Ted Chiang is a science fiction author who’s largely famous for writing “Story of Your Life,” the novella that the movie “Arrival” is based on.
I read the compilation that story was in, and it was fantastic.
So I got his second compilation, “Exhalation,” and the first story, “The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate,” is sensational.
Chiang had written very little, considering he’s been at it over two decades. I’m not even super sure how he paid his bills until 2016, after which I’d assume his residuals for “Arrival” resulted in a bag of money. But holy shit, this guy can write a story.
I’ve been following his fiction since his first story, “Tower of Babylon.” His third, “Understand,” blew me away. He is a great writer in all respects. He’s a master of coming up with new and fascinating concepts.
He averages less than one short story (or novelette or novella) per year. Every one of them is brilliant. He apparently is or was working as a technical writer (or perhaps also a computer programmer) full-time while writing part-time.
Every story is different. Wildly different. He experiments with style, tone, point of view, approach, auctorial distance. His characters are often distant or metaphors or conceits. The stories are not easy, popular reading: they make demands.
Very few writers can operate this way. A full-time job or an academic position is a necessity. Becoming widely known is a luxury they rarely achieve.
I’m trying to think of parallels. The closest I can come up with is the mystery writer Stanley Ellin, who wrote one short story a year beginning in the late 1940s and usually won an award for it. But he did write a novel every few years. Kelly Link straddled the mainstream/f&sf bounds with a major award-nominated story a year starting in 1995 and hardly any longer works. She edits and runs a small press.
I met Chiang briefly once at a convention when he was, ironically, skipping out on the award ceremonies.
He’s awesome. He is one of the few science fiction writers to seriously examine religious dogma (e.g. “Hell is the absence of God”) and traditional magic (e.g. “72 letters”.) His stories are carefully crafted and thought provoking. “The story of your life” is one of the best alien contact stories ever written.
The novella is generally better than the movie; the movie forces a more traditional structure onto the story. That said the movie is great, and one thing it did improve was having the ships come to the surface of the Earth; they are a truly staggering effect in the film.
I keep a shelf of just a few books that are, in my humble opinion, the most moving, extraordinary pieces of fiction I have ever read. “Stories of Your Life and Others” is on that shelf. I don’t fully understand every story in that book, but the title story moved me to tears.
Honestly, the movie “Arrival” kind of sucked, which I expected. There is no way that the film format, which is wonderful for certain types of art, could capture the elegiac nature of the story, the exploration of linguistics, and the haunting nature of human relationships as seen through the lens of time.
(Other books on my shelf: The Night Train to Lisbon, The Windup Bird Chronicles, The Famished Road, and [not fiction, but a portrait of human relationships that the best of fiction can accomplish, so I include it]: Sir Vidia’s Shadow.)
The first story in Exhalation, “The Merchant and the Alchemists’ Gate,” is tremendously emotional and I cannot recommend it highly enough. I’ve been thinking about it for a week.
I thought the movie Arrival was reasonably good. Yes, it wasn’t as good as the story, but that doesn’t mean that it was bad. The problem is that sometimes a story is so good that it’s not possible to make a movie from it that’s as good. It’s like my opinion of the Peter Jackson movies of The Lord of the Rings. It bothers me that people think that they’re great movies. I don’t think so. The Lord of the Rings is so good that it’s impossible to make a film as great from them.
I VEHEMENTLY disagree. It is a outstanding movie, made by one of the greatest filmmakers alive. The acting is stellar, the script tight, the cinematography magnificent.
It is significantly altered from the novella, but it’s totally worth a watch as its own work of art.
Yeah, I’ve been following him ever since I read “Understand” in Asimov’s magazine.
If I recall correctly, that’s the one he withdrew from consideration for an award because he didn’t think it was quite as good as it could be (I thought it was terrific)
It was a Hugo nomination. Here’s what Chiang had to say on it:
The story that was published isn’t the story I wanted it to be. When my editor and I originally set a deadline for a new story for the collection, he told me to make up a date, and he’d give me an extension if I wanted one. I made up a date; later, I told him I needed an extension. He refused. So I was forced to turn in a story I wasn’t happy with.
This doesn’t mean that I’m ashamed of “Liking What You See”; I’m not. And as with many writers, I can look back on any of my stories and imagine how it could have been done better. But with those other stories, at least I know that, at the time I submitted them for publication, I had done the best I could. That’s not the case with “Liking What You See.” I had a different story in mind, one which I think would have been better. And I didn’t think it’d be appropriate for me to accept a nomination for a story that I wanted to do differently.
Another fan of “Stories of Your Life and Others”, and I thought Arrival did a decent job with a difficult story to tell. I didn’t mind the changes, although if you haven’t seen the film I would recommend reading the short story first if possible. The film will ruin the story, but the story doesn’t really ruin the film.