Skip to main content

Snapshot (SF) - Brandon Sanderson ****

Although a science fiction story is just as capable of having all the usual furniture of a novel - character building, human reactions, locations and environment and so on - there is the added depth science fiction gains by being a genre of ideas. Some of the early greats of science fiction - Asimov, for example - managed the ideas and the 'What if?' far more eloquently than they did the traditional elements of fiction writing, presenting us with cardboard characters. Although Snapshot is nowhere near as bad as the old brigade in this respect, there is no doubt that Brandon Sanderson scores significantly more on the 'What if?' aspect. This is very much an idea-driven novella.

It's a dramatic idea at that. What if it were possible to recreate a day in a city with all its inhabitants, going through exactly what happened on the day? It would enable, for instance, police officers to go in and attempt to solve a crime, able to revisit the scene and interact with those involved. But Sanderson piles on the implications by making this not a virtual reality recreation, but a meatware one. By means we'll come back to, the whole physical reality of the city is recreated, then destroyed again at the end of the day. And to make the whole thing more laden with ethical dilemmas, the police officers carry a badge that makes inhabitants of the recreated city aware that they are copies who have less than a day to live.

Although some aspects of the story are a little predictable (Sanderson, in his afterword, actually says that he assumed that readers would guess one major twist), others still manage to surprise. It's a nicely constructed story within that jaw-dropping concept of a physical recreation of the city.

There are, I suppose, two issues to be addressed. One is that, as mentioned above, this is a novella, not a full length novel. I've a lot of time for the novella format, and they work well as ebooks, but I would usually expect it to be accompanied in physical form by a good bunch of short stories. Here it's left to fend for itself, and it's possible that a book that can be read on a shortish train journey is one that feels a little skimpy for the price.

The other issue is one that, again, Sanderson brings up in his postscript. The mechanism here is pure magic (though given a vague science-like wrapper with hints of an alien involvement). It has to be magic when you think about it. It's physically impossible to recreate anything at a quantum level other than making a copy and destroying the original. The practicalities are endlessly impossible (how to capture all the information, how to store it, how to manufacture the objects and people, what happens at the boundaries etc. etc.). So it requires a little more suspension of disbelief than most SF. I was also slightly surprised that Sanderson didn't refer to one of my favourite movies, Inception, when talking about the inspiration for the story - it's hard to read this and to believe that he's never seen Inception.

Overall, though, a truly interesting novella, which, though hardly creating deep characters, at least has some magnificent ideas to play with.

Hardback:  

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

Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...