Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

This is to discuss November 2017 group read, The World of Null-A by A.E. van Vogt.

I was convinced i'd picked this up from the bookswapper club a few years ago and not gotten round to reading it. Today when I went to find it, seems I picked up but Slan instead! Now i'm going to have to try and track down the correct book....

funny, I made the same mistake.

I actually read Slan years ago but this will be a first read for me. I've just read the first page or two and it already seems interesting. I'll hopefully have time to read more today.

The book is dedicated to John W. Campbell Jr., the editor & author I mentioned that 'Star Smashers', my nomination to read, lampoons. Great way to start!

Slan is good.

This isn't a great book or at least it didn't age well. The science is laughable, the plot was murcky and the prose was ordinary. Althought I did read an old French translation of it. The big thought. I can't argue with that.

In the afterword, van Vogt said he was called a pygmy behind a giant typewriter (I paraphrase) by Damon Knight. It seems accurate.

²Ñ²¹°ù³¦-´¡²Ô»å°ùé wrote: "This isn't a great book or at least it didn't age well. The science is laughable, the plot was murcky and the prose was ordinary. ..."

Uh-oh. I was hoping this was better than Slan. I didn't like it at all for much the same reasons as you list, although a couple of his books are among my old favorites. My review is here:
/review/show...

I liked Slan better than Null-A, though neither is great ,and neither is terrible. Here is my review of The World of Null-A from a year ago: /review/show...

Buck wrote: "I liked Slan better than Null-A, though neither is great ,and neither is terrible. Here is my review of The World of Null-A from a year ago: /review/show..."

I agree completely with your review, Buck. I was interested in the concept of non-Aristotelian thinking, but at no point did this book present it as anything but garden variety pragmatism. I have read a half dozen Van Vogt books, and this one is my least favorite.

²Ñ²¹°ù³¦-´¡²Ô»å°ùé wrote: "he was called a pygmy behind a giant typewriter (I paraphrase) by Damon Knight."

Somebody with a stronger knowledge of genre history than me can probably shed some light on that. (G33? Are you listening?)

Harlan Ellison wrote a forward to Futures Past: The Best Short Fiction of A.E. van Vogt, in which he brutally attacked Knight for these remarks. He heavily implied that Knight was acting as part of a broad Scientology conspiracy to ruin Van Vogt's career. I know nothing about Knight specifically, but I do know that Van Vogt and LRH had a falling-out when Dianetics turned into Scientology.

Not that Harlan Ellison is my idea of an untainted source.

Very interesting, Phil.

Different ways of thinking about things seems to be one of his favorite devices & it doesn't surprise me that he would have been interested in early Scientology. In The Silkie, there's some structure of logic or something that the main character uses to defeat enemies. He's physically powerful, able to shift shape for different environments, but it's the ability to apply the logic thing that really makes him formidable. In The Voyage of the Space Beagle, there's a science that encompasses all the others & brings them to bear to do the same thing. From the comments, I wonder if Null-A was an early attempt.

In my copy of Null-A, a revised one, Van Vogt wrote the following in his introduction about Knight's criticism:

...With that out of the way, we come to the attacks. As you'll see, they're more fun, make authors madder, and get readers stirred up.

Here is what Sam Moskowitz, in his brief biography of the author, said in his book, Seekers of Tomorrow, about what was wrong with World of Null-A: ". . . Bewildered Gilbert Gosseyn, mutant with a double mind, doesn't know who he is and spends the entire novel trying to find out." The novel was originally printed as a serial in Astounding Science Fiction, and after the final installment was published (Mr. Moskowitz continues), "Letters of plaintive puzzlement began to pour in. Readers didn't understand what the story was all about. Campbell [the editor advised them to wait a few days; it took that long, he suggested, for the implications to sink in. The days turned into months, but clarification never came-"

You'll admit that's a tough set of sentences to follow. Plain, blunt-spoken Sam Moskowitz, whose knowledge of science fiction history and whose collection of science fiction probably is topped
only by that of Forrest Ackerman (in the whole universe) ... is nevertheless in error. The number of readers who wrote "plaintive" letters to the editor can be numbered on the fingers of one and a half hands.

