“Anathem” is a 2008 science-fiction novel by Neal Stephenson. You can read the hype and find a link to read the first 160-or-so pages of the book at http://www.nealstephenson.com/anathem/. This post is based on reading those pages and additional material around the book (interviews with Stephenson and the like).
A lot of people seem to be searching for an “Anathem movie”. As far as I know, the only thing like that is Anathem’s official video trailer.
While reviewing a less than half-read book is risky business, I think it’s warranted for two reasons: I actually pulled myself to read that much, so I have to make something for it, and I can’t help thinking the people who praise it so much do it because they haven’t read a good book (if you have read both “Anathem” and one of the books I mention below, please comment).
Although “Anathem” has to explain itself almost since the first page, I won’t give spoilers. I will just point out the novel failures:
- It kinda tries to expose a philosophical point, but not really.
- It kinda tries to create a different world out of an unbelievable Earth with misspelled names -and fails to the point it has a spoiler at the beginning to get its failure out of the way early.
- It kinda tries to impress its readers with the subtlety of abstract mathematical thought, but the protagonists are just dumb, despite all the big words.
And it does it very persistently, all the time. Its only success is to confirm spectacularly xkcd’s Fiction Rule of Thumb:
"Except for anything by Lewis Carroll or Tolkien, you get five made-up words per story. I'm looking at you, Anathem."
A while ago there was the “remix culture” fad. Basically, you took a work (book, movie) and edited it to suit your tastes. “The Phantom Edit” was Star Wars: Episode One without Jar Jar Binks, for example.
I might give “Anathem” a try if I could replace all the fake, misspelled exotica with the properly spelled names. I’m aware it might be a writing device -just like a novel about a boring person might be purposely written in a boring way to bring the point home. I also caught the self-referential points in the story. However, as a reader, I just wanted to skip to the last 10 pages and be done with it. Not good. When I found out I had to pay for the privilege, I cut my losses and wrote this. Fail.
I will list a few books. They are not “replacement”, ”Anathem”-like novels -that’s the whole point! They are superb works that might be appealing to readers who out of ignorance thought “Anathem” was incredible.
Warning: After reading these, you won’t be satisfied by just any hyped book.
Atlas Shrugged
The classical philosophical novel by Ayn Rand. Not as popular outside the United States, but still a classic. Not for everyone, because being a philosophical novel, the characters are ”restricted” by the ideas and attitudes they represent, feeling a bit differently from your usual novel; but the plot is interesting, and as an unapologetic defense of Capitalism, is a must-read book to everyone with an opinion on it. The official website is http://atlasshrugged.com/
There has been a movie in the works forever -it looks like it finally happened, complete with Facebook Page; the dystopian world of the original Bioshock video game (highly recommended) was clearly inspired by it (Hello, Andrew Ryan!). And how many novels have a social network and dating site built around them?
A Canticle for Leibowitz
Technically a science-fiction novel, it’s actually a story of Humankind told in three short glimpses spanning hundreds of years in a future, post-apocalyptic Earth. While a careless reader might think it’s similar to “Anathem” (both novels are centered around monks and their convent), they couldn’t be more different.
“A Canticle for Leibowitz” is about the preservation of knowledge for a world that is not ready to reclaim it, and might never be. Walter M. Miller manages to do in plain English what Stephenson fails to do with its dictionary of misspelled words: create an engaging, believable world. And unlike the poseurs in “Anathem”, the monks of the Order of Leibowitz are real Christian monks (in the fictional world of the book, of course).A bad, fake ”sequel” (more of a spin-off, a side story set some time after the second part of the original) was “Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman”. It was edited out of Miller’s incomplete drafts, and published posthumously. Don’t waste your time -comparing it to “A Canticle for Leibowitz” is like comparing a season of ”24″ to Orson Welles’ “Citizen Kane”. It’s hard to believe they come from the same author. But it is not totally worthless -even being an inferior novel, “Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman” does a better job at creating a fake world (complete with fake culture and history) than “Anathem”. In fact, they share this emphasis -for worse.
His Dark Materials Trilogy
Known to most people from the movie loosely based on the first book, “The Golden Compass”. Philip Pullman shows us a different but still recognizable and believable world. This strange reality is a central part of the story, but the story is not about it -it’s about the people who inhabit it. Although not a philosophical novel, it does have an underlying point: live life for life itself. Incredibly engaging, one of the few series that really needs all its books.
“The Golden Compass” movie wasn’t neither a commercial success nor faithful to the first book (in fact, it’s way shorter). Sure, there is a talking polar bear and the protagonist is a child, but it’s not for children. Is for young adults and older people who don’t mind having their world rocked a bit. Imagine what would happen to “Kirikou and the Sorceress” if it was remade by Disney; this is what they did to “The Golden Compass”.
The Martian Chronicles
One of Ray Bradbury’s classics, in an unusual genre: science-fiction chronicle. Born as short stories written separately, as a whole they have a nostalgic quality, as the repeated attempts of Humankind to colonize Mars finally succeed, more than they thought.
