Skip to main content

Time (SF) - Stephen Baxter ***

It was perhaps a mistake to read this book so soon after Stephen Baxter's 1995 sequel to The Time Machine called The Time Ships. For some reason, Baxter had passed me by until recently, so, impressed by reading his recent The Thousand Earths and World Engines: Destroyer (which confusingly features another version of the same main character is this book), I've been digging back into his earlier work. Time is certainly is a book of ideas - but there are three big problems with this 1999 novel. Despite a totally different setting, it has too many similarities to The Time Ships, it has structural issues and its view of 2010 is bizarre.

Time features time travel, a portal on an asteroid, talking squids in space, the sudden emergence of super-intelligent children, a riff on time travel, alternate histories and universes, and more. You can't fault it for its reach, or all the (admittedly highly speculative) scientific concepts that are brought in. And when Baxter settles down and does a bit of action writing, notably in an attack on the asteroid, things suddenly kick up a gear. This is without doubt an impressive and interesting piece of thoughtful science fiction.

However, lets get onto those problems. Both this and The Time Ships feature time travel, intellects of the far future and alternative realities. Even more so than its predecessor, Time also has an ending with strong echoes of the finale of Blish's Cities in Flight series. That, to be honest, was more a problem from reading the two books one after the other, rather than anything fundamental. Structurally, the book is rambling and could do with a good tightening edit. It spends far too long on plodding through situations. Until the structure suddenly changes for a while near the end, it is broken up into sections from the point of view of different characters, each headed with the characters' names. I suspect it might have been originally framed as first person views from these individuals, because on a couple of occasions the text briefly switches into the first person, suggesting it was missed in a re-write. This all feels a little clumsy. The characterisation is often two-dimensional as well, while the character of Emma, the ex-wife of central character Reid Malenfant, is unbelievable in the way she is willing to go along with decision after decision she doesn't agree with.

Oddest of all, though, is Baxter's vision of 2010. It's worth noting that Baxter was something of a protégé of Arthur C. Clarke, as there are several echoes of 2001, A Space Odyssey here - one consciously and clearly making a direct reference to the film. And like 2001, Time shows us technological advances in its setting that are way too far ahead of what was ever likely. Of course, there was more excuse for the anomalies in 2001 as this came out 33 years before its setting, but Baxter used a date just 11 years in his future, yet introduced technological changes that are often still decades away. It just feels wrong. It's also amusing in retrospect that a major theme in the book is NASA and the US government's attempts to prevent private companies doing space flights (even resorting to military attack) - considering what has happened in the last few years.

It's also worth briefly picking up on the 'squids in space' thing. Baxter suggests that squids are sentient and very intelligent (even more so when their intelligence is enhanced by some technical magic) - this now seems exaggerated, especially if the suggestion in the book Sentience that only warm blooded animals are sentient is true. But the reason the concept is fascinating is in the context of Margaret Atwood's put-down of science fiction that it's limited to 'talking squids in outer space.' I've never found a date for that, so it's not clear if Baxter did this intentionally as a wind-up - if so, it's hilarious.

All in all a fascinating, if deeply flawed, book.

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 free here

Comments

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

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

Deep Utopia - Nick Bostrom ***

This is one of the strangest sort-of popular science (or philosophy, or something or other) books I've ever read. If you can picture the impact of a cross between Douglas Hofstadter's  Gödel Escher Bach and Gaileo's Two New Sciences  (at least, its conversational structure), then thrown in a touch of David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest , and you can get a feel for what the experience of reading it is like - bewildering with the feeling that there is something deep that you can never quite extract from it. Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom is probably best known in popular science for his book Superintelligence in which he looked at the implications of having artificial intelligence (AI) that goes beyond human capabilities. In a sense, Deep Utopia is a sequel, picking out one aspect of this speculation: what life would be like for us if technology had solved all our existential problems, while (in the form of superintelligence) it had also taken away much of our appare