Skip to main content

Artifact Space (SF) - Miles Cameron *****

This is a cracking (and, frankly, wrist-cracking at 568 pages) piece of space opera. That's a term that is sometimes used as a put-down to suggest pulp rubbish, but I use it affectionately. It's not trying to be great literature, but it's a great read, which is all I want from a book. 

The author mentions Alistair Reynolds as an inspiration - and it's certainly true that there's something of Reynolds' (or Banks') sweeping imagination of a space-based civilisation. But for me, there's more here of a modern equivalent of Robert Heinlein at his best. Not the soppy stuff he produced towards the end of his career, but the period that peaked with The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. In fact, the basic storyline has a distinct resemblance to that of Heinlein's Starman Jones. In that 1950s novel, the main character is from a spacegoing family who manages to get a place on a ship despite not having the qualifications, and with his skill manages in the end to save the whole ship. Here, our central character, Marca Nbaro, has a similar trajectory, though both the ship Athens (which is Star Trek-like in its scale and ethos, but in the form of a massive military-supported interstellar trader rather than an exploratory ship) and the central character is much more twenty-first century science fiction.

I liked the way that Miles Cameron doesn't gloss over the grunt work of getting on in an environment like this - Nbaro spends a long time working on training in different spheres - and despite the book feeling a little too long, there is plenty of action to keep the reader engaged. The characters are reasonably well drawn, though they rarely surprise you - the good guys are always obviously good guys, and similarly with the villains. Although there is also a touch of Starship Troopers in the military action side, it never dominates - this is a much more subtle book and doesn't attempt to glorify war and killing.

Like many modern SF novels - particularly the military action type - the main character is female. What's fascinating given the discussions about male and female main characters is that it doesn't make any difference to the reader identifying with her - it makes you wonder why this took so long to happen. It's just an excellent example of space opera at its best.

There were one or two small issues, mostly editorial. The first few pages were difficult to follow - if you just go with the flow, you do pick up what it's referring to, but Cameron deliberately introduces a flurry of not-quite-clear concepts. This isn't bad - I rather like it - but might put some readers off. The book has been converted from US (well, Canadian) into English spelling, but rather irritatingly the title hasn't been. And there were a few examples - hardly surprising in a book this length - of word repetition and other slightly clumsy bits of writing you might expect to be fixed in the edit. However, all this is trivial.

This is the first half of a two-book series - it works fine as a standalone, but it's hard to imagine anyone reading it and not wanting to read the other title as well. 

Paperback: 
Bookshop.org

  

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

Vector - Robyn Arianrhod ****

This is a remarkable book for the right audience (more on that in a moment), but one that's hard to classify. It's part history of science/maths, part popular maths and even has a smidgen of textbook about it, as it has more full-on mathematical content that a typical title for the general public usually has. What Robyn Arianrhod does in painstaking detail is to record the development of the concept of vectors, vector calculus and their big cousin tensors. These are mathematical tools that would become crucial for physics, not to mention more recently, for example, in the more exotic aspects of computing. Let's get the audience thing out of the way. Early on in the book we get a sentence beginning ‘You likely first learned integral calculus by…’ The assumption is very much that the reader already knows the basics of maths at least to A-level (level to start an undergraduate degree in a 'hard' science or maths) and has no problem with practical use of calculus. Altho

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