Sevenneves by Neal Stephenson

By coincidence (I’ve only just been aware of this thread), I’ve lately been trying to tackle Quicksilver: first thing I’ve tried by Stephenson – had noticed a lot of positive opinions on the author, and especially this particular book.

I’m roughly a quarter of the way through, and am pretty sure I’m about to give up on it. While there’s a good deal of fun with Seventeenth-Century-isms, and with the featuring of historical events and figures; I’ve found the whole thing just too bloody long and meandering, for my perhaps not very discerning tastes. I get the impression that Stephenson isn’t for me.

I’m a huge Stephenson fan but I still found Quicksilver to be long and meandering. Not that his other stuff isn’t long… it just doesn’t feel like it, mostly (well, to me at least). I haven’t read The Confusion or The System of the World, but I’m told they move a little faster. You might want to try some of his other works before giving up completely.

Thanks – maybe I shouldn’t be in extreme haste to “bin” the guy. I haven’t been outright hating Quicksilver – it’s just the feeling that “life’s too short”. Going off-topic: but I recently discovered Dan Simmonds [sp?], in the shape of his novel The Abominable. I considered that such utter dreck, that though he has written much other stuff, some – I gather – in different veins, and has many fans: I’ll never open another book by our boy Dan.

He could be - Quicksilver is far from his best and is bloated beyond belief, he’s written a lot better. At least give Snow Crash a whirl - great book.

Looking forward to reading sevenneves out of general NS love, but not a great deal of expectation - think he stopped developing as a writer a long while back. Cryptonomicon was the watershed IMHO, a phenomenal book with all his brilliance on show, and all of his weaknesses contained. He could have developed from there, got even better and left the genre behind, but he bottled it. Retreated back to his comfort zone and mired us all down with the Baroque cycle.

I haven’t read a lot of Stephenson. Tried the first of the Baroque cycle a while back, couldn’t get into it. Also read half of Reamde and remember liking it, but it was a library book that I had to return before I finished.

Seveneves was definitely worth reading. I’m still pondering the whole world-will-be-destroyed scenario in my head. But there were many points that I didn’t like/thought were unrealistic:

  • SO MUCH TECH DETAIL. Good lord, I’m all for technical explanations, but I don’t need to know all the details that go into every single movement of the ship or mining asteroids. What was worse is that several times, he’d put important plot points in the middle of several pages of dull technical explanation, so you couldn’t just gloss over them. I’m sure I missed some important points because I couldn’t bring myself to read, once again, 5 pages of why fuel and propellant are different things. The book could have been edited down to 1/2 to 2/3s the length and it would have been a better, cleaner read (and this is from someone who LOVES LOVES LOVES big thick books.)

  • He really serious downplayed the reactions of a planet full of people about to die. So we had a smattering of riots and social unrest, but by-and-large people marched quietly to their deaths. I don’t buy it; I think it would have caused huge, massive unrest and chaos.

  • He also downplayed the psychological toll on the people in space. Once again, everyone was nicely resolved to their fates, who cares that their loved ones (including children!) were being left on earth to die. People don’t act that way in real life, no matter the logic/lack of real options/etc.

  • WTF, one underground silo? Give me a break, everyone and their brother would be digging holes/diving into caves/etc. If one group of people could come up with a plan that lasted through the 5K years it took for the planet to come back, several others could as well. Probably not all, but you gotta think that many, many people would attempt it.

  • And yeah, why would all the governments decide space is the place and not even try the massively-simpler option of underground silos? Or underwater, as we find out at the end happened but for whatever reason was hush-hush very-secret.

  • As others have said, what happened to the Mars mission? They just disappeared? Would have been nice to tie up that plot hole.

I love Stepehnson and the Baroque Cycle is one of my top ten favorite works of all time.

Something that may shed some light on the nature of the technical exposition and world building in Seveneves is an interview he did. I will try to find and post a link to it.

In the interview he says he complained about how all the scientists and engineers these days were off building apps and doing things on the internet rather than doing big an important stuff.

Apparently some engineer came back and said that that that was the fault of science fiction writers who weren’t supplying any big or inspiring ideas to work on. Apparently, Stephenson too this to heart and actually got a bunch of sci-if writers together and made a book with a whole bunch of short stories about such ideas. Immediately after this came Seveneves. I kind of view it as a blue print/suggestion box for NASA and the human race regarding the future of space exploration than as a novel in and of itself. I’ll go find the link.

Here’s the interview

Page 2 contains a link to his article on innovation starvation which is more on point to what I was discussing.

Yeah, welcome to Stephenson. The thing that you can either appreciate or not - because it’ll be true either way - is that the techy expository filler is actually the reason for the book. “Better, cleaner read” is not something that applies here, because I think he wouldn’t bother with it. He’s neither especially good at nor especially interested, as far as I can tell, in writing fiction in the traditional sense. He just likes talking about the stuff he likes talking about, and is good at that, and does it via fiction.

