Fun adventure, cheerful for a post-apocalyptic story. Not really plausible in a lot of spots, but enjoyable.

EXCEPT! Content warning. If you're going to make your protagonist an 11-year-old girl, maybe don't spend such a chunk of the book talking about sex. Really not okay. Please don't teach kids who read this book that an adult pedophile who tries to pressure an 11-year-old into a sexual relationship are "really a nice guy." Super creepy. Maybe this kind of thing has become less common in the past few decades.

future looks bright

Homo post hominem sounds like what I wish I was. The intelligence ad physical abilities are envious. This is a great book. Worth reading over and over again.

I enjoyed the story, but I did not always enjoy the writing style. Much of the novel is written as an English translation of shorthand notes in the form of a diary. This was written decades ago and it shows. Somewhat similar to Heinlein's novel "Farnham's Freehold". In 2017, it is a bit dated but if you like Heinlein's fiction this will feel somewhat familiar. The protagonist in the story is an 11 year old mutant girl genius & deadly karate diva, rather than a middle aged man genius.

I enjoyed this a lot.
The book offered edge-of-the-seat fun ride, with only a little of "nearly magic" and "highly improbable" in the way of solutions.

I didn't mind the shorthand writing style - after all, I learned shorthand myself out of boredom at school, not unlike the main character. Although, for lack of certified genius, it took me considerably longer than two days. If I could get away with writing e-mails abbreviated like this at work, I most certainly would. But, if you are all about grammar precision and never understood why shorthand would be employed by anyone, you'd probably hate this book. I found the style fit the character.

I liked the main character. Admittedly, child genius characters like Candy are among my favourite tropes. The only unrealistic notion in here was lack of resentment from "ordinary" children in Candy's memories of time before Armageddon. It wasn't a major issue, because the author had done away with this conflict quite simply - by killing off all ordinary humans as a premise.
The decision-making process since then on, faithfully related from Candy's PoV in her own shorthand, makes for amusing reading. I sympathised, and didn't question much - too much fun blundering about and inventing solutions to own purported "stupidity".

So why only 4 stars?
I found the ending rushed and the main plot unresolved. It didn't feel satisfying. Probably, a bit shallow for me - spoon-fed entertainment (good one too!), rather than thoughtful exploration of concepts.

Still, well worth reading, if entertainment is what you seek.

This book is really hard to find, and if you do, it's probably going to be expensive. But- you'll never read anything like it. It's one of my favorite novels of any genre, and I've read lots (and lots) of post-apocalyptic titles. If you are lucky enough to find this, read it. It's just plain fun as well as impossible to put down, so save it for a lonely weekend. Absolutely do not plan to read it out loud to anyone else, because it was written by a court reporter and reads like it was.
It was serialized as a novella in "Analog" magazine and there was such a clamor that he lengthened it into a novel by adding an implausable ending, still very entertaining. I'm not sure that it improved the story, however, it did give us more time with the protagonists, who we love despite the story going way, way beyond plausible coincidence. If you get the chance to read this fun piece of "almost everybody else is dead" fiction and can actually find this one, it's well worth your time.

Interesting style, it is in the words of an 11 year old that is adept at shorthand. The end of the world and what happens. Well, superhumans. Not just homo sapiens, but a new species. This book is interesting. I actually enjoyed it. The book was interestingand a quick read.

Wow found this on line today love this book.

First Read this 20 years ago told my friends and family. Like fast Pace writing style. Story different lots of action . Have read book at least six times over year.

Storyline: 2/5
Characters: 4/5
Writing Style: 5/5
World: 2/5

Consistency. A trait far too often absent from science fiction texts but which is a necessary requisite for any excellent story. Palmer has consistency. An abundance of it. He tries something risky with the writing, giving us a clipped syntax that was rough on even my poorly-trained grammatical senses, but he stays with it. Long after the reader thinks, "this is not really going to keep going this way, is it?" Palmer is consistent. Then there's a point that you thank him for doing so. Somewhere along the way you got over the hump, you managed to settle in and accept the new grammar, reading it as if a linguistic savant. It is not only the writing that is consistent though, it is the character. The character is as unfamiliar as the syntax, but Palmer makes her real. The author wants to do some extraordinary things with her, so Palmer spends a lot of effort working through plot holes. He's got the right backstories, the needed scientific explanations, the appropriate excuses for paths not taken. Again, consistency. One could easily lose their sense of humor in arranging so many details, but Palmer manages to include some wit and comedy. He also tosses in some other character moments, changing up the pace and tone of the whole thing, making sure you appreciate the foundations of what he's built. Always thinking ahead, that David R. Palmer, taking away most of the criticisms one could launch at the book. I, however, am not an easily deterred critic.

There were just a few elements that kept this from going on my "greatest science fiction in the history of the world" shelf. First, I was so dazzled by the care in which the journal entries and our main character were put together, that I expected that same care in every other element of the novel. And it just wasn't there. A brilliantly conceived writing style and astounding main character deserved an equally exotic storyline. That storyline was nothing more than acceptable, however. Palmer wasn't especially good at generating tension or expectations. That might have been mitigated with more attention to the world, but the worldbuilding did little more than what was necessary for the character-building. Palmer was so narrowly focused on the writing and the character, so devoted to working out any plotholes that he tended to ignore anything not central to those elements. Thus the world, which was easily susceptible to the creativity Palmer had already exhibited, was barely touched on or experienced. The second portion that kept this from being one of my favorites was Palmer's insistence on exploring the sexual outlook of an 11-year old girl. It was a little disturbing that here, too, he was thorough with the context and justifications, showing the reader why this was not only relevant but also fully predictable and understandable. Having made the point early on, Palmer could have left it there, but he returned to it again and again. This was that consistency at work again. Rather than dealing with the issue through hints and allusions, taking on additional depth and breadth, Palmer sticks with the core attributes, of which this was one. This would have been awkward even had it been a female author; recalling that it was someone named David R. Palmer made it just a little creepy.

This was without a doubt an exceptional book. I would have chosen it over Neuromancer for the 1985 Hugo Award for novels. It wouldn't have required much more to become one of my favorites, and it is with some disappointment that I see that he did not go from this first novel to any notable subsequent ones.

Have you ever reread a book years after you first read it--because you remembered how much you liked the book but you don't remember why? This science fiction book was published in 1984 and I must have read it in the 90s. I remember thinking it was just a great book and, in fact, passed it on to my father to read. I got it back at some point and it's been sitting in a box with other books I've read--and, finally, I took it out to read it again. I really did not remember the plot or how it ended---! From the cover, I could recall the protagonist was a young girl and the story was set in a post-apocalyptic world.
Now, having reread it, I think it was a great story and I enjoyed reading it again. It's the story of Candidia ("Candy"), an eleven-year-old girl who is the survivor of an apocalypse. In this case, it's the Cold War of the 1980s turning hot, with hard-line Communist leaders of both Russia and China working together to destroy the USA, mainly by using a bioengineered plague. Candy is able to survive in a very well-stocked shelter constructed by her father, who works for the government. When the plague hits, Candy's father is away in Washington but she, fortunately, goes into the shelter--and survives. It helps that she is a super-genius and, when she emerges, she goes on an odyssey across a depopulated America seeking other survivors.
I liked the character of Candy the genius child. I also liked how the story is told, for the most part, by her log entries. And she traveled with a wonderful companion--Terry the hyacinth macaw. All in all, a very engaging story. However, there is a shocking murder that occurs. Somehow I had managed to forget about it and, maybe, along with the shocker, I also managed to forget the rest of the story!
Unfortunately, and I checked on this, the author seems to have written only a couple other books, including a sequel continuing the Candy saga. I'd like to find that.

This was another novel which I had started reading as a series of short stories in either Analog or Asimov's in the early 80's. I was first attracted to it due to the TEOTWAWKI elements, as I adore apocalypse fiction. But the unique writing style, and the delightful lead character has made this a book that I still returned to every few years. I have always thought it a real shame that Palmer never wrote more than two novels, his talent suggested that he was capable of many more great things.

Maybe an odd choice as a comfort read, but I've loved this book since I was about ten years old and swiped it off my dad's shelves of science fiction when I desperately needed something new to read. Something about the combination of apocalyptic landscape, brilliant and funny eleven-year-old girl, and sciency stuff (even though, looking back, the science is horrible and also now incredibly dated) just hit all the right notes for me then, and even now I pull it off the shelf and reread it every once in a while when nothing else suits. At this point the cover's fallen off and several pages have been taped back together multiple times, but unfortunately the book's out of print so I've had trouble finding a better copy. Still, if you can find it somewhere, it might be worth a read!

Apocalypse? Hugo nominee? An eleven year-old girl? A pet parrot? Friend recommendation? Sign me up!

The first part of the story was published in 1981 as a novella in Analog Magazine, followed two years later by Part Two. Both, I think, had well-deserved Hugo noms, and the novel itself was nominated for a Hugo and Locus when published in 1984. Quite honestly, I think I would have loved it had I found it then or a few years after. Seriously, why on earth was I reading Piers Anthony when I could have been reading about a kick-ass girl navigating an empty world?

"Whereupon, for very first time in entire life, Candy Smith-Foster--plucky girl adventurer; most promising pre-adolescent intellect yet discovered amongst Homo post hominem population; youngest ever holder of Sixth Degree Black Belt; resourceful, unstoppable, never-say-die superkid; conquereror of unthinkable odds... Fainted."

The story wastes no time into diving into a series of world-scale catastrophes. Candy's father had been a highly-placed government consultant and doctor, and had the foresight to construct a very comprehensive bunker with just about every resource except hydrophonic gardens. Eventually, she decides to check on life outside and discovers everyone dead, as well discovering a closely-guarded secret of her neighbor and mentor.

It's an intriguing beginning, and I might have been a little bothered by the Speshul Snowflake syndrome (Candy is truly capable of everything) except she is so direct and honest about her feelings that her stiff-upper-lip self-talk and overall competence comes off as courageous.

The narrative structure is--how do I say this--interesting, and now that I know the seeds of the story were in a novella, it makes more sense as a 'hook.' Candy uses a type of shorthand to write her journals, and the 'translation' of it comes across as quite staccato, missing conjunctions and normal sentence structure. Initially, I found it annoying, but it eventually grew on me. Surprisingly, it still does a nice job conveying emotion, whether it's Candy's distress or her self-depreciating humor.

I admit, one of my favorite characters was Terry, frequently referred to as Candy's adoptive twin brother. But I'm biased; as the owner of three parrots, I thought Palmer's characterization was spot-on and hilarious. Terry is a beautiful hyacinth macaw whose "diet is anything within reach, but ideally consists of properly mixed seeds, assorted fruits, nuts, sprinkling of meat, etc. Hobbies include getting head and neck scratched (serious business, this), art of conversation, destruction of world." I did wonder if the average reader would have appreciated the little throw-away notes about Terry, which captured the psittacine love of drama and propensity for destruction.

All that said, there's some barriers here. One is the cognitive dissonance between Candy's mature voice and immature age of eleven, although that is generally acceptably explained within the confines of the story. Two, there's some parts of this that feel more than a little early 80s, particularly Candy's characterization of Terry as her "retarded baby brother." I remember that word being rather prevalent in adolescent vocabulary when I was younger, although even then it was undergoing cultural shift towards unacceptability. On the same note, the general structure of the apocalypse feels a little dispassionate Cold War kind of dynamic rather than the disseminated violence we see more often these days.

Thirdly, and perhaps most significantly, I don't know what the hell Palmer was thinking at about page 200 or so (Volume III--Part Two--Portents). The last 'volume' of the book takes a fairly significant curve in plotting and ties in opposition  (a shadowy opposing agency) along with telepathic-type developments. I think I could have settled for one or the other, but both strained credulity of the world Palmer had created, that of the advanced Homo post hominem.

Overall, generally enjoyed it a great deal until page 200, at which point I was significantly less impressed. The voice is entertaining, it's an interesting story and it generally avoids the depressing death-decay-violence we see in most apocalypse stories, focusing on self-empowerment and discovering connections. I'd recommend it, especially to younger apocalypse fans who might be more forgiving about the ending developments.

Three and a half, rounding up because of spot-on parrot characterization.