However, Moskowitz might argue that it isn't the quantity of complainers, but the quality. And there he has a point.

Shortly after The World of Null-A was serialized in 1945, a sci-fi fan, hitherto unknown to me, wrote in a science fiction fan magazine a long and powerful article at-tacking the novel and my
work in general up to that time. The article concluded, as I recall it (from memory only) with the sentence: "Van Vogt is actually a pygmy writer working with a giant typewriter."

The imagery throughout this article, meaningless though that particular line is (if you'll think about it), induced me to include in my answering article in a subsequent issue of the same fan magazine-which article is lost to posterity-the remark that I foresaw a brilliant writing career for the young man who had written so poetical an attack.

That young writer eventually developed into the science fictional genius, Damon Knight, who-among his many accomplishments-a few years ago organized the Science Fiction Writers of America, which (though it seems impossible) is still a viable organization.

Of Knight's attack so long ago, Galaxy Magazine critic Algis Budrys wrote in his December, 1967, book review column: "In this edition [of critical essays] you will find among other goodies from the earlier version, the famous destruction of A. E. van Vogt that made Damon's reputation."

What other criticisms of The World of Null-A are there? None. It's a fact. Singlehandedly, Knight took on this novel and my work at age 23-1/2, and, as Algis Budrys puts it, brought about my "destruction."

So what's the problem? Why am I now revising World? Am I doing all this for one critic?

Yep.

But why?-you ask.

Well, on this planet you have to recognize where the power is.

Knight has it?

Knight has it.

In a deeper sense, of course, I'm making this defense of the book, and revising it, because General Semantics is a worthwhile subject, with meaningful implications, not only in 2560 A.D. where my story takes place, but here and now...

I have the same introduction in my edition of the book. It is an interesting defense of his work. I do not have a copy of the original version of the book, so I'm curious how extensive his revisions were (he states in the beginning of his introduction "...In fact I have decided to take the criticisms seriously and have accordingly revised this edition and have provided the explanations which for so long I believed to be unnecessary."), and whether those, particularly Damon Knight, who were so negative of the original ever bothered to review the updated version.

Damon Knight sounds like a jerk.

Here's something interesting from the LA Review of Books:

"One can only marvel at Philip Dick’s defense of The World of Null-A: “All the parts of that book did not add up; all the ingredients did not make a coherency. Now some people are put off by that. They think that’s sloppy and wrong, but the thing that fascinated me so much was that this resembled reality more than anybody else’s writing inside or outside science fiction.� Huh? I can enumerate many virtues of van Vogt’s wacky novel, but resemblance to reality would not make the list. "

#!

I'm not sure Dick is a refence when it comes to reality.

Not only do I agree with ²Ñ²¹°ù³¦-´¡²Ô»å°ùé, but I also wonder why 'resembling reality more' would be a good thing. The best SF stories take a bit of reality & make it more so through the point of the novel. They speculate on trends, handle the what-ifs, & entertain at the same time.

Reality is messy. Every adult knows that & many of us use fiction as an escape from that mess &/or a way to put some of it into different perspectives to handle it in some fashion. We can't do that when the story is as messy & pointless as reality.

I looked at some of my reviews of Dick's works & noticed they shared one point in common with my review of Slan. In that I wrote:

The biggest problem was that he tried to cover too much territory in too short a time. From evolution to revolution, racism, mob psychology, fantastic science & even a love story all wrapped up in a coming of age story. It started out pretty well, but there was just so much going on by the end that none of it worked well. The great reveals weren't & some just sucked. Everything else was too convenient & magically solved to make the hero out to be wonderful, while much of his reasoning was ridiculous.

That often sums up the way I feel about Dick's stories. In my review of Ubik I wrote:
There are some interesting ideas, but nothing spectacular, often the worst of Space Opera cheese without any real insight...

Birds of a feather...

I take the Dick flock any day of the week.

