Rating: 
Summary: Warning: Not For Everybody!
Review: I want to start by saying that I really enjoyed this book. That is, once I realized what it is. Or rather, what it isn't. This book is pushed as science fiction with names like Heinlein and Gibson mentioned on the cover and it is science fiction in the sense that it's fiction set in the future in a set-up generated by scientific advances-- but it isn't science fiction in terms of adhering to classic genre rules or plot. Several points:1) This is a novel musing on the possibility of Utopia in a future where our 'greed and growth' (as the book puts it) have grown to dangerous proportions. 2) Not a whole lot happens to anything except on an internal and a narrowly interpersonal level. Don't look for action. 3) Occasionally very dense passages heavily laced with current and historic utopian thinkers. I've read 'em, so it meant something to me. I shudder to think what it would have been like if I hadn't. 4) Charactization gets lost, sometimes, in all the philosophizing. Roger, in particular, feels a little bit stock. 5) The ending has some definite lameness. It's as though he suddenly woke up and decided he had to put some action in, quick. So he did. If you go into the book while knowing all of the above, you may well enjoy it quite a bit. If you go in expecting escapist genre fiction, it's really going to suck.
Rating: 
Summary: Heavier than lead - much much much much heavier
Review: If you like to read books where the characters' everyday conversations are composed of 80 percent high-falutin, deep, heady, heavy philosophical conversations, then this book is for you. I really wish I had read some of the reviews here before I plucked down [money] for it, because if I had I wouldn't have bought it. It was just horrid, really. I just couldn't get through it. I've read Plato, Plotinus and some other heavy-duty philosophy, and those all seem like realistic, light reading compared to this. Hendrix should be writing philosophy instead of sci-fi that barely even has much of a plot.
Rating:
Summary: Consciousness, society, ecology, sci fi technology!!
Review: LIGHTPATHS by Howard V. Hendrix is a science fiction blend of some of my favorite things: ecology, mystery, philosophy, psychology, science, sociology, technology, believable characters and those incredible descriptive passages that put the reader right into the story! What a great way to start my recent vacation: A cup of coffee and this book. Suddenly I'm "on my way to the Orbital Complex, the center of controversy with certain groups on Earth, along with a few of the characters all of whom are researchers." But their chatter and thoughts do not prepare me for experiencing the Orbital Complex and events to come through Howard Hendrix's mind! One human-relevant feature of this science fiction work is the notion of an Orbital Complex or global colony orbiting the earth complete with homes, gardens, water supply, animals, and atmosphere, etc.; not a far-fetched idea these days! Even more relevant to today's world is the pervasive presence of the computer and its components in every aspect of human life (And, just how DO we plan to manage all of the information coming our way at an ever faster pace?)!! In addition, the author delves with gusto into the mind-body problem so dear to psychological researchers' hearts. LIGHTPATHS also reminds us that we need, TODAY, to address important social and environmental issues. Readers who enjoy Ray Bradbury, Robert Heinlein, and Frank Herbert (to name a few) will find LIGHTPATHS difficult to put down! I look forward to Hendrix's next work which I understand is due out soon.
Rating: 
Summary: Boring
Review: Perhaps this book was a little heavy on philosophy and light on the story-line. Fairly good character development. I prefer a more engaging writing style. I'd spend my money on Gibson's Idoru first.
Rating:
Summary: Not very engaging
Review: The only reason I am giving it 2 stars is because it had a couple cool ideas and I like the book cover design. Some interesting ideas but the author spent the whole novel explaining things to the reader. As soon as there was some plot twist or mystery the authorhad another charecter call up an explain how they figured out what was going wrong. None of the Charecters seemed very realistic. The main "plot" of the book was only indirectly dealt with by any of the main charecters. And then when some of the main charecters stood face to face with the "problem" at the climax of the book the "problem" basically explained what was going on and then solved itself. And to think I continued reading it to the end.
Rating:
Summary: Intrigueing
Review: This novel is a bit too heavy on the linguistic pretension and a little slow to start off, but worth sticking with to the end. An interesting blend of idealism, pre-apocalyptic paranoia and utopian philosophy, it's a challenge to read, but a worthy addition to your to-read list.
Rating:
Summary: worth the payoff..
Review: This novel is a bit too heavy on the linguistic pretension and a little slow to start off, but worth sticking with to the end. An interesting blend of idealism, pre-apocalyptic paranoia and utopian philosophy, it's a challenge to read, but a worthy addition to your to-read list.
Rating:
Summary: Sci Fi it ain't.
