Mary Rosenblum's Horizons epitomises some of the best aspects of science fiction, but also some of the worst failings of the genre.
The best writing in this area combines idealistic and original fiction about our future with real life human issues. As a fellow student once remarked, good sci-fi is appealing due to the fact that it does not need a science fiction setting. The only way we can truly appreciate any novel is if it appeals to something that is intrinsic to our existence.
So the question is, does Horizons adhere to this high standard of science fiction? The first half of this novel had me believing that this was a masterpiece unfolding before me and I would certainly have said yes to that question. There is an excellent combination of politics, genetics, psychology, sociology and even philosophy played out through the likeable main characters. The personal relationships that develop are also well paced and believable.
However, it seems that Rosenblum was simply unable to reconcile these vast issues within this novel. The author intends to deal with a plethora of human issues, but in doing so fails to deal with any of them sufficiently. The lack of foreshadowing for some of the final issues contributes to this confusion and destroys the excellent pacing of the earlier chapters. If her focus had not been too diffuse, if she had not relied on pointless "deus ex machina" and if she had expanded the novel to a more appropriate length, Rosenblum could have written a classic.
These are big "if"s however and they do not distract from the fact that this is a disappointing novel.
-The English Student
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Horizons: Book Review
Labels:
book review,
contemporary,
horizons,
mary rosenblum,
sci-fi,
science fiction
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment