La caida de Hyperion

3.5
Tenía muchas expectativas con esta secuela o continuación. El prefacio aseguraba que era mejor que su primera parte, Hyperion. Yo entusiasmada lo cogí con ganas. Sin embargo he de decir que se me hizo verdaderamente eterno, sobretodo la primera parte. Odiaba al personaje principal, no me importaba nada de él, solo quería saber el destino de cada uno de los peregrinos como en el anterior tomo. Menos mal que poco a poco fueron teniendo más protagonismo.

Como he dicho en mi anterior reseña, Dan Simmons es un autor por el que siento amor-odio. Me encanta como escribe, se nota que tiene una mente brillante y trabaja bastante en sus novelas, sin embargo hay algunas serie de cosillas que me chirrían. Solo espero que sus siguientes libros me enganchen como Hyperion, porque este ha sido un bajón en comparación.

La caida de Hyperion retoma las historias desarrolladas en Hyperion, es decir, la primera entrega de esta épica novela de ciencia ficción de Dan Simmons, pero es un tipo de libro muy diferente. Hyperion comprendía una mezcla de historias y estilos. La Caída de Hyperion es una ópera espacial mucho más directa, desarrollada a escala galáctica.

Brevemente, los peregrinos protagonistas del primer libro estan ahora desempeñando sus papeles en una vasta trama cuyas raíces e implicaciones solo pueden ver en fragmentos y destellos. Los lectores, por otro lado, recibimos actualizaciones frecuentes del "panorama general", entregadas a través de una maniobra narrativa muy inteligente que Simmons realiza con genialidad. Ahora es el destino de la humanidad el que está en juego, incluso cuando algunos de sus miembros menos afortunados cuelgan empalados en el árbol del dolor del Alcaudón. . . .

Esta novela tiene elementos de todos los temas que hacen entretenida a la la ciencia ficción : batallas a velocidad de la luz entre vastas flotas de naves espaciales; viajes en el tiempo; una alta tecnología que permite hazañas asombrosas pero no impensables; y quizás lo más importante, la extensa investigación, que abarca gran distancia y tiempo, sobre los misterios de los orígenes humanos y el destino final de la humanidad.

La caída de Hyperion no es exactamente una secuela, sino la segunda mitad del primer libro que Simmons concluye brillantemente.

If you feel n  Hyperionn is the heart of this series, then n  The Fall of Hyperionn is the megamind. Honestly, I thought I wouldn't like this as it kicks off with 100 or so pages of space battles without much heart to the story, which is expected given the ending of the first book. But Oh my.., did Simmons just wave his magic wand and *boom*, sci-fi wonder.

n  n    [We enslaved you
with power/
technology/
beads and trinkets
of devices you could neither build
nor understandn  n

n  Yes Mr. Simmons, you got me. My neurons are yours to use.n

Mindboggling! Simmons throws big, and I mean BIG ideas to the pages... time paradox, black holes, Shrike - Lord of Pain, interstellar battles, politics, survival, betrayal, religion, God, datasphere, megasphere, poetry, Cybrids, AI, parasite and God knows more.

n  n    “The Great Change is when humankind accepts its role as part of the natural order of the universe instead of its role as a cancer”n  n

The Fall of Hyperion is a satisfactory conclusion to a masterpiece. A beast of a different nature even when compared to Hyperion, which is why some prefer one over the other.

Hyperion Cantos #2: It's the end of times? Technology vs humankind vs outlier humans vs fundamentalists vs time travellers oh my!! And somewhere amongst this all, a quest for God?

This startling sequel to Hyperion sees humankind struggle to determine how it became so vulnerable to external attack and so quickly, and most importantly why? In addition the Time Tombs have been opened, setting the Shrike free. Science fiction saga at it's best! A series, I should make clear, that is genius for it's whole, as opposed to the sum of its parts (to paraphrase Aristotle). 8 out of 12.

2017 read

The sequel to the classic "Hyperion" is in many ways even more ambitious than the original book. The style of the story has changed as well. Instead of being presented in a Chaucerian style Canterbury Tales it is just a continuous story.

