Dorian

I didn't appreciate this book as I thought I would. I have read Earthlings by the same author and was expecting more depth. Her style is clear, the social critique is clear (though a bit shallow compared to Earthlings). But the ending is abrupt and it feels emotionally flat. Maybe that was the point. But then there is also no intellectual reward. It left me indifferent.

One thing I loved about Agatha Christie’s style is how she manages to create distinct character voices (ten protagonists, all different and recognizable, in a 300-page novel with such a dense plot is, to me, something extraordinary). She is also able to render indirect interior monologues in scenes with multiple characters in an impeccable way.

The way she conveys atmosphere, character, and events in just a few words demonstrates a mastery of writing that is hard to match. The language is simple, but precise. Some of the interior monologues even drift into a kind of stream of consciousness, creating a descent into the human psyche where the boundary between reality and perception begins to dissolve.

The characters’ consciousness seems to blur into the environment surrounding them, echoing through the events of the novel, which almost mirror their deepest fears.

I am not sure if I am able to finish this book. I picked it up because I am interested in exploring questions around consciousness. I must admit the premise around this particular group of individuals seemed odd to me, but in hindsight maybe I should have seen the red flag already in the blurb.

The chapters about Siri's past and his different theory of mind are the most interesting and make you think about identity, relationships, alienation. But for a book with such a strong premise it kind of falls flat when it comes to picture the concept of consciousness as lived experience. The main characters are not very developed, which you might think, it's really important for the main theme of the book. They seem to be there only to serve as props for pseudo philosophical musings, not as complex and nuanced individuals. The vampire character's whole personality is being a vampire. The "pacifist" soldier character's whole personality is being a pacifist soldier. It looks to me that they are thrown there as cool concepts to serve whatever point Watts is trying to make, which I am not sure I am interesting in knowing. To me it looks like he is trying too hard to be original, throwing as many things at the reader as to give to the reader the illusion of complexity, while also not doing the work of exploring it or its implications.

On a personal note: a vampire in a SF novel? Why? Why not call it an augmented human or give it another name? It really looks ridiculous.

DNF. I have read Red Rising and I have quite enjoyed it, despite the prose not being my favorite thing. The pacing was good, the plot was interesting and I could forgive the fact that the characters looked so single minded because it was new, it was fresh, the protagonists were mostly teenagers. Now I have read 300 pages of Golden Son, patiently waiting for some development, some evolution, something that didn't read as "Red Rising but bigger scale". Man, that was disappointing. Reading this book was joyless to me. It's more of Red Rising except it feels done. Action, lot of action, but you don't get a breather or significant character development so you stop caring even if the scale is bigger and the stakes are supposed to be higher. The characters have aged, but still act as stunted teenagers. The adults act as stunted teenagers as well. And all the flaws of the prose being incredibly simple and dull that I could forgive to Red Rising, just became insufferable.