I’m just finishing the book The Years of Rice and Salt, by Kim Stanley Robinson. Without giving away much, the basic plot is that Western Europe was completely devastated by plague at the end of the Dark Ages. With a few nominal exceptions, no Europeans survived, from Spain to Moscow. The novel details the spread of Islamic, Chinese, and Indian cultures across the world, and theorizes on what the modern world would be like if these cultures had interacted over time, without any Christian or European influence. The main characters are people who are continually reincarnated, in the Buddhist sense, throughout this span of time. They tend to end up living in the same places and times together, often keeping many of their previous interests and temperaments.
I’ve really enjoyed this book, and I’m curious to hear other people’s opinions. I’d especially like to hear from non-Westerners. The author seemed to focus on the cycles of good and bad that can be found in, say, the Chinese bureaucratic system, or the treatment of women under Islam. Would the extreme possibilities that he presents be things that you might actually expect to occur in such a situation? Or did he over-exaggerate faults, perhaps because of his Western point of view?
My last question: I’m not Buddhist, and don’t know any Buddhists. I’m curious to know if the presentation of Buddhism that he makes, especially of reincarnation, is more or less an accurate portrayal of the belief system. I enjoyed reading the “between chapters” about the spirits in the bardo as much as I liked the regular chapters about what was going on in the world.
Can’t answer any of your questions – just chiming in to say that I loved this book, which I read a month or so ago, and I’ve been recommending it right and left. In fact, I was in Borders with a friend yesterday, and I made him buy a copy.
I expected to really enjoy this book as I like alternate histories. But I had a lot of trouble getting into it for about the first third, the reincarnation/bardo plot device just confused and bored me. But it seemed to hit its stride near the middle and I really started to like it, for instance the female muslim leader who moves back into France and the little oasis of scientific experimentation in the middle east.
I recommend this book but have patience with the beginning.
AndrewT, I had the opposite experience. The bardo part of the plot sucked me right in immediately, but I got bogged down in a couple of the longer middle sections. The physicists and the Muslim-Chinese philosopher couple got a little boring - too much detail that I didn’t think was very interesting.
Thanks for the bump, Aesiron, altho I think this thread is doomed. Rats. And Twickster, I have two friends reading it now. It’s worth sharing, I think!
The bardo is real enough in the Buddhist belief system. I found it a fascinating concept as a literary device.
I was weirded out in the first hundred pages or so – just getting into what looked like the two main characters and bam! they’re dead. I kept plowing along and it took another cycle or two before I twigged onto what was going on and even longer than that to figure out the major clue who was who as the sagfa progressed. Quite a ride by the end of the book, though, quite a ride.
Yeah, I liked that it took a few cycles to figure out what was going on. I’ve been very careful not to use the word “reincarnation” when I recommend it to people, because that lightbulb moment when it becomes clear that that’s the thread was very much part of my pleasure in the book.
I also liked how later sections would refer back to the earlier sections – like how the Chinese woman turned out to be an important thinker, who the woman in the final Islamic section in France was reading.
I loved the book, though I enjoyed the first sections more than the last. I have taken a couple of classes on Chinese and Buddhist history, which definitely increased my enjoyment of the novel. Sadly, I don’t think any of the people I’ve recommended it to have actually read it.