What do you think?
Rate this book
Voyage to Alpha Centauri
Set eighty years in the future, this novel by the best-selling author Michael O'Brien is about an expedition sent from the planet Earth to Alpha Centauri, the star closest to our solar system. The Kosmos, a great ship that the central character Neil de Hoyos describes as a "flying city," is immense in size and capable of more than half light-speed. Hoyos is a Nobel Prize winning physicist who has played a major role in designing the ship. Hoyos has signed on as a passenger because he desires to escape the seemingly benign totalitarian government that controls everything on his home planet. He is a skeptical and quirky misanthropic humanist with old tragedies, loves, and hatreds that are secreted in his memory. The surprises that await him on the voyage--and its destination--will shatter all of his assumptions and point him to a true new horizon.
Science fiction and fantasy literature are genres that have become dominant forces in contemporary worldwide culture. Our fascination with the near-angelic powers of new technology, its benefits and dangers, its potential for obsession and catastrophe, raises vital questions that this work explores about human nature and the cosmos, about man's image of himself and where he is going--and why he seeks to go there.
Science fiction and fantasy literature are genres that have become dominant forces in contemporary worldwide culture. Our fascination with the near-angelic powers of new technology, its benefits and dangers, its potential for obsession and catastrophe, raises vital questions that this work explores about human nature and the cosmos, about man's image of himself and where he is going--and why he seeks to go there.
587 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 2013
76 people are currently reading
1,050 people want to read
About the author
Michael D. O'Brien
42books766followersMichael D. O'Brien is a Roman Catholic author, artist, and frequent essayist and lecturer on faith and culture, living in Combermere, Ontario, Canada.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 97 reviews
July 14, 2021
Here we go, I have been ripped off again in 2021, and for the second time. I think I have to fine-tune my book-selection skills. The first time was a book supposedly treating the Etruscan civilization (and actually being a proclamation of activist, rampant woke-ism in disguise), and this time it is a conservative Christian book disguised as a work of science fiction.
The first time, at least, I managed to limit the damage by reading just a bit over half of a smallish book, while this time I stopped only after reading two-thirds of a pretty voluminous work of pretend-science-fiction.
In order not to seem too gullible as a reader, however, I must add that I perceived the first symptoms of the true character of this book after the first couple of hundred pages, but I elected to continue in the hope that these were just a few intellectual slips in a otherwise relatively well-written book (I also trusted the high overall rating of this book in GR). Unfortunately, this did not prove to be the case, and I felt impelled to stop when the author, through one of his main characters, indulged into a deeply embarrassing and utterly ridiculous (after all, we are in the 21-st century, aren't we?) defense of the literal truth of the Old Testament and the Noah's Ark. Truly brain-damaging stuff.
Moreover, the author seems to be defending a conservative Catholic perspective of the Bible, and in this he is at variance with the majority of the Catholic community itself, which has moved on, a long time ago (starting with Augustine in the 5th Century AD), from such literal and utterly indefensible position, a position which is only maintained by the most intellectually challenged forms of Evangelic Christianity, especially in the US.
This is not the only issue that I found with this book: what is sorely missing (which is unforgivable in a work of science fiction, especially one whose main theme is a interstellar voyage to another system), is the sense of dread and wonder at the sheer immensity of the Universe and at its awesome, ruthless and uncompromising beauty, the feeling of an impelling and irresistible yearning for exploration and discovery of its mysteries, a craving for alien new experiences, a confident striving for the unknown. There are no visionaries of the likes of Carl Sagan, Neil DeGrasse Tyson or Elon Musk in this book.
The intellectual world of the main characters is strangely claustrophobic - even the description of the new world is just a less-than-plausible pantomime of the Garden of Eden (coincidentally, with the only dangerous animals being snakes), and the voyage itself (which takes up a good part of the book, so it is not a negligible element of the story) is strangely uninspiring and feels almost like a very long subway commute trip, rather than the first interstellar trip of mankind.
The underlying problem, in my opinion, is that many conservative Christians have such a confined, claustrophobic, limited view of reality (and, on top of that, a reality closely and frequently influenced by a petty, vengeful and meddlesome God), that they lose the capacity to admire the poetry and mystery of the Universe. When you think that the Universe itself was created just a few thousand years ago at the whim of such small God, just for the benefit of one intelligent species on one planet, and that the Universe will end within the next few thousand years, your intellectual world is so limited that it becomes almost impossible to write inspiring science fiction.
To compound this problem, the dystopian character of the future society portrayed by the author is used as a weapon for a thinly disguised but indiscriminate attack on the ideal of the ongoing scientific and technological progress of human kind, and especially on the idea of secularism itself; this is admittedly a well-trodden path in dystopian science fiction (with the exception of the author's attack on secularism which, in a typical straw man argument, is represented in the book under the form of an extreme form of Jacobinism); however I personally much prefer the more fascinating, nuanced, sophisticated and better developed Universe as brought to life in masterpieces such as "Blade Runner", the latter being a world beautiful and magnificent in its decadent elements, and in its terrifying but breathtaking technological progress ("I have seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate").
I also want to highlight that the author's idea of a future, dystopian advanced society where any form of religious feeling and observance are strictly forbidden for reasons of societal control is quite preposterous, and surely at variance with much of the experience of human history: in fact, with the exception of the short-lived Jacobin regime in Revolutionary France and of the ill-fated Soviet-style communist experiment, much of human history has seen religious persecution enforced by the State NOT with the objective to promote atheism per se, but simply in order to promote its own version of religious creed as a means to enforcing better control of its subjetcs. The author is probably unaware of historical developments such as Byzantine Caesaropapism, the Albigensian Crusade or the Thirty Years� War (just to name a few).
While I uncompromisingly share the author's implicit message that religious freedom is one of the basic human rights (however, with the important proviso that such religious freedom must be exercised in the context of a secular State), I would also like to point that the authoritarian, antidemocratic and reactionary tendencies of some part of the Christian religious right in the US are clear for everybody to see, as are the obscurantist and repressive aspects of some strict Islamic regimes such as Saudi Arabia.
Not all is negative in this book, mind you; the author can write quite well, and some of his characters are undoubtedly quite interesting and well portrayed: some aspects of the human society evident in the starship community (especially the highly intrusive and deceitfully benign character of its leadership) are really well represented and thought-provoking, and this is the main reason why I decided to add one star to my initial 1-star rating: this however did not significantly lessen my overall deep sense of personal dissatisfaction with this book.
The first time, at least, I managed to limit the damage by reading just a bit over half of a smallish book, while this time I stopped only after reading two-thirds of a pretty voluminous work of pretend-science-fiction.
In order not to seem too gullible as a reader, however, I must add that I perceived the first symptoms of the true character of this book after the first couple of hundred pages, but I elected to continue in the hope that these were just a few intellectual slips in a otherwise relatively well-written book (I also trusted the high overall rating of this book in GR). Unfortunately, this did not prove to be the case, and I felt impelled to stop when the author, through one of his main characters, indulged into a deeply embarrassing and utterly ridiculous (after all, we are in the 21-st century, aren't we?) defense of the literal truth of the Old Testament and the Noah's Ark. Truly brain-damaging stuff.
Moreover, the author seems to be defending a conservative Catholic perspective of the Bible, and in this he is at variance with the majority of the Catholic community itself, which has moved on, a long time ago (starting with Augustine in the 5th Century AD), from such literal and utterly indefensible position, a position which is only maintained by the most intellectually challenged forms of Evangelic Christianity, especially in the US.
This is not the only issue that I found with this book: what is sorely missing (which is unforgivable in a work of science fiction, especially one whose main theme is a interstellar voyage to another system), is the sense of dread and wonder at the sheer immensity of the Universe and at its awesome, ruthless and uncompromising beauty, the feeling of an impelling and irresistible yearning for exploration and discovery of its mysteries, a craving for alien new experiences, a confident striving for the unknown. There are no visionaries of the likes of Carl Sagan, Neil DeGrasse Tyson or Elon Musk in this book.
The intellectual world of the main characters is strangely claustrophobic - even the description of the new world is just a less-than-plausible pantomime of the Garden of Eden (coincidentally, with the only dangerous animals being snakes), and the voyage itself (which takes up a good part of the book, so it is not a negligible element of the story) is strangely uninspiring and feels almost like a very long subway commute trip, rather than the first interstellar trip of mankind.
The underlying problem, in my opinion, is that many conservative Christians have such a confined, claustrophobic, limited view of reality (and, on top of that, a reality closely and frequently influenced by a petty, vengeful and meddlesome God), that they lose the capacity to admire the poetry and mystery of the Universe. When you think that the Universe itself was created just a few thousand years ago at the whim of such small God, just for the benefit of one intelligent species on one planet, and that the Universe will end within the next few thousand years, your intellectual world is so limited that it becomes almost impossible to write inspiring science fiction.
To compound this problem, the dystopian character of the future society portrayed by the author is used as a weapon for a thinly disguised but indiscriminate attack on the ideal of the ongoing scientific and technological progress of human kind, and especially on the idea of secularism itself; this is admittedly a well-trodden path in dystopian science fiction (with the exception of the author's attack on secularism which, in a typical straw man argument, is represented in the book under the form of an extreme form of Jacobinism); however I personally much prefer the more fascinating, nuanced, sophisticated and better developed Universe as brought to life in masterpieces such as "Blade Runner", the latter being a world beautiful and magnificent in its decadent elements, and in its terrifying but breathtaking technological progress ("I have seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate").
I also want to highlight that the author's idea of a future, dystopian advanced society where any form of religious feeling and observance are strictly forbidden for reasons of societal control is quite preposterous, and surely at variance with much of the experience of human history: in fact, with the exception of the short-lived Jacobin regime in Revolutionary France and of the ill-fated Soviet-style communist experiment, much of human history has seen religious persecution enforced by the State NOT with the objective to promote atheism per se, but simply in order to promote its own version of religious creed as a means to enforcing better control of its subjetcs. The author is probably unaware of historical developments such as Byzantine Caesaropapism, the Albigensian Crusade or the Thirty Years� War (just to name a few).
While I uncompromisingly share the author's implicit message that religious freedom is one of the basic human rights (however, with the important proviso that such religious freedom must be exercised in the context of a secular State), I would also like to point that the authoritarian, antidemocratic and reactionary tendencies of some part of the Christian religious right in the US are clear for everybody to see, as are the obscurantist and repressive aspects of some strict Islamic regimes such as Saudi Arabia.
Not all is negative in this book, mind you; the author can write quite well, and some of his characters are undoubtedly quite interesting and well portrayed: some aspects of the human society evident in the starship community (especially the highly intrusive and deceitfully benign character of its leadership) are really well represented and thought-provoking, and this is the main reason why I decided to add one star to my initial 1-star rating: this however did not significantly lessen my overall deep sense of personal dissatisfaction with this book.
March 25, 2014
Michael O'Brien has once again defined what I love about true science fiction (that it's not about fantasy). He has woven a masterful tale of space travel and exploration, while touching on hot topics (without ever calling them by name). His characters are so deeply formed you may find yourself looking over your shoulder to see if they're there.
I especially enjoyed the themes of hope in this storyline. It is all too easy to give up on humanity: to take the negative "here's where we're heading" viewpoint and blow things up. O'Brien, however, crafts a story that faces evil head-on and finds it lacking. In the midst of a society and culture that seems chillingly familiar to modern readers, he teases out the thread of light and expands it into a smile by the end.
Truly, this was one of the best books I've read in a while. Highly recommended.
I especially enjoyed the themes of hope in this storyline. It is all too easy to give up on humanity: to take the negative "here's where we're heading" viewpoint and blow things up. O'Brien, however, crafts a story that faces evil head-on and finds it lacking. In the midst of a society and culture that seems chillingly familiar to modern readers, he teases out the thread of light and expands it into a smile by the end.
Truly, this was one of the best books I've read in a while. Highly recommended.
January 27, 2014
The idea of "Christian" science fiction is nice, but the writing of it is hard. This longish effort of O'Brien shows the tension between this niceness of intention, and the hardship of realization.
The promise of "Christian science fiction" is something indeed that O'Brien offers. He brings to this project an established profile of a careful conservative Catholic writer. One thing that he actually delivers in this book is good-quality writing in a consistent, carefully crafted style. He does not descend into preaching rhetoric (always a danger with religious writers), nor do his symbols ever step out into the living room and shed their Halloween costumes. They remain decently veiled. So props for that.
Nevertheless, what happens to O'Brien occurs as a general malady for this troubled genre. And it is a malady that affects Christians in particular.
The premise of the science fiction genre is that it involves the construction of an alternative, but possible, world. Indeed, that is true of all novels -- in fact, the construction of a believable, conceivable "world" is the most important difference that distinguishes a novel from a short story (and anything else, for that matter). This is the business of a "sub-creator," as Tolkien would say -- the implication here is that "sub-creation" becomes, more than any other literary craft, most prominent in a novel.