I’m not even sure whether I’m defending him or criticizing him.

Wow ! I think I’ll become a novelist, and have a whale of a time talking at great length, via fiction, about the stuff I like talking about; and make a shedload of money in the process. (I’m not being snarky – clearly, things have come together for Stephenson so that he’s been able to pull off this feat – for every one of him, there are many ordinary Joes who might attempt this trick, but would not succeed at it.)

A whale of a time couldn’t be more apropos – that’s what Melville did with Moby Dick – a story about a captain’s obsession with the whale, interspersed with pages and pages of technical information about whaling.

Anyway, I just finished Seveneves and I liked it quite a bit. I assume the loose ends are there for a sequel – introduce the Martians and talk about the Purpose or whatever. I agree that the discussions about how all that future technology worked went on and on, though.

Frankly I don’t mind open-ended finishes or the detours into minutia, Stephenson is on my “Read anything he publishes” list.
[/QUOTE]

My favorites were Snow Crash, Cryptonomicon, and Baroque Cycle. Of the three, I think I enjoyed BC the most, since I just love history of science, and I loved the way it was presented.

I enjoyed Quicksilver and am surprised it wasn’t mentioned earlier in the thread. But, along with Diamond Age, it wasn’t quite in the same class as the others. I do think that Diamond Age was the most imaginative. I do confess that when I read the last page I double checked to make sure my ebook wasn’t tricking me. In terms of concepts, yeah, I think he’d pretty much finished. But reading it, it just seemed to come to a jarring ending. I don’t have a problem with endings that leave open lots of possibilities, so that’s not it. (I particularly like the ending of 12 Monkeys, for just that reason.)

Somehow, I wasn’t even aware of the others. I’ll probably be reading Anathem next, once I finish with Russell’s history of philosphy. Or maybe I’ll need a break. I’m about to start the section on the Christian era, which is going to put a hurt on my head.

It occurs to me that the Curse of Aida could easily have been averted: The Eves could have simply decided/decreed that:

  1. After the first generation, or as soon as sufficient males are available, Moira’s equipment will be shelved except for special cases, and almost all reproduction will be old-style natural-sexual reproduction.
  2. There will be a rigorous incest-taboo against breeding, naturally or artificially, with anyone of one’s own Eve-lineage.
    That preserves the human race as one race/species; whatever special characteristics each Eve asks Moira to add to her progeny will be scattered throughout the population in a melting pot.

Heck, you don’t even need to shelve the equipment. Just request as much as cross breeding as possible every generation. You’ll be melting potted nearly instantly. That whole idea, that there would be seven distinct races so many thousands of years later, was one of many things that just seemed silly to me.

Well, finished the book today. I liked it, while not believing much of it. Spoilers ahead…

The thing is, it’s not really a novel, it’s more a collection of interesting ideas, glued together with Plot. Here’s what happens if the moon falls apart. Here’s how to move a comet. Here are cool things to do with robots. Here are cool things to do with genetics. Here are a whole bunch of really neat mega-structures. All presented in an explain-it-like-I’m-five style. It sort of works if you don’t think about the human factor too much. As Athena pointed out, humans would be unlikely to go gentle in that good night. But even more so, I think people would probably be much more likely to stick their heads in the sand and pretend that the scientists were wrong. Look at the way we’re responding to climate change.

More unlikely human reactions arise when the Eves have their conference on the moon. Parenthetically, I think getting to the conference on the moon was very well handled. The mounting horror of the mounting death toll was very effective and somewhere around page 549 you encounter the phrase Seven Eves for the first time and go “D’oh! That’s what the title means!” But even given the psychological trauma caused by the end of the world and the complete Ark fiasco, you’d have to think at least one of the Eves would go “Screw it, I’m not fooling around with unknown technology – just give me normal kids”. Especially after a few failed pregnancies. Even if you could choose the genes, it seems like you’d breed for small size and lower food and oxygen consumption instead of, in some cases, large warrior types.

OK, but the really improbable stuff happens 5000 years later. And the problem is, it’s 5000 years later and people are still obsessed with the seven Eves and the Epic. When was the last time you thought about the hunter gatherer type who sired your ancestors 5000 years ago? Granted, the Spacers have improbably extensive video documentation of the Epic (improbable, because those scarce memory chips would have been repurposed or would have degraded over the first 1000 years or so), but in 5000 years, a lot of history happens. It’s very hard to believe that the society would remain so obsessed with a five year Epic and the pre-Agent Earth civilization given the large number of heroes and major-league assholes that arise in any given 100 year period.

Other things that don’t really mesh well with a 5000 year time span:

The genetic distinctions between races: the races can interbreed, so they almost certainly would have. Opposites attract. If nothing else, spontaneous mutations would have resulted in each of the races reacquiring those characteristics that were bred out of them. Or, there would have been more genetic modifications along the way.

Could the Spacers really communicate with the Diggers after all that time? Would the Deeps recognize a picture of an event from 5000 years in the past? I’m thinking no in all cases.

