Skip to main content

Friendly Fire (SF) - Gavin Smith ****

Way back in the hoary old days of pulp science fiction, militaristic stories were common, culminating in the truly unpleasant Starship Troopers (1959). From the second half of the 60s, though, when I first got seriously into SF, far more thoughtful and interesting books began to dominate. The military SF space operas never went away, but were relegated to the backwaters. Space opera as a sub-genre became far more sophisticated with Iain M. Banks' superb Culture series. 

However, first person shooter video games such as Doom, plus movies such as Star Wars plus its successors, and the rise of superhero films, brought the militaristic aspect front and centre to the cinema and now it's relatively common again to find novels that glorify big guns and combat. With The Bastard Legion, Gavin Smith showed how to do it with style, combining a Buffy the Vampire Slayer-style subversion of the genre, featuring one woman in charge of 6,000 enslaved hard criminals, with a superb example of 'if you're going to do it, go large.'

In this sequel we get some interesting development of a number of characters who appeared in the first book (I would recommend reading that before this). Even Miska Corbin, the woman who stole the prison ship, has some development of personality in that she now seems to accept that she is a psychopath. As before, the basic premise of training up criminals as mercenaries under the duress that they are fitted with collars that will blow their heads off at a thought from Miska is genuinely effective, though the morality of the whole enterprise remains troubling. The fact that Miska is effectively running a black ops unit for a government agency is, I suspect, meant to make her indulgence in mass murder and slavery acceptable, but it really doesn't.

That all sounds a bit negative, but it is without doubt a rip-roaring read. Smith makes almost the entire second half of the book a single continuous piece of action, where it's very difficult to put the the book down because the writing has immense inertia - it just carries the reader along on an explosive shockwave. Apart from the character development, there is also the added promise of a big picture behind the storyline. Although the book does come to a successful end, some major unknowns are introduced, clearly lining up the next title in the series. Thankfully, though, this doesn't involve the disconcerting sudden stop in the narrative that makes some series books infuriating to read. 

My only technical issue was that it did sometimes feel as if it had been written a little too quickly. Several times there were word repetitions that felt like a first draft - and though the main task towards the end of the book gets full coverage, there is a secondary task where it feels as if Smith hadn't the time to write it, so let what amounted to a deus ex machina sort things out.

Although there's always a pleasure in revisiting familiar characters, I wasn't quite as struck by this book as the first in the series - I think because that dramatic main premise is no longer a novelty - but it's a worthy successor and I look forward to reading the next one.

Paperback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you


Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

David Spiegelhalter Five Way interview

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter FRS OBE is Emeritus Professor of Statistics in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication and has presented the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance, the award-winning Climate Change by Numbers. His bestselling book, The Art of Statistics , was published in March 2019. He was knighted in 2014 for services to medical statistics, was President of the Royal Statistical Society (2017-2018), and became a Non-Executive Director of the UK Statistics Authority in 2020. His latest book is The Art of Uncertainty . Why probability? because I have been fascinated by the idea of probability, and what it might be, for over 50 years. Why is the ‘P’ word missing from the title? That's a good question.  Partly so as not to make it sound like a technical book, but also because I did not want to give the impression that it was yet another book

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead . That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes. Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová. T

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on