Skip to main content

Lake of Darkness (SF) - Adam Roberts *****

Two of the best ever fantasy writers - Alan Garner and Gene Wolfe - both wrote books that over the years got more sophisticated and harder to take in, yet these books really rewarded the reader who put in the effort to a great degree. Adam Roberts has become their equivalent in the science fiction world. Although much of Lake of Darkness is an easy enough read, the concepts it is built on are mind-boggling and the last part left my mind buzzing, if not entirely sure what I had just experienced.

This could be seen as one of Roberts' few ventures into space opera - it certainly has the large scale trappings of this sub-genre. But the setting here is very different. Fairly early on, one of the characters (who it is does not become clear until later) addresses the reader directly, poking fun at the way that science fiction stereotypically sees space-based societies almost inevitably as militaristic, with ships modelled on warships. This is a very different type of future, with a society reminiscent in a way of Wells' Eloi in The Time Machine - who have just discovered their own version of Morlocks within.

In Roberts' future - several centuries from now - there is no work: most day-to-day essentials are handled by AIs. (This, in passing, gives an opportunity to underline what happens if you rely too much on AIs and they go wrong.) To keep themselves occupied, humans develop 'fandoms', based on anything from history to physics. It was somewhat scary to hear on the radio while reading this someone saying that to appeal to younger voters 'politicians should develop their own fandoms', though I think this was inspired more by Taylor Swift than Roberts.

For me, three major themes came through. One was a Swiftian take on this quasi-utopian future with its fandoms and obsession with caring for others feelings (as long as they didn't stray too far from the line) - in parts it felt a bit like Gulliver's Travels among the snowflakes. Humour is stressed here with the one bit of the book I found a touch irritating - every historical reference gets something wrong, misnaming books and characters with abandon (though I did enjoy the revived ancient popular song 'We all live in a yellow sunny scene').

A second theme was this being one of the few SF novels I've read that really relished and made use of the super-speculative science (or, rather, the ascientific speculation, given it's rarely based on observation) that is dedicated to black holes. Not only is this discussed at length, it is central to the working of the book. I'm not a fan of this as a scientific topic, but as a vehicle for science fiction it's brilliant.

The third theme is one that some SF fans will struggle with, though again I'd say Roberts handles it brilliantly - Christianity is central to the plot. Roberts is not the first to do this in a science fiction setting - think, for example, of Blish's A Case of Conscience or Miller's A Canticle for Leibowicz (not strictly Christianity but strongly based on its forms). This is not done by Roberts in a negative way as might have been typical of a new wave SF author, but simply takes as fact Christian beliefs, including the existence of devils as fallen angels, and explores some consequences.

I know this is a book I'm going to have to read again quite soon - and as is often the case particularly with Wolfe, I did find the ending too loose and open to interpretation to be truly satisfying, but even though the approach will strongly divide readers, for me this is without doubt one of the most impressive pieces of science fiction writing I've ever seen and possibly Roberts' best.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin Five Way Interview

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin (born in 1999) is a distinguished composer, concert pianist, music theorist and researcher. Three of his piano CDs have been released in Germany. He started his undergraduate degree at the age of 13 in Kazakhstan, and having completed three musical doctorates in prominent Italian music institutions at the age of 20, he has mastered advanced composition techniques. In 2024 he completed a PhD in music at the University of St Andrews / Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (researching timbre-texture co-ordinate in avant- garde music), and was awarded The Silver Medal of The Worshipful Company of Musicians, London. He has held visiting affiliations at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and UCL, and has been lecturing and giving talks internationally since the age of 13. His latest book is Quantum Mechanics and Avant Garde Music . What links quantum physics and avant-garde music? The entire book is devoted to this question. To put it briefly, there are many different link...

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...

Should we question science?

I was surprised recently by something Simon Singh put on X about Sabine Hossenfelder. I have huge admiration for Simon, but I also have a lot of respect for Sabine. She has written two excellent books and has been helpful to me with a number of physics queries - she also had a really interesting blog, and has now become particularly successful with her science videos. This is where I'm afraid she lost me as audience, as I find video a very unsatisfactory medium to take in information - but I know it has mass appeal. This meant I was concerned by Simon's tweet (or whatever we are supposed to call posts on X) saying 'The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder: if you are a fan of SH... then this is worth watching.' He was referencing a video from 'Professor Dave Explains' - I'm not familiar with Professor Dave (aka Dave Farina, who apparently isn't a professor, which is perhaps a bit unfortunate for someone calling out fakes), but his videos are popular and he...