Customer Reviews

Quicksilver:Volume One Of The Baroque Cycle

5 star:		(59)
4 star:		(52)
3 star:		(21)
2 star:		(33)
1 star:		(37)

 

 

The ironically named _Quicksilver_ is the most disappointingly leaden
book it has been my displeasure to read in recent years.

After _Cryptonomicon_ my expectations were high. Early on in
_Quicksilver_ I realized that there was no way this book could be as
good as the earlier one, so I adjusted my hopes downward
accordingly...and even then, I was disappointed.

The flaws are numerous.

The one thing that everyone knows about the book is that it contains a
frantic pile of trivia. I was actually looking forward to this aspect
of the book, given that I enjoy random learning opportunities as much
as the next geek, and given that this is one part of _Cryptonomicon_
that I was enthused about. _QS_ disappoints in this regard. To my
mind there are two main bins that trivia are sorted in to: (1) those
random items that are capable of clicking in an interesting way into
the knowledge structure I already have; and (2) utterly random
tidbits. NS delivered a few of the former, and a few truck-loads of
the latter. In so far as the trivia was interesting, I already knew
it (Germanic witch trials, etymology of the word "dollar", the broad
outlines and purposes of the various 16th century political
structures), and in so far as the trivia was not something I already
knew, I found it dreadfully boring (hail-storms of random names of
royalty, many of them playing minimal roles in the plot, etc.).

Ah. I used the word "plot", so I've segued onto the next region of
disappointment. _QS_ does not have a plot, in the conventional sense.
Sure, in a 900 page novel (or a 2,700 page novel, really), one
wouldn't expect the broad sweep of the action to be clear by page 50,
or 100...but by page 500 or so, one would hope to have an idea of
where things might be going. The book has Theme aplenty.

The Theme, however ("Things Really Changed a Whole Lot, Religiously,
Economically, Politically, and Scientifically"), is big, but too

insubstantial and too vague to construct a huge novel like this on.
_A Winter's Tale_ managed to work very well with out a real plot - it
could hang off of the Theme that "New York changes a lot, and is
magical through the ages". Then again, _A Winter's Tale_ was about
1/9th the length of Stephenson's Inflated Series.

Speaking of inflation, this book needed an editor, badly. Dialogue
and exposition are clunky in many many places. For that matter,
dialogue and exposition are poorly differentiated. There's a joke about
1950's science fiction that 3/4 of the plot and background information
are revealed in "As you know, Bob" asides. The same is true of _QS_.
There's some minor variation on a theme: there's "As you know", there
is "I need not mention the fact that X ...<1,000 words
elided>...because you already know that", and there is "as everyone in
the town knew...".

There's a persistent and pernicious meme in the art world that to
truly convey some situations you need to recreate those situations for
the audience. Thus, the only way to convey tedium is through a four
hour movie, etc. NS seemed to be held by this meme: to convey the
intellectual ferment and vast scope of the 17th century he felt the
need write a book that was adrift in a ferment and vast in scope.
Certainly he could not have conveyed these things in a novella, but
that does not mean that he could not have pruned perhaps a third of
what he wrote.

The book is large enough that there's a Dramatis Personae at the end,
which was somewhat useful...but it didn't work wonderfully well for
me, because the entries were fairly short and defined the characters
(well, historical figures) mostly in terms of descriptors and events
that did not take place inside the book. If I come across a character
who I know was present 500 pages earlier, but I'm trying to remember
whether that character was a alchemist or a merchant, it helps little
to learn that the character was a friend of the Duke of Wessex (or
what have you). This is not a huge departure from how Dramatis
Personae are usually implemented, so this is not a failing unique to
NS, but in a long, meandering, and yawn-inducing book the author
should be at particular pains to provide aids to the reader.

Finally, I found it difficult to read the book at points because of
several incidents of barbarous cruelty to animals. I understand that
the moral code of the time was different, and that these actions are
historically accurate, and even that some reference should be made in
the book, so as not to commit the sin of omission, and thus render the
book less of its time...but NS went further than that and introduced
the cruelty repeatedly. If it was required to advance the plot, he'd
have an out. I would wince (and more) at a book that had explicit
scenes of child rape or brutality, but would accept it if the book was
about the pursuit and capture of a child abuser...but I would find it
hard to read a novel that threw in a random scene of a child being
scalded as punishment just, because, you know...these things happen.

