Rating: 
Summary: One of the easiest books to put down I've ever read
Review: I'm sorry about this John. But your book Einstein's Bridge is a real sleeper. I've only read the first half of it and I'm falling asleep. I love hard fiction. And I'm a big SSC fan. Hell I even like bugs. But the first half takes so long in setting up the characters to their momentous encounter and adds alot of useless details about their lives. It's more fitting for a romance novel. I hope it improves. if so I'll write back.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent Hard Science Fiction
Review: If you enjoy hard science fiction, as I do, then you will definately enjoy this exceptional book. Well worth a read (as is Twistor).Like one of the other reviewers, I encourage the author to write again.
Rating: 
Summary: Good science and politics, endless novel
Review: Interesting and pleasantly educational. A little extra time spent on a plot outine (especially to come up with AN ENDING, which this book totally lacks -- it has a stopping instead) would turn an average book into a solid effort.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderfully imaginative and strikingly remarkable!
Review: John Cramer's book are so detailed, and backed by scientific theory that you start to get pulled in to the imaginary world that he creates for you. Both novels are centered on groups of scientists; he makes you feel as though you are one of the scientists. The idea that there are ways to interact with alternate universes through space tunnels is astonishing. Einstein's Bridge is very interesting and it is a fast paced read.
Rating:
Summary: What a strange book!
Review: Okay, kids, here's a quick quiz. If a book is labelled prominently "A novel of Hard Science Fiction" then: a) take it as a warning that the book will be dull b) take it as a threat that you won't understand the plot without a Ph.D. in quantum physics c) take it as an indication that the author can't write dialogue or do characterisation to save his life d) expect all the plot devices of "regular" science fiction, like time travel and fiendish aliens, but with "good" explanations e) the author will use the word "quark" as often as possible Hah! You thought it was going to be a multiple choice test, didn't you? But no, and neither is this book quite as bad as the warning on the cover might lead you to believe. (I wonder if the Surgeon General has started requiring the labelling of "hard" sci-fi, or was it simply a public service offered by the publisher?) However, given that it is "hard" sci-fi, it is plot-driven; and given that the author admits that he had written 80% of the novel before the basic premise fell through in the real world, it is surprisingly entertaining. No profound philosophical issues here, just a tale of alien invasion, time travel, and US politics in a very odd mix. The first half of the book concerns an alternate future in which we are invaded and almost destroyed by insectoid aliens--the author makes fun of himself with one character writing a giant mutant fire ant book. Things go awry, as they are wont to do during invasions of evil insectoid aliens, and the only possibility to save not only the human race, but our ENTIRE UNIVERSE (no small measures here) is for our plucky heros, with the help of our good alien friends, to travel back in time, raise a fortune, meddle in politics and get Dan Quayle on the ticket with George Bush. Yes, it's nuts, and in the hands of a writer like Keith Laumer this would have been such good fun. But Cramer just isn't a superb writer, I'm afraid--perhaps his sense of humor is too dry for my taste. He seems to all too often veer off into unconvincing explanations of WHY THIS COULD ACTUALLY HAPPEN, when we are talking about such unlikely but tried and true staples of sci-fi like time travel and alien invasion. (And frankly, he missed one: after explaining why giant mutant ants are impossible, he turns around and gives us.....giant alien ants...oops.)....
Rating:
Summary: What a strange book!
Review: Okay, kids, here's a quick quiz. If a book is labelled prominently "A novel of Hard Science Fiction" then: a) take it as a warning that the book will be dull b) take it as a threat that you won't understand the plot without a Ph.D. in quantum physics c) take it as an indication that the author can't write dialogue or do characterisation to save his life d) expect all the plot devices of "regular" science fiction, like time travel and fiendish aliens, but with "good" explanations e) the author will use the word "quark" as often as possible Hah! You thought it was going to be a multiple choice test, didn't you? But no, and neither is this book quite as bad as the warning on the cover might lead you to believe. (I wonder if the Surgeon General has started requiring the labelling of "hard" sci-fi, or was it simply a public service offered by the publisher?) However, given that it is "hard" sci-fi, it is plot-driven; and given that the author admits that he had written 80% of the novel before the basic premise fell through in the real world, it is surprisingly entertaining. No profound philosophical issues here, just a tale of alien invasion, time travel, and US politics in a very odd mix. The first half of the book concerns an alternate future in which we are invaded and almost destroyed by insectoid aliens--the author makes fun of himself with one character writing a giant mutant fire ant book. Things go awry, as they are wont to do during invasions of evil insectoid aliens, and the only possibility to save not only the human race, but our ENTIRE UNIVERSE (no small measures here) is for our plucky heros, with the help of our good alien friends, to travel back in time, raise a fortune, meddle in politics and get Dan Quayle on the ticket with George Bush. Yes, it's nuts, and in the hands of a writer like Keith Laumer this would have been such good fun. But Cramer just isn't a superb writer, I'm afraid--perhaps his sense of humor is too dry for my taste. He seems to all too often veer off into unconvincing explanations of WHY THIS COULD ACTUALLY HAPPEN, when we are talking about such unlikely but tried and true staples of sci-fi like time travel and alien invasion. (And frankly, he missed one: after explaining why giant mutant ants are impossible, he turns around and gives us.....giant alien ants...oops.)....
Rating:
Summary: a light switch?
Review: On a whole I enjoyed Einstein's Bridge. It did have a tendency to over explain things... a hazard of the genre I suppose. Somehow I just kept picturing someone explaining how a light switch works every time they walked into a new room. :) Regardless, it kept me interested and turning pages, hallmarks of a good read.
Rating: 
Summary: Fun ideas and a good read
Review: Starts with a realistic picture of scientists at work and adds some fantastic ideas for a fun, fast story. The science aspects are interesting and relevant to the story. Shows the politics behind doing big science in both government and academia. Some of the non-scientist character development is a little tedious and shallow hence 4 stars instead of 5.
Rating:
Summary: Fun ideas and a good read
Review: Starts with a realistic picture of scientists at work and adds some fantastic ideas for a fun, fast story. The science aspects are interesting and relevant to the story. Shows the politics behind doing big science in both government and academia. Some of the non-scientist character development is a little tedious and shallow hence 4 stars instead of 5.
Rating: 
Summary: Poor attempt at hard sci-fi.
Review: The editors really blew it on this one. While the author starts with a decent, if fairly worn set of premises, and has a few genuinely unique ideas strewn about, he obviously can't help but tell us everything he knows about the defunct SSC project along with some physics wet-dream stuff. This candy is only good when skillfully mixed with good characterization and plot pacing. Instead, we get fairly 2D characters, ham-handedly described, and reams and reams of Q&A designed to bore the reader into skipping ahead to see if anything ever actually happens, or if this is a tour guide disguised as fiction. Frequently, the "conversations" turn into a brain dump of the author's banal familiarity and bias on everything from Dallas society to particle physics. People don't talk like this! Then it gets worse. Just as things seem to be able to get interesting, a cheesy deus ex machina gets pulled and saves the day. Instead of putting us out of our misery and ending it there, Cramer then continues by having our heroes play politics. I'm not kidding. Was he trying for humor? The one love story seems contrived and is as limp as a month old asparagus. The deepest irony is that the lone female character, used pretty lamely as a foil througout, is a bad scifi writer. There is plenty of good hard SF out there. Read "Cosm" by Benford instead of this dreck.
|
