[Kamakhya]

I did end up finding a copy of this book and have just finished it today. I, too, was very impressed. His short stories are fresh and different. Since he is obviously a techie (math geek) of some sort, one would think his characterization would be way off. Also, given his very intriguing premises, he might succomb to preaching. Yet, his characterization is decent and he seemingly examines many sides of the same problem.

Something about his writing bugged me, though, and I am not sure what. Perhaps an almost text book style? This might be reminiscent of tech writing. But, his different outlooks and experimentation with viewpoint were fun. All in all, clearly someone we should watch out for in the future. I think he certainly has potential.

My favorites were Understand and Seventy-two Letters. But, each scenario was fun in its own right. Lots of creativity.

[Soon Lee]

It's almost a dispassionate style, remote and emotionally disconnected. You're right, it has a textbook feel, or even that of a scientific paper. Guess it's his technical writing background coming through. It does give his writing a sense of authority which I like.

[Archren]

I agree with Soon Lee. I think it is an older style of writing - sometimes reminds me a little bit of H.G. Wells, although I might get flamed for the comparison! :D

[FicusFan]

It's almost a dispassionate style, remote and emotionally disconnected. You're right, it has a textbook feel, or even that of a scientific paper. Guess it's his technical writing background coming through. It does give his writing a sense of authority which I like.

I think he sucked the juice out of the stories and left them lying there on the page like hollow skins. His little blurbs at the back where he explains each story and probably didn't spend as much time or care, were actually lively and interesting.

[Soon Lee]

This is one book that we'll just have to agree to disagree on.

[lemming]

Wow, I had almost forgotten this month's book was Stories of Your Life and Others. I started an excited thread on this when it very first came out, remember? I knew his name already just from reading Story of Your Life, which I absolutely loved. (I didn't find the characterization dry at all, by the way... but perhaps it's because I found I could easily project myself onto the main character and thus didn't need much extra fleshing-out.)

Recognized later that the very first story, the one about the Tower of Babel, was also one that I had read in an SF anthology but utterly hated. I liked it better this time around, realizing just how off the beaten track these stories are, but still not much... oh, and why does everyone love Understand so much? My problem with that one is that it's too hand-wavey. Clearly we can't possibly follow the thoughts of an ultra-intelligent being, and sure enough, the descriptions of the thought processes quickly fall off to the usual level of description of magical duels in fantasy books: vague and making no sense.

Seventy-two Letters was incredibly interesting and warrants a reread, and Liking What You See: A Documentary is something I thought about again and again after reading it (especially when viewing advertisements). Industrial strength beauty... hmmm, there's MORE than a grain of truth to it.

Anyway, I've now mentioned 5 stories, 4 of them by name, in a book that doesn't contain many more than that, without having the book in front of me. That alone says something about the staying power of Chang's work. I for one don't care to see him write a novel when he clearly works so well in this format... I want to see him keep doing what he's good at. :)

[odo]

I did like the book very much, specially "Liking what you see", which somehow reminded me of Greg Egan. But "Understand", "72 letters", "Hell is the absence of God" and "Story of your life" are also excellent stories in my opinion.

I was surprised that the stories were so different one from the others. Very different styles and very different topics. It's difficult to find a common characteristic for all of them, though I've heard somebody classify them as "hard SF sometimes based in wrong science". As for instance in "Hell..", "72 letters" or "The tower of Babylon". They are coherent and "hard" in the sense that all seems to follow from the premises, though these premises are not true (in our universe, at least)

[LordBalthazar]

Loved it. Or, I should say "them". Well, most of them. The Evolution of Human Science was neither here nor there, and while I did find the premise of Seventy-Two Letters fascinating, the actual story failed to capture my interest. The stand-out for me, one that no has mentioned, was Hell is the Absence of God, one of the most darkly humorous reads I've ever had the pleasure of enjoying. Not only does this one rank as my favorite in the collection, but it rates right up there in my top ten favorite short stories of all time.

I found it interesting that most of the stories, in one or another, dealt with the notion of enlightenment and the protagonist's quest to capture that elusive unattainable beyond the reach of ordinary mortals - with differing results: a short-lived cosmic attunement, insanity, a transformative mindset on the concept of time-space, a literal Hell. And, after reading the collection and these various results, I came to appreciate the first story all the more with its deliciously wicked turn demonstrating that even higher powers must have a sense of humor. It reminded me of that episode of South Park where Carman and the gang visit the fair and happily line up for a ride. The line proceeds at a snail's pace, hours pass, tempers fray, they progress inch by inch until, finally, the boys reach the front of the line - where a carny thanks them for "riding the line ride" and sends them on their way.

All of the stories were fascinating, incredibly creative works, and its interesting to note that the reason Chiang doesn't produce more is because of the time and thought he puts into these individual stories. Well, it shows. I loved this collection and wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to any of my friends.

[odo]

its interesting to note that the reason Chiang doesn't produce more is because of the time and thought he puts into these individual stories. Well, it shows.

Recently I found another short story by Chiang. As far as I know, it's the only one that is not included in "Stories of your life". It was originally published by Nature and it's available online for free

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050704/pf/436150a_pf.html

I did really like it :)

[LordBalthazar]

[QUOTE=odo]Recently I found another short story by Chiang. As far as I know, it's the only one that is not included in "Stories of your life". It was originally published by Nature and it's available online for free

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050704/pf/436150a_pf.html

I did really like it :)[/QUOTE

Thanks Odo. It's a nice, short read and, like his other works, offers up a unique and thought-provoking prospect. In some ways, it reminded me of the Japanese movie Kairo (not the horrible English remake) in which people all over the world begin to fall victim to "horrible epiphanies" with similar results.