thegooddoctor
7/25/2025
I had long looked forward to reading this classic. Having read and reread Orwell's masterpiece "1984", I had great hopes for this book. As I dove in, I found it compulsively readable. Despite being in the middle of a "best-of" collection by Robert Silverberg (one of the very best of the best), and also in the middle of making a big salad for supper -- I found myself transfixed by the text. I could not drag myself away -- right up to the end of Chapter 5 (page 52, in my "Penguin Modern Classics" edition -- 1951; out of a total of 120 pp.).
From that point on, I started to find more and more irritants scattered through the author's paragraphs. There was still a good deal here to enjoy and appreciate -- but there were more and more head-scratchers. More and more incidences of extreme behaviour by "the powers that be". Yes -- the back cover does advise the reader that this book is "biting satire" -- but I am one of those stubborn readers who nevertheless requires a readable story. As the text veers father and farther from what seems to me a readable story -- I become less and less interested.
I would have rated the first half or so of the book as excellent -- but the latter half falls off dramatically, in my estimation. As the efforts of those in power to exert control exhibit more and more brutality (and less and less logic), the narrative trajectory flattens then starts to dive downward -- eventually plummeting at nearly terminal velocity.
I am glad that I read it. I cannot, in good conscience, suggest that you will enjoy reading it.
You should only read it if you are compelled to (attempt) to read all of the important works of science fiction by all (or as many as possible) of the important authors. But, on the other hand, that is the primary reason I have spent so very much time on this website!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My rating system for this website (I have done reviews for over 80 "books" (including short stories, novelettes and novellas, as well as novels).
Their system is out of 5 stars, and allows you to use half-stars, so highest rating is 5 full stars, next-highest 4 ½ stars, etc. -- and lowest is ½ star. I did NOT want to space these ratings equally, giving just as much precedence to low-quality mush as to really good works. For that reason, I laid out my system as follows:
My rating system: I begin with one star being equivalent to a rating of "C-". Progressing upwards, I add ½ star for each step, up to the maximum 5 stars, which is equivalent to a rating of "A"+. I reserve ½ star for BOMBS, there being no option of zero or negative stars. As a result, I maximize my rating space for good books, and don't squander half or more of that rating space on books that are of marginal quality.