In science fiction, the construction of the possible world is usually built upon a "scientific" foundation. "Science" here is defined as "materialistic" or "naturalistic" philosophy (not "science" in its best and real sense -- i.e., "actual knowledge"). I say "usually" here: if only to emphasize the fact that the science fiction genre is populated by a historic membership that accepts the metaphysical bias of materialistic philosophy.
I do not think it can be disproven that most science fiction -- headed up by the luminaries H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, Arthur C Clarke -- is rather jazzed up about the possibility of finding, and proving, that the traditional monotheistic God (especially the Trinity) does not exist, and therefore, need never trouble the poor human mind again with Its troublesome rules, expectations, and maddening interference in the management of the universe. This is the ironically and patently eschatological hope of science fiction -- and it is a very religious hope at that.
So in general, this is the generic promise of science fiction world building. Occasionally, exceptions to this rule creep in. C S Lewis' Space Trilogy is, in my mind, a fine, successful example of such an exception. In the hands of a master writer, such exceptionalism can work well (and, once in a while, the general readership agrees). The exception lies mainly in the importation of other genres into the often superficial "shopping mall" province of science fiction -- but it takes adept writing to manage such importation. Lewis does this in his first volume by melding motifs from the sea voyage (think "Odyssey" here), with the strangeness of alien lands, characters, flora and fauna. In the second, Lewis very perilously attempts (and I don't think with complete success) the importation of high fantasy and the rhetoric of the Paradiso. And finally, in the third novel, he brings into the contemporary moment the hard themes of dystopia and post-apocalypse (despite the comic fact that he closes his last tale with a fairy-tale deus ex machina).
It is strangely interesting how important the themes of dystopia and the post-apocalypse have become in the science fiction genre. It is almost as though the anti-theological world of the materialist philosophy collapses in on itself, as if cursed by its own black hole lodged in its soul.
Yes, I know. O'Brien "baptizes" (i.e., "Christianizes") his science fiction tale precisely in his oft-repeated theme of dystopia. Heck, there's even a nod to a possible apocalypse toward the end. The dystopic theme reveals itself in the cynical tone of the central character's narration (first person, for the most part -- a voice disrupted in the epilogue, of course). Even the description of the big space ship and the ubiquitous computer (ever an important character in dystopia) carries the heavy note of impending disaster.
And it is at this very appearance of dystopia where I lodge my biggest complaint about O'Brien's Christian tale of science fiction. When one engages the dystopia theme, one must create a malevolent culture. Perhaps a despot can be at the center of it, or even its source. Perhaps the malevolence can be communicated through the media, or through a virus (e.g., zombies), or through the Big Computer (i.e., virtual reality as in Neuromancer). This is not hard to do if one has accepted the premise of the genre: the notion of evolution proceeding beyond humanity and disposing of it -- like one does a pawn in chess en passé) -- is simply a logical extension of evolution in its anti-theological form (a form which, drearily, is a majority opinion). But if one does not accept this premise, then the dystopian work becomes more difficult.
Actually, if one is a Christian (as O'Brien is), then the work enters a realm that should be a genre in its own right: "Christian dystopia," that is, vis-a-vis "science fiction dystopia." The latter is easy, with easy lines of consistency and easy expectations of plot and character development. In a genre where most things are superficial -- as is expected with the bodiless realm is either dismissed completely or relegated to Halloween status) -- and so it is easy to deliver on one's promises. It is, as the nameless rider of spaghetti westerns should have observed, quite easy to paint the town red when the town is composed of facades and rote characters.
But Christian dystopic literature must be apocalyptic in a believable, literary manner -- that is, in a manner where characters become human; where symbols become flesh, or real flora and fauna; where the tone prefers the feeling of "haunting" over "being bludgeoned by the doctrinaire axe': and, fundamentally, where the world is not only internally consistent, but is quite conceivably. And, most important of all, Christian dystopia must be cognizant of its inescapable genealogical link to the Gospel.
Ah yes. The one and only real story that all humans must find themselves nested within.
It is the more difficult task of the good Christian writer to build such a dystopic world that is believable, beautiful (i.e., literary), and most of all linked without disruption to the Gospel. It should go without saying that one cannot do this with a preaching rhetoric, because then it would not be beautiful literature. I think Flannery O'Connor did this, but she wrote short stories that only had to intimate, incompletely, a whole world. Fyodor Dostoevsky did this, but that novel -- Brothers Karamazov -- is sui generis. Tolkien did not, simply because he wasn't dystopic -- he was writing an alternative to Genesis (a frightening possibility), and he did it well (he was, after all, patently "eu-catastrophic," something that never happens effectively in any dystopic literature). G K Chesterton dabbled almost exclusively, in his novel experiments, with Christian dystopia -- but the novels he wrote do not qualify as good art so much as they stand as just holographic projections of his essays: one really does not find much reality in his rollicking tales (which I very much enjoy).
I think that O'Brien does what GK did -- i.e., that holographic business. He projects his favorite mashup of conservative Catholicism and rightwing libertarianism onto a spaceship. His conservative Catholicism works well for a literary dystopia. The rightwing libertarian note does not. In my mind, it falls with a cardboard thud.
I have lesser beefs with O'Brien. A number of things just did not hit the mark of believability. The Big Spaceship -- always an important character -- seemed as though it were designed by the plot: and I really don't know what to make of swimming pools and fireplaces in a lightspeed vessel. The origin story of the aliens is not only inconceivable, but is really theologically unforgivable. The climactic moment of salvation failed at "eu-catastrophe" because it is wildly arbitrary: one would hope that a science that could make for a lightspeed ship would 1) have safety mechanisms that would rule out the failure to begin with, and 2) not have navigation engineered with such vulnerabilities that would make the last-moment "patch" possible.
I will set aside my larger complaint of the conservative Catholic penchant for conflating itself with rightwing libertarianism -- a dull practice that is getting too much airplay these days. Perhaps this failure of imagination should be looked into.
These lesser beefs are problems that are depressingly over-represented in science fiction at large. Maybe O'Brien shouldn't be faulted for falling prey to the sirens of this genre.
I applaud O'Brien in his courageous choice of an unattractive character. He attempted a good backstory for this character, and it works for the most part. The post-climax narrative was clever and engaging. The resolution and redemption epilogue acted as a short-story in its own right (probably better than the entire novel). There were the more-than-faint notes of "Canticle for Leibowitz" running here and there -- and these notes were, for the most part, welcome.
At the end, then, O'Brien should leave off GK in the writing of novels, and follow Tolkien and Lewis more. He should remember that the catholic conservatism of the latter two is more artistic and imaginative than the unfortunate superficial complaints of other voices -- complaints that end up corroding art.
Still, it remains to be seen if a beautiful Christian space opera is possible at all.
The promise of "Christian science fiction" is something indeed that O'Brien offers. He brings to this project an established profile of a careful conservative Catholic writer. One thing that he actually delivers in this book is good-quality writing in a consistent, carefully crafted style. He does not descend into preaching rhetoric (always a danger with religious writers), nor do his symbols ever step out into the living room and shed their Halloween costumes. They remain decently veiled. So props for that.
Nevertheless, what happens to O'Brien occurs as a general malady for this troubled genre. And it is a malady that affects Christians in particular.
The premise of the science fiction genre is that it involves the construction of an alternative, but possible, world. Indeed, that is true of all novels -- in fact, the construction of a believable, conceivable "world" is the most important difference that distinguishes a novel from a short story (and anything else, for that matter). This is the business of a "sub-creator," as Tolkien would say -- the implication here is that "sub-creation" becomes, more than any other literary craft, most prominent in a novel.
In science fiction, the construction of the possible world is usually built upon a "scientific" foundation. "Science" here is defined as "materialistic" or "naturalistic" philosophy (not "science" in its best and real sense -- i.e., "actual knowledge"). I say "usually" here: if only to emphasize the fact that the science fiction genre is populated by a historic membership that accepts the metaphysical bias of materialistic philosophy.
I do not think it can be disproven that most science fiction -- headed up by the luminaries H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, Arthur C Clarke -- is rather jazzed up about the possibility of finding, and proving, that the traditional monotheistic God (especially the Trinity) does not exist, and therefore, need never trouble the poor human mind again with Its troublesome rules, expectations, and maddening interference in the management of the universe. This is the ironically and patently eschatological hope of science fiction -- and it is a very religious hope at that.
So in general, this is the generic promise of science fiction world building. Occasionally, exceptions to this rule creep in. C S Lewis' Space Trilogy is, in my mind, a fine, successful example of such an exception. In the hands of a master writer, such exceptionalism can work well (and, once in a while, the general readership agrees). The exception lies mainly in the importation of other genres into the often superficial "shopping mall" province of science fiction -- but it takes adept writing to manage such importation. Lewis does this in his first volume by melding motifs from the sea voyage (think "Odyssey" here), with the strangeness of alien lands, characters, flora and fauna. In the second, Lewis very perilously attempts (and I don't think with complete success) the importation of high fantasy and the rhetoric of the Paradiso. And finally, in the third novel, he brings into the contemporary moment the hard themes of dystopia and post-apocalypse (despite the comic fact that he closes his last tale with a fairy-tale deus ex machina).
It is strangely interesting how important the themes of dystopia and the post-apocalypse have become in the science fiction genre. It is almost as though the anti-theological world of the materialist philosophy collapses in on itself, as if cursed by its own black hole lodged in its soul.
Yes, I know. O'Brien "baptizes" (i.e., "Christianizes") his science fiction tale precisely in his oft-repeated theme of dystopia. Heck, there's even a nod to a possible apocalypse toward the end. The dystopic theme reveals itself in the cynical tone of the central character's narration (first person, for the most part -- a voice disrupted in the epilogue, of course). Even the description of the big space ship and the ubiquitous computer (ever an important character in dystopia) carries the heavy note of impending disaster.
And it is at this very appearance of dystopia where I lodge my biggest complaint about O'Brien's Christian tale of science fiction. When one engages the dystopia theme, one must create a malevolent culture. Perhaps a despot can be at the center of it, or even its source. Perhaps the malevolence can be communicated through the media, or through a virus (e.g., zombies), or through the Big Computer (i.e., virtual reality as in Neuromancer). This is not hard to do if one has accepted the premise of the genre: the notion of evolution proceeding beyond humanity and disposing of it -- like one does a pawn in chess en passé) -- is simply a logical extension of evolution in its anti-theological form (a form which, drearily, is a majority opinion). But if one does not accept this premise, then the dystopian work becomes more difficult.
Actually, if one is a Christian (as O'Brien is), then the work enters a realm that should be a genre in its own right: "Christian dystopia," that is, vis-a-vis "science fiction dystopia." The latter is easy, with easy lines of consistency and easy expectations of plot and character development. In a genre where most things are superficial -- as is expected with the bodiless realm is either dismissed completely or relegated to Halloween status) -- and so it is easy to deliver on one's promises. It is, as the nameless rider of spaghetti westerns should have observed, quite easy to paint the town red when the town is composed of facades and rote characters.
But Christian dystopic literature must be apocalyptic in a believable, literary manner -- that is, in a manner where characters become human; where symbols become flesh, or real flora and fauna; where the tone prefers the feeling of "haunting" over "being bludgeoned by the doctrinaire axe': and, fundamentally, where the world is not only internally consistent, but is quite conceivably. And, most important of all, Christian dystopia must be cognizant of its inescapable genealogical link to the Gospel.
Ah yes. The one and only real story that all humans must find themselves nested within.
It is the more difficult task of the good Christian writer to build such a dystopic world that is believable, beautiful (i.e., literary), and most of all linked without disruption to the Gospel. It should go without saying that one cannot do this with a preaching rhetoric, because then it would not be beautiful literature. I think Flannery O'Connor did this, but she wrote short stories that only had to intimate, incompletely, a whole world. Fyodor Dostoevsky did this, but that novel -- Brothers Karamazov -- is sui generis. Tolkien did not, simply because he wasn't dystopic -- he was writing an alternative to Genesis (a frightening possibility), and he did it well (he was, after all, patently "eu-catastrophic," something that never happens effectively in any dystopic literature). G K Chesterton dabbled almost exclusively, in his novel experiments, with Christian dystopia -- but the novels he wrote do not qualify as good art so much as they stand as just holographic projections of his essays: one really does not find much reality in his rollicking tales (which I very much enjoy).
I think that O'Brien does what GK did -- i.e., that holographic business. He projects his favorite mashup of conservative Catholicism and rightwing libertarianism onto a spaceship. His conservative Catholicism works well for a literary dystopia. The rightwing libertarian note does not. In my mind, it falls with a cardboard thud.
