I suspected I might disagree with you but I'm shocked at how completely we differ. The Three Body Problem books were dire. And Children of Dune? Seriously? Have you never read Silverberg? Aldiss? Whyndham? Malzberg? Ballard?
starting about ten years ago the Hugo’s started mainly ignoring male writers, for political reasons. Count the male nominees every year … its a tiny vanishing list. Race and sexual preference also play a HUGE role. why did NK Jemisin always win? Women and writers who are not white of course should be honored when they deserve it and both are more represented in sci fi than before 2000z. that’s all good. but its obvious the voting has been politically motivated. The Hugos are another institution taken over by an organized political ideological movement. What a shame.
Yes, they actually perform a disservice to authors of the identities they claim to champion by conditioning a lot of genre fans to doubt the merit of those same identities' writing abilities.
@@propagandaangie Do you remember that OnlyRequiresHate blogger and the huge shidstorm she caused within the industry? It's a truly wild and interesting story
I disagree with you wholeheartedly about Stephenson's Seveneves. N. K. Jemisin's Fifth Season is absolutely the better book and it is science fiction in the guise of fantasy. Seveneves was poorly paced overwritten mess, with many interesting ideas to be sure, but quite boring and with no real characters to speak of.
The Hugo is often awarded between an entertaining novel and an imaginative one that is a more difficult read but much more rewarding to the reader. Seveneves, while very entertaining, does not match the imagination of 'The Fifth Season'. As a side note, N.K. Jemisin's imagination is so powerful and interesting. 'The City We Became' is an interesting mix of sci-fi, fantasy and everything else I think of to this day. The same with 'Project Hail Mary' and 'A Desolation Called Peace' - both excellent novels but while '...Mary' is both excellent and entertaining 'A Desolation....' simply shines with its storytelling and, again, imagination. A common theme for the 'popular' sci-fi novels that lost the Hugo is that their prose is lacking.
@@toms5996 Good point about "A Desolation Called Peace" - I greatly enjoyed both books but "The Project Hail Mary" didn't really do anything particularly new that haven't been done before (just off the top of my head Weir's own "The Martian" or Clark's "Rendezvous with Rama"). And while Weir's book has perfectly serviceable prose and a good strong protagonist voice, it's nothing particularly special either.
@@arsenikritchever501 Agree completely. Weir's books are serviceable but don't offer anything new. Entertaining is the word again. Which is why Weir lost to Arkady Martine.
My all time favourite sci-fi series is Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice series, honestly deserves more attention just because all the books were fun reads
Wonderful video! I agree, especially on Death's End. I told my ophthalmologist,who loves Dune (had to show me a pic of his Dune bookshelf) that he need to try the Three-Body Problem trilogy because I think he would enjoy the hard science in it (I love these books and Dune). I also agree with your pick of John Scalzi - Old Man's War was a great surprise to me when I read it, and also Seveneves (unique).
I want to say lots of sources expected Seveneves to win against The Fifth Season. Yeah, it's a heady scifi epic. The Fifth Season has it's own narrative tricks to portray it's own weird scifi (yes, scifi, not fantasy) complexities. Plenty of things on the list I don't agree with, several that I do. Keep up the fine content.
I don't find the big idea in blindsight particularly impressive. It's basically describing AI, like the computer in Star Trek. That's intelligent but not conscious or sentient. Because the idea is with biological lifeforms instead of machines it somehow becomes fascinating? Not really in my view
I was not impressed with it either. I technically DNF'd but went the read up on its ending and was like "Given who I see loving this book, I guess they'd find that amazing but I really do not" I know I sound like an asshole but the novel starts off with lumping psychopaths in with "high-functioning" autistics (a label that was in vogue when the novel was written and now is not used for good reasons, but even then we autistics said it was a bad and incorrect label) and tries to make that BS into a genetic science, which is just not hard SF in my book at all and that told me everything I needed to know about Watts. The book just got progressively more annoying from there until it was just not worth it for me.
Many of the instances you mention are replacing books written by women by male authors, and you also seem to have a bias towards witty space opera. It could just be coincidental (I haven't read many of these books to say for sure based on writing quality), but it raised my eyebrows, and could be a case of unconscious bias. One book I have read was Project Hail Mary (or rather, listened to the fantastic audiobook), but while it's a rollicking story, I'm not sure it's particularly groundbreaking in any way or a literary masterpiece. I always assumed the Hugo awards were reserved for literary merit, and not necessarily cultural impact. I would have liked to have heard more about why the winners didn't deserve to win.
i have read both desolation called peace and hail mary and hail mary is just more interesting as a book and exploring scifi concepts including communication with aliens. Desolation called peace main thing it's exploring doesn't really get explored that much. In the first half it set up a lot but in the end it didn't do much with it.