Yeah.

Yay verisimilitude.

The book was not with out wondrous scenes. Jack Shaftoe steps onto
center stage in an audacious scene at the siege of Vienna, which
matched the very best action scenes of _Cryptonomicon_. Daniel
Waterhouse meets up with danger at sea, and the intellectual faint and
bluff of the ensuing engagement is wonderful, as is the nonchalance of
the captain of the ship that Daniel is on. However, the scenes are
all too rare and far between, and concentrated disproportionately in
the first half of the novel.

I suppose I'll end up reading the remaining two volumes to see if NS
manages to pull a rabbit out of a very battered and pathetic looking
hat...but I've got to say, I'm not particularly looking forward to
another 1,800 pages of lying back and thinking of Enlightenment
England.

~I loved Cryptonomicon, and felt like Neal Stephenson was a bloody genius. Rather than a sequel, he has embarked on an epic prequel. After reading Quicksilver, the first of a trilogy set in late 17th Century Europe, I still think he's bloody brilliant, but felt that I should develop a measuring system for whether folks will like this book. Give yourself the indicated number of points if you agree with the following statements. At the end, total your points, and I'll provide a scale as to~~ whether you will like/love/dislike/hate this book.

You love European history: +3 points
You love lots of details in what you read: +3 points
You're into Newton/Leibniz and things scientific: +2 points
You think Neal Stephenson is bloody smart: +2 points
You loved Cryptonomicon for its detail: +1 point
You loved Cryptonomicon for its style: +1 point
You loved Cryptonomicon for its wit: -1 point
You get bored by endless detail: -2 point
You like a strong plot in the novels you read:~~ -1 point
You like a plot, however strong, at least clearly stated: -1 point
You are turned off by graphic descriptions: -1 point
You like a lot science in your science-based novel: -1 point
You like an easy read that flows well: -2 point

Score: >=10 You'll love this book!. 6-9 You'll like the book but find some of it tedious. 1-5 You'll like minor parts, but wonder if it was worth it. -1 to -5 You'll dislike this book. <-5 You'll hate this book.

I usually read trilogies after all the~~ books are published. But I made an exception here because I love Stephenson and because I am also coincidentally reading Isaac Newton's PRINCIPIA (translation by Cohen). Sadly, we see Newton and Leibniz in glimpses only in this book, and instead are treated to Daniel Waterhouse, the ancestor of Cryptonomicon's Lawrence Waterhouse; Jack Shaftoe, the ancestory of his Cryptonomicon counterpart; and Eliza, a former Turkish harem sex slave. As in Cryptonomicon, we see a great genius through the~~ more limited eyes of a very bright, but not brilliant protagonist (in Quicksilver we are treated to Waterhouse's interactions with I. Newton, W. Leibniz, R. Hooke, and others of that era; in Cryptonomicon it was Alan Turing).

Shaftoe is initially almost just to tie plot elements together and supply some much-needed comic relief. Eliza gives us eyes into the political machinations of Louis XIV, William of Orange, and various changing English monarchs. You can read more about plot in other~~ reviews, and I do not wish to spoil it here, suffice to say that particularly early in this book, it seems that we are just getting a slightly humorous lecture on European history.

Given that I have some background knowledge on Newton, the era, the controversies involved in his theories, etc., I can honestly say that I am astonished by N.S.'s detail and accuracy. He captures the theory, the socio-political circumstances, the religious conflicts, even I.Newton's personal issues with a~~ clarity that boggles my mind. He even goes so far as to project somewhat on why Newton uses geometry in his Principia, rather than calculus, to prove his theories-- and it seems consistent to what I have read in Cohen's excellent book. I can only assume that the detail regarding the other issues, and the projections N.S. makes regardng them-- revolutions galore, religious conflicts, economic issues-- is likewise as clear. It is certainly immensely and profusely detailed. The scenes with~~ these great minds are truly to be relished-- N.S. captures the essences of these great historical characters into believable dialogue and interactions. How penetrating N.S. must be to make such characters real from the dry library research he must have spent thousands of hours doing!

But some of the detail is too profuse. The endless political shenanigans and counter-shenanigans motivating each and every noble are a bit much for all but the true fan of European history. Fortunately, it~~ does not all need to be understood in such detail to follow a fairly simplistic plot overall.

