I'm not going to lie. This book is an investment of time (as many Stephenson books are). There are numerous concurrent plot lines and a TON of characters to keep straight. It helps that a lot of the characters are based on historical figures. If you have at least a cursory knowledge of early scientists, you can follow along.

That being said, I've read this book (and trilogy) several times now, and it remains a favorite. Stephenson is SO GOOD at maintaining a lively story, interjected with lots of humor. I love that he takes the time to explain mathematical and scientific concepts.

Jack Shaftoe might be one of my all-time favorite characters. Jack is all heart and impulsive decisions. He's the indefatigable thorn-in-your-side, proto-Bart Simpson. His storyline makes me laugh the most.

Quicksilver,the first book in the Baroque Cycle, is set in Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries, taking place mostly in England but also in France and the Netherlands. The three main characters are:

Daniel Waterhouse, a natural philosopher and member of the Royal Society
Jack Shaftoe, a street urchin and adventurer
Eliza, a former harem slave who becomes a successful investor and a spy

Several of the secondary characters are historical figures, such as Isaac Newton, Robert Hooke and Gottfried Leibniz.

I usually managed to keep track of the complicated plot, but the best moments in the book were usually in the digressions, I thought. I enjoyed this and I think I'll read the other books eventually, but I don't feel compelled to read more right away.

***

[Roger Comstock] "There are all sorts of churches in Amsterdam. Cheek by jowl. Strange as it must sound, the habit has quite worn off on us over the years.
[Daniel] "Meaning what? That you’ve become used to preserving your faith despite being surrounded by heretics?"
[Roger] "No. Rather, it’s as if I’ve got an Amsterdam inside of my head."
[Daniel] "A what?!"
[Roger] "Many different sects that are always arguing with one another. A Babel of religious disputation that never dies down. I have got used to it."

***

t"Newton has thought things that no man before has ever thought. A great accomplishment, to be sure. Perhaps the greatest achievement that any human mind has ever made. Very well — what does that say of Newton, and of us? Why, that his mind is framed in such a way that it can outthink anyone else’s. So, all hail Isaac Newton! Let us give him his due, and glorify and worship whatever generative force can frame such a mind. Now, consider Hooke. Hooke has perceived things that no man before has ever perceived. What does that say of Hooke, and of us? That Hooke was framed in some special way? No, for just look at you, Robert —by your leave, you are stooped, asthmatic, fitful, beset by aches and ills, your eyes and ears no better than those of men who've not perceived a thousandth of what you have.
tNewton makes his discoveries in geometrical realms where our minds cannot go, he strolls in a walled garden filled with wonders, to which he has the only key. But you, Hooke, are cheek-by-jowl with all of humanity in the streets of London. Anyone can look at the things you have looked at. But in those things you see what no one else has. You are the millionth human to look at a spark, a flea, a raindrop, the moon, and the first to see it. For anyone to say that this is less remarkable than what Newton has done, is to understand things in but a hollow and jejune way, 'tis like going to a Shakespeare play and remembering only the sword-fights."
— Daniel Waterhouse to Robert Hooke

It is really difficult to rate this book. It was incredible - sweeping, detailed, erudite and witty. But it was so big, so overwhelming and so intelligent that, because I needed to read it quickly, I think I have probably missed some of the subtleties. However, I am glad I've read it through once, as when I go back to it again (which I definitely will) there are parts that I am going to take more note of. I do like how this book comes under science-fiction. Although it is really historical fiction, the fact that there was a lot of science discussed in it (it was set during the Seventeenth century, and Newton and Leibniz were characters among a cast of others) and it was fiction means that it probably deserves the tag more than some others.

Upon finishing the last page of Quicksilver i really was expecting a gold star; the book is physically massive and ridiculously dense with plot so anyone who finishes deserves an award.

As it was split into three separate parts or books, as the author has labelled them, i decided to treat it the same; after each part i took a few days break and read something else. I believe this aided in enjoying Quicksilver. Reading it all in one go would’ve been overkill and possibly sent me insane.

n  Book 1 – Quicksilvern
Daniel Waterhouse is our main protagonist as he lives a life of a Natural Philosopher. There isn’t a plot as such but Daniel is lucky enough to be alive during the time of Isaac Newton and several other famous eccentrics the majority of which i’d never heard of. They spend most of their time carrying out bizarre and grotesque experiments all in the name of science whilst also reacting to the plague, the great fire of London and the reign of Charles II. There’s so much going on i reckon you’d have to read this three or four times to truly appreciate it’s genius.