Phil wrote:
Here's something interesting from the LA Review of Books:
"One can only marvel at Philip Dick’s defense of The World of Null-A: “All the parts of that book did no..."
Some 50p in and I was just wondering what to think of this book, reading interesting storylines but having no clue why they are happening. I found the explanation in the article:

"Even so, the wealth of invention packed into this work demands our respect. Van Vogt starts by describing a month-long competition in which contestants try to outwit the Machine, a massive computer that controls human destiny. It’s an intriguing plot � anticipating a slew of later SF novels built on the adolescent fantasy of games morphing into real-life adventures (e.g., Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game, Iain M. Banks’s The Player of Games, Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash, Ernest Cline’s Ready Player One, etc.). But van Vogt never takes us beyond day one of the contest, and soon he is pursuing a different storyline about false memories and mistaken identity. When Gosseyn is killed at the end of chapter five, and is mysteriously resurrected on the planet Venus at the start of chapter six (for no apparent rhyme or reason), you may think that you’ve stumbled into a completely different novel, but this sudden narrative displacement is emblematic of the work as a whole. "

I wonder what this sort of narrative has on readers when they are reading it serialized instead of as a novel. Or if the author hasn't written the entire work before sending in the script.

We've read The Invisible Man this year and it was also serialize when it fist came out. I found that it showed in the narrative and that H.G. Wells maybe didn't have a finished story when it first started being published.

²Ñ²¹°ù³¦-´¡²Ô»å°ùé wrote: "I wonder what this sort of narrative has on readers when they are reading it serialized instead of as a novel. Or if the author hasn't written the entire work before sending in the script.

We've r..."

I think the book would be much more effective read as a serial. The "sudden narrative displacement" that happens in most chapters is very frustrating for me, kind of kills any enthusiasm to continue reading.

²Ñ²¹°ù³¦-´¡²Ô»å°ùé wrote: "I wonder what this sort of narrative has on readers when they are reading it serialized instead of as a novel. Or if the author hasn't written the entire work before sending in the script...."

Van Vogt seems to say the story is all worked out in advance, including the follow-up The Players of Null-A (in thought):

"Did you have any thought of the sequel while working on the first story? And, more to the point, were many of the loose ends left in the first story resolved already if not on paper at least in thought when the first story appeared?

Van Vogt:
Yes, they were resolved in thought � although at the time I had no intention of writing another novel; that came later. The reason they were resolved in thought is because, essentially, the principal problem of Players was already on stage in World: that is, the attack by entities of the Greatest Empire."

This book is not at all what I expected. Dont know what I expected - but not this.

So far I am up to chap 4. I think that it is wonderful. Really loving it.

I can see why Dick would like it. It is very similar to what he writes.

As I expected there are a lot of questions puzzling me after finishing the book. In doubt whether I shall continue with The Players of Null-A, since there should be more answers in there. Did anyone read the follow up and recommend it?

I'm surprised how much people disliked this one, OK the science wasn't great but then it was written in 1948. I thought it was quite fast paced and if you didn't take it too seriously it was quite entertaining.

Are there many earlier examples of sci-fi with the memory loss/false memory concept? I was wondering if this was the inspiration for Total Recall but it turns out that was Philip K Dick's We Can Remember It for You Wholesale from 1966.

Jo wrote: "I'm surprised how much people disliked this one, OK the science wasn't great but then it was written in 1948. I thought it was quite fast paced and if you didn't take it too seriously it was quite ..."

I enjoyed this book, Jo. I tend to enjoy these sci-fi / mind stories. Am a big fan of Philip K Dick and Null-A was not dissimilar to his writing

Philip K. Dick stated in an interview that he was influenced by A. E. van Vogt:

It is not hard enough for many folks. That issue started even before the New Wave.
..

Great article, Ronald!

Thanks, Ronald. Excellent!

Took me a while to find a copy, so I haven't started yet. I got the compilation Triad which has Null-A and Slan in it because I someday hope to get around to Slan.