This first novel of the trilogy is scene-setting, some plot, character building, for 600 pages. In some places it is tedious. Some of the dialogue is entertaining, some of the character's thinking processes amusing, but N.S. does not hit his stride until after 600 pages. The final 300 are amusing, entertaining, even thrilling. N.S. somehow turns the delivery of a baby scene into a triumph of~~ spirit, ingenuity, and tension, for example. In Cryptonomicon, I was laughing every other page from page one. In Quicksilver, I chuckled a few times, and was entertained about a third of the time.

I am hoping that future volumes are more direct, briskly paced, and less endless detail and trivia. Some of it is excellent for scene-setting and mood building. I am truly grateful I do not live in 1690s England after reading this book. But others are just tiresome and exasperating.

OTOH,~~ N.S. has a unique, unmatched talent. His characters breath like real people. You come to understand their motivations, their emotions-- like a real-life friend. This may come about by his endless, detail-driven meandering style, and so changing one destroys the magic of the other. But I would think he could manage with just a little less narrative.

Still, all in all, you must experience N.S. at the peak of his powers. He has evolved from Snow Crash to Cryptonomicon to this, a splendid~~ insight into a revolutionary, chaotic time in our world history. You might be deluged with detail, but then you swim through it and get to meet major characters that changed the world, and it is almost like you met them for real.~

I should probably preface this review by saying that I am a Neal Stephenson fan. I have read and enjoyed all of other books prior to reading this one, so it should come as no surprise that I enjoyed this novel as well.

It did however take me about 50 or 70 pages to get in to the novel. At first I found the plot to be very slow moving, with lots of confusing names and not a lot happening. Dull and boring are two words that come to mind. But if you can get past the first 70 pages, the novel slowly starts to develop a story line that by the time the book is finished has left you eagerly looking forward to the next book.

I do not want to give away too much of the novel and spoil it for any of the readers out there. But I will say this. Don't be discouraged by the size of the novel (900+ pages). Do stick it out, and read the whole novel, as you will be rewarded for it. And finally, if any of the history that took place in England in the 1600s is of interest to you, then this book should definitely make it on to your reading list.

It seems people who have read 'Quicksilver' have either loved it or hated it. I'm sorry to say, I belong to the second group.

Neal Stephenson originally became one of my favorite all-time authors for 'Snow Crash', for I felt his prose was quick, sharp, precise and very enjoyable. I remained a fan throughout 'Cryptonomicon', because although he was no longer quick, his drawn-out discussions on Things Geek remained fascinating.

I was looking forward to 'Quicksilver', but I'm afraid this book has seriously damaged the affection I had for Mr. Stephenson's work. Quicksilver is no longer witty, nor particularly fascinating. It sounds a lot like somebody who's spent a long time doing historical research setting out to prove the depth of his knowledge... which I guess is exactly what it is.

Stephenson spends the better part of this novel throwing out random historical facts of no importance whatsoever in the hopes of sounding as historically knowledgeable as, say, Umberto Eco. It seems in the middle of his research, Stephenson actually forgot about such things as 'plot', because all we're left with is a very, very, very long mess of discussions of things related to historical events and trying to cleverly tie in with historical characters such as Newton or Franklin.

To cap it off, this book is only one of three in a series (if you exclude Cryptonomicon as 'Volume 0'.) My god, how can one write so many pages on such a lack of plot? I cannot imagine plodding through another such book, let alone two 1000 pages bricks.

If you're thinking of picking this book up because you enjoyed 'Cryptonomicon', try and read a few pages in the library before shelling out the dough. Perhaps you will like it, but I certainly know I did not. I miss the days when Stephenson remembered how to get to the point and pack his novels with action and revelance, instead of being so infatuated with the names Waterhouse, Shaftoe and Root that he felt necessary to write 4000 pages about them.

The book promises to span 'decades and continents' and it does -- with the reader feeling that much older for having read through this brick-like tome. There is much labouring over minute and tedious events as we are forced to look ponderously into the thought process and the non-fictional and fictional events that led the great minds of the late 17th and 18th century.