n  Book 2 – King of the Vagabondsn
We leave Daniel behind for part 2 and follow the story of the syphilis infected Jack Shaftoe who, whilst fighting against the Turks in the Battle of Vienna, sets free a lady of the Sultans Harem called Eliza. Both escape the camp and commence a sightseeing tour of Amsterdam, Paris and Marseilles, interacting with William of Orange, Gottfried Leibniz and the Duke of Monmouth who is planning his coup of the English crown. As with part 1 there’s too much going on for a proper synopsis. Needless to say there’s no let up of events/action and i was never bored.

n  Book 3 – Odalisquen
Part 3 rejoins Daniel and also concentrates on Eliza who is now a financial adviser and the 17th century female version of James Bond as she aligns herself with William of Orange. We also witness the downfall of James II and the Glorious Revolution.

I read the above and my description of Quicksilver seems sparse compared to the mammoth tome that i read. On paper i shouldn’t have liked this book; there’s no definitive plot and it’s focus is the 17th Century, which wouldn’t be my first choice if i was to geek out on history. It’s also full of historical events and people i wasn’t clued up on and there’s little explanation as to what’s going on; Neal Stephenson writes as if you should know about this period of history and if you don’t then tough! Thankfully Wikipedia is a great aid for research if you’re in need. Despite all of this i loved it. It was interesting, packed full of philosophy and there’s an array of crazy characters, none more than Isaac Newton who is an insane genius!

I’m a scientist by profession and I love history. Thus, I’m fascinated by the history of science, especially the era of Isaac Newton et al. So, Neal Stephenson’s Quicksilver should be just my thing and I was fully expecting to love this book (it’s been on my list for years), but I’m sad to say that I was disappointed in this first installment of The Baroque Cycle, though I still have high hopes for the remaining books.

Quicksilver is well-researched and well-written and chock full of plenty of stuff I love to read about: 17th and 18th century scholars and politicians exploring the way the world works. What... Read More: http://www.fantasyliterature.com/revi...

Questo è uno dei romanzi più difficili che mi sia mai capitato di leggere per i suoi contenuti: non ho mai incontrato un tentativo così riuscito di riprodurre lo stile ma soprattutto il pensiero corrente di un periodo storico così lontano da noi come il tardo diciassettesimo secolo. Non potrei considerare questo romanzo "storico" perché non è tratteggiato con l'occhio di un contemporaneo che guarda il passato. L'autore si è immedesimato in maniera quasi inquietante nella mente di scienziati e vagabondi e altri personaggi di metà Seicento... forse ha una macchina del tempo nascosta in garage, chissà. La cosa secondo me è doppiamente incredibile se si considera che metà del romanzo parla di scienza: credo sia molto difficile riuscire a guardare ai primi scienziati coerenti con questo termine (i filosofi naturali) e alle loro idee senza apporre giudizi di sorta dati dalla nostra conoscenza di oggi. Ci sono idee di Newton di cui oggi sorridiamo bonariamente perché sappiamo che non sono valide, per dire, e così per molti altri: riuscire a far discutere queste idee ai contemporanei di Newton senza però infarcire la loro bocca di nozioni e conoscenze posteriori è veramente complesso, bisogna davvero fare delle scissioni non da ridere.

Ed è questo che lo rende un libro di fantascienza: la fantascienza nasce dalla riflessione di dove la tecnologia sempre più permeante della vita umana avrebbe portato la nostra specie. Ed è la stessa precisa riflessione che si pongono alcuni dei personaggi (specie nella divertentissima - sarcasmo - parte in cui si discute dell'eticità dello sventrare cani ancora in vita o nel sezionare i resti di un collega recentemente defunto). La scienza ai suoi inizi, chiamata per la prima volta così (forse non ancora, neanche), la fisica, la chimica che si scinde dall'alchimia, la crittografia - base da cui nascerà poi lo studio che porterà ai primi elaboratori di calcolo e poi ai nostri computer - l'anatomia, l'astronomia...), gli albori di discipline importantissime per l'evoluzione umana...

Ciò è un punto a favore ma anche un difetto, per certi versi, perché anche i lettori devono riuscire a fare la stessa scissione, e soprattutto impegnarsi a leggere un libro che per una corposa prima parte è interamente incentrato su discussioni scientifico-filosofiche e per l'altra su giochi politici di cui noi sappiamo poco o pochissimo. Se si riesce a superare questa prima parte, poi le vicende prendono di più, ma rimane un romanzo che richiede molto impegno. Anche lo stile è molto difficile: ho letto che l'autore ha dichiarato "non l'ho scritto pensando al pubblico di oggi", o una cosa simile, ed è vero. Ci sono termini, anche nella traduzione, che io conosco perché ho trovato in certi libretti d'opera settecenteschi, ma che non ho mai sentito utilizzare nel linguaggio corrente.