Review: To be fair about this work: The author is a bit like the one who wrote "Zen in the art of motorcycle whatever." He is working out the grief of his brother's death noted in the preface and his process takes the form of social criticism, specifically the nature of utopia. It's a bit like B.F. Skinner's "novel" Walden Two which is about another utopia. I think the author is probably a brilliant man and should write an expository book on his new age ideas. I am reading his sequel "Standing Waves" which is Part 2 of 2. I hope he makes up for the spad work we had to go through in Part 1. The only reason I read it is due to his ideas being interesting if not derivative. But that is okay, nothing is original anyway. But trying to make this into sci fi entertainment was a mistake I'm afraid. He would do better to SHOW us than TELL us his ideas in some form of ACTION! For pete sake! The book has no plot that I can see, the characters are flat and unengaging and what little action there is is incredulously ignorred by these self-obsessed trust-victim academics who discuss The Great Books while their space habitat is about to be destroyed. When I was in philosophy grad school I learned it is better to talk through books than about them. "Oh, would you like to have a mushy before the concert begins? Oh, dear, don't mind the flotilla of space ships bearing down to kill us. We'll get around to them by and by. Just sit back and enjoy the show." (sic) Reading this book was like sitting through that god-aweful movie "My Dinner with Andre" that came out when the wealthy of this country were meditating on their navels while social unrest threatened to tear the U.S. apart. Talk about alienation! Mr. Hendrix you've got it bad. Sorry about your brother but try to write a story next time. You will get more people to listen to your ideas if you entertain them -- intellectually -- like Voltaire. Oh, there I go naming names again!
Rating:
Summary: Sci Fi it ain't.
Review: To be fair about this work: The author is a bit like the one who wrote "Zen in the art of motorcycle whatever." He is working out the grief of his brother's death noted in the preface and his process takes the form of social criticism, specifically the nature of utopia. It's a bit like B.F. Skinner's "novel" Walden Two which is about another utopia. I think the author is probably a brilliant man and should write an expository book on his new age ideas. I am reading his sequel "Standing Waves" which is Part 2 of 2. I hope he makes up for the spad work we had to go through in Part 1. The only reason I read it is due to his ideas being interesting if not derivative. But that is okay, nothing is original anyway. But trying to make this into sci fi entertainment was a mistake I'm afraid. He would do better to SHOW us than TELL us his ideas in some form of ACTION! For pete sake! The book has no plot that I can see, the characters are flat and unengaging and what little action there is is incredulously ignorred by these self-obsessed trust-victim academics who discuss The Great Books while their space habitat is about to be destroyed. When I was in philosophy grad school I learned it is better to talk through books than about them. "Oh, would you like to have a mushy before the concert begins? Oh, dear, don't mind the flotilla of space ships bearing down to kill us. We'll get around to them by and by. Just sit back and enjoy the show." (sic) Reading this book was like sitting through that god-aweful movie "My Dinner with Andre" that came out when the wealthy of this country were meditating on their navels while social unrest threatened to tear the U.S. apart. Talk about alienation! Mr. Hendrix you've got it bad. Sorry about your brother but try to write a story next time. You will get more people to listen to your ideas if you entertain them -- intellectually -- like Voltaire. Oh, there I go naming names again!
Rating:
Summary: Sci Fi it ain't.
Review: To be fair about this work: The author is a bit like the one who wrote "Zen in the art of motorcycle whatever." He is working out the grief of his brother's death noted in the preface and his process takes the form of social criticism, specifically the nature of utopia. It's a bit like B.F. Skinner's "novel" Walden Two which is about another utopia. I think the author is probably a brilliant man and should write an expository book on his new age ideas. I am reading his sequel "Standing Waves" which is Part 2 of 2. I hope he makes up for the spad work we had to go through in Part 1. The only reason I read it is due to his ideas being interesting if not derivative. But that is okay, nothing is original anyway. But trying to make this into sci fi entertainment was a mistake I'm afraid. He would do better to SHOW us than TELL us his ideas in some form of ACTION! For pete sake! The book has no plot that I can see, the characters are flat and unengaging and what little action there is is incredulously ignorred by these self-obsessed trust-victim academics who discuss The Great Books while their space habitat is about to be destroyed. When I was in philosophy grad school I learned it is better to talk through books than about them. "Oh, would you like to have a mushy before the concert begins? Oh, dear, don't mind the flotilla of space ships bearing down to kill us. We'll get around to them by and by. Just sit back and enjoy the show." (sic) Reading this book was like sitting through that god-aweful movie "My Dinner with Andre" that came out when the wealthy of this country were meditating on their navels while social unrest threatened to tear the U.S. apart. Talk about alienation! Mr. Hendrix you've got it bad. Sorry about your brother but try to write a story next time. You will get more people to listen to your ideas if you entertain them -- intellectually -- like Voltaire. Oh, there I go naming names again!
| 
