Doomsday Book (SF) - Connie Willis ***

Having enjoyed Connie Willis's collection of award winning stories, Time is the Fire, I thought I'd follow up with her 1992 novel (winner of both SF's major book awards). To be honest, I struggled with this one.

In my review of Time is the Fire I suggested a couple of the stories were unnecessary long - this doubly applies to Doomsday Book. It is so slow, there's a feeling it's going to come to an absolute stop any time soon. I know the topic is time travel, but this made time go very slowly indeed. Just one example - a character bursts into a pub with an important piece of information and collapses. We then get what feels like 100 pages of him not quite telling us what he wanted to say. In his excellent introduction (the best bit of the book) Adam Roberts says 'Doomsday Book is a long novel, and it starts slowly; but its length is not egregious.' Well, no, I suppose it's not - but it is distinctly painful.

I ought to mention that the underlying concept is excellent. The book is set in the 2050s where there are political shenanigans between different parts of the Oxford University history department. The goodies are 20th century historians, who are thoughtful and careful - contrasted with the careless medieval historians who send the heroine Kivrin back to the fourteenth century unprepared for what she will meet. The book then alternates between the 2050s and Kivrin's experiences.

Particular resonant now are the 'present day' scenes, which feature Oxford locking down after a virus outbreak - a process that has become standard since an earlier pandemic. Meanwhile, as Roberts points out, while Willis doesn't play with the mind-bending aspects of time travel (and gets a fair number of historical details wrong), she nonetheless does an excellent job of exposing us with Kivrin to the less than jolly aspects of life and death in the thirteenth century. It's just done at a glacial pace.

One strange aspect is Willis's portrayal of 2050s Oxford. Bizarrely, someone is bought a Christmas present of a 'muffler' - a word that was already antiquated when the novel came out. In fact, Willis's 2050s social setting feels far more like the 1930s than 60 years ahead of when it was written. Almost everyone is very formal and stiff. The dialogue and general social attitudes could come straight out of, say, C. S. Lewis's 1938 Out of the Silent Planet. This just feels very odd.

All in all, while the concept was great, I couldn't get on with the way this book was written - it was a disappointment.

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

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

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

Search This Blog