I'm almost embarrassed of Stephenson and his childish delight in revealing the inventions of Hooke, Newton et. al. as if discovering them for the first time. Those that may be even somewhat familiar with the leaders in the age of invention or may already have picked up sophomoric bits of trivia like the etymology of the word 'dollar' will find little enjoyment here.

The prose is strangely static and often terse with abbreviations instead of full sentences. It's as if the author just wants to get the point across and move on to other things giving the feeling that the chapters were originally written as a collection of e-mails on a Blackberry handheld device. Metaphors are blunt tools for Stephenson here and always heralded by 'like' and 'as'.

After the first four hundred pages things start to improve when the focus switches to Jack, a vagabond of increasing status. The pace picks up and the reader starts to get a small bit of that sense of enjoyment that made 'Snow Crash' and 'The Diamond Age' such delights. Unfortunately, this portion of the book is developed hurriedly and the characters are thin gruel and only appear more hearty because of the switch in pace. On reflection, I felt little connection to the far-to-clever Jack and scarcely believed Eliza's intelligence let alone her motivation for staying with Jack beyond it 'being a man's world' (or whatever the precise cliché trundled out). Why this man? Jack is meant to be far from lovable. Why stay when other opportunities presented themselves?

Finally, I didn't really care what happened and neither will most. Stephenson's ideas are a little dry and the clever bits of the story can be credited to the real life personalities whom these events circle (Newton's clash with Hooke and Leibniz etc.). This book suffers from having a weak editor that didn't quite have the gonads to remove five hundred pages and distil this beast into something worthwhile. And we can expect two more editions.

Only poor book sales will reign an increasingly self-important author and allow Neal Stephenson to fulfil the promise he's exhibited in earlier works. I recommend you wait for his next oeuvre and skip the Baroque Cycle altogether. Read 'War and Peace' if you want a comparatively light read. Life's too short for bad literature.

This paperback volume is only the first 1/3 of the hard cover version of "Quicksilver".

This is mentioned in very fine print on one of the title pages, but is otherwise not apparent.

A truly great read nevertheless.

It's unfortunate to see numerous 1/2/3-star ratings for what is, by all accounts, Mr. Stephenson's magnum opus (or at least the first part of a trilogy which comprises said magnum opus). The "reviewers" bestowing these low scores often appear to be whining at how "boring" and "uninteresting" this novel was, rather than offering a fair exposition of the book's merits and shortcomings. Much of the time, these reviewers don't even seem to have managed to finish this book. True enough, the book is massive and, as a result, undoubtedly daunting for readers with limited imaginations, low tolerance for/poor attention to background and detail, and a misguided fondness for Mr. Stephenson's shorter, albeit less accomplished, works. To dismiss a novel for simply being "too long", a book whose breathtaking scope, engrossingly accurate historical and scientific elaborations, painstaking character development, and downright hilarity, however, is to do it the very worst kind of justice.

Let's be clear: I liked Zodiac, I liked The Diamond Age, I loved Snow Crash (despite the fact that Neal borrowed many elements from Gibson's Neuromancer, a superior work), and I LOVED Cryptonomicon. So yes, I'm a Stephenson fan. I agree it would certainly help to be acquainted with and to have enjoyed his prior novels, if only to be familiar with his sense of humour, intellect, and passionate descriptions. That having been said, anyone with an open mind, a desire for a complex tapestry rather than a floor mat, and, above all, PATIENCE will be rewarded should they choose to break the spine on Quicksilver.

It's interesting to note that volumes 2 and 3 (The Confusion and The System of the World) have far fewer reviews, but much higher ratings. It goes to show that those brave and interested enough to tackle (and complete) volume one of The Baroque Cycle go on to love the rest of the trilogy.

Because of its length and breadth, a plot synopsis would be foolish to undertake. Suffice to say that the story occurs during the middle half of the 17th century in Europe and is driven by three main protagonsists, each with their own well-developed motivations, viewpoints, and personalities. Real-life historical figures (Louis XIV, Isaac Newton, William of Orange, Robert Hooke), places (London, Versailles, Amsterdam), and events (wars; executions; intrigues of various kinds) are incorporated as a vehicle to further the plot (which does, in fact, exist, contrary to several reviewers' opinions). I laughed out loud countless times; enjoyed learning about the Reformation, Restoration, and "Natural Philosophy" (among others); and was pleased to finish the book, knowing that I still had another two novels to savour.