Would the technology of robots still be modeled on the same four or five basic types that were introduced 5000 years ago? Wouldn’t you have robot butlers?
But all these objections can get waved aside if, as I said, you view the novel as a chance to explore a bunch of cool ideas, lightly sprinkled with plot and characters. That said, I wouldn’t mind revisiting this world with more fleshed out characters. The whole Red vs. Blue (in joke alert) conflict would make an interesting story. Although in reality, a society containing mostly Julians would be even more dysfunctional than the current US House of Representatives.

I came to this thread to ask a question (which maybe should go into GQ). I am in the middle of Seveneves (45% through according to my e-reader) and I am curious whether anyone knows how accurate the basic science is. If the moon somehow split into 7 pieces, were the white sky and hard rain scenarios and the destruction of earth really inevitable, the way Doob and others calculated? Has anyone confirmed this?

I am amused by the spread of opinion on Stephenson’s opus. I loved The Baroque Cycle (and learned all I know of 17th English history from it) as well as Cryptonomicum. I was not impressed by Snow Crash, although my wife loved it. I liked the Diamond Age, but she didn’t. After reading the comments I will try Anathem. Zodiac was a work of the left hand. Enjoyable but slight (not the adjective you would use to describe any of his other works).

Nitpick: Not on the Moon. On a piece of it.

Yes, yes, now we know you read the book. Whatever. If Phobos and Deimos can be moons, then this chunk is also a moon.

I recently finished Seveneves, and I had a lot of problems with suspension of disbelief. There were a lot of places where I said “that wouldn’t work that way” and it really got in the way of reading the thing.

The basic premise was the first stumbling block. As far as I know, if the Moon broke into pieces, and the pieces were in approximately the same orbit for a period of time, those pieces would rapidly coalesce back into a spherical object. Collisions shouldn’t send most of the objects flying OUT of their orbit–they should be sticking together into bigger objects, at least in part.

The second problem for me was the lack of hole-digging, which as we saw was completely successful and didn’t appear to pass through a seven individual bottleneck. What happened to Cheyenne Mountain?

Another problem was the lack of a Mars plan, which seems to me to be about 1000 times more likely to be survivable than an orbital plan. Stephenson did not seem to do his research on long-term life support and long-term space habitats, which is a shame. Had he come to Johnson Space Center we would have been glad to bend his ear about stuff like that.

Then, of course, the Seven Eves thing. As soon as the “races” started sexually reproducing, which apparently happened in the second generation, the races would have vanished. That is pretty much why we invented sex, after all.

There was a long piece in the middle that I would describe as the **Ralph 124C 41+ **section, where the viewpoint character wanders around the habitat thinking how amazing it would seem to a man from the primitive year of 1914, which coincidentally was when **Ralph 124C 41+ **stories got stale.

Finally, I didn’t believe the fish people, but they were hardly in the novel at all before Stephenson ended it, leaving behind a Cold War being fought between two technologically advanced powers, with a bunch of low-tech indigenes claiming a lot of valuable real estate. Let’s see how that works out for them.

I didn’t think it worked very well as a science fiction novel. I don’t think Stephenson’s strengths are on display, but a lot of his weaknesses are. I think *The Martian *did the first part much better. I understand why I found a brand new, signed copy of Seveneves at a used book store. I will probably read his next, but I might check it out from the library.

I’m late to the party here because I read this one on Audible (clocked in at 30+ hours).

In my opinion, Stephenson’s biggest strength is in building interesting sci-fi worlds. Snow Crash, Diamond Age, and Anathem were all compelling, to me, because his worlds seem real and logical. Seveneves doesn’t get into any of that until a full 2/3rds of the way in!

I wanted to learn more about the society that came into being in orbit. I wanted to learn more about the diggers and the pingers.

Seveneves feels like what would have happened if Tolkien had decided that the Silmarillion was the most important part of LotR, and had only catalogued the actual journey to Mordor in the last half of the last book in the trilogy.

I just started reading Seveneves. I am a big Neal Stephenson fan, and I was excited to finally make it to the front of the library queue. But I am finding the premise of the book so disturbing and distracting that I am not sure I am going to keep reading. Everyone just seems to get on the same page with the cloud ark without fully exploring options to save the earth or buy time. (As a parent of 2 young ones I keep thinking about the horror of the mass extinction scenario for all of those left on earth.) Couldn’t the large moon pieces potentially be towed into different orbits to reduce collisions? And with a little more time, maybe the pieces could be broken up individually and ejected from earth’s orbit. Or what about some sort of giant net to contain small moon fragments and keep them gravitationally bound? Or a combination of these strategies? He opens the book with a mention of towing the amalthea asteroid into a different orbit, so it seems obvious that ideas along these lines to prevent the white rain or delay it would be first on everyone’s minds. The earth is a pretty well adapted life ark, definitely worth keeping… Anyway, I wouldn’t appreciate what others think about this.