What a story it is. Without getting too spoilery, there is a war going on. The Ousters are invading the Hegemony. But, all is not as it seems. It turns into a story that is partly hard sci-fi and partly a religious story about a Messiah. The sheer scope of it was quite impressive.

Written in 1990, there are some very interesting parallels with modern society. From the way the Web works, to society being fixated with their Web experiences, to even the subtle (or unsubtle?) way Tech companies and their corporate media ilk manipulate information and influence society. Bearing in mind the technology of the 1990's, this is a very forward looking concept.

Now what about the story? Well the original pilgrims have their individual encounters with the Shrike. For the record, I am a huge fan of Col Kassad. The rest? I did like the Keats cybrid, but the rest all have their own issues. But as they interact with the Shrike, more and more of the story develops.

The interplay between the Core-Hegemony and the Ousters is very interesting and well done, since it isn't till near the end that you understand just what exactly is happening. However, on top of the conflict between the forces (which I did enjoy), to me the best part was the concept behind the UI conflict. The fact that there is an Universal Intelligence, one for humanity and one for the AI's is brilliant. The inherent conflicts between the various "sides" of the AI and even their UI and its goals are truly great sci-fi material, though bordering on the metaphysical.

In summation, hard without spoilers, the second book is surprisingly different and surprisingly epic as it develops. If you enjoyed the first book, you will appreciate the second. The story is a grand one- in scope, in the underlying themes and in the war that breaks out.

Dan Simmons did try to give a warning about the vast majority of humanity and its overwhelming fixation on the Web, this in time, will breed dependence. A man far ahead of his time and a prescient one at that. Well worth the time of anyone who appreciates hard sci-fi with a grand storyline.

There are few words that strike more fear in the hearts of Über-Intellectuals (as defined in my review of The Da Vinci Code, of all places) than the word “sequel”. Adored by Hollywood producers and publishing moguls alike for its low-risk, high profit profile, this extension of plot and character guarantees your presence for at least another act. Uber-Intellectuals, however, shun The Sequel for those same reasons; often rightfully so. If you can tell a story in one book, don’t tell it in two.

Behold the general rule: The Sequel is not as good as the original. Yes, this encompasses the distant sequel, interquel, midquel, sidequel, parallel, prequel and caramel coated chocoquel. Every good rule is proven by its exception: The Empire Strikes Back, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Godfather II. But make no mistake, the basic tenet is that almost all sequels are best left on your neighbour’s doorstep like the flaming bags of dog feces that they are. The Sequel is often devoid of fresh characters, ideas and oxygen.

Allow me to interject with two points: 1. This review is a sequel to my Hyperion review. 2. Dan Simmon’s Fall of Hyperion is likely only in the form of a sequel to Hyperion because of a publisher-imposed limit on page count. When deciding whether to set both this review and Fall of Hyperion ablaze in a small plastic sac, I urge you to keep those points in mind.

My review of Hyperion was a poor attempt to echo its literary structure. Clearly I’m no Simmons, let alone a Chaucer, but it was fun and I achieved my stated goal to do it wrong. In strict accordance with the rule of sequels, this reviewquel will likely be subpar. I propose to construct my review of Fall of Hyperion in the same basic form as its subject. This will require four elements: a less obvious use of the frame story, a first-person narration in half of the story, the use of dreams and an ultimate sacrifice. Here we go.

(The opening bit of Keats poetry)

My quick eyes ran on
From stately nave to nave, from vault to vault,
Through bow'rs of fragrant and enwreathed light
And diamond paved lustrous long arcades.
Anon rush'd by the bright Hyperion;
His flaming robes stream'd out beyond his heels,
And gave a roar, as if of earthly fire,
That scared away the meek ethereal hours
And made their dove wings tremble. On he flared

The Less Obvious Overarching Frame

Another reviewer has proposed that the Hyperion duology may, and perhaps should, be read in reverse order. This suggestion merits consideration for the reasons described more fully in that review. It also begs the question: would we then care enough to go on to read Hyperion? You don’t lead with your chin, and in my view, while it is a great novel, Fall of Hyperion lacks the soul of the first book. I missed the emotional connection to the characters that was forged through the structure of Hyperion. Each story dragged by our ears into the character’s pain. I think that is why that book was so successful. It feels untouchable. In Fall of Hyperion, however, we are kept at arms length from the hearts of Sol, the Consul, and the others. More than that, we learn about their journey through the dreams of a Cylon. Sorry a Cybrid. We are too many steps removed. Even if the overarching plot may have been even more engaging than the first book, readers will no doubt come away feeling distant. “It was great, I loved it, but I don’t know, something is missing.”