I have lesser beefs with O'Brien. A number of things just did not hit the mark of believability. The Big Spaceship -- always an important character -- seemed as though it were designed by the plot: and I really don't know what to make of swimming pools and fireplaces in a lightspeed vessel. The origin story of the aliens is not only inconceivable, but is really theologically unforgivable. The climactic moment of salvation failed at "eu-catastrophe" because it is wildly arbitrary: one would hope that a science that could make for a lightspeed ship would 1) have safety mechanisms that would rule out the failure to begin with, and 2) not have navigation engineered with such vulnerabilities that would make the last-moment "patch" possible.
I will set aside my larger complaint of the conservative Catholic penchant for conflating itself with rightwing libertarianism -- a dull practice that is getting too much airplay these days. Perhaps this failure of imagination should be looked into.
These lesser beefs are problems that are depressingly over-represented in science fiction at large. Maybe O'Brien shouldn't be faulted for falling prey to the sirens of this genre.
I applaud O'Brien in his courageous choice of an unattractive character. He attempted a good backstory for this character, and it works for the most part. The post-climax narrative was clever and engaging. The resolution and redemption epilogue acted as a short-story in its own right (probably better than the entire novel). There were the more-than-faint notes of "Canticle for Leibowitz" running here and there -- and these notes were, for the most part, welcome.
At the end, then, O'Brien should leave off GK in the writing of novels, and follow Tolkien and Lewis more. He should remember that the catholic conservatism of the latter two is more artistic and imaginative than the unfortunate superficial complaints of other voices -- complaints that end up corroding art.
Still, it remains to be seen if a beautiful Christian space opera is possible at all.
May 5, 2014
I'm a fan of Michael D. O'Brien, so I know his stories are long. Since I love his writing, I enjoy every chapter and always wish the novel to never end. This is exactly how I felt about Voyage to Alpha Centauri.
His books are like nature walks. I mean you have to stop, smell the roses, and enjoy. You can't race through them. They're not suspenseful thrillers. They make you think.
They'll leave a mark.
His books are like nature walks. I mean you have to stop, smell the roses, and enjoy. You can't race through them. They're not suspenseful thrillers. They make you think.
They'll leave a mark.
February 6, 2022
"O mankind, why, why are you so blind, when you can have this!"
The reviews complaining about Voyage to Alpha Centauri being a religious "bait and switch" are unfounded. The author is openly Catholic, has composed other Catholic works of fiction, and makes it quite clear to those even a little familiar with Catholicism that this will be a Catholic book from about page 10. Hoyos' boyhood experience with his leg in the first few pages is jesuitical. Appropriate, as he goes on to be a master scientist.
Furthermore, the idea that religious works in the genre of science fiction aren't "real" science fiction is nonsense. The science fiction genre is often used to explore philosophical and religious questions, including man's relationship to man, man's relationship to machine, and man's relationship to the eternal.
In Voyage to Alpha Centauri, O'Brien explores all three of these themes in-depth. Masterfully, he delves into the harsh consequences of secular humanism and paganism in parallel, and near the climax shows the two to be opposite extremes which result in similar attitudes and behaviors among their adherents. You can take man out of religion, but you cannot take religion out of man.
I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in a good Catholic take on our burgeoning modern-day secular religion, even those not usually inclined to reading science fiction.
The reviews complaining about Voyage to Alpha Centauri being a religious "bait and switch" are unfounded. The author is openly Catholic, has composed other Catholic works of fiction, and makes it quite clear to those even a little familiar with Catholicism that this will be a Catholic book from about page 10. Hoyos' boyhood experience with his leg in the first few pages is jesuitical. Appropriate, as he goes on to be a master scientist.
Furthermore, the idea that religious works in the genre of science fiction aren't "real" science fiction is nonsense. The science fiction genre is often used to explore philosophical and religious questions, including man's relationship to man, man's relationship to machine, and man's relationship to the eternal.
In Voyage to Alpha Centauri, O'Brien explores all three of these themes in-depth. Masterfully, he delves into the harsh consequences of secular humanism and paganism in parallel, and near the climax shows the two to be opposite extremes which result in similar attitudes and behaviors among their adherents. You can take man out of religion, but you cannot take religion out of man.
I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in a good Catholic take on our burgeoning modern-day secular religion, even those not usually inclined to reading science fiction.
November 13, 2020
Verbum
Split, 2016.
Prijevod: Mijo Pavić
Sjajna knjiga! Bliska budućnost, ne promijenimo li kurs, bi mogla donijeti zabranu ove knjige koja se zasudila dirnuti u tekovine 1789.
No, prije svega jezik.
Jezik je tipični primjer tržišnog realizma s nekim jačim dijelovima prilikom gradnje scena koje su emotivno i naratorski nabijene. Određeni kadrovi se sjajno oformljuju jezikom. Ipak, nikada se ne postiže razina jezične aktualizacije koja bi bila na razini visoke umjetnosti. Navedeno je jedan od razloga zašto je četvorka prevagnula.
Tehnologija pisanja postiže da se u velikim dijelovima knjige sam roman guta kao što vrijeme guta ruševine. Stil pisanja podsjeća na Micheala Crichtona i Jamesa Rollinsa (/review/show...).
U pogledu konstrukcije roman je polifoničan, posjeduje dvojicu autodijegetičkih pripovjedača te fragmente mnogih pisama, poruka i sl. koji su izravno unešeni u sam glavni tok naracije. U biti mogli bismo reći da je roman bifoničan jer je biautodijagetički.
Radnja se odvija u dvije različite vremenske točke u budućnosti. Prvotna, i najdulja, jest ona koja opisuje putovanje s kraja 21. i početka 22. stoljeća do Alphe Centauri, druga se odvija nekih dvije stotina ili tri stotina kasnije na planetu .
Sadržajno roman je prividno science fiction. Bit romana se ne osniva na opisivanju ekspedicije koja je krenula 2097. do najbliže zvijezde, već kritička razgradnja održivog razvoja i feminizma kao kopiladi 1789.
U tom pogledu početak romana se doima poput heterotopije (svemirski brod kao mjesto periferno društvu, kao mjesto s drukčijim pravilima društvenog uređenja od klasičnih), no u biti se pokazuje da je svemirski brod samo ogled onoga društvenog uređenja na Zemlji, da je distopija.
2097., godina početka ekspedicije, svijetom je zavladala jedna jedina vlada koja počiva na održivom razvoju te svim ostalim dogmama proisteklim iz krvavo-dogmatične 1789.
Na prvi pogled ideja vladavine jedne jedine vlade, jedne svjetske države, je uistinu glupa i izlizana, no ovaj roman se u biti ne fokusira previše na taj koncept, navedeni koncept je više samo podloga ideološkom polju bitke.
2097. ljudi radi zaštite okoliša ne smiju imati više od jednog djeteta, u vlastitom dvorištu ne mogu posjeći stablo,sve religije su zabranjene. Pobijedila je ta veleumnost liberala te su antifašisti i liberali pokazali svoje pravo lice.
Danas Slavoj Žižek otvoreno govori kako bi trebalo na svjetskoj razini uvesti neko netržišno/naddržavno tijelo koje bi tehnikama komandnog gospodarstva kontroliralo sječu šuma i prašuma. Slobodno tržište je, prema Žižeku, nesposobno samo sebe kontrolirati u sječi šuma te ako se kapitalizam ne zauzda odu sve šume.
Još kada sam bio dijete tata mi je kupovao enciklopedije za odrasle u vezi životinja, te enciklopedije su bile s početka ili sredine devedestih. Godina 2000. se u njima označavala kao glavna prekretnica, sve te propagande su prale mozak da će već 2000. ne znam koliko hektara prašuma nestati.
I eto nas u 2019., a Amazona i dalje stoji. Ja sada pitam sve vjernike održivog razvoja, sve kognitivne plićine kada će se napokon vaši ledenjaci otopiti, kada će napokon vaše prašume nestati? Slušamo vaša laprdanja već više desetljeća, a ono što laprdate nikako da se dogodi.
Nihilizam održivog razvoja, i samim time totalitarna narav te ideologije, se odražava u mnogim glupostima poput toga da život životinja vrijedi jednako kao život čovjeka, ima čak vjernika fundamentalista koji tvrde da je život biljke jednako vrijedan životu čovjeka.
Najžalosnije je što svi ti prijatelji životinja, svi ti vjernici u ekologiju i održivi razvoj uistinu misle da imaju otvoreni um kada kažu da je život psa jednako vrijedan životu čovjeka. Upravo u tome leži opasnost za sve nas od takvih fundamentalista, nacisti su por cierto također jako vjerovali u ekologiju, i u čisti okoliš. Nacistička Njemačka je bila prva država koja je prodavala maglu o tome da ljudi mijenjaju klimu.
Zato vjernici u ljudska prava, u održiv razvoj, u evoluciju i u cijeli niz drugih gluposti i ne vide vlastitu mračnu dvoličnost kada tvrde da je neko prljavo pseto vrijedno poput čovjeka, dok ljudski fetus nije čovjek te ne zaslužuje živjeti.
Mi živimo smrt. Feminizam/održiv razvoj/ekologija/rodna ideologija su ubili daleko više ljudi nego njihovi antifašistički saveznici (Staljin i Mao) ili njihova fašistička strana iste medalje modernizma (Adolf Luzer Hitler). Pobačaj je holokaust koji svjedoči o nihilizmu i totalitarizmu baš zato jer milijuni misle da je pobačaj izraz slobode. Isto kao što milijuni u Sjevernoj Koreji misle također da je pobačaj izraz slobode i da je Partija izraz slobode.
Zanimljivo je kako je Krist i dalje revolucionaran (na pozitivan način, ne na onaj smrdljivi način iz 1789.) i nakon dvije tisuće godina.
Protuobiteljski sentiment današnjice je totalitaran. Obitelj se predstavlja kao socijalni konstrukt, kao nešto što i nije ništa suštinsko, zagovara se hedonizam, pobačaj, promjena spola i roda. Sve navedeno se perfidno predstavlja kao sloboda, a nema većih okova od ljudskih prava.
Ako je nešto socijalni konstrukt to znači da nije bilo oduvijek i da u istom vremenu nije na isti način prisutno u različitim društvima. Istina je da su obitelj, rod i druge stvari socijalni konstrukt, ali kako ih ta činjenica da su socijalni konstrukt može diskreditirati? Samo viđenje nečega kao socijalni konstrukt je također samo po sebi socijalni konstrukt. Doživljavati nešto socijalnim konstruktom je također socijalni konstrukt. Time se ogledava nelogičnost i dogmatizam rodne ideologije i feminizma. Kada je nešto protiv zdravog razuma i kada je nešto dogmatično ono je time totalitarno.
Probudite se!
Velika većina likova koje protagonist (prvi autodijegetički narator) upoznaje žele imati više djece, no navedeno bi bilo protuzakonito. Oni, kao i mi sve više, žive u svijetu koji misli da su bitnije životinje i priroda nego čovjek. Negira se ontološka hijerarhija Bića, kada se negira Boga, onda se negira i Čovjeka.
Kada ateizam sa svojim dronovima gađa zdrave i mnogobrojne afganistanske obitelji u ime društva kod kojega je pobačaj nekakvo pravo jasno je da su sile zla preuzele ovaj svijet.
Nedvojbeno je da postoje sile zla i sile dobra.
A, u konačnici tko je to koji je došao poremetiti normalno, tko u biti stoji iza oblačenja dječaka u djevojčice, i obratno, iza pustih kockarnica i kladionica, iza pobačaja i gej parada? Spominje ga Biblija kao velikog negativca.
Iza totalitarne ideologije održivog razvoja, feminizma, rodne ideologije i drugih inačica stoji nešto metafizičko, nešto što je Biblija prozvala kao onog koji donosi konfuziju i razdor.
Naravno, možete misliti da je čovjek nastao od majmuna, to mora da je istina kada to kažu znanstvenici i stare kosti.
Previše sam nabubrio u svojim razmišljanjima, ali eto jednostavno izlazi iz mene.
Skrećem s ovog romana, no mislim da ne skrećem s teme.
Uostalom, uvijek možete otvoriti Guardian i čitati o tome kako su žene diskriminirane ili kako se eto još jedan ledenjak otopio. Sve to mora da je istinito!
Vratimo se na sam roman jednim citatom koji prikazuje sjećanja protagonista na to kako su ljudi skrivali djecu od liberala:
"-Policija uvijek brzo dođe. Dolazi nenajavljeno.- rekao sam.
-Da, zato i jesmo napravili labirint od prikolica.-
-To je gradić prepun luckastih uličica. Mislio sam da je to zato što su naši ljudi budalasti.-
-To je zato što su naši ljudi pametni i vole svoju djecu. Kasnije su policija i socijalni radnici počeli koristiti helikoptere i skenere koji registriraju tjelesnu toplinu pa se nije bilo lako skriti....
