Let me preface this review by
saying the Wanderer is not a book that has held up well over time, and
the most common question asked in a lot of the reviews you can read
online is: "How did this book win a Hugo?" Never a good sign. The book
has a lot of problems, the action jumps around too much, the characters
are poorly developed, the writing in spots borders on unreadable, and
the treatment of women in the story is emberassing. It's very curious
that a book like this can come out of an author as famous a Leiber, one
of the premier authors of the 50s and 60s, and one of the founding
authors of the Sword and Sorcery genre.
Leiber
is probably most famous for his 'Fafhrd and the Grey Mouse' series, I
have not read it, and have no idea how to pronounce it. Leiber was one
of the most prolific writers of the early sci-fi era, winning awards in
Science Fiction, Horror, and Fantasy. He has over two dozen collections
of short stories, and several novels as well. Sci-fi wasn't a very
profitable venture in the early days, and those authors who made a
living at it usually did so through quantity not quality. It was not
uncommon to see authors publish two or three novels a year along with a
couple dozen short stories, writing at this pace there will always be a
few duds that leak through (see Silverberg, Robert). That provides a
little context for why this novel is so difficult, but not really an
excuse.
'The
Wanderer' is probably most famous today for kicking off the sub-genre
of disaster fiction. The novel describes the arrival of a new planet
into our solar system and the havoc it wreaks as it devours the moon.
Leiber bounces back and forth between the 'soft' science fiction of
describing the effect it has on people, and the 'hard' sci-fi of
describing the science involved with what is happening. The novel might
better have been served by focusing on one or the other. Though the
disaster novel has kind of faded away today to be replaced by the
disaster movie (see: '2012') for awhile there disaster novels were a
mainstay of both sci-fi and mainstream fiction. John Brunner took some
inspiration from this novel in his work, as did John Barnes in his novel
'Mother of Storms.'
This novel seems to be another example of the idea for
a novel winning the Hugo despite the writing. There is no denying that
the idea for this novel is a grand one, the idea of a universe filled
to the brim with life is more than interesting, and the conceit of a
rogue planet on the run from the authorities is more than enough to
inspire any writer. But, there is also no denying that this might be
the most poorly written novel to ever win a Hugo. While there are some
well described scenes in the book, the destruction of the moon and Don's
escape through the middle of it for one, there are countless other
examples of poorly developed characters and meandering plotlines. Other
authors have used multiple perspectives to give the reader a general
sense of a large community, but Leiber does a poor job here, jumping
back and forth from settings so often that the reader is often left
confused about what is happening or what character is doing what.
Women
are poorly served in most early science fiction, regulated to damsels
in distress most often or sex symbols as a back-up. Leiber does even
worse here, where a woman's only choice seems to be between manipulative
fool and crazy lesbian with a desire for death-sex (you heard me).
While the novel is probably the first (and last) instance of a man
having sex with a humanoid cat, it does nothing to serve the novel, and
feels more like Leiber exercising a fantasy that creeps most people
out. Sexism is prevalent, like I said, in most early science fiction
and to be expected, but examples like this drag an already troubled book
even further down. Sex becomes more common in sci-fi as we move into
the early seventies, but it was already here to stay by 1965. While no
one would expect equality of the sexes in 1965 you should remember that
this book was published after Heinlein's 'Stranger in a Strange
Land' and Dick's 'The Man in the High Castle,' two novels that took at
least a slightly more mature and balanced look at the sexes.
It's
tough to say something about 'The Wanderer' that hasn't already been
written, it's a novel that has large defenders and just as large
detractors. Marc Goldstein in his review of the book seemed to believe
that Leiber intentionally avoided characterization in an attempt to
support the story's underlying pessimism and the small impact humanity
can have on the final outcome. This seems a little like saying that
Leiber intentionally wrote a bad story, which is hard to believe or
understand. More often there are reviews like Sam Jordison's who ask
how this book could be nominated for any award. The answer to that is
tough to say, but often, like the Nobel Prize or any major award, those
giving out the award are actually looking at the entire body of work for
an author, or their importance throughout the genre rather than looking
at the specific work the author was nominated for. That seems like
more of what we're dealing with here. Leiber wrote a poorly executed
disaster novel that had a very promising premise and a few thought
provoking ideas, if it had been another author writing it maybe it would
have recieved just a nomination, since it was Leiber it won the award.
(Here are links to the two reviews I mentioned if you want to see them:
Jordison's 'Bad' review: Here
Goldstein's 'Good' review: There
These are good examples of some other takes on the material).
No comments:
Post a Comment