As I've mentioned before, these books form part of a series, are in a chronological order, but are separate stories. It wouldn't be a big deal to read them out of sequence as they focus on separate characters for almost the entirety of their respective stories and the links between the books generally appear in the conclusion. It's quite difficult to review these without giving too many spoilers out, so I'm not going to delve too far into the stories, other than what could be gleaned from the first few pages, or the back cover fluff. Needless to say that the continuing American Civil War intrudes on both stories, as do 'Zombies', both to a greater or lesser extent.
The description of the Hospital and 19th Century medicine are well done, as is the battle scene in which Mercy gets embroiled. The latter was written from the perspective of a non-military individual and exhibited the confusion such a person might experience when caught up in one, so plus marks from me for that.
Otherwise it was a good read. Mercy is a strong character and the others are well done too. One or two of the disappearing ones showed promise and I'm left wondering if they may have their own stories in the future.
When we get introduced to characters, who appear and then flit out of the story, you wonder why so much colour was wasted on them in the first place. I also think that the richness of the story leads to a number of plot dead-ends that could have been pursued, although to do so would deviate from the story, perhaps too much. I suspect that Priest had a whole bundle of ideas for this book and wanted to cram them in. This has led to what can be a frustrating read sometimes for me, but to follow them would have resulted in a ponderous mess. Don't get me wrong, it's still a good book!
Once more the Civil War provides the backdrop to the story and again Zombies are present in the storyline. I would argue that this is the best book out of the three. In fairness though, Boneshaker spent a lot of time unfolding the Clockwork Century for us within its narrative, taking the burden off the following two in this respect. I expect books in a series to get better as they go on and I wasn't disappointed.
In all both books are worth a read. The characters are on the whole well rounded, with the female ones being the best depicted. Some of the male characters appear to be how women would like or expect them to be, but the same can be said of female characters where there is a male author. I'll also accept that my own gender gives a bias to this too! I didn't find myself having to suspend disbelief in this regard though, so no anachronisms or stereotypes stand out.
I have to admit that the idea of Steam Punk leaves me pretty cold, yet these books work. I believe this to be because the 'technology leaps' aren't actually that great and are actually achievable within the limits of real world technology of the time, or soon would be. Neither are things over done. Where a 'super weapon' exists, it's unique. Other items are in somewhat short supply too, so the tech isn't overbearing on the stories. This to me is the strength of the books and what makes them stand out from the herd. While the desire may be evident to leap into the realms of science fiction by one or two of the characters, they are definitely bound from achieving that by real world constraints.
Dreadnought gets a 3/5 and Ganymede a 4/5. Again I'm a hard marker and Dreadnought was verging on a 4, while Ganymede was close on a 5. I actually like these better than Harry Turtledove's Southern Victory Series, which I also enjoyed immensely, despite their own imperfections.
Stephen King is perhaps one of the best authors I know. Having said that, many of his books (from 'IT' onwards pretty much) appear to be over-long and padded out. That he can do this and still have me read a book through, says a lot for the quality of his work. I also find him somewhat patronising politically in my opinion. He's either preaching to the converted in me, or I don't need the reinforcement of my beliefs he is offering, I'm not sure which.
King's depiction of 1958 through to 1963 are excellent and really make this book for me. King is heavily into pop culture and was also living through the times he portrays, so he really brings it to life to the smallest details. Nevertheless he's clearly done a lot of research too and it shows. As is usual with King books, there's a degree of cross-referencing with other works, in this case 'IT', which is pursued briefly as an aside and thankfully without depth.
If I wasn't heavily into the time myself, it's possible that I'd be saying that some of the book could be edited out to save a few pages. I can see that some of the detail might be too much and over wordy, and that King seems to obsess over certain things to the detriment of the story. This time, for me, it wasn't a problem, but in other books I've wanted to scream "just get on with it will you!". I've found that this problem is the price you pay for an excellent story with him however.
It is an excellent story too. The character is not the best person to be doing this job, he's no James Bond, or Navy SEAL, he's an ordinary guy... an English teacher no less. He makes mistakes, his conscience screws with him and he has to live in the world back then for five years to complete his 'mission'. He can of course return to the present (2 minutes on from when he left) whenever he likes, but at a cost of ageing and the fact that when he eventually returns, he returns to the same start day in 1958, with everything back to square one.
I thoroughly enjoyed the book. However I can't help feeling, that like one or two of his books, King got a way into the story, got bored, or thought he was going over word limit and somewhat rushed the ending. I actually thought the ending sucked a bit, however that's purely my feeling and looking objectively it might have been the only real option, each to their own and he's a best selling novelist and I'm not, reason enough to go with his conclusion to the story. That he was able to evoke this feeling of disappointment, rather than a "meh" is a positive I think.
There is also King's preference for painting things at their very worst and overdoing it sometimes. There is an assumption at the start of the book that is expressed by one character that; Kennedy's death was the start of bad things happening in America, the Vietnam War being one of them. From that single event, the path to today's unsatisfactory world was set. By stopping the assassination, things could have been different and better, is the belief that King toys with as one of his themes.
I could easily have given this book a 5/5, it is still one of the best books I've ever read. He's over-egged the cake in places, settled for black and white instead of shades of grey to some extent into the bargain too. As it is I'll offer a very high 4/5, if I wasn't really into the time frame, I'd drop it to a mid 4. Not his worst, but not his best either and it's a shame. Regardless though it's worth reading and I recommend it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment