That’s an excellent point. I’m all for a few big ideas, just not dozens that are all very thinly explored.

For the record, and as I alluded to in the review, my favourite SciFi is when an author creates a whole universe full of ideas, and explores them over the course of 3-4 books. For example:

1. Asimov’s Foundation and Robot series
2. Scalzi’s Old Man’s War Universe
3. Campbell’s Lost Fleet
4. Heinlein’s various Future History time lines
Etc.

Each book in those series explores 3-5 different major ideas in depth and alludes to half a dozen more ‘mysterious’ ideas that are developed in later works in the same imaginary places/spaces.

However, all have a strong story about people in each book. This is fiction after all.

You seem to suggest you prefer sci-fi that takes one or two big ideas and explores them within the context of a well written story. That sort of thing drives me nuts, and I often believe indicates a poverty of thought on the author’s part. From an ideas perspective, I believe all the fertile ground is found in the intersection and interaction of a multitude of a new ideas as they crop up. Consider the dozens of technologies developed during WWII, and how they intersected in dozens of ways that couldn’t be forseen. Human history rarely follows a linear progression of ideas, and I’m delighted when authors like Stross are bold and imaginative enough to string together a dozen ideas and make a constellation out of them.

The Atrocity Archives is incredible!

This book is great too (not quite as good as Atrocity Archives though )

I discovered Stross in “Rewired: the Post-Cyberpunk Anthology” and it made me want to read more of this stuff. So far I’m glad I did.

Interestingly, I recently finished Forever War, so I note the similarities: time travel via “folding” or jumping, the unknowable alien culture.

I also agree that the ideas are very original (as I stated in my review) but that as a SINGLE STORY it doesn’t hold together as a story, just one big idea after another. Which brings me back to my statement that “Taken in pieces the ideas in this book might have made an excellent collection of short stories that all take place in the same universe.”

The short format lends itself to less character development and more idea. It’s a shame few current “big name” authors spend serious attention writing short fiction.

I do agree that the characters weren’t particularly great and the romance was unnecessary; I’ll forgive it just this once since the ideas more than make up for it.

And one last thing…
“It’s only worth reading only if you can’t find anything better.”

Isn’t that true of ANYTHING? Why would you willingly sit down and read something if you knew you’d enjoy reading “X” better? =P

Just kidding.

I have no problem that you all disagree with me. Maybe I was in a bad mood when I read the book or maybe I was just tired.

Science Fiction certainly makes it’s way into real life, maybe real life tainted my opinion of this book.

Who knows. What do other people think?

So that makes three to one against you, Cam…

And with me, it makes four.