This was the first Neal Stephenson book I ever read, and I adored it! I gobbled up "The Confusion" and "The System of the World" immediately, and only after finishing The Baroque Trilogy did I read "Cryptonomicon" or "Snow Crash". Frankly, I found Cryptonomicon and Snow Crash" to be maddeningly brief ... good, but short.

I'm confounded when reviewers say it was too long, too involved, or too detailed -- I don't think Stephenson could have told such a vivid account of European politics, economy and alchemy with a lesser word count. Here is a grand arena where his genius for research, synthesis and imagination really shines. "The Baroque Trilogy" is a work of generous amplitude; to cut out parts or render it down into a shorter novel would have made it a lesser tale.

I would love to give you a general idea of the story, but I'm afraid that the 900+ pages which comprise this "slender" volume make it impossible to put it in a nutshell. As one review claims, «this one will defy any category, genre, precedent, or label.» Simply put, Neil Stephenson's Quicksilver is in a class of its own.

The scope of Stephenson's undertaking is staggering. To proclaim that it is an ambitous project would be insulting. The amount of research that undoubtedly went into the creation of this historical epic makes me shake my head in wonder.

What is it about? Hmmm, truth be told, it would be impossible to tell in a way that would do justice to the novel. It is about politics: the 1600s were a time or turmoil all over Europe, with many wars, revolutions, and other conflicts. It is astonishingly remarkable to see how the author depicts this era in such a richly detailed fashion. It is about history: Quicksilver contains more historical figures than most history books. It is about religion: Catholicism and Protestantism clashing all over the continent. It is about scientific breakthroughs: Newton, Hooke, Wren, Huygens, Leibniz, Locke, and so many others are part of the tale. You might have to consult wikipedia.com or another encyclopedia in order to keep track of everyone. Another one of Stephenson's tour de force is that the fine line between fact and fiction is seamless.

To say that Quicksilver is brilliant would be like stating that Harvard and Oxford are good universities. It goes beyond that. Yes, it is a dense and erudite yarn. It is also an enthralling adventure, clever and at times hilarious.
Stephenson possesses a witty sense of humor which gives this book a brazen, sometimes irreverent feel. It is so refreshing, and keeps you turning to pages to find out what happens next.

Having said all that, I don't believe that Quicksilver is as accessible as Brown's The Da Vinci Code. Enough research went into this creation to make it a scholarly work. Hence, I believe that one must at least have basic notions of that historical period, as well as an inkling of those religious conflicts, in order to truly appreciate this novel at its just value.

The characterizations are of the first order. And Stephenson's wit makes their POVs bring smirks to your lips, when you don't laugh out loud. Jack Shaftoe, "Half-Cocked Jack" (no pun intended!), brings a lot of humor, tempering the serious side of this ambitious epic with interludes of pure fun!

So by all means plunge into this historical saga. This is the sort of series that people will still be talking about in a decade. Follow the adventures of Daniel Waterhouse, thinker and Puritan, seeking knowledge among the greatest European minds of that era. Follow Jack Shaftoe's misadventures, which more or less begin when he rescues Eliza from a Turkish Harem in Vienna. And follow Eliza's own adventures, as she becomes a spy and an agent for and against the most powerful rulers and nobles of Europe.

As I mentioned before, Quicksilver is not for everyone. But love it or hate it, this book remains one thing: a work of pure genius. I will eagerly read its sequel, The Confusion. Hopefully it will live up to the hype and the standards set by its predecessor.

I know that Quicksilver is in many people's "books to read" pile. If that is the case, please move it to the top of the pile. For everyone else, this one should be added to your "books to buy" list!;-)

Check out my blog: www.fantasyhotlist.blogspot.com

I had great expectations for this book, having read all of Neal Stephenson's previous books, but was disappointed by this. Although he has obviously invested immense hours in research, the book comes across as stiff and overly ornate - much like baroque design.

In particular, Stephenson's smart-alecky dialogue, that worked to great effect in Snow Crash, is merely grating here, as are the anachronisms that the characters utter from time to time.

As for the characters themselves, I found it very difficult to care about any of them, which made it very difficult to involve myself in the story.

I really had to wonder what the benefit was of creating a gargantuan work that appeared to say so little; as if mere volume could substitute for depth.