Hello ma'am I think you are great.
I wait, I think I hear a thousand noses lifting into the air at that phrase. Literary fiction? Surely not!
As I slowly start to dig into the literary world I come across this interesting genre bias. TRUE literature is only realistic! Science fiction and fantasy are always pulp. Obviously I find this to be ludicrous, or I wouldn't make a point of being mildly sarcastic about such a statement. I grew up reading genre, because it was what was interesting. And some of it, sure, was pretty pulpy. But is it too dramatic if I compare it to an addiction, in that it feels really, really good, but not being able to step back from genre to study it objectively can leave the aspiring writer with some severe problems?
Maybe that's a rant for another time (short version: hey stop writing the same stories new writers, please) so I'll get right down to my main point: Genre is fun. Genre is awesome. Genre has so many possibilities and places you can go, limited only by the writer's skill and imagination. But there's a big caveat: the best genre is CHARACTER-driven, not PLOT-driven.
So yes, this kind of focus is what bridges us between poor genre and snobby literary fiction, to create a hybrid that's taking some of the best qualities of both: the fun escapism, the exciting adventure, the strange worlds; and the complex characters and literary chops to pull it off.
So laugh, literature snobs, but Bujold is an amazing writer. Every time I read (or in this case, listen to) one of her stories, I'm astounded at the end at how she's crafted a story that is complex, and yet easy to follow; surprising, and yet logical. At the end, everything just makes sense. I suspect this is the result of deep, intimate knowledge of your characters, your setting and your plot, something that every writer should aspire to. Bujold excels at the aphorism, and her characters and their dialogue are, although distinct from each other, just so damn funny sometimes.
Tangentially related: Meet Grover Gardner, the best damn audiobook narrator ever. He does the whole Vorkosigan series (and I spotted him under a pseudonym doing Ringworld, too.)
Brothers in Arms is the... well, I'm not sure exactly what number in the series it is, to be honest. The chronological and publication orders are substantially different, and while I prefer to read in chronological order, even that is a little complicated. There's a lot of short stories and novellas worked into the saga here and there, and opinions seem to differ about what order to read them in. For myself this is seventh Vorkosigan book I've read. Miles Vorkosigan is a young man leading a double life: He is a member of the Vor of Barrayar, a class of nobility on his home planet, and a low-ranking military officer; but he is also Admiral Naismith, leader of the Dendarii mercenaries, and only his closest associates know that the fleet is secretly under the pay of the Barrayarans. How did Miles acquire this fleet? Though fast talking, a keen mind and sheer luck. In a previous book he essentially talked an entire mercenary fleet into his own power.
In this installment, Miles and the Dendarii are stopped at Earth after the mercenaries' last engagement, and when Miles checks in with the Barrayaran embassy (because hey, they need to get paid!) he gets caught up in a Komarran revenge plot against his famous father. Miles tries to pass off the appearance of both Vorkosigan and Naismith in the same place with a story about a clone, but as it turns out, the Komarrans really do have a clone, and Miles discovers his new 'brother', who he christens Mark. Deep down this is a story about loyalties: Miles to his planet, his fleet, his family; Mark's to the Komarrans; Galeni's to Komarr, his father, and Barrayar. Which of these loyalties are worthy? Which are not?
I feel like this summary is only scratching the surface of what Bujold is setting down. Her stories are just so deliciously complicated, and I don't want to ruin the flavor by boiling it down to its separate parts here. Suffice to say it's a great story; though, perhaps, not the best one to start the series with. It feels so rich to me because I know the history that has led up to this point, and someone entering the series here might not catch quite as much. In a sense I appreciate that Bujold hasn't spoon-fed us recaps with every book, or worked in extraneous information in artificial ways, in the way that some authors do when trying to make a series book stand alone. I don't think the story here suffers without that context, but is certainly enriched by having it.
A few years ago there was a really interesting post on whether or not Bujold can be considered hard science fiction (hard being based on actual science, soft being less true to actual physical possibilities, but both terms have some leeway). I liked what Martin Wisse had to say about the matter:
Much hard science fiction suffers from technofetishism, where the characters go around lovingly describing each type of ship taking part in a space battle or go into the finer details of the ammunition they’re using in the midst of a firefight. Even when the focus is less militaristic, it can sometimes seem the future is entirely populated by geeks. This is not the case with Bujold: her characters are people comfortable with using futuretech, without particularly noticing it or how it influences their society, but this influence is still there. As a reader it means you yourself have to work harder to notice things too, as they’re not pointed out to you.There's an implication in the argument over hard vs soft science fiction that soft science fiction is somehow inferior to hard. Geek culture likes to rank things like this, in terms of something being better, geekier, more pure or more hardcore than something else; but really I think it comes down to personal preference. While I certainly like stories that are science-plausible, I don't like stories where the science is prioritized over the characters. So in a way, soft science fiction fulfills this need more, but again, there's a certain amount of leeway that makes for successful stories in both categories.
In closing, quotes.
"The costs had been so small, compared to the spectacular results. Except for all the individuals who had paid for the triumph with their lives, for whom the price was something infinite, divided by zero."
"They tilted bed-ward, hungry mouthed."
"Some attitudes couldn't be changed, they just had to be outlived."
Overall: 5 stars
Amazon: Brothers in Arms
More reviews: Brothers in Arms on Librarything (Average 4.16 stars)
Brothers in Arms on Goodreads (Average 4.18 stars)
No comments:
Post a Comment