[vortexreader]

This month the Reading Group is discussing Time Future by Maxine McArthur. If you have read the book please feel free to join in the discussion at any point - all opinions are welcome.

Once again, I will list a few starter points below. Respond to, or ignore, them as you wish.


(1). Time Future is Maxine McArthur's first novel. Is this obvious to the reader?

(2). The theme of contact with aliens who invite humanity to join a 'confederacy' of species and who oversee the progress of humanity is hardly unique. Does McArthur handle this theme well? How does her attempt compare with, for example, David Brin's Uplift novels?

(3) Is a Commander Halley a believable character? A believable commander?

(4) What is your opinion of McArthur's characterisation?

(5) Is Time Future a poorly conceived, thinly veiled rip off of Star Trek Deep Space Nine crossed with Alien?

(6) Was the motivation of the Seouras adequately explained?

(7) McArthur has written a sequel, Time Past, will you read it?

[Kamakhya]

Well, just to kick things off, I will offer some comments.

All in all, I liked Time Future. It is not destined to become a classic, but it is a decent read.

(1). Time Future is Maxine McArthur's first novel. Is this obvious to the reader?

It reminded me a lot of Revelation Space. Maybe because I had the same complaints. With both novels, it was like the author had an idea for a story, but did not bother to keep track of it's development. Time Future is an epic style universe, but lacks the depth involved in explaining it. Take Night's Dawn by Hamilton. It took him 3 mammoth novels to get across his universe in a coherent manner. Same with Brin's Uplift universe. However, in one novel, McArthur tries to do the same. I found myself completely confused at places and desiring more information. At times, she was able to get in some background, but it never seemed enough to explain what was occurring.

So, in a way, yes. It was a good first novel, showing lots of potential, but definately not up there with the best.

(2). The theme of contact with aliens who invite humanity to join a 'confederacy' of species and who oversee the progress of humanity is hardly unique. Does McArthur handle this theme well? How does her attempt compare with, for example, David Brin's Uplift novels?

I liked the underdog theme. I liked her explanation of the Invidi and the other races. However, there just wasn't enough to go on. I don't think it compares with Brin's Uplift universe. He gave a seriously plausible explanation for why humans were treated like dirt, whereas McArthur turns it into a major power play between the four founders and the other nine members. She should have expanded on this idea, rather than let it be a minor background detail.

(4) What is your opinion of McArthur's characterisation?

I think this is one of McArthur's strong points. Halley is believable and interesting. I liked her portrayal of the aliens. I liked how she showed body language as well as verbal language in her character's expressions. I could picture the characters in my mind and see them interact. Her scenic description was also very good, though, I must admit, the endless discussion of what is up and down and such of the space station, left me baffled.

(6) Was the motivation of the Seouras adequately explained?

No. In fact, I don't think the motivations of anyone other than a handful of charachters was adequately explained. As I said earlier, it was far too complex a universe with far too complex aliens and politics to be handled in one novel.

(7) McArthur has written a sequel, Time Past, will you read it?

Hehehe....I just finished it today. http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

I really did like the universe and wanted to know more about it. So I went out and bought the sequel to see if anything more was cleared up. I have to say, that I did get more out of the second novel. Yet, like Chasm City, I still found it lacking in background and coherency. She talks about all these neat races, but only gives cursory descriptions of them, if that! She fails to describe how Earth really feels about being one of the nine, or how they even deal with becomming a star-faring world. So much of her story is spent in the mystery plot, that it is hard to grasp the overall feel of the universe the plot is based in.

All that aside, Maxine McArthur is a decent writer and I enjoyed both Time Future and Time Past. Like Alastair Reynolds, she may well become a popular author. The potential is there, but perhaps she just bit off a bit more than she could chew at the moment.

Kamakhya

[Hobbit]

Ok - finished Time Future today and thought that it was OK, though nothing really special. A good first novel, but in my opinion I've read better.

As a first novel it should be applauded. The characterisation of Halley is OK, dealing with difficult situations in a difficult environment and all, though I did get a little annoyed at her weary whinging in places. I think CJ Cherryh and even David Weber or David Feinteuch have perhaps created similar characters better.

Was it just me though that kept thinking 'Babylon 5' through the book? http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

The book tried an uneasy path between developing storyline and filling in backplot as it went along. There is a risk here - too much backplot and the story slows down, too much narrative and the reader is left with a lot of gaps that they have to fill in themselves. Don't think McArthur's quite got it right here - there were places where it became difficult to keep going.

Not a rip-off, and better than a lot of books I've read, but not in the same league as some of the other 'space-station-opera' books I've read.

Not that bothered about the sequel, though in the right circumstances, I might. In a few years though I reckon we might yet see a potential classic from this writer.