Nelle ultime trecento-duecento pagine poi sono stata risucchiata dagli eventi e ora VOGLIO sapere come va avanti, il che è incredibile, considerando che una settimana fa mi dicevo "finisco questo e poi MAI PIUUUUUUUUU'!")... Magari però prima mi prendo una pausa e leggo qualcos'altro. XD

Interessante, ma preparatevi a un librone che richiederà impegno, dedizione... E grandi dosi di caffè!

It is always painful to write a negative review of a beloved author, but less so when the book in question is as desultory and tedious as this one. Neal Stephenson is probably my favorite living author, but making it through the first volume of his Baroque Cycle (which is really three books in one) was like taking a cross-continental flight through a turbid storm with only momentary glimpses of clear sky. Any experienced Stephenson reader expects to be bowled over by recondite descriptions of, well, pretty much everything, but Quicksilver displays the needless sprawl and lack of restraint that can render impotent even the most beguiling intellect. For a book that spans a considerable length of time during which things are constantly happening, there is a remarkable paucity of events, in the sense of emotional climax or meaningful developments in the story. The book’s bloated nature tarnishes Stephenson’s brilliance, exacerbating his worst tendencies and drawing back from his best.

Quicksilver takes place in late 17th century Europe, with small bits set in early 18th century not-yet-America. It is a fictionalized account of the intellectual, social, and political journeys of some of Europe’s most beloved thinkers, most notably Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz. This part of the tale is seen through the eyes of Daniel Waterhouse (ancestor of Lawrence and Randy Waterhouse from Cryptonomicon), a lesser savant who rooms with Newton in college and goes on to be a member of London’s Royal Society. There are two other main characters: Jack Shaftoe (ancestor of Bobby) and Eliza. Jack is a lovably audacious London-born vagabond who gallivants around Europe with an air of self-determination uncommon for the time period. On one of his many adventures, he meets Eliza and frees her from a harem during a battle with the Turks outside Vienna. They travel together for a time, eventually part ways, and Eliza becomes involved in Europe’s nascent currency speculation business.

These three characters, and a massive host of supporting ones, dance around each other throughout the novel, occasionally crossing paths or engaging in indirect shenanigans with mutual acquaintances. They experience many genuinely interesting things, but the book’s plot never quite decides which story it wants to tell, leaving the reader feeling as if Stephenson himself didn’t really know (or––more likely––that he simply didn’t care about adhering to plot conventions). This feeling of disconnection inhabits Stephenson novels with varying strength, but dominated Quicksilver in a way that was both distracting and disappointing.

Despite its many flaws, there is much to like in this 900+ page door-stopper. Daniel, Jack and Eliza all come to represent the tension between individualism and allegiance to monarchy that sprang from the Protestant Reformation and culminated in the American Revolution and the advent of constitutional democracies in Europe. Jack is especially flippant about authority and his own status as a person without status. Daniel, the Puritan son of a radical father, is a man whose considerable intelligence makes him useful to British aristocrats, but who is treated as an outcast due to his family history.

Describing Eliza is more difficult; she is definitely the character about whom I feel most conflicted. Equal parts proto-feminist and hyper-sexualized temptress, Eliza is a baffling contrast of progressive and anachronistic qualities. I don’t know if that’s what Stephenson was going for, but I was left with the nagging feeling that he wanted to write a character who was supposed to be a strong female in a male-dominated world. In this, he was partially successful. Eliza’s strong qualities are diminished somewhat by Stephenson’s tendency to overemphasize her body as a sexual object of the male gaze. Even worse, Eliza is sometimes blasé about her own sexuality in a way that just didn’t sit right with me. In one particularly disturbing scene, Eliza is coerced into performing fellatio on a nobleman. This is her thought just before capitulation: “What was about to happen wasn’t so very bad, in and of itself” (599). Now, it’s perfectly possible (although I suspect not probable) that someone in this situation could have such a thought, and also that a woman sold into a 17th century harem might be casual about being forced sexually, but in this case Stephenson’s writing really bothered me. Eliza is assertive with her intelligence and sexuality at other points in the story, and is certainly not a simplified caricature. But too often she comes off as a kind of pornographic fantasy that just happens to have a brain and some guts.