A Dream: Simmons Shrikes Me

(Something is stabbing me in the gut. I am impaled by a large pen. Dan Simmons’ pen.) I am not worthy to write the post-it note that Dan Simmons uses to remind himself to take his daily vitamins, but I am going to offer a few critiques here. The use of the word “Technocore” for the sentient artificial intelligences identifies this novel as a child of the 1980s. There’s just no other way to say it. The discussions with Ummon, while very enlightening, read like tea leaves. If you want to locate them in your copy of the book, search for the clump of pages written in some form of whack robot poetry code that relies extensively on backslashes. There are very few parts of the Hyperion duology that I don’t really like and Kwatz if this isn’t one of them. Finally, I know this isn’t Simmons’ doing but I was also shocked at how dismal the Shrike looks on the cover art. Is that a twelve-year old girl with bad posture in a Halloween Shrike costume? I wouldn’t give that thing the time of day let alone a baby. Sci-fi covers…sigh…

Semi-reliable narrative

As humans and as a society we want to think that humanity generally does good and will continue to do so, presumably even 700 years into the future. In the Hyperion universe, the Hegemony of Man is the authority that governs humanity’s settled worlds, including those in the Web (connected by farcasters) and those simply in the Protectorate, such as Hyperion. The Hyperion duology is essentially told from the perspective of members of the Web and Hegemony. They don’t see like bad people. Most of the actions they take are for the good of the people of the Hegemony. There’s also the All Thing, a real-time participatory democracy. The enemies of the Hegemony, the Ousters, are seen as “barbarians”. But the actions of the Hegemony reveal it for what it is: a brutal dictatorship. Worlds are dragged into the Web in order to exploit their resources. The Ousters are not necessarily as they are described to us. While this book is not laid out as an unreliable first-person narration, it smacks of that. And I love that.

A Dream: I Am Ouster

(My iPod tells me what to do. I look behind me. I have wings. I fly away.) A future ruled by artificial intelligence as a result of a technological singularity and recursive self improvement is a common theme in sci-fi. Iain Banks’ Minds and Simmons’ Technocore are good examples. Both Banks and Simmons play on the motivations of such non-organic sentient life forms, and have fun with our inherent discomfort with placing our faith in them. From my perspective, the technological singularity theory makes a lot of sense and seems likely. I do, however, very much enjoy that Simmons offers us alternatives to AI rule.

Martin Silenus Redux

Martin continues to be a central point of enjoyment in this novel. In my Hyperion review I promised to reveal my favourite Silenus line. Unfortunately I was an unreliable narrator. But I’ll give you a hint: it’s the first thing he says when Brawne wakes him up from his sleep.

Return to the Less Obvious Overarching Frame

I enjoyed Fall of Hyperion. A lot. The future of politics, military tactics that take into account the issues of space travel, difficult choices galore, and some answers to interesting questions. I want to give it five stars but I am forced to compare it to Hyperion and for the foregoing reasons, four stars is clearly a better fit. If anyone out there experiments with reading the duology in reverse, I’d love to hear how you felt.

The Ultimate Sacrifice

It was great, I loved it, but I don’t know, something is missing.

Ovo je drugi deo jednog od najvecih, ali kada kazem najvecih mislim u top 5 najvecih serijala fantastike ikada. Ima svojih mana, na primer nije dobar koliko i prvi deo xaaxxaxaxax pa zar ista moze biti bolje od prvog dela Hiperiona! Popicu jedno pice za Konzula, Martina Silenusa i Srajka :D

3.0 Stars
Video Review: https://youtu.be/9q64BSnOQBg

After loving the end of the first book, I was surprised at myself struggling so much with this follow up novel. My main issue is with the narrative style and choices. The actual story should be quite interesting but it was told in a way that worked against itself. I wanted to be engrossed in the story but I just wasn't.