What a disappointment. Sorry Mr. Weir, perhaps after "The Martian", there is no way to live up to the task. I am still a fan but I can't, in good conscience, recommend "Artemis" to your fan base.
First, F. Scott Fitzgerald, tells us to write what we know. You are a computer scientist, not a welder or a twenty something female who thinks like a boy in middle school. Jazz is not Lisbeth Salander, but perhaps she could have been? The computer science you wrote into "The Martian" was extremely accurate. The computer science you wrote into "Artemis" despite the futuristic setting, was all of late 1990's. Far from science fiction. This makes sense because although I said the computer science in "The Martian" was accurate, it was dated given the necessity to find engineers from the previous decades to reprogram the Mars lander. You never really gave major advances in computer science a spin and could have given your background.
You choose Artemis as the name of the Moon Base. How cliché, but then again, you write with clichés. I didn't count them but it feels like there is one on every page. You named the Moon base after a Greek Goddess, whose space program was developed in an African country, with a Muslim heroin, and a South American mafia as the antagonist. Are you trying for a diversity award? Diverse yes, but culturally speaking, you've stereotyped everything and everybody. It's a bit the opposite of being in the running for a diversity award. A Ukrainian computer wizard? Ugh. Well at least he, spoiler alert, gets the girl.
As far as plot development goes, it's not clear if Jazz isn't the antagonist. The ethics of her decision to engage in an act of sabotage for money, is no deeper than the dollar amount, followed by her saying, "I'm in". Repaying her estranged father for burning down his lab was a weak attempt at a justification. Maybe Jazz has some depth, seemingly because she's always referring to a second meaning behind everything she says. There could be merit in this approach to her character, except for everything she says or thinks, and every double entendre she manifests, she gives it a sexual reference. Ugh. Note comment on a boy in middle school above.
I like that you tried to research and build a firm basis for the Moon's economy. It's a foundation, although, completely wrong, lends credibility. We can assume there will be some sort of currency, with some sort of exchange, but it's safe to say, those living on the moon, even at this seemingly advanced, and mature stage, with only 2,000 residents, will still be hugely subsidized by government or industry investment. Think about this for a second. Every trade on the Moon has a guild. There are a lot of trades on the Moon. How many trades would you need to establish a functioning colony. There are a bunch of welders and tour guides…but only one law enforcement officer. Ugh. When there are 20,000 residents on the moon, there might be the beginnings of a stand-alone economy. But more likely it takes many more. Even then, the Moon wouldn't be able to sustain itself because there simply are no raw resources on the Moon…or Mars for that matter. You cannot compare Moon or Mars exploration with the colonization of continents on Earth. When settlers came to the "New World', everything they needed was already in place. The resources to live were in place, food, water, shelter. All that was necessary was a strong back and a set of hands. You carved out a living on the land and traded what you had in excess. Moon dwellers will be completely dependent on Earth forever. Once we colonize Mars, terraform the atmosphere, and turn it into its own ecosphere, perhaps. But we are talking centuries from now.
This book does not push the genre for this fiction in any direction. The closest perhaps to what you were trying to achieve would be "Total Recall", either the original short story idea by Phillip K. Dick, or the novel by Piers Anthony, or even just watching the movie, the Schwarzenegger version as I had trouble with Collin Farrell.
All of this criticism aside, you do write well. Perhaps it comes from your experience as a blogger. The story moves quickly and you want to turn the pages, but for me, I had to suspend complete belief. Those with a technical background, who loved "The Martian" cannot love this book for the same reasons despite the ease of your writing. Others will…so perhaps you've carved out a followership that will allow you to continue to write. Good for you. It's doubtful I will read another book, and be content simply to go back and reread "The Martian". Five stars for the promise, subtract one for implausible plot, and one for character development, and one more for juvenile use of double entendre…basically every ugh. Add one star back for smooth and easy writing. Three stars for Artemis…sadly it is not "The Martian".
No comments:
Post a Comment