-Da, majke su se izmjenjivale na straži. Kada bi na cesti vidjele neobičan automobil ili kada bi se na nebu pojavila lebdjelica, zazvonile bi starim mjedenim zvonima- istim onima koja je tvoja mama koristila prigodom svečanosti piñate."
Nakratko ću se vratiti na samu radnju, a onda slijede finale osvtra.
Planet koji je i cilj same ekspedicije otkriva da je na njemu bila davno prije jedna civilizacija. Očekivah svemirce, no ugodno iznenađenje u pogledu radnje jest to što ekspedicija otkriva da su ljudi u vrijeme Sumera kolonizirali taj planet. Time je ekspedicija drugi ljudski posjet toj planeti. Kraj romana će donijeti jedan sablastan treći posjet planetu koji će izvršiti samo mrtvi.
Autor je kreativno promijenio tipični topos toga da su ljudi nastali od svemiraca ili da su svemirci nas davno posjetili na način što je iznio da je bila posjećena od ljudi još za vrijeme Sumera. Kul je ta sadržajna razigranost da su Sumerani imali svemirske brodove.
Ovime vam ne otkrivam sam kraj romana, već samo sam kraj prve narativne putanje, kraj onoga što iznosi prvi autodijegetički narator.
Dronovi i nadzorne kamere su duboko povezane s gej paradama i ženskim pravima. Kao što sam već prije spomenuo u tekstu, nije čudno da liberalni Babilon gađa zdravo afganistansko pastirsko društvo, jedno od rijetkih društava koje je normalno, u kojemu ne postoji egalitarna laž.
Pogledajte sami kako su liberalne i ekološke ovce spremne na još veću kontrolu svog voljenog Babilona; te .
Nemojte dopustiti da vas uvjere da je životinja bitnija od nerođenog djeteta.
Ponavljam, dronovi i imperijalistički ratovi idu ruku pod ruku s feminizmom i ekologijom. Plantaža američke Demokratske partije je paradigmatski primjer toga.
Dosta je bilo ljudskih prava i granata!
Split, 2016.
Prijevod: Mijo Pavić
Sjajna knjiga! Bliska budućnost, ne promijenimo li kurs, bi mogla donijeti zabranu ove knjige koja se zasudila dirnuti u tekovine 1789.
No, prije svega jezik.
Jezik je tipični primjer tržišnog realizma s nekim jačim dijelovima prilikom gradnje scena koje su emotivno i naratorski nabijene. Određeni kadrovi se sjajno oformljuju jezikom. Ipak, nikada se ne postiže razina jezične aktualizacije koja bi bila na razini visoke umjetnosti. Navedeno je jedan od razloga zašto je četvorka prevagnula.
Tehnologija pisanja postiže da se u velikim dijelovima knjige sam roman guta kao što vrijeme guta ruševine. Stil pisanja podsjeća na Micheala Crichtona i Jamesa Rollinsa (/review/show...).
U pogledu konstrukcije roman je polifoničan, posjeduje dvojicu autodijegetičkih pripovjedača te fragmente mnogih pisama, poruka i sl. koji su izravno unešeni u sam glavni tok naracije. U biti mogli bismo reći da je roman bifoničan jer je biautodijagetički.
Radnja se odvija u dvije različite vremenske točke u budućnosti. Prvotna, i najdulja, jest ona koja opisuje putovanje s kraja 21. i početka 22. stoljeća do Alphe Centauri, druga se odvija nekih dvije stotina ili tri stotina kasnije na planetu .
Sadržajno roman je prividno science fiction. Bit romana se ne osniva na opisivanju ekspedicije koja je krenula 2097. do najbliže zvijezde, već kritička razgradnja održivog razvoja i feminizma kao kopiladi 1789.
U tom pogledu početak romana se doima poput heterotopije (svemirski brod kao mjesto periferno društvu, kao mjesto s drukčijim pravilima društvenog uređenja od klasičnih), no u biti se pokazuje da je svemirski brod samo ogled onoga društvenog uređenja na Zemlji, da je distopija.
2097., godina početka ekspedicije, svijetom je zavladala jedna jedina vlada koja počiva na održivom razvoju te svim ostalim dogmama proisteklim iz krvavo-dogmatične 1789.
Na prvi pogled ideja vladavine jedne jedine vlade, jedne svjetske države, je uistinu glupa i izlizana, no ovaj roman se u biti ne fokusira previše na taj koncept, navedeni koncept je više samo podloga ideološkom polju bitke.
2097. ljudi radi zaštite okoliša ne smiju imati više od jednog djeteta, u vlastitom dvorištu ne mogu posjeći stablo,sve religije su zabranjene. Pobijedila je ta veleumnost liberala te su antifašisti i liberali pokazali svoje pravo lice.
Danas Slavoj Žižek otvoreno govori kako bi trebalo na svjetskoj razini uvesti neko netržišno/naddržavno tijelo koje bi tehnikama komandnog gospodarstva kontroliralo sječu šuma i prašuma. Slobodno tržište je, prema Žižeku, nesposobno samo sebe kontrolirati u sječi šuma te ako se kapitalizam ne zauzda odu sve šume.
Još kada sam bio dijete tata mi je kupovao enciklopedije za odrasle u vezi životinja, te enciklopedije su bile s početka ili sredine devedestih. Godina 2000. se u njima označavala kao glavna prekretnica, sve te propagande su prale mozak da će već 2000. ne znam koliko hektara prašuma nestati.
I eto nas u 2019., a Amazona i dalje stoji. Ja sada pitam sve vjernike održivog razvoja, sve kognitivne plićine kada će se napokon vaši ledenjaci otopiti, kada će napokon vaše prašume nestati? Slušamo vaša laprdanja već više desetljeća, a ono što laprdate nikako da se dogodi.
Nihilizam održivog razvoja, i samim time totalitarna narav te ideologije, se odražava u mnogim glupostima poput toga da život životinja vrijedi jednako kao život čovjeka, ima čak vjernika fundamentalista koji tvrde da je život biljke jednako vrijedan životu čovjeka.
Najžalosnije je što svi ti prijatelji životinja, svi ti vjernici u ekologiju i održivi razvoj uistinu misle da imaju otvoreni um kada kažu da je život psa jednako vrijedan životu čovjeka. Upravo u tome leži opasnost za sve nas od takvih fundamentalista, nacisti su por cierto također jako vjerovali u ekologiju, i u čisti okoliš. Nacistička Njemačka je bila prva država koja je prodavala maglu o tome da ljudi mijenjaju klimu.
Zato vjernici u ljudska prava, u održiv razvoj, u evoluciju i u cijeli niz drugih gluposti i ne vide vlastitu mračnu dvoličnost kada tvrde da je neko prljavo pseto vrijedno poput čovjeka, dok ljudski fetus nije čovjek te ne zaslužuje živjeti.
Mi živimo smrt. Feminizam/održiv razvoj/ekologija/rodna ideologija su ubili daleko više ljudi nego njihovi antifašistički saveznici (Staljin i Mao) ili njihova fašistička strana iste medalje modernizma (Adolf Luzer Hitler). Pobačaj je holokaust koji svjedoči o nihilizmu i totalitarizmu baš zato jer milijuni misle da je pobačaj izraz slobode. Isto kao što milijuni u Sjevernoj Koreji misle također da je pobačaj izraz slobode i da je Partija izraz slobode.
Zanimljivo je kako je Krist i dalje revolucionaran (na pozitivan način, ne na onaj smrdljivi način iz 1789.) i nakon dvije tisuće godina.
Protuobiteljski sentiment današnjice je totalitaran. Obitelj se predstavlja kao socijalni konstrukt, kao nešto što i nije ništa suštinsko, zagovara se hedonizam, pobačaj, promjena spola i roda. Sve navedeno se perfidno predstavlja kao sloboda, a nema većih okova od ljudskih prava.
Ako je nešto socijalni konstrukt to znači da nije bilo oduvijek i da u istom vremenu nije na isti način prisutno u različitim društvima. Istina je da su obitelj, rod i druge stvari socijalni konstrukt, ali kako ih ta činjenica da su socijalni konstrukt može diskreditirati? Samo viđenje nečega kao socijalni konstrukt je također samo po sebi socijalni konstrukt. Doživljavati nešto socijalnim konstruktom je također socijalni konstrukt. Time se ogledava nelogičnost i dogmatizam rodne ideologije i feminizma. Kada je nešto protiv zdravog razuma i kada je nešto dogmatično ono je time totalitarno.
Probudite se!
Velika većina likova koje protagonist (prvi autodijegetički narator) upoznaje žele imati više djece, no navedeno bi bilo protuzakonito. Oni, kao i mi sve više, žive u svijetu koji misli da su bitnije životinje i priroda nego čovjek. Negira se ontološka hijerarhija Bića, kada se negira Boga, onda se negira i Čovjeka.
Kada ateizam sa svojim dronovima gađa zdrave i mnogobrojne afganistanske obitelji u ime društva kod kojega je pobačaj nekakvo pravo jasno je da su sile zla preuzele ovaj svijet.
Nedvojbeno je da postoje sile zla i sile dobra.
A, u konačnici tko je to koji je došao poremetiti normalno, tko u biti stoji iza oblačenja dječaka u djevojčice, i obratno, iza pustih kockarnica i kladionica, iza pobačaja i gej parada? Spominje ga Biblija kao velikog negativca.
Iza totalitarne ideologije održivog razvoja, feminizma, rodne ideologije i drugih inačica stoji nešto metafizičko, nešto što je Biblija prozvala kao onog koji donosi konfuziju i razdor.
Naravno, možete misliti da je čovjek nastao od majmuna, to mora da je istina kada to kažu znanstvenici i stare kosti.
Previše sam nabubrio u svojim razmišljanjima, ali eto jednostavno izlazi iz mene.
Skrećem s ovog romana, no mislim da ne skrećem s teme.
Uostalom, uvijek možete otvoriti Guardian i čitati o tome kako su žene diskriminirane ili kako se eto još jedan ledenjak otopio. Sve to mora da je istinito!
Vratimo se na sam roman jednim citatom koji prikazuje sjećanja protagonista na to kako su ljudi skrivali djecu od liberala:
"-Policija uvijek brzo dođe. Dolazi nenajavljeno.- rekao sam.
-Da, zato i jesmo napravili labirint od prikolica.-
-To je gradić prepun luckastih uličica. Mislio sam da je to zato što su naši ljudi budalasti.-
-To je zato što su naši ljudi pametni i vole svoju djecu. Kasnije su policija i socijalni radnici počeli koristiti helikoptere i skenere koji registriraju tjelesnu toplinu pa se nije bilo lako skriti....
-Da, majke su se izmjenjivale na straži. Kada bi na cesti vidjele neobičan automobil ili kada bi se na nebu pojavila lebdjelica, zazvonile bi starim mjedenim zvonima- istim onima koja je tvoja mama koristila prigodom svečanosti piñate."
Nakratko ću se vratiti na samu radnju, a onda slijede finale osvtra.
Planet koji je i cilj same ekspedicije otkriva da je na njemu bila davno prije jedna civilizacija. Očekivah svemirce, no ugodno iznenađenje u pogledu radnje jest to što ekspedicija otkriva da su ljudi u vrijeme Sumera kolonizirali taj planet. Time je ekspedicija drugi ljudski posjet toj planeti. Kraj romana će donijeti jedan sablastan treći posjet planetu koji će izvršiti samo mrtvi.
Autor je kreativno promijenio tipični topos toga da su ljudi nastali od svemiraca ili da su svemirci nas davno posjetili na način što je iznio da je bila posjećena od ljudi još za vrijeme Sumera. Kul je ta sadržajna razigranost da su Sumerani imali svemirske brodove.
Ovime vam ne otkrivam sam kraj romana, već samo sam kraj prve narativne putanje, kraj onoga što iznosi prvi autodijegetički narator.
Dronovi i nadzorne kamere su duboko povezane s gej paradama i ženskim pravima. Kao što sam već prije spomenuo u tekstu, nije čudno da liberalni Babilon gađa zdravo afganistansko pastirsko društvo, jedno od rijetkih društava koje je normalno, u kojemu ne postoji egalitarna laž.
Pogledajte sami kako su liberalne i ekološke ovce spremne na još veću kontrolu svog voljenog Babilona; te .
Nemojte dopustiti da vas uvjere da je životinja bitnija od nerođenog djeteta.
Ponavljam, dronovi i imperijalistički ratovi idu ruku pod ruku s feminizmom i ekologijom. Plantaža američke Demokratske partije je paradigmatski primjer toga.
Dosta je bilo ljudskih prava i granata!
January 19, 2023
Absolutely incredible. Mildly dystopian science fiction with flashes of riveting beauty. The main character is a Nobel Prize winning physicist who loves fountain pens and appreciates well-bound books. What could be better?
April 17, 2014
I'm glad that's done. Maybe now I can focus on my schoolwork.