Flatland: a romance of many dimensions
By Edwin A. Abbott. Written from the point of view of a square living in Flatland, it describes its people, ranked by the number and regularity of its sides, and the once-in-a-millenium Revelation he received from a higher-dimensional being. The full text is at Project Gutenberg’s site: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/97
There’s even a movie oriented to students based on it.
© 2010 Héctor Cuevas. All rights reserved.
I totally agree (the intenet echo chamber at work) (-;
Was disappointing compared to stunning works of his like the Baroque Cycle and the specialist non-common usage vocab was annoying for any impact it had (v. little). Loved the xkcd take.
Because I managed to finish it in its entirety I hope to get prize some day.
Canticle for Leibowitz sounds more interesting.
If you liked Bradbury’s “The Martian Chronicles” you’ll probably like “A Canticle for Leibowitz”.
I think Stephenson totally missed a great opportunity to explore the concept of living time-capsules. Anathem partly came out of Stephenson’s concept sketches for the 10,000 year clock. Had he stick to that, it would have been a great book.
I’m trying to read this for a book club and it’s irripaining me.
Full disclosure – I’m a huge Stephenson fan. That said, I’ve read
Bradbury – probably part of the Martian Chronicles, also Farenheit 451. – great
A Canticle for Leibowicz – good
Flatland – good
I started the first book in His Dark Materials Trilogy, didn’t get very far before putting it down.
I’m not sure why you think these are far superior to Anathem. Absolutely it is hard to get into – it was for me at least – I started it once and gave up after 20 pages.
I thought Canticle and Flatland were very obvious in the points they were trying to make. I think you’re making some assumptions about the point that Stephenson is making. As some who went to grad school for science, and has moved over into “engineering”, the interplay in his invented world between these disciplines and people who are non-technical is amazing. It spoke directly to my experiences and presented a world in which those experiences are greatly amplified.
I think they are superior because Anathem has some great ideas but fails to develop any of them. Whatever point it’s trying to make, it doesn’t matter if it’s a bad read. Whatever angle it tries, some book in my list does it better and fuller.
Take Flatland: it’s as didactic as satyrical; the way feeble and dumb lines can kill the strongest polyhedron is as clear as it gets. Yes, it’s too obvious -but what’s so wrong with going straight to the point? :D
Anathem seems to have satire (b*ytt? Is that your best?) and it seems to have philosophy (the brief bit about philosophical attitudes towards knowledge was okay) but it doesn’t follow through.
I’ve read all books except Flatland. Each is good. None are like Anathem. In my view, Anathem is a very unique book and deserves to be placed among the best SF novels of all time. I’m surprised that so many people get caught up in the language and in the philosophy, which (at best) are minor side points to the overall story. I’m no expert, but much of the philosophy in this book seems to be taken directly from our own history of western philosophy – and to call this in some way frivolous is in my opinion completely missing the point. As a science PhD at harvard I’ve found this book incredibly engaging. I certainly don’t think of it as lightweight in any of the subjects it touches on. Of course everyone has their own tastes- but if you didn’t like it the first time I suggest you try again
I side with xkcd on this. Despite my being only 311 pages into the book right now, I can yet say that the philosophy is important but not the central point, as I see it. It tends to be contextual–part of the framework for the narrative. And yes, the philosophy is almost exactly that of actual philosophical history and discourse from ancient times until today with its prevailing arguments. The names are often identifiable as references in conjunction with content descriptions, so much so that it reads much like a theoretical parallel universe. This is relevant to the narrative’s world. Yes, it takes a while to get a grip and picture of the world (lots of glossary use is helpful), but an attention span more like the monastic types and less like the “sline” types goes a long way here. It might be a taste and personality issue–for those who are attracted to the cloister aesthetic, it could be more enjoyable.
Also, the comment that the characters are dumb is ridiculous. The characters are young, that’s all.
“Also, the comment that the characters are dumb is ridiculous. The characters are young, that’s all.”
And isn’t that the same thing? :)
I have read Atlas Shrugged and agree that it is a great book. It is confusing to see why one one would like Atlas Shrugged and not Anathem. The flaws attributed to Anathem are similar to the ones scored against Atlas Shrugged.
Most of the criticism comes from the ‘characterization’ school of thought, by people biased towards characterization being the central element to a story. That is missing the point. This applies to novels based on contemporary settings (or even history) where the context is known to the readers. No point being re-defined. Real science fiction includes creation of a new world, new or different systems that drive this world. The idea becomes central to the story and is accorded more importance. Stephenson has been able to convey grand ideas, in the form of a story of a civilization on a fictitious planet where a logical way of life, based on scientific principles of theories backed by supporting observations, triumphs over alternate personality driven self-fulfilling philosophies. It is the expression of the longing for a civilization that some (or many) people wish for. Stephenson has been able to sustain this over a thousand page book, all the time presenting a consistent, credible set of ideas.Any book that is able to achieve this is a great book.
Right up along with the Dune series (Frank’s books, not Brian’s), LOTR (Tolkien).