The note about the author at the end has a few interesting things to say:

A. E. Van Vogt has a first name, which he dislikes intensely, and which must remain his secret, and ours.

And:

In 1939 he married E. Mayne Hull, who is almost as well known a writer of what is popularly known as s-f.

Maybe true in 1959, but doesn't seem true now.

I have a cousin named Alfred. We used to call him 'little awful Alfie'. He now goes by Al. Understandable hate, I suppose.
;)

Interesting about Hull. I've never heard of or read anything by her that I recall. All her books seem to be written with Al. I checked her out on Fantastic Fiction, too.

Jim wrote: "I have a cousin named..."

Ack! You gave away the secret!

The interview above with PK Dick is a good one. He states "I did the same thing over and over again, and that was what the protagonist thought was real was not real, actually. That was my idea of the surprise ending. I did it so many times that it became predictable in my writing."

That really is the key feature I associate with Dick's writing. Reality shifts under your feet. What you think is real can turn out to really be something else, which turns out to be something else. Even though he did that trick over and over, he did it in many different ways so it often worked well.

Ed wrote: "Jim wrote: "I have a cousin named..."

Ack! You gave away the secret!..."

People are weird. My grandfather hated his name, Clarence, too. Everyone called him Mac. It took me years to find out what his name was.

I'm about half-way into this book now and I'm basically liking it. I can understand why Dick would appreciate this book, because of the status of the main character not really knowing who he is or what is really going on. I like that about it, too.

But, the plot is also complicated by having many characters plotting and counter-plotting against each other, and I don't like that so much. That is just a general preference of mine. I get very confused in stories where everyone is deceiving everyone else. I have enough trouble remembering everyone's name without the added complication of remembering who believes what about whom.

You can tell that this is really old SF because they still act like it is possible for humans to live comfortably on Venus. If only!

I was amused by a few of the technology references. Van Vogt is able to imagine video phones, but still has people recording sound on wire recorders. [He wasn't the first to imagine video phones.] I checked and was surprised to learn that tape recorders didn't become a really viable replacement for wire recorders until the late 1940s, so it is possible van Vogt didn't know of them. The same chapter mentions a "dictaphone" which I assumed was invented after tape recorders, but that company name actually goes back much earlier and was still using wax cylinders in the 40s.

I was also surprised to learn that this book was first translated into French by none other than Boris Vian. Perhaps due to his reputation, and to the relative scarcity of SF in France at that time, it seems to have been more influential in the development of French SF than American. Perhaps this is also related to what seems to me to be a greater streak of surrealism (or general weirdness) in French SF than American. Dick, for example, seems much more popular there.

The French like Dick. It is a well known fact.

²Ñ²¹°ù³¦-´¡²Ô»å°ùé wrote: "The French like Dick."
How could one not like Dick ?

Word!

This transcribes an interview Dick did in Metz in 1977. He addresses the reasons why he is more respected there than at home:

There is a major flaw in America which does not appear to exist in France. And that is the American people are basically anti-intellectual; they’re not interested in novels of idea. And Science Fiction is essentially the field of ideas. And the anti-intellectualism of Americans prohibits their interest in imaginative ideas and intellectual concepts.

That makes a lot of sense to me. Anti-intellectualism is rampant in the USA.

Anyway, the whole reason I brought this up in a discussion of Null-A is that Van Vogt apparently "boasted that this novel [Null-A], all by itself, had more or less established the French SF market". I read that in this review by the frequent reviewer Manny: /review/show...

²Ñ²¹°ù³¦-´¡²Ô»å°ùé wrote: "The French like Dick. It is a well known fact."

Maybe he gets more respect there because his name isn't a dick-joke in French. ;)

Nice catch, Ed.

I finished it, and haven't changed my opinion. I basically like it, but get confused easily by the multiple characters deceiving each other. Hard for me to keep track of.

I was disappointed by the aliens. They basically seem identical to humans. Not much imagination shown there. And there was an odd assertion that the human brain is the greatest thing that could ever exist and no alien brain could ever match it and could never master non-A training. Pretty bold assumption!

Anyhow, I still plan to read Slan someday.