Skip to main content

Entanglements (SF) - Ed. Sheila Williams ***

It's important to say up front that the star rating here is an average: there are some 5 star stories in this collection and there are some that would only get 1 star.

It's very brave to put together a collection of science fiction stories with a message - in this case, the impact on relationships and families of emerging technologies. There is something very dampening about an enforced message that can so easily kill a story by making it feel like little more than propaganda. It's to the credit of many of the authors here that this doesn't usually happen.

This is a collection of ten SF stories. A few really stand out. The opening story Invisible People, by Nancy Kress was excellent, exploring the tangled concepts of gene editing and designer babies with a fascinating twist on the subject of altruism. My only criticism would be that I think writers rather let their reader down when the story pointedly ends just before a major decision by a character, leaving the story incomplete. I don't buy the 'it's down to your imagination' argument - if you're telling a story, you should finish it.

Two others deserving of high praise were Rich Larson's Echo the Echo and Sparklybits by Nick Wolven. In Echo the Echo there was a combination of a fascinating idea of an AI personal assistant that knows you so well it can audition dates for you (or rather can audition their avatars), plus some interesting thoughts on the nature of memory and personality. Although Wolven irritated me by the 1950s-style SF failing of unnecessary overuse of weak-sounding future technology names - why make an oven an 'ovenex'? - it's great fun with a twist on Ghostbusters where we're dealing with what amount to ghosts in the machine.

My favourite overall was Suzanne Palmer's Don't Mind Me, set primarily in a school in a chilling near future America where, at their parents' request, some students are provided with textbooks with everything excised that is 'controversial' (such as climate change or the Earth being more than 6,000 years old), and where brain implants prevent memory storage whenever the students hear things their parents don't want them to hear. It's a great read.

Every short story collection will have some pieces that work better than others. (It helps if there are rather more stories - only having ten meant some were over-long, and there were fewer opportunities to find favourites.) But, I suspect because of the weight of that imposed message, there were more that didn't work here than is typical. Three of them I had to give up on entirely. They simply didn't engage me as a reader - this hasn't ever happened with so many stories in a collection for me before. Two others were simply the right-on message wrapped in a fictional context - readable, but not much to write home about as storytelling. The other five were excellent.

Considering the difficulty imposed by the need for a message, this collection does well - but it could have been so much better if the prime decision-making factor for inclusion was whether or not there was a good, engaging narrative, rather than whether or not the story ticked the right boxes for the theme.



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