Hobbit

[vortexreader]

I suppose I should start my response to this book by pointing out immediately that I didn't like it very much at all. I'm having trouble actually finding any good points about it

(1). Time Future is Maxine McArthur's first novel. Is this obvious to the reader?
I thought it was blindingly obvious! The world McArthur has created is under-realised and 'immature'. I truly don't believe she had given it as much thought as, I presume, is needed when creating a universe from scratch. I thought the writing, on the whole, lacked depth and maturity. Part of me kept wondering if I was actually reading a Young Adult novel. Of course, part of this is the result of poor editing - something that seems to be rife in Australian genre publishing (don't even get me started on the whole Sara Douglass phenomenon!).

(2). The theme of contact with aliens who invite humanity to join a 'confederacy' of species and who oversee the progress of humanity is hardly unique. Does McArthur handle this theme well? How does her attempt compare with, for example, David Brin's Uplift novels?
It's hardly unique but has certainly been done better. Brin managed to create an entirely convincing scenario that had it's own psychological integrity. McArthur, on the other hand, seems to have employed a confederacy only as a means of creating an 'us and them' situation. What is the purpose of the four leading races? Are they meant to guide humanity or subjugate it? Like so many of the details in Time Future this was either not explored at all or not adequately explained.

[Raisuli]

I haven't read 'Time Future' as I couldn't get hold of the book.

I was just wondering if the two novels ('Future' and 'Past') might have actually been one single novel, which the publishers (nervous with a new writer to sell) requested to be split into two books. It might go some way towards explaining some of the criticisms of the novel above.

I know something similar happend to John Sladek's 'Roderick' and 'Roderick at Random', which were written as one complete story but published 3 years apart.

Sorry for butting into this topic without having read the novel.


[This message has been edited by Raisuli (edited May 20, 2002).]

[This message has been edited by Raisuli (edited May 20, 2002).]

[Kamakhya]

That's a great point Raisuli, but, sadly, I don't think it is the case. They do work together, in that the second book continues where the first left off. But, both have disctinct plots. Time Past is definately a sequel (or should I say prequel) to Time Future and not the second half of Time Future.

Time Past has all the same faults as Time Future, unfortunately.

It would seem that it is agreed that Time Future was good on ideas, but sorely lacking in execution. For me, the author does not seem to have a grasp on her own environment. The species seem to be ad hoc rather than well thought out cultures.

Kamakhya

[vortexreader]

Kamakhya wrote:
The species seem to be ad hoc rather than well thought out cultures.
I totally agree. Even while reading the book I couldn't adequately picture the aliens let alone distinguish between the species...not good when your novel's major protagonists are alien!

What do you all think were the best things about McArthur's book? I'm still having trouble thinking of something....


[This message has been edited by vortexreader (edited May 21, 2002).]

[AlienLogic]

I found Time Future an OK read but thats all. Usually when I'm reading a novel I can't wait to pick it up. In the case of Time Future it was a bit of an effort to pickup.

I feel that Maxine mcArthur had some good ideas (I like genuinely alien aliens) but has really tried to do to much in one novel. There was too little depth and background spread over too many ideas. I feel that she should have expanded on some aspects of the book eg the Seouras history, motivation and future.

David Brin I think did a better job. In his novels the views of the aliens were shown giving a much better insight to their motivation etc.

I don't think I'll read the sequel. In general this style of novel is not really the subgenre that I read. Same goes for Brins Uplift books. I read the first three Uplift but like Time Future really found that themes that were concentrated on (politics, relations etc) were not really what I was interested in. While subjects that were mentioned that interested me were not expanded on.

[vortexreader]

I feel that Maxine mcArthur had some good ideas (I like genuinely alien aliens) but has really tried to do to much in one novel. There was too little depth and background spread over too many ideas. I feel that she should have expanded on some aspects of the book eg the Seouras history, motivation and future.
Well put. I also found that, the times she did go off on a tangent to explain some background detail it was exactly that - explaining. And usually about an area that I wasn't interested in.

Can anyone explain the title to me? Maybe I missed something important but I can't see the relevance!

[Kamakhya]

What do you all think were the best things about McArthur's book? I'm still having trouble thinking of something....

I just didn't think it was *that* bad! I have read worse. I thought her ideas were decent, but the execution clearly needed work. I totally agree that she would go off on these weird tangents that weren't really important to the story as a whole, yet completely neglect vitals aspects/background. I loved that she had aliens that breathed different atmospheres, that were truly *alien*. I liked how she attempted to show the communication problems involved in dealing with these aliens. But, dang, why have nine (actually more) species, and fail to discuss them at all! Like I said before, I liked Time Future enough to read Time Past, but I probably shouldn't have wasted my time. It did little to clarify and expand on the universe.

However, it did clarify the titles. In essence, the gateways through which the ships travel move through time as well as space. The jump point which opened between Earth and Jocasta was 99 years. In Time Past, Halley went back in time to the Earth of 99 yrs prior to the setting in Time Future and then back again. So Time Future was the future of Time Past.

Kamakhya