At times reminiscent of CS Lewis, at times channeling the struggle against stifling benevolence in Poul Anderson's Harvest of Stars, this book is one of the most unexpected page turners I've had the pleasure of discovering. It's literary without losing or disdaining the SF; Christian without being cheesy; Catholic without being alienating to us Protestant folks. I can't sing the praises of this book highly enough.
At times reminiscent of CS Lewis, at times channeling the struggle against stifling benevolence in Poul Anderson's Harvest of Stars, this book is one of the most unexpected page turners I've had the pleasure of discovering. It's literary without losing or disdaining the SF; Christian without being cheesy; Catholic without being alienating to us Protestant folks. I can't sing the praises of this book highly enough.
January 18, 2021
Stayed up until 1am way more nights than I should have reading this. Overly detailed at times and some science/astrophysics that just went over my head, but my gosh is the storytelling stunning. As I read this I also saw a lot of parallels with what is happening in our world right now, so provided me with much to think about in regards to government influence & censorship. I think my favorite of Michael O’Brien so far.
April 21, 2018
If I could, I would give this ten stars. It´s an amazing novel. I'm overwhelmed. A voyage to a possibly new earth and also a voyage into ourselves and out of ourselves. It´s about faith and belief in God and in our own power, of good and evil, of the consequences of our choices. It´s about how to measure the world, of what is most important to us. How we live and how we want to live.
November 24, 2015
This book, as all by Michael O'Brien, has an important story to tell. For those unfamiliar with the author, Michael O'Brien, he is one of my favorite storytellers ("Father Elijah" is without question one of my favorite books). Peter Kreeft compels us to include him in the ranks of Flannery O'Connor and C.S. Lewis.
"Voyage to Alpha Centauri has a fascinating plot, compelling characters (many who challenge me toward a more devout life), but most importantly profound insight into humanity, culture, technology, and the consequences of life without Christ. The only reason I gave it four stars instead of five is because it did bury me in details from time to time. However, it is worth the read and certainly worth getting to the end.
"We receive life so unthinkingly, often ungratefully. And this may be, in part, one of the causes of our worldwide devaluation of life in these times."
"Our world is drowning in communication, but starving for genuine communio - the union of true communion."
"Voyage to Alpha Centauri has a fascinating plot, compelling characters (many who challenge me toward a more devout life), but most importantly profound insight into humanity, culture, technology, and the consequences of life without Christ. The only reason I gave it four stars instead of five is because it did bury me in details from time to time. However, it is worth the read and certainly worth getting to the end.
"We receive life so unthinkingly, often ungratefully. And this may be, in part, one of the causes of our worldwide devaluation of life in these times."
"Our world is drowning in communication, but starving for genuine communio - the union of true communion."
March 8, 2020
This was pleasantly surprising. I liked the characters and the story flowed well. I thought it got a little bogged down in the end by retelling the same things from another perspective but I enjoyed the book overall. I wavered between 4 & 5 stars but am going with 5 since I never expected to find good science fiction in a Monastery gift shop.
October 13, 2024
This book is very long, but hard to put down. The main reason are the characters: the narrator, Neil de Hoyos, a physicist in his 70s whose theories made possible the travel to Alpha Centauri, and whose flashback memories build a very relatable back story; and his friends on board the Kosmos, sharing meals and meaningful conversations with Neil. During the long years of the trip, Neil and his friends discuss and then take action against the Kosmos directors, a miniature copy of the Earth's stifling government.
The second part contains the arrival to planet 7 in the Alpha Centauri system, the exploration of its geology, Eden-like flora and fauna (with the exception of poisonous snakes), the discovery of signs of an inteligent race, the settlement... The plot continues to be fast paced till the end, which I will not give away.
The second part contains the arrival to planet 7 in the Alpha Centauri system, the exploration of its geology, Eden-like flora and fauna (with the exception of poisonous snakes), the discovery of signs of an inteligent race, the settlement... The plot continues to be fast paced till the end, which I will not give away.
March 7, 2014
Beautifully written, literary science fiction? Sounds like an oxymoron, but famed novelist Michael O'Brien delivers with Voyage to Alpha Centauri. The prose is rich, detailed, descriptive, filled with insights and wry observations about humanity, told from the point of view of a physicist whose work made space travel possible. M
It's almost impossible to discuss this novel without spoiler alerts. My review for Perihelion Science Fiction offers more details than I can give here. In all, it's a haunting story, a cautionary tale, with a flicker of hope. It is not the escapist, feel-good kind of story I needed during the coldest, longest, most unrelenting winter I can remember in 50+ years of living in Iowa. But it's finally above freezing today - 40F!! - and after a week of "unwinding" mentally from this novel, a certain scene near the end is finally fading from my mind. O'Brien likely never intended for readers to see such horror, but for me, the darker aspects of the ending eclipsed the lighter side.
Truly, it's a marvelous addition to the realm of speculative fiction, aka science fiction. If you're looking for the fast pace of a space opera, look elsewhere. If you're looking for the kind of depth Dostoevsky and other 19thC writers delivered, here you'll find it, minus the verbosity of 19thC prose. The richness, depth of character and existential questions could keep a book club talking all night and for weeks on end. Long enough to get them through an 8-year voyage to another planet, even...
It's almost impossible to discuss this novel without spoiler alerts. My review for Perihelion Science Fiction offers more details than I can give here. In all, it's a haunting story, a cautionary tale, with a flicker of hope. It is not the escapist, feel-good kind of story I needed during the coldest, longest, most unrelenting winter I can remember in 50+ years of living in Iowa. But it's finally above freezing today - 40F!! - and after a week of "unwinding" mentally from this novel, a certain scene near the end is finally fading from my mind. O'Brien likely never intended for readers to see such horror, but for me, the darker aspects of the ending eclipsed the lighter side.
Truly, it's a marvelous addition to the realm of speculative fiction, aka science fiction. If you're looking for the fast pace of a space opera, look elsewhere. If you're looking for the kind of depth Dostoevsky and other 19thC writers delivered, here you'll find it, minus the verbosity of 19thC prose. The richness, depth of character and existential questions could keep a book club talking all night and for weeks on end. Long enough to get them through an 8-year voyage to another planet, even...
February 11, 2017
Overall the story was engaging. I was thrilled by the opportunity to travel aboard a starship to Alpha Centauri. Written as a journal by the inventor of the propulsion system, the story hooked me in bit by bit.
Many surprises throughout. Divided into three parts: the voyage, the planet and the return.
After reading I learned this was written by someone known for "Christian Sci-Fi" which would account for the inclusion of many theological discussions by the characters.
Many surprises throughout. Divided into three parts: the voyage, the planet and the return.
After reading I learned this was written by someone known for "Christian Sci-Fi" which would account for the inclusion of many theological discussions by the characters.
May 19, 2014
This was our first O'Brien book we've read, and thoroughly enjoyed it; though you need to walk with this book... it doesn't grab you and run.
It very much felt like we were on the voyage with them all: which of course had it's slow bits - it is 8 years to Alpha Centauri after all! Some reviewers referred to it being too slow or too long, but like any journey, pushing through the slow/tough bits produced a fantastic reward.
The story makes many twists and turns, and includes some shocking developments out of left-field: but it's beautifully written with some wonderful prose.
O'Brien has a wonderful wit, which we really appreciated, though it seemed to disappear during the journey (much like it would have on the journey I guess). The development / revelation of man's evil is shocking and impending, and unfortunately irresistible.
Highly recommended, but you need the time/space to live in it for the duration.
It very much felt like we were on the voyage with them all: which of course had it's slow bits - it is 8 years to Alpha Centauri after all! Some reviewers referred to it being too slow or too long, but like any journey, pushing through the slow/tough bits produced a fantastic reward.
The story makes many twists and turns, and includes some shocking developments out of left-field: but it's beautifully written with some wonderful prose.
O'Brien has a wonderful wit, which we really appreciated, though it seemed to disappear during the journey (much like it would have on the journey I guess). The development / revelation of man's evil is shocking and impending, and unfortunately irresistible.
Highly recommended, but you need the time/space to live in it for the duration.
September 27, 2015
Too long? Not long enough. Too much minutiae? I could have enjoyed even more detail. I guess his writing style is one that doesn't appeal to everyone, but it does to me. The human soul is endlessly interesting, especially in one who 'thinks', as Neil does. I loved the story, the people in the story, the way the story made me ponder the human experience outside the box of planet earth which only made me reflect more deeply on planet earth.
I'm not able to write a book-long review of this long book, but if you are one who mozies as opposed to one who races through a story, this is your type of book.
I'm not able to write a book-long review of this long book, but if you are one who mozies as opposed to one who races through a story, this is your type of book.
September 5, 2017
The book is not a fast, compelling read. It's a bit plodding for the first half - the outbound journey to Alpha Centauri, but as we get closer to the planet the action finally picks up, and the reader feels compelled onwards. I don't want to spoil the novel so I won't speak about it too much other than to say it's a refreshing sci-fi read because the questions of religion are explored, not ridiculed, and the all important question of technology's importance for our lives is what the book is wrapped around. Another generation's look at themes seen in A Canticle for Liebowitz.
The book is much too long for the content it delivers, and that's why the lower rating.
The book is much too long for the content it delivers, and that's why the lower rating.
December 31, 2024
This book is, unfortunately, a missed opportunity. While there’s a potentially powerful story buried within its pages, it’s buried so deeply under unnecessary length and irrelevant details that the narrative struggles to shine. At its core, the tale of an ancient, Baal-worshipping civilization swept away by the arrival of Christ holds great potential. But this has been told far more effectively elsewhere—Yeats, in just a few haunting verses, captures the essence far better:
“A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.�
The first half of the book is almost entirely irrelevant and could have been condensed into two paragraphs. The central situation is drawn out unnecessarily, and the ending feels tacked on, adding nothing of value to the story. It should have concluded with the death of Hoyos—anything after that is superfluous.
The prose itself is competent but unremarkable, lacking the spark to elevate the material. Additionally, the details feel poorly thought out, failing to create the immersive world or cohesive narrative this story deserves.
Ultimately, this could have been an excellent short story, or even a novella. As a novel, it overstays its welcome and underserves its themes. Two stars for the glimmers of potential that peek through, but I can’t recommend this one.
November 13, 2021
I first picked this up just out of loyalty to O’Brien, as the ‘sci-fi� thing isn’t really my thing. But I ended up loving it! The first portion of the book, on the journey to the planet, was kind of predictable O’Brien, driven by themes in common with the other books of his I have read. But things really took a fascinating turn once they got to the planet. Highly recommend!
Read
January 29, 2023Eerie, haunting, plausible
June 9, 2018
I enjoyed the narrator very much and really got sucked into his story. The book took on a variety of topics, without being didactic. Christian fiction done well.
READ FOR BOOK CLUB
READ FOR BOOK CLUB
October 8, 2024
I really enjoyed reading this ultimately disappointing book. It is still worth a read. SPOILERS FOLLOW.
This was a relatively interesting (fictional) conversion story. It probably didn't need to be in a sci fi setting. O'Brien appears to be a great storyteller. However, ultimately I was disappointed by the following:
1. The prose isn't very good. This is a function of the literary technique of making this a "found journal" of the main character, who is a physicist whose first language is Spanish; thus someone who is completely fluent in English but not a particularly amazing writer. Neil de Hoyos' "voice" fits the character very well, but this is a character who is, for example, basically ignorant of English poetry or most English literature, because he spent his adult life doing physics, not reading English lit. It makes sense that his private journal is not written in particularly exciting language, but it's still boring.
Re-reading this, I am righteously angry. If you want to write a book about a character who is a native Spanish speaker, then write the damn book in Spanish. If your Spanish isn't good enough to write such a character, then stop pretending you can. It's insulting.
2. Michael O'Brien (the author) isn't a genius physicist. Therefore Neil de Hoyos is not a genius physicist. Everyone says he is, but since we get to witness his personal reflections as written in his journal, it's very obvious that he's not a genius. His IQ is perhaps in the 120s at best. Look, you can be Lois Bujold and write a genius tactician like Miles Vorkosigan because that's a genius that is shown through action. You have your character win a battle against overwhelming odds and it's clear he's pretty smart. You don't have to show how his mind works, just that it does work. It's not possible to do that with a character whose genius is theory. Genius theoretical physicists spend the day surfing at the beach while weird mathematical equations bounce around in their heads until something clicks. Unless you actually are smart enough to spend your time thinking about that stuff, you can't write that character. The only thing you are capable of putting into their thoughts, which is where their genius necessarily shows itself, is your own thoughts. Which are not, you know, genius. Furthermore, it is not believable that a genius theoretical physicist is essentially ignorant of art and poetry. That's not how intelligence works. Intelligent people are intelligent. Someone might prefer to spend most of his time doing theoretical physics, but he's not going to be ignorant of all the other branches of human knowledge. Weirdly, de Hoyos is portrayed as being a gifted rhetorician who is ignorant of rhetoric. He's like a crippled Gary Stu. He's automatically a genius at a small set of discretely defined things and a dummy at everything else. What a lame character. A native Spanish speaker who writes his personal journal in English who is a genius theoretical physicist who never thinks about theoretical physics.
