Okay, so pretty deep into Neuropath things roll onward irretrievably. Thomas has just been asked by Sam to go in with her to question one of Neil's victims. All in the hopes of learning more about Neil's motive and method, of course.
After the first 20 pages of the book I was pretty much convinced that this was the same R. Scott Bakker that I had become intrigued and amazed by in the Judging Eye (a scientific fart joke notwithstanding). But, now that I'm another 100 pages into it, I can say that it definitely is that same Bakker. His style is minimalistic in that he really doesn't describe much of anything aside from the bare minimum. The make of a car, the colour of a house's siding. That's it.
However, I also find that he uses this minimalism to great use in his imagery - particularly things like his describing sunlight as light "glinting from a thousand windshields. His is a style that I think is closest to my own ideal style - sleek, minimalist, and striking.
Since act 1 has long since finished, I've already met the miscellaneous name-dropping of Neil's victims.
The latest two, a blonde girl and some sort of religious politician, are named as necessary, and both are noted as having previously been missing in the same breath. This bothers me for two reasons.
One: it's what every thriller, mystery, police procedural does. Agent x: "Oh my god, that's Senator Y, who's been missing since three days ago;" Agent w: "Yes. Yes, it is.".
Two: Bakker drops all sorts of tidbits about the near-future world in which his story is set. Yet he makes not one mention of either of these victims in passing. Still, from his brief and tidy sidebars we know that the world is in turmoil, wetware is on the rise, and terrorists burned a large portion of the southern US' forests, along with many other details that seem like they're from a proper dystopian future, while also being similar in tone to most modern news tickers.
This shortcoming notwithstanding, I'm interested in seeing what sort of twist awaits at the end of the book, and how long it takes Thomas and Sam to hook up. I'll likely learn about the latter before the former, but my theory about the twist is that Thomas has somehow engineered Neil's actions and all of his clinging to his kids and what not is just his method of insulating himself from the truth.
But such a twist is very predictable, especially since Bakker has underlined Thomas' struggle with the Argument (that all experience, emotion, and choice, is based on chemical impulses rather than 'will') and pointed out several times that though everything else in his life is currently in turmoil, his kids offer solace, solidity, and safety.
We'll see, I suppose. We'll see.
No comments:
Post a Comment