Help offset server costs by donating. This is totally optional. Any overages will go to library fines or new books.
Babel A1: general opinion
What are your general thoughts on the book so far? Are you enjoying it? What do you like, what don't you like? Most importantly, should we continue with the book in December?
(And a note about further questions: I'm sure we'll revisit many of these themes when we finish the book, so don't feel like you need to give deep and thoughtful replies to them. And if you think there are other themes and questions we should discuss, please say so!)
General opinion
- Should we finish the book in December?4 votes
- Yes, let's carry on100.00%
- No, let's read something else0.00%
Comments
So far I find it a kind of Harry Potter book, but preachy. Since Harry Potter ended up a nice suburban magician, I guess we were going to get correctives published. Not really enjoying it - I find it a bit long. Continue reading.
Of the old universities in the UK I know Cambridge and Durham through personal experience, and Oxford only via friends and family, but the picture she painted of 1830s Oxford Uni seemed entirely believable to me
I understand the Harry Potter comments, but I think it's a deliberate ploy by Kuang: she's trying to portray Oxford as an idyllic home of pure intellect, floating above the mundane reality of the world. I expect the action to move out of Oxford soon.
Preachy? Yes. The book isn't exactly subtle.
Since I couldn't get past this first section I will answer the A series discussion and not the other. There were things I liked about the book - the writing style being one big plus, and the depiction of Oxford was wonderfully intimate. On the other hand I felt preached at, and the plot was telegraphed - at least as far as I went. The magic system made no sense to me at all, it all just felt ungrounded. That ultimately made it too difficult to grind through for me.
What is meant by "the plot was telegraphed"? She wrote the word 'stop' instead of using periods?
"Telegraph, any device or system that allows the transmission of information by coded signal over distance."
I meant I knew much of what was coming before it happened, at least as far as I read.
Yes, apparently the plot shifted into a higher gear after the section I read! I have no idea if I would have felt the same after reading the later part!
In re: 'Telegraph'; the word was extensively use for the networks of signalling towers built in sight of each other, in first France, then England during the Napoleonic period. This allowed almost instantaneous news of raids or invasions from the seas. These towers were also built in the US, and it is not uncommon to find tall hills named "Signal Hill" or "Telegraph Hill" there - most famously in San Francisco - which once carried such devices.
There's a Telegraph Hill not all that far from where my parents lived, part of the Admiralty chain from London to the dockyards at Portsmouth. They were used 1815-1847, replacing a slightly earlier and simpler system, so were pretty much contemporary with Babel.
The claimed "speed record" for an end-to-end message was just over a minute but it's generally agreed that this must have been a very short message under ideal conditions. The normal message time was more like 10 minutes which is still not bad at all... but dwarfed by the electric telegraph which replaced it.
10 minutes to transfer a message that would take hours otherwise - I think the post chaise made it in about 8 hours or so, riders in 5-6 - would be amazing!
I think the second half was more of the same, albeit faster. I think you wouldn't have enjoyed the rest of the book, given what you thought of the first half.
I was psyched for this book too! It looked like it might be fascinating! The only thing that might have been a problem was the length, and you took care of that with the two-month read! If only all books lived up to our initial expectations! Thank you Neil!
Thank you for saying that. One thing I like about this club is the breadth of books we look at. Most work, some don't. But for me, the few failures are worth it for finding all the good ones.
Looking back, I actually think Bancroft is an inherently better writer of prose, and seems capable of more depth. The problem I had with that series was bloat, esp in the 3rd and 4th book. And possibly too many characters, and it dragged on because the author loved them. Both books suffer this a bit, and maybe it’s a new author thing, and publishers liking to exploit a franchise.
Babel aimed higher than Fall of Babel, but couldn’t really hit the target. Fall of Babel aimed lower, I think, which put the target more in reach. But the first book was so good, I expected the rest of the series to match, and it couldn’t quite sustain. But the last book ended well, with possible the best prose of any of these books.
I gave Babel 4* (albeit a low 4 if I had such flexibility) - I thought the prose, grammar and basic concept were good, and I never felt at risk of abandoning reading it. We've all talked about the shortcomings, especially the failure to maintain good worldbuilding, and the tendency for the author's personal agenda to overcome the story. But I'm glad to have read it
I liked how the book started with a strong voice and sense of place, and how it presented a bunch of new (to me) perspectives on racism and colonialism. Well, they're issues that I knew existed, but I hadn't seen the presented from such a personal view and as a clearly lived experience. The problem is, the book couldn't sustain its promise to the end and sort of petered out a bit. A bit shorter, and a bit less polemical, would have made a better novel.
Perhaps Kuang needs a bit more experience when it comes to plotting. Her first book, The Poppy War was excellent, but the plot was lifted directly from World War II. The sequels were less good.