Not quick enough

With a heavy heart I must consign another book to the “Life’s too short” category. And I so wanted to like it.

The last, and first, to suffer this fate was The Dice Man back in January. That one went with much rejoicing and lightness of heart because it was truly quite pants. The latest, tragically, is Neal Stephenson’s Quicksilver.

Neal Stephenson wrote two of the greatest SF novels of the nineties. Snow Crash made cyberpunk hip and enjoyable and compulsive reading – something William Gibson, who only invented the genre, could never quite manage – and The Diamond Age is the perfect primer for life in a future, post-national, post-scarcity society. And then the new century was ushered in with Cryptonomicon, which defies categorisation and tragically sows the seeds for The Baroque Cycle, of which Quicksilver is the first volume.

Y’see, each of the above books was getting longer. It wasn’t hard to plot ahead of the curve and see that sooner or later Stephenson was bound to turn in a 380,000 word opus and that his editor would let him get away with it. Sadly said editor didn’t bother editing.

Quicksilver, which is set around the dawn of the modern scientific age and the Restoration in the late seventeenth century, could have been such fun and is so boring. Pages and pages (and pages and pages) of people talking to one another for no reason than to convey all the research Stephenson has done. I knew the book consisted of three smaller (for a given value of “smaller”) books and vowed I would at least get through the first one; then I’d see how the second was going. And it started well … until two characters spend six (six!) pages riding across Europe to a destination they could have reached in a paragraph if they weren’t so intent on telling each other what they already know, or didn’t but have no reason to either, for no reason than to give us more of the author’s Research.

Life is too short.

Stephenson has a lovely dry way of writing that makes the fun bits a real pleasure to read. Here is lapsed Puritan Daniel unable to shake off his upbringing as he finally has sexual intercourse for the first time with the crucial aid of a sheepgut condom:

“Does this mean it is not actually coitus?” Daniel asked hopefully. “Since I am not really touching you?” Actually he was touching her in a lot of places, and vice versa. But where it counted he was touching nothing but sheepgut.

“It is very common for men of your religion to say so,” Tess said. “Almost as common as this irksome habit of talking while you are doing it.”

“And what do you say?”

“I say that we are not touching, and not having sex*, if it makes you feel better,” Tess said. “Though, when it is all finished, you shall have to explain to your Maker why you are at this moment buggering a dead sheep.”

(*an irritating and deliberate stylistic touch is to combine seventeenth century spellings and styles with slap bang modern idioms.)

Or this, about life on the Isle of Dogs in 1665:

“The Irish worked as porters and dockers and coal-haulers during the winter, and trudged off to the countryside in hay-making months. They went to their Papist churches every chance they got and frittered away their silver paying for the services of scribes, who would transform their sentiments into the magical code that could be sent across countries and seas to be read, by a priest, or another scrivener, to dear old Ma in Limerick.

In Mother Shaftoe’s part of town, that kind of willingness to do a day’s hard work for bread and money was taken as proof that the Irish race lacked dignity and shrewdness. And this did not even take into account their religious practices and all that flowed from them, e.g. the obstinate chastity of their women, and the willingness of the males to tolerate it.”

More of that, and less drop-of-the-hat extemporising about the sociopolitical state of Europe and inter-relationships of the various royal families, and Quicksilver would really be quite readable. It is one of the few books where a Readers’ Digest condensed version would actually be a good idea, and I don’t often say that.

The One with the Silly Title

Quantum of Solace isn’t the worst Bond but it’s far from being the best. It’s far from being as good as Casino Royale. That one rightly won praise for re-inventing Bond. This one is … more of the same, really. The first one gave us mean, moody hurtin’ Bond. This comes perilously close to giving us Bond the Big Baby. Oh get over it, you want to cry out.
Let’s not be too negative; let’s talk strengths. Daniel Craig is still flippin’ good. Judi Dench is even better. Bond is just so beautifully irritating to the baddies. The bad guy isn’t a world-dominating ogre, just a well-acted bad guy; and like most bad guys, it wouldn’t actually make that much difference to the greater good of the greater whole if he won. But you’re glad he loses.
We get tantalising hints of the new Big Bad, Quantum, which might just might just possibly might be a SPECTRE for the twenty first century. And it will be interesting to see how well this films in Bolivia – or maybe they’ll dub the name of another country. Not many people want to be told their homeland is a corrupt coup-prone rat infested banana republic. Even if it’s true.
The fact that Bond doesn’t go to bed with Bond girl gives their relationship a sense of plausibility. Sadly said Bond girl has to be one of the densest of the lot, and frankly that’s pretty dense. Having ascertained that her boyfriend has sent an assassin after her, she twice confronts him in a situation that he completely controls and where he could quite easily have her killed without anyone batting an eyelid, and then acts surprised when – um – he tries to kill her. Pattern recognition not her strongest point.
And then there’s the fighting. Oh dear, the fighting.
Remember the fight between Sean Connery and Robert Shaw in From Russia With Love? It was gripping, brutal and to the death. 007 was up against someone who was at least his equal and you could believe (and you cared) that he might not make it (apart from the obvious given that he would make it – but it was fun to see how). Every blow, every shot counted. The camera often stayed stationary for seconds at a time. You could tell what was happening.
Three, four, five times QoS gives us an action scene so fast, furious and blurry you can’t (a) tell or (b) give a toss what’s happening. It’s a case of wake me up when Bond’s won and we’ll get on with the movie. At least one of the chases I could swear I’ve already seen, in the last Jason Bourne movie. Run across rooftops, check. Jump through windows, check. Perhaps the producer got confused.
Please will the producers and directors of thriller movies start trusting the intelligence of the audience again and give us scenes we can follow and care about. Thank you.
Here’s how fight scenes should be done.

If you’re in a hole, stop digging

Best Beloved served up some really quite nice rice pudding for dessert. I went to boarding school: “nice” and “rice pudding” have never belonged together in the same sentence. This was hot and creamy with a hint of cinnamon.

Quoth Bonusbarn: “it’s a bit like phlegm, isn’t it?”

[Transfixed by twin glares]

“I mean, good phlegm, obviously.”

[Glares do little in the way of abating]

“The kind that’s out, not still in and making you feel unwell.”

I think we then talked about the weather.