Thank you for bringing this up. This video was in my recommendations and it sounded interesting so I watched it. However, as I watched it I couldn’t help but notice how many on his list were women nominees beating male nominees. He didn’t have a single example of the reverse. I know he has no control over the content of the comments here, but there are several complaining about “identity politics” and “wokeness”. I really hope it wasn’t his intent so a clarification would be helpful.
Totally agree. It's like the hugo awards were sacrificed for the sake of wokeness (I would say) in these specific cases you described, from my understanding.
@@kablamo9999 I didn't say he said it. That's my understanding (opinion) from reading the aforementioned hugo winning books. I just agree that the other books deserved it more.
I like your channel, and think this is a great topic which solidifies your taste for me. That said, I disagree with all of your choices and criteria except for Anathem, even on the award-winners we agree upon not being our favorite choice. Keep voting!
I've heard so much about the Cixin Lui "Three Body Problem" trilogy but the protagonist is, I believe, a teenage girl. I cannot abide "Young Adult" or Teen" oriented SF at all so I am loath to spend money on it (3 Body). Can anyone here give me an honest review?
@@Wayland444 My pleasure. Also, I think the character is older than a teen, and isn't the protagonist, but is kind of an antagonist whose immaturity caused them to make a rash, pivotal decision very early in the series, that sets a lot of the plot in motion. Iirc, that character fades into the background afterwards.
Absolutely Disagree that Herbert should have won the Hugo. Anatham was excellent but complicated; Was it better than Gaiman's Graveyard? maybe. A Desolation Called Peace absolutely deserved the Hugo.
Graveyard wasn't even scifi tbh. If that's how we're defining it now, Stephen King should have multiple Hugos by now. Anathem on the other hand is an actual landmark of science fiction - the sheer ambition and his success in actually pulling it off demanded recognition.
Hugo is no longer a prestigious award. The Hugo community has tarnished the once great award and has now turned it into political garbage. Hugo no longer means anything to me as an avid reader.
Never understood the love for the Cixin Liu books. Somewhat idiotic ideas and at some point it's more plothole than story. Maybe it's more about the experience/atmosphere than the story in which case it definitely just failed to do it for me.
Ive got a few disagreements to be honest. I think Jemisin really deserved those 3 wins. Those SciFantasy books are fucking incredible and so imaginative, new and refreshing. Also, I disagree about Blindsight. Its great, however the sequel/companion novel Echopraxia is better if you ask me. Seveneves is incredible! Anathem, not so much. I want to like it so badly but I just cannot get into it. Ive tried like 6 times lol. However, many of my fav books have taken me multiple attempts to get into, so maybe Ill finish Anathem one day. But speaking of books taking multiple attempts, that brings me to a book thats criminally underrated and deserves a Hugo imo: Gnomom by Nick Harkaway. Took me 5 tries over multiple years to get into it. I kept giving up in the first Konstantin chapter cause I just didnt get it at all. But once i finally got into it, I binged it and it quickly became an all time fav. Its extremely PoMo. Near future Panopticon UK is run by an all seeing AI called The Witness. People have traded their privacy for safety and convenience. A political dissident named Diana Hunter is taken in for interrogation where her mind is hooked up to this extremely safe, and totally unbeatable machine that reads neural activity and lets interrogators view your thoughts. Despite being super safe and unbeatable, Diana promptly beats the machine and dies. An Inspector for the Witness named Neith is tasked with investigating the death, and to do so she downloads Dianas memories of the interrogation into her own mind. She investigates by day, and then relives Diana's memories by night in her sleep. Except Diana's memories aren't of Diana's life. Instead, Diana remembers being an ancient Carthaginian alchemist trying to bring Scipio back from the dead, she remembers being a greek banker who notices strange patterns in the stock market and has a religious experience with a shark, she remembers being an Ethiopian artist tasked with designing a revolutionary new video game, and she remembers being an eldritch entity from the end of time itself. Its wild. But as the story progresses you see how all these stories combine together in the CRAZIEST WAY IMAGINABLE and the conclusion of the book is really mindblowing. But you really gotta get through that first greek banker chapter lmao. It was what tripped me up every time. Cause I was intrigued by the Diana and Neith stuff, but then didnt care about Konstantin, and didnt yet realize his role or how he was in any way connected to the story. The book is likely not gonna be for everyone. But if you like it, you'll probably love it. Worth giving a try.
Do you take requests? Would love you to cover a little known pulp cyberpunk book called Farewell Horizontal by K W Jeter. It kinda inspired the game Beneath a Steel Sky. Takes place in a world where people live on the side of a giant tower. Never got an audiobook release. Could use some love and critique
