[Duarh]

Opinions on this work (V. Vinge)?

Duarh

[FitzChivalry]

Great stuff.

[Rob B]

Here are some other's thoughts on Vinge's writing: Vinge? (http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000079.html)

I thought the book was good, but I had a tough time with it. Interesting concepts but I think the book a bit overrated.

[Hobbit]

Got to be honest - I haven't finished Fire upon the Deep, though I really enjoyed Deepness in the Sky. I think that Mr Vinge has many original ideas and is a skillful writer. He deals with cosmological consepts and 'hard' SF entertainingly. I enjoyed his Across Realtime (Peace War/Marooned in Real Time) books, though - they are entertaining, though IMHO not as demanding as the Deep books.

Still don't know why I haven't finished 'Fire' - keep meaning to go back and give it another go. I had a lot on at the time I tried to read it - perhaps you need to give it undivided attention!

Hobbit

(Whoops - just read the other comments linked by FF - they are similar to my experience - how strange!) http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by Hobbit (edited September 10, 2001).]

[Rob B]

Hobbit:

Was it that annoying way he measure time?

I think I can sum up my feelings this way: Good stuff in both of his DEEP books, but at times I felt he was trying too hard to show how smart he was, almost as if he was looking down his intellectual nose.

[Hobbit]

Hmmm...could be the time units, Fitzflagg, though I did read Joan Vinge's Heaven Chronicles/Outcasts of Heaven's Belt in the '80's (which uses kiloseconds, megaseconds and so on) and coped fairly happily with that.

He is clearly a clever man with some good original ideas in his work and he can write - the portrayal of the spiders in Deepness was brilliant, IMHO - but I still didn't finish it...

Hobbit

[Rob B]

The Spiders, that's partially what I had a problem with, too - they were portrayed TOO similiar to Humans, IMHO. Vinge even used Human names for many of the cities/universities, IIRC (i.e. Princeton).

Now I understand that was intentional, to illustrate how similar the two races were, but I still had a problem with it and thought he could have showed the similiarities in a way that also illustrated they were "spiders" or different from humans.

[FitzChivalry]

The spiders are not in A Fire Upon the Deep though.

I found his ideas original and intriguing and his galactic map (politically and technologically) very plausible for the physical laws he invented, also a great setting for a story.
Another thing that i liked is how unlike other sci fi books he really managed to capture the feeling of a galactic history, something that lasts billions of years, nothing that happens didn't already happen at some time, that's something that many authors ignore and tend to look at as if it was our own short history of a few thousands years.
His galactic network thing was cool too.
The book was a great space opera, maybe the best i read since Hyperion.
I got Hamilton's The Reality Disfuncion on my shelf waiting for me too, judging from the hype it recieves i might find another contender for best space opera.

[Rob B]

oops! I constantly switch the titles on the books.

As much as I've complained about the books above, they were both thought provoking reads, I just had difficulties with some of the concepts I said above.

The history that he lays out gives you that WOW! Sense of Wonder.

[blahginger]

Personally I loved both of these books. The characters building and completeness of the worlds is remarkable. If you are going to read only one, I would say 'A Deepness in the Sky' was my favorite.

The Names and time units did not bother me at all. I usually do not get around to actually reading the names and sounding them out until about two thirds the way through any book...up until then it is just pattern recognition.