Skip to main content

Cytonic (SF) - Brandon Sanderson **** 

Updated for paperback
The third in Brandon Sanderson's Skyward series is perhaps not quite as impressive as the second, Starsight, but still packs in enough to make it a good read. Interestingly, where Starsight triumphed in terms of action sequences, the best bits of Cytonic for me were more talky and philosophical - but filled in huge gaps in exactly what is going on in the series, particular in terms of the nature and motivation of the mysterious delvers. Not as action packed, then, but more fulfilling in its revelations. 

Broadly we get three acts here - the first is a kind of mission quest across a Roger Dean-like (and surely Roger Dean-inspired) floating islands, the second involving some of the starfighter flying action that Sanderson does so well, and the third the talky bit, which had a touch of van Vogt about it, for SF oldies who might appreciate the reference. (Speaking of Roger Dean's art, the Barbie-like proportions of the central character seem to get more extreme with every cover, bearing in mind she's 5 foot 1 tall in the book.)

Pretty well all the action takes place not in the real universe, but the 'nowhere' that ships pass through when travelling faster than light. It's amusing that the up-front dedication (as opposed to the lengthy acknowledgements at the end) refers to getting physics guidance, as one thing this place lacks is good physics - specifically, the conservation of energy. It's very convenient to keep the plot line simple that no one in the nowhere needs to eat, for example, but you do wonder how they get their energy.

This non-physics underlines what is the most important thing about the Skyward series as it is developing - it's not really science fiction. Like the Star Wars films, it is a fairy story that makes use of SF tropes. That's not a bad thing - I loved the original Star Wars trilogy - but accepting this is essential to be able to make use of the right suspension of disbelief to read the book if you are into real science fiction. Sanderson even underlines this by making explicit referral to storytelling and inhabiting a story.

Once you pick up this idea, the parallels with Star Wars are strong. Not only in the central character from a hick location who becomes a space jockey and then a user of mental 'cytonic' abilities. But also, for example, in the way that all the aliens are just humans with a different shape (with the exception of the delvers, whose difference is here explained), in the juvenile aspects that are particularly strong in the first novel, not to mention in the irritatingly pompous-yet-cute entities. (Remember ewoks, anyone?)

I ought to stress that I am not putting this forward as a negative. Apart from finding the quest section a little episodic, the book was highly enjoyable to read (based on having read the previous titles - I wouldn't recommend it standalone), with some clever twists. And I am looking forward to the way Sanderson develops the new complexities added at the end of the book in the already promised sequel, Defiant. But don't expect sophisticated SF, because that's not what this book is.

Paperback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email for free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are
Post a Comment
Read more

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i
Post a Comment
Read more

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re
Post a Comment
Read more