3. The premise that there is a "one world government" on Earth violates certain basic laws of political power. Yes, there are laws of politics which are independent of ideology. One of these is that it is not possible for there to exist a single political entity. Absent a political enemy, political power is irrelevant and thus does not come into existence. For the slow-witted, politics is the acquisition and exercise of power. You want power because you want to do something and there are people who want to stop you. If nobody opposes you, then you just do what you want. If you have an opposition, then you're not the sole political power. QED.
3B. The whole dystopian one world government thing is a stupid Boomer fantasy. "Well, things could be worse in the future." So we've got a future in which nobody eats meat. Where does the food come from then? Are we saying that all of the farmers growing soybeans don't eat burgers? Do you...know any farmers? Oh, the farming is all automated now. So...the men building and fixing the giant automatic farm machines...don't eat burgers? Do you...know any mechanics? Oh, and the "one world government" enforces a worldwide one child policy. And nobody did anything about it. Is the official story that illiterate goatherders from the Middle East blew up the World Trade Center by the judicious application of box cutters?
3C. Possible major spoiler: when the remnant colonize the alien planet, after the fact they mention that they have a "democratic" government. Also they're all Catholic, or apparently so. Since democracy is the devolution of authority to the lowest common denominator, and is therefore demonic, and a core doctrine of the Catholic Church is deference to proper authority, which is ultimately monarchical (Jesus is the King of the Universe), therefore Catholic integralism is incompatible with democracy.
4. Major Spoiler: The story takes place in the "real" world of roughly 2100 AD, and many of the characters are Catholic or at least Christian; this is an intrinsic part of the story. In this context, the story is that the planet these people go to is essentially an Edenic paradise. This contradicts scripture.
4B. It is not possible for the planet to actually be Eden. There is no means by which Man can return to the Garden under his own power on a spaceship.
4C. The story necessitates that God created an entire other planet, populated with Earth-like flora and fauna, but with no human stewardship. Who then is ruling over this planet? It can't be God, as the planet is in the distant past invaded by demon-worshipping (Nephilim) prehistoric humans fleeing the Flood. God is not an anarchist. It is not possible for there to be a planet teeming with life and no rational creature created in God's image to steward it.
4D. Where is the firmament of this world? There was no Flood on this alien planet. One could continue with all of the theological problems which arise when one posits an inhabited planet full of life which is entirely absent from any mention in Genesis. This is a huge problem for the book as a whole and probably makes what is obviously meant to be a pro-Catholic book deeply anti-Catholic teaching.
5. This dire theological mistake compounds a general misunderstanding of how natural ecologies work. There are absolutely no predators on the alien planet. It's stated that the Nephilim-worshippers brought poisonous snakes with them which were not indigenous to the planet. It's also stated that there are huge herds of ruminant-equivalent herbivores. That's impossible. Herding herbivores absent predation result in desertification. It is the predators which force the herd to move on before all the forage is eaten, leaving behind their manure which, mixed with the remaining plants, over time grows the "grass" back so that the herd can return again. Absent predation the herd stays in one place too long, eats all the grass, and thus creates a barren desert. Any planet populated solely by herbivores would be lifeless after a sufficient passage of time. You can't just wave your hands and say, "It's an alien planet." That's not how biology works.
6. It's a far lesser mistake than those above, but this book perpetuates the Boomer mythology that illegal aliens in the United States are devout and culturally significant members of the Catholic Church. That is simply not the case. If you go to a Catholic church in any part of the U.S. where there is a sizeable Latino immigrant population, you will find plenty of LEGAL immigrant families at Mass, but you won't find illegals. Most illegal aliens in the U.S. are not part of a functional family unit in the first place: it is girls being trafficked and men coming on their own to find work. These people are not, typically, practicing Catholics. The men who come to work and send their money back to a family in Mexico do not typically go to Mass on Sunday, they are either at work or drinking to blow off steam from being exploited by their employers. The girls who are enticed to come by promises of a nice life and then sold to a pimp are not allowed to go to Mass.
7. O'Brien continues the cowardly practice Western Catholics have of never mentioning the Jews. The Catholic Church is explicitly anti-Jewish. Not "anti-Semitic", anti-Jewish, as in "the people that killed Christ whom Christ said belong to their father the devil." (John 8:44) The Catholic Church prays for its lost brethren, the children of Israel, to repent and convert. You might think that if a Catholic author is writing a story set in 2100, that story might mention...what happened to the Jewish ethnostate of Israel? Did they repent? Is it still there? In fact, if all religion is supposedly banned and driven underground, what happened to the Jews? Are there still synagogues? What did the ADL have to say about it all?
8. WAIT Wait wait wait wait. Referencing 3B above, when they banned religion so that Catholics have to practice in secret, are we saying they ALSO banned religion in the dar-al-Islam? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. And the EARTH is still there? A character does mention that "World War 3 was pretty bad." Okay, my new theory is this entire story takes place in a simulation running on a computer on the dark side of the moon after the atheists tell the Mohammedans they can't pray facing Mecca or else we'll...socialize you appropriately and all life ends in nuclear fire.
8. The science stuff was frankly stupid. Supposedly they have "anti-gravity". That's the equivalent of saying you have "anti-electromagnetism". It's not a thing. "Anti-gravity" is a nonsense word. Is what is meant "a means of counteracting the force of gravity on an object?" You mean like...a hot air balloon? Terms like "antigravity" and "dilithium crystals" are magic words thrown into space operas as a sign to the reader that he is meant to focus on the descriptions of well-endowed green-skinned alien maidens and rough and ready Earth men with ray guns and dashing smiles. If you are pretending to write a serious science fiction story told from the point of view of a genius physicist...no. Antigravity is a no. Nobody intelligent talks that way except in make-believe, for fun.
9. MAJOR SPOILER. My favorite part in what was a not very good science fiction story (again, I liked other aspects of the story) was when the main character never actually gets to go to the planet. I had been really hoping that the expedition would find a barren ball of rock orbiting an alien star. A completely pointless voyage, except insofar as the characters could find meaning in the journey itself. I was very disappointed that of course at the end of their trip they find a beautiful, living planet. BO-ring. However, the fact that only a small number of the total passengers ever get to settle on the planet, and the MC is not one of them, was pretty good.
Ultimately, this was such a moving (though completely made up) conversion story that I'm still glad I read it despite all of the very disappointing flaws. I suppose I also thought Neil de Hoyos was a poorly chosen viewpoint character. The whole "Edward Abbey as a genius nuclear physicist" schtick is as lame as the character was. It would have been much better to tell the story of his conversion in the third person.
A final word: I doubt much of anyone not Catholic has ever finished this book. Please, please DO NOT recommend this book to nonbelievers. This is not effective evangelization. People who don't already believe are going to get partway into this and think, "God, this guy is an insufferable twit." OF COURSE all of the "good people" JUST SO HAPPEN to be Catholics. Or Russian Orthodox. Seriously people, nobody is convinced by this kind of thing.
This was a relatively interesting (fictional) conversion story. It probably didn't need to be in a sci fi setting. O'Brien appears to be a great storyteller. However, ultimately I was disappointed by the following:
1. The prose isn't very good. This is a function of the literary technique of making this a "found journal" of the main character, who is a physicist whose first language is Spanish; thus someone who is completely fluent in English but not a particularly amazing writer. Neil de Hoyos' "voice" fits the character very well, but this is a character who is, for example, basically ignorant of English poetry or most English literature, because he spent his adult life doing physics, not reading English lit. It makes sense that his private journal is not written in particularly exciting language, but it's still boring.
Re-reading this, I am righteously angry. If you want to write a book about a character who is a native Spanish speaker, then write the damn book in Spanish. If your Spanish isn't good enough to write such a character, then stop pretending you can. It's insulting.
2. Michael O'Brien (the author) isn't a genius physicist. Therefore Neil de Hoyos is not a genius physicist. Everyone says he is, but since we get to witness his personal reflections as written in his journal, it's very obvious that he's not a genius. His IQ is perhaps in the 120s at best. Look, you can be Lois Bujold and write a genius tactician like Miles Vorkosigan because that's a genius that is shown through action. You have your character win a battle against overwhelming odds and it's clear he's pretty smart. You don't have to show how his mind works, just that it does work. It's not possible to do that with a character whose genius is theory. Genius theoretical physicists spend the day surfing at the beach while weird mathematical equations bounce around in their heads until something clicks. Unless you actually are smart enough to spend your time thinking about that stuff, you can't write that character. The only thing you are capable of putting into their thoughts, which is where their genius necessarily shows itself, is your own thoughts. Which are not, you know, genius. Furthermore, it is not believable that a genius theoretical physicist is essentially ignorant of art and poetry. That's not how intelligence works. Intelligent people are intelligent. Someone might prefer to spend most of his time doing theoretical physics, but he's not going to be ignorant of all the other branches of human knowledge. Weirdly, de Hoyos is portrayed as being a gifted rhetorician who is ignorant of rhetoric. He's like a crippled Gary Stu. He's automatically a genius at a small set of discretely defined things and a dummy at everything else. What a lame character. A native Spanish speaker who writes his personal journal in English who is a genius theoretical physicist who never thinks about theoretical physics.
3. The premise that there is a "one world government" on Earth violates certain basic laws of political power. Yes, there are laws of politics which are independent of ideology. One of these is that it is not possible for there to exist a single political entity. Absent a political enemy, political power is irrelevant and thus does not come into existence. For the slow-witted, politics is the acquisition and exercise of power. You want power because you want to do something and there are people who want to stop you. If nobody opposes you, then you just do what you want. If you have an opposition, then you're not the sole political power. QED.
3B. The whole dystopian one world government thing is a stupid Boomer fantasy. "Well, things could be worse in the future." So we've got a future in which nobody eats meat. Where does the food come from then? Are we saying that all of the farmers growing soybeans don't eat burgers? Do you...know any farmers? Oh, the farming is all automated now. So...the men building and fixing the giant automatic farm machines...don't eat burgers? Do you...know any mechanics? Oh, and the "one world government" enforces a worldwide one child policy. And nobody did anything about it. Is the official story that illiterate goatherders from the Middle East blew up the World Trade Center by the judicious application of box cutters?
3C. Possible major spoiler: when the remnant colonize the alien planet, after the fact they mention that they have a "democratic" government. Also they're all Catholic, or apparently so. Since democracy is the devolution of authority to the lowest common denominator, and is therefore demonic, and a core doctrine of the Catholic Church is deference to proper authority, which is ultimately monarchical (Jesus is the King of the Universe), therefore Catholic integralism is incompatible with democracy.
4. Major Spoiler: The story takes place in the "real" world of roughly 2100 AD, and many of the characters are Catholic or at least Christian; this is an intrinsic part of the story. In this context, the story is that the planet these people go to is essentially an Edenic paradise. This contradicts scripture.
4B. It is not possible for the planet to actually be Eden. There is no means by which Man can return to the Garden under his own power on a spaceship.
4C. The story necessitates that God created an entire other planet, populated with Earth-like flora and fauna, but with no human stewardship. Who then is ruling over this planet? It can't be God, as the planet is in the distant past invaded by demon-worshipping (Nephilim) prehistoric humans fleeing the Flood. God is not an anarchist. It is not possible for there to be a planet teeming with life and no rational creature created in God's image to steward it.
4D. Where is the firmament of this world? There was no Flood on this alien planet. One could continue with all of the theological problems which arise when one posits an inhabited planet full of life which is entirely absent from any mention in Genesis. This is a huge problem for the book as a whole and probably makes what is obviously meant to be a pro-Catholic book deeply anti-Catholic teaching.
5. This dire theological mistake compounds a general misunderstanding of how natural ecologies work. There are absolutely no predators on the alien planet. It's stated that the Nephilim-worshippers brought poisonous snakes with them which were not indigenous to the planet. It's also stated that there are huge herds of ruminant-equivalent herbivores. That's impossible. Herding herbivores absent predation result in desertification. It is the predators which force the herd to move on before all the forage is eaten, leaving behind their manure which, mixed with the remaining plants, over time grows the "grass" back so that the herd can return again. Absent predation the herd stays in one place too long, eats all the grass, and thus creates a barren desert. Any planet populated solely by herbivores would be lifeless after a sufficient passage of time. You can't just wave your hands and say, "It's an alien planet." That's not how biology works.
6. It's a far lesser mistake than those above, but this book perpetuates the Boomer mythology that illegal aliens in the United States are devout and culturally significant members of the Catholic Church. That is simply not the case. If you go to a Catholic church in any part of the U.S. where there is a sizeable Latino immigrant population, you will find plenty of LEGAL immigrant families at Mass, but you won't find illegals. Most illegal aliens in the U.S. are not part of a functional family unit in the first place: it is girls being trafficked and men coming on their own to find work. These people are not, typically, practicing Catholics. The men who come to work and send their money back to a family in Mexico do not typically go to Mass on Sunday, they are either at work or drinking to blow off steam from being exploited by their employers. The girls who are enticed to come by promises of a nice life and then sold to a pimp are not allowed to go to Mass.
7. O'Brien continues the cowardly practice Western Catholics have of never mentioning the Jews. The Catholic Church is explicitly anti-Jewish. Not "anti-Semitic", anti-Jewish, as in "the people that killed Christ whom Christ said belong to their father the devil." (John 8:44) The Catholic Church prays for its lost brethren, the children of Israel, to repent and convert. You might think that if a Catholic author is writing a story set in 2100, that story might mention...what happened to the Jewish ethnostate of Israel? Did they repent? Is it still there? In fact, if all religion is supposedly banned and driven underground, what happened to the Jews? Are there still synagogues? What did the ADL have to say about it all?
8. WAIT Wait wait wait wait. Referencing 3B above, when they banned religion so that Catholics have to practice in secret, are we saying they ALSO banned religion in the dar-al-Islam? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. And the EARTH is still there? A character does mention that "World War 3 was pretty bad." Okay, my new theory is this entire story takes place in a simulation running on a computer on the dark side of the moon after the atheists tell the Mohammedans they can't pray facing Mecca or else we'll...socialize you appropriately and all life ends in nuclear fire.
8. The science stuff was frankly stupid. Supposedly they have "anti-gravity". That's the equivalent of saying you have "anti-electromagnetism". It's not a thing. "Anti-gravity" is a nonsense word. Is what is meant "a means of counteracting the force of gravity on an object?" You mean like...a hot air balloon? Terms like "antigravity" and "dilithium crystals" are magic words thrown into space operas as a sign to the reader that he is meant to focus on the descriptions of well-endowed green-skinned alien maidens and rough and ready Earth men with ray guns and dashing smiles. If you are pretending to write a serious science fiction story told from the point of view of a genius physicist...no. Antigravity is a no. Nobody intelligent talks that way except in make-believe, for fun.
9. MAJOR SPOILER. My favorite part in what was a not very good science fiction story (again, I liked other aspects of the story) was when the main character never actually gets to go to the planet. I had been really hoping that the expedition would find a barren ball of rock orbiting an alien star. A completely pointless voyage, except insofar as the characters could find meaning in the journey itself. I was very disappointed that of course at the end of their trip they find a beautiful, living planet. BO-ring. However, the fact that only a small number of the total passengers ever get to settle on the planet, and the MC is not one of them, was pretty good.
Ultimately, this was such a moving (though completely made up) conversion story that I'm still glad I read it despite all of the very disappointing flaws. I suppose I also thought Neil de Hoyos was a poorly chosen viewpoint character. The whole "Edward Abbey as a genius nuclear physicist" schtick is as lame as the character was. It would have been much better to tell the story of his conversion in the third person.
A final word: I doubt much of anyone not Catholic has ever finished this book. Please, please DO NOT recommend this book to nonbelievers. This is not effective evangelization. People who don't already believe are going to get partway into this and think, "God, this guy is an insufferable twit." OF COURSE all of the "good people" JUST SO HAPPEN to be Catholics. Or Russian Orthodox. Seriously people, nobody is convinced by this kind of thing.
July 31, 2022
Epic and thoughtful
January 3, 2018
I've read this book twice, and probably will read it again. I just love it. O'Brien is at his best here - at least to me - Sci-Fi that's generally not beyond belief, Catholic/Spiritual elements that are expertly woven through it, and characters that I particularly recall fondly. If you're a Christian of any sort and like Sci-Fi, it's a must read.
April 16, 2025
I recently read The Island of the World by O'Brien, and was wildly impressed. As a fan of C.S. Lewis' Space Trilogy, when I saw my library had this book on shelf, I was intrigued. I was a bit surprised that many aspects of the book reminded me of Huxley's Brave New World. I was not surprised at what I thought was influence from Lewis' Space Trilogy, but this novel leans much more towards sci-fi than the trilogy.
It is a good book, but it did not reach the heights of The Island of the World. Much of the book was five stars, especially in the first half, but I thought a decent chunk of the book was three stars, hence my settling on four stars. I was completely engrossed for the first half, but then lost momentum as the second half went along until I was happy to reach the end. I think it was more of a question of style rather than content, but this was a book where I quite literally found the voyage much more interesting than the destination. I did not have this experience of losing momentum with The Island of the World, even though that novel is over 200 pages longer than this one.
What I like about the book, and about what I've read of O'Brien's writing in general, is that it is not afraid to make truth claims, and not shy to offer to the world potentially―or, frankly, probably―offensive social commentary and critique. Different philosophies, ideologies, and moralities contend and are judged; good and evil are juxtaposed and named as such; the sinful nature of man is made clear along with the holiness of God; and the liturgical life of the church as it connects believers of all times and places together in Christ is contrasted with the blind thirst for progress and the "perfecting" of secular human society.
This is, unsurprisingly, a very Roman Catholic novel. As a confessional Lutheran, there are certain details I have definite theological qualms about. However, speaking broadly as a member of the universal church catholic, I am glad novels like this are being written. We will always need more of them, especially since they serve as reminders not to despise the gifts of God, not to neglect living a life of forgiveness and love in a broken world, and to continually live as the Church, gathering together as a "congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered" [Augsburg Confession, Article VII].
(Addendum edit to original review:)
Since I've read them all, below is my current power ranking of all of O'Brien's novels:
1. The Island of the World
2. The Father's Tale
3. The Lighthouse
4. Plague Journal
5. The Sabbatical
6. By the Rivers of Babylon
7. Sophia House
8. Strangers and Sojourners
9. Voyage to Alpha Centauri
10. Theophilos
11. Elijah in Jerusalem
12. Letter to the Future
13. The Fool of New York City
14. A Cry of Stone
15. Eclipse of the Sun
16. Father Elijah
It is a good book, but it did not reach the heights of The Island of the World. Much of the book was five stars, especially in the first half, but I thought a decent chunk of the book was three stars, hence my settling on four stars. I was completely engrossed for the first half, but then lost momentum as the second half went along until I was happy to reach the end. I think it was more of a question of style rather than content, but this was a book where I quite literally found the voyage much more interesting than the destination. I did not have this experience of losing momentum with The Island of the World, even though that novel is over 200 pages longer than this one.
What I like about the book, and about what I've read of O'Brien's writing in general, is that it is not afraid to make truth claims, and not shy to offer to the world potentially―or, frankly, probably―offensive social commentary and critique. Different philosophies, ideologies, and moralities contend and are judged; good and evil are juxtaposed and named as such; the sinful nature of man is made clear along with the holiness of God; and the liturgical life of the church as it connects believers of all times and places together in Christ is contrasted with the blind thirst for progress and the "perfecting" of secular human society.
This is, unsurprisingly, a very Roman Catholic novel. As a confessional Lutheran, there are certain details I have definite theological qualms about. However, speaking broadly as a member of the universal church catholic, I am glad novels like this are being written. We will always need more of them, especially since they serve as reminders not to despise the gifts of God, not to neglect living a life of forgiveness and love in a broken world, and to continually live as the Church, gathering together as a "congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered" [Augsburg Confession, Article VII].
(Addendum edit to original review:)
Since I've read them all, below is my current power ranking of all of O'Brien's novels:
1. The Island of the World
2. The Father's Tale
3. The Lighthouse
4. Plague Journal
5. The Sabbatical
6. By the Rivers of Babylon
7. Sophia House
8. Strangers and Sojourners
9. Voyage to Alpha Centauri
10. Theophilos
11. Elijah in Jerusalem
12. Letter to the Future
13. The Fool of New York City
14. A Cry of Stone
15. Eclipse of the Sun
16. Father Elijah
November 7, 2024
Uma aventura emocionante e trágica que marca os que estão dispostos a embarcar nela.
Parece que a melhor maneira de experimentar essa história é mergulhar no livro sem outra expectativa se não a de acompanhar uma viagem maravilhosa pelo espaço sob a perspectiva inédita de um autor católico como Michael D. O'Brien. Eu posso dizer que minha experiência foi tal, e não podia ser mais recompensador. Meu motivo inicial era consumir boa literatura cristã e saciar a curiosidade de ver o que um autor religioso faria em ficção científica. Depois de ler as primeiras páginas, eu me engajei com a história pessoal do protagonista, Neil de Hoyos, e o desejo de ver o seu personagem se desenvolver serviu de impulso adicional para seguir em frente. Quando cheguei à nave e à partida, estava pronto para um romance mais tranquilo concentrado na interação entre os personagens e nas maravilhas da ciência futurista e do espaço sideral. Mas a história progrediu, transformando-se lentamente num thriller envolvendo cientistas rebeldes e um departamento tirânico numa nave espacial semelhante a uma cidade. A partir daí, a leitura começou a ser mais rápida, mais fácil e o momentum me conduziu até as últimas páginas.
A parada no ritmo para a descoberta do planeta foi muito bem-vinda. A essa altura, as surpresas não cessavam: os "plot twists" e os mistérios carregaram a segunda porção da obra. Eu preciso confessar que, perto do desastre que acontece no continente um, eu estava tão melancólico com a reflexão da maldade dos homens que esperava alguma coisa, qualquer coisa, para me lembrar do lado bom, das coisas que Deus faz entre nós e por nós, e isso veio para concluir o livro. A passagem da mais completa desesperança para a nota alta de esperança das últimas páginas foi catártica no sentido mais pleno do termo aristotélico. Foi também catártica a resolução do arco do protagonista: o cientista consumado que percebe a vaidade do mundo quando suas descobertas acabam causando, indiretamente, a morte de centenas de pessoas e a quase destruição do planeta Terra.
Antes de passar às críticas, creio que vale a pena defender alguns pontos da história. Primeiro, eu entendo que para alguns especialistas o vocabulário científico pode não convencer � mas ele passa para a gente comum, e é preciso lembrar que não é o que está no coração da obra, porque os personagens vêm em primeiro lugar e o cenário de ficção científica está ordenado a eles. Segundo, alguns disseram que foi muito conveniente que os amigos do protagonista fossem se revelando cristãos, um a um. Mas é natural no contexto do enredo, porque sabemos que os cristãos são perseguidos pelo governo mundial, e o protagonista tem uma inimizade pessoal com o mesmo establishment que os persegue, então eles se uniram por algo em comum, coisa comum também na realidade. Por fim, alguns acharam a revelação dos "alienígenas" do planeta Nova muito implausível. Talvez seja o ponto mais delicado da história, mas eu achei bem construído: não só porque segue os temas de civilização e religião, como também pelo aspecto misterioso e quase mitológico em torno do aparecimento desse povo de origem terráquea. Pessoalmente, eu não vi problemas: se fossem "homenzinhos verdes" ou seres humanóides que vemos em outros lugares, a verossimilitude da trama cairia por terra. Mas, teologicamente, não é algo de todo infundado: pois o autor deixa implicado que aquele povo idólatra teve alguma revelação satânica para escapar do dilúvio. Também é de se ver que, considerando o panorama bíblico, não só houve algum progresso industrial rudimentar desde os filhos de Caim, como houve séculos até o dilúvio. Nesse campo hipotético, alguém poderia muito bem supor que muito da tecnologia do tempo se perdeu, coisas que ninguém nunca fez depois ou não do mesmo modo. Não que haja evidências de naves espaciais ou coisa do tipo naquele tempo: mas um autor poderia aproveitar essa abertura hipotética para fins literários, como fez O'Brien. Sem contar que, na trama do livre, tudo gira em torno dos temas que o autor quer trabalhar: e se resume no fato de que, assim como os Apóstolos semearam a fé cristã em território pagão, assim também os "pioneiros" de Nova colonizaram um planeta outrora apóstata e o batizaram "Regnum Pacis".
Dito isso, e apesar de avaliar a obra em cinco estrelas, tenho algumas críticas que prejudicaram o desfecho da história. Antes de tudo, o autor escolheu um estilo rigorosamente documental, e isso vem com vantagens e desvantagens. De longe, as partes mais fracas são os relatos da rotina na nave e as descrições precisas que o protagonista faz, às vezes impossíveis de se imaginar. Há um problema também com as mortes de personagens: as mais importantes acontecem sem muita solenidade. E se é verdade que isso desenvolve o tema de que a morte vem depressa e sem notícia ("in ictu oculi"), por outro, não tem o impacto que poderia ter. Stron (meu personagem favorito) morre "off-screen" e mal sentimos sua falta depois. As mortes de Xue Li e Dariush têm muito de um "horror do momento" e não muito mais. Mas essas são as coisas mais fáceis de se perdoar.
O que mais prejudicou a obra foi o capítulo final. Eu notei que é algo que o autor devia pretender desde o início, e faz sentido no contexto do livro. O maior problema é o tamanho dela. É de se entender que o autor precisava de um personagem do futuro distante para deixar em evidência a prosperidade da comunidade cristã de Nova e o triunfo do Dr. Hoyos sobre o governo mundial � o problema é que se estende por muito tempo, deixa explícitas demais coisas que já estavam claras para quem leu com atenção e, o pior, segue personagens com quem não temos a menor conexão. É verdade que o Abade Anselmo, por tudo que lemos, é um personagem simpático para o leitor � mas por não ter sido trabalhado no correr das últimas 500 páginas e não ter o carisma do Dr. Hoyos, ele não consegue carregar sozinho mais de cinquenta páginas de epílogo. Sem contar que algumas cenas do último capítulo parecem sem propósito: ou desenvolvem algum worldbuilding com respeito a "Regnum Pacis" ou trazem alguma interação entre personagens completamente desconexa do resto da história. Eu creio que teria sido melhor cortar parte do capítulo para reduzir ao essencial: talvez cinco ou dez páginas sobre a expedição para a nave. A conversão de Neil também estava clara pela nota final achada no bolso dele, com uma citação de Jó, mais alguns elementos que vimos no fim do capítulo "O Retorno".
Outro problema foi a worldbuilding final com respeito ao planeta Nova. A maioria dos nomes parecem forçados e têm um sabor de quase utopia religiosa, principalmente o nome final do planeta, "Regnum Pacis", "Reino de Paz". Não que todos os nomes sejam ruins: como católico, acho maravilhosos os "Queensland" e "Josephsland", mas parecem muito idealistas perto de coisas como "Colinas do Louvor" e assim por diante. A vantagem de desenvolver mais a história de Nova depois da história do Dr. Hoyos é não deixar nenhum ponto em aberto � mas, às vezes, parecem amarrar mais do o necessário. Talvez fosse melhor especificar pouco e deixar o cenário geral do planeta em aberto: por exemplo, sabendo que há vários bispos lá e muitas cidades, qualquer leitor infere que as coisas vão bem para os católicos por lá.
Enfim, isso não tira o mérito do livro: é uma leitura longa, mas tudo recompensa. É mais maduro, feita para os que têm estômago e precisam de algo mais forte para se nutrir. Às vezes é como um remédio amargo, que esconde a cura por detrás do sabor incômodo. É uma obra profunda que entende o coração humano e o vai e vem da história do mundo � leiam-na todos os que puderem!
Parece que a melhor maneira de experimentar essa história é mergulhar no livro sem outra expectativa se não a de acompanhar uma viagem maravilhosa pelo espaço sob a perspectiva inédita de um autor católico como Michael D. O'Brien. Eu posso dizer que minha experiência foi tal, e não podia ser mais recompensador. Meu motivo inicial era consumir boa literatura cristã e saciar a curiosidade de ver o que um autor religioso faria em ficção científica. Depois de ler as primeiras páginas, eu me engajei com a história pessoal do protagonista, Neil de Hoyos, e o desejo de ver o seu personagem se desenvolver serviu de impulso adicional para seguir em frente. Quando cheguei à nave e à partida, estava pronto para um romance mais tranquilo concentrado na interação entre os personagens e nas maravilhas da ciência futurista e do espaço sideral. Mas a história progrediu, transformando-se lentamente num thriller envolvendo cientistas rebeldes e um departamento tirânico numa nave espacial semelhante a uma cidade. A partir daí, a leitura começou a ser mais rápida, mais fácil e o momentum me conduziu até as últimas páginas.
A parada no ritmo para a descoberta do planeta foi muito bem-vinda. A essa altura, as surpresas não cessavam: os "plot twists" e os mistérios carregaram a segunda porção da obra. Eu preciso confessar que, perto do desastre que acontece no continente um, eu estava tão melancólico com a reflexão da maldade dos homens que esperava alguma coisa, qualquer coisa, para me lembrar do lado bom, das coisas que Deus faz entre nós e por nós, e isso veio para concluir o livro. A passagem da mais completa desesperança para a nota alta de esperança das últimas páginas foi catártica no sentido mais pleno do termo aristotélico. Foi também catártica a resolução do arco do protagonista: o cientista consumado que percebe a vaidade do mundo quando suas descobertas acabam causando, indiretamente, a morte de centenas de pessoas e a quase destruição do planeta Terra.
Antes de passar às críticas, creio que vale a pena defender alguns pontos da história. Primeiro, eu entendo que para alguns especialistas o vocabulário científico pode não convencer � mas ele passa para a gente comum, e é preciso lembrar que não é o que está no coração da obra, porque os personagens vêm em primeiro lugar e o cenário de ficção científica está ordenado a eles. Segundo, alguns disseram que foi muito conveniente que os amigos do protagonista fossem se revelando cristãos, um a um. Mas é natural no contexto do enredo, porque sabemos que os cristãos são perseguidos pelo governo mundial, e o protagonista tem uma inimizade pessoal com o mesmo establishment que os persegue, então eles se uniram por algo em comum, coisa comum também na realidade. Por fim, alguns acharam a revelação dos "alienígenas" do planeta Nova muito implausível. Talvez seja o ponto mais delicado da história, mas eu achei bem construído: não só porque segue os temas de civilização e religião, como também pelo aspecto misterioso e quase mitológico em torno do aparecimento desse povo de origem terráquea. Pessoalmente, eu não vi problemas: se fossem "homenzinhos verdes" ou seres humanóides que vemos em outros lugares, a verossimilitude da trama cairia por terra. Mas, teologicamente, não é algo de todo infundado: pois o autor deixa implicado que aquele povo idólatra teve alguma revelação satânica para escapar do dilúvio. Também é de se ver que, considerando o panorama bíblico, não só houve algum progresso industrial rudimentar desde os filhos de Caim, como houve séculos até o dilúvio. Nesse campo hipotético, alguém poderia muito bem supor que muito da tecnologia do tempo se perdeu, coisas que ninguém nunca fez depois ou não do mesmo modo. Não que haja evidências de naves espaciais ou coisa do tipo naquele tempo: mas um autor poderia aproveitar essa abertura hipotética para fins literários, como fez O'Brien. Sem contar que, na trama do livre, tudo gira em torno dos temas que o autor quer trabalhar: e se resume no fato de que, assim como os Apóstolos semearam a fé cristã em território pagão, assim também os "pioneiros" de Nova colonizaram um planeta outrora apóstata e o batizaram "Regnum Pacis".
Dito isso, e apesar de avaliar a obra em cinco estrelas, tenho algumas críticas que prejudicaram o desfecho da história. Antes de tudo, o autor escolheu um estilo rigorosamente documental, e isso vem com vantagens e desvantagens. De longe, as partes mais fracas são os relatos da rotina na nave e as descrições precisas que o protagonista faz, às vezes impossíveis de se imaginar. Há um problema também com as mortes de personagens: as mais importantes acontecem sem muita solenidade. E se é verdade que isso desenvolve o tema de que a morte vem depressa e sem notícia ("in ictu oculi"), por outro, não tem o impacto que poderia ter. Stron (meu personagem favorito) morre "off-screen" e mal sentimos sua falta depois. As mortes de Xue Li e Dariush têm muito de um "horror do momento" e não muito mais. Mas essas são as coisas mais fáceis de se perdoar.
O que mais prejudicou a obra foi o capítulo final. Eu notei que é algo que o autor devia pretender desde o início, e faz sentido no contexto do livro. O maior problema é o tamanho dela. É de se entender que o autor precisava de um personagem do futuro distante para deixar em evidência a prosperidade da comunidade cristã de Nova e o triunfo do Dr. Hoyos sobre o governo mundial � o problema é que se estende por muito tempo, deixa explícitas demais coisas que já estavam claras para quem leu com atenção e, o pior, segue personagens com quem não temos a menor conexão. É verdade que o Abade Anselmo, por tudo que lemos, é um personagem simpático para o leitor � mas por não ter sido trabalhado no correr das últimas 500 páginas e não ter o carisma do Dr. Hoyos, ele não consegue carregar sozinho mais de cinquenta páginas de epílogo. Sem contar que algumas cenas do último capítulo parecem sem propósito: ou desenvolvem algum worldbuilding com respeito a "Regnum Pacis" ou trazem alguma interação entre personagens completamente desconexa do resto da história. Eu creio que teria sido melhor cortar parte do capítulo para reduzir ao essencial: talvez cinco ou dez páginas sobre a expedição para a nave. A conversão de Neil também estava clara pela nota final achada no bolso dele, com uma citação de Jó, mais alguns elementos que vimos no fim do capítulo "O Retorno".
Outro problema foi a worldbuilding final com respeito ao planeta Nova. A maioria dos nomes parecem forçados e têm um sabor de quase utopia religiosa, principalmente o nome final do planeta, "Regnum Pacis", "Reino de Paz". Não que todos os nomes sejam ruins: como católico, acho maravilhosos os "Queensland" e "Josephsland", mas parecem muito idealistas perto de coisas como "Colinas do Louvor" e assim por diante. A vantagem de desenvolver mais a história de Nova depois da história do Dr. Hoyos é não deixar nenhum ponto em aberto � mas, às vezes, parecem amarrar mais do o necessário. Talvez fosse melhor especificar pouco e deixar o cenário geral do planeta em aberto: por exemplo, sabendo que há vários bispos lá e muitas cidades, qualquer leitor infere que as coisas vão bem para os católicos por lá.
Enfim, isso não tira o mérito do livro: é uma leitura longa, mas tudo recompensa. É mais maduro, feita para os que têm estômago e precisam de algo mais forte para se nutrir. Às vezes é como um remédio amargo, que esconde a cura por detrás do sabor incômodo. É uma obra profunda que entende o coração humano e o vai e vem da história do mundo � leiam-na todos os que puderem!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 6, 2019
"Voyage to Alpha Centauri" is a combination of science fiction, philosophy, Roman Catholicism and a polemic against secular humanism. The story is fast paced, easy to read and has a number of interesting twists. While I agree with the "moral of the story" there are times when it is not very subtle. I think the ability to make an indelible moral statement with the story itself (instead of using the dialogue to articulate it) is a much to be desired and elusive skill. The choir will get what the author, Michael O'Brien is "preaching" and agree but I'm not sure it will win over skeptics or the undecided. The main character, Dr. Neil de Hoyos, is a skeptic and an agnostic and a moral man. His journal outlining events, conversations and his own introspection about the world and his life, provides the back bone of the story. One reviewer compares O'Brien to C.S. Lewis and I see the similarities in their spiritual cosmology. O'Brien's imaginings of an omnipresent totalitarian government that rules all aspects of life (for our own good) reminded of George Orwell's "1984." Many of these imaginings rang true to me. I thought O'Brien's message about a moral component to science, invention and technology was fair. Science is not evil but the men who use it are. O'Brien's view of a utopian Christian (Catholic) based community was overly optimistic. Overall I would say that "Journey to Alpha Centauri" was enjoyable and made me think on many levels.
April 6, 2017
O'Brien is a thinker... Which usually makes for good scifi. (Sadly, most modern scifi is just action\thriller + future-tech.) Voyage is good scifi in that the tech exists to reveal something about humanity. But, while the story is good scifi, the book is overlong and the characters are fairly unimaginative and unbelievable. The protagonist, Neil, is a kind of cowboy professor with a couple of Nobel Prizes. Even allowing for a certain quirkiness, why would a thoroughly modern, 1984-esque society allow someone with his background on this all-important voyage? If the book were pared down to maybe 60% of it's present length, many of these sins could be forgiven. As it is, the length and slowness of the story will make the book seem unreadable - fully the first half of the book has little or no payoff in story or character insight. Once the payoff arrives, the book is 100% worth it! The twists and unexpected turns are engrossing. The revelations in both plot and characterization are very, very satisfying. And, perhaps most importantly, the book does cause the reader to consider his or her own perceptions about self, society, freedom, science, risk and a hundred other things.
In sum, worth your time if you've got the chops to make it through the build-up.
In sum, worth your time if you've got the chops to make it through the build-up.
December 31, 2013
Just an excellent book. I really need to read more Michael D. O'Brien. When I saw that he'd written a novel with a science fiction element, I pre-ordered it. It has been a while since I sat down to a book for such lengths of time and I was really sorry when it was over because I enjoyed the whole thing. I really hope that he writes more science fiction; it has always carried an interest for me. O'Brien does the genre great justice by including a great spiritual and moral element (reality) to the story. I haven't read enough of his Children of the Last Days series to know if it is possible that this is a continuation of it, but I hope he writes a series continuing from his "Alpha Centauri".
Displaying 1 - 30 of 97 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.