In general, this novel does a great job of reminding the reader that most humans lived before modern scientific thinking and the plethora of technologies it spawned. Quicksilver is situated at a tipping point in Europe’s historical conversation about what the world is and how we should live in it. Daniel and Jack both represent the struggle between predestination and free will that was taunting Europe’s elite. The idea of scientific truth “pushing back the veil of God” is front and center in the novel’s best moments, with some of history’s biggest minds obsessing over the paradox of how to justify the existence of (or need for) omniscient will within an increasingly understandable set of natural laws. Stephenson’s prose wields its characteristic cleverness and erudition, but his attempts to utilize certain Baroque writing elements largely fall flat, adding little to the reader’s engagement in the story and providing ample opportunity for inanition.

My problems with this book stem from the fact that I’m not a European history buff. If I were, I’m sure many of the passages I found absolutely boring would have had me begging for more. The tidbits of intellectual history were fascinating, and I occasionally enjoyed learning about an old type of building, tool, or cultural practice, but more often than not Stephenson’s tangents proved mere distractions from the main story (what little of it there was). The worst part was the politics. I usually eschew the historical details of monarchies, which, as unique and raunchy as they can sometimes be, always amount to the same old shit: assholes trying to get the upper hand on other assholes. I can occasionally get sucked into power-centered narratives like Game of Thrones or Shogun, but such stories need to be emotionally visceral to keep my attention. I really don’t care how Louis XIV and his sycophantic horde of admirers spend their days at Versailles while working people suffer. I don’t care who the next King of England will be, because I’m too modern-minded to want any king at all. Stephenson seems to expect readers to find monarchical plots and authority struggles interesting in and of themselves, and does little to enliven protracted lists of people and events that ultimately have little influence on Quicksilver‘s story or characters.

I also don’t care much about the history of money, which plays a large role in this book; it’s just a topic that draws Stephenson’s interest but repels my own. In his other works––most notably n  Reamden––Stephenson has evinced in me a fascination with objects and methods about which I have little knowledge and less interest, but Quicksilver couldn't grab my attention enough to challenge those boundaries.

My biggest regret here is that I became so annoyed with this book that I stopped reading very closely after the first few hundred pages. I just didn’t get enough bang for my buck by paying close attention, so once I learned who the important characters were, I began hunting for them and skimming paragraphs that clearly weren’t going to teach me anything I wanted to know. It’s also true that elements of this book were simply over my head. And while I managed to follow the story just fine, I’m sure there were plenty of fun and even profound moments along the way that I missed. But I also made short work of a lot of dense gobbledygook.

In its finest moments, this book is fantastic––as good as anything one could hope to read. But therein lies the problem: because Stephenson sets such a high bar, it’s hard to take it when the overall effect doesn’t prove earth-shattering. My quarrel with Quicksilver is no doubt due in part to my own intellectual shortcomings and parochial interests, but I also think the book contains some objectively obnoxious and dull qualities. Even so, I love Stephenson and will press on with the Baroque Cycle because I am invested in reading his corpus. He can be a real pain in the ass, but he’s worth it.

This review was originally published on my blog, words&dirt.

it took me about a year to get through this one. somewhat worth it, and i will get around to the second and third books of this gargantuan trilogy eventually. i learned a lot about the philosopher-scientists and byzantine politics and what it actually was like to live in the tumultuous times depicted...and didn't learn a whole lot about the inner life of a couple of the central characters. but there are dozens and dozens of truly fascinating and wonderfully written passages depicting all sorts of dramatic and at-times morbid events - more than enough to make up for the relentless and dry detailing of every frickin' scientific, economic or philosophic theory ever contemplated.

This book is just too vast to give justice to it in the few lines of this review that I might come up with now.

If you are ready to read this, here are some suggestions:

1) Start with Cryptonomicon first. You don't need to read this first, but it will help you get used to Stephenson's style, and you'll appreciate Quicksilver better having done so.

2) Before reading Quicksilver, spend some time brushing up on some basic English history. (Did you know that London burned? Do you know what the Monmouth Rebellion was, and the Bloody Assizes that followed? Do you know about the interregnum? Do you know that William III deposed James II in a coup?)

It would be nice if a timeline could be provided that summarizes the main points of English history that serve as context for this book - I admit I did not know enough myself of the history involved to get full appreciation of the book on my first reading... so now I'll have to read it again some time after doing some historical readings.

Perhaps read the wikipedia page on the diary of Samuel Pepys (if not the diary itself). Although he's really just a minor figure in this novel, his diary covers many of the same events that you'll encounter in Quicksilver.

3) Be prepared to deal with long digressions and elaborate descriptions. Instead of seeing them as tedious, look for the humor. Stephenson inevitably tries to put some humor into these, and although it's often very dry, it's quite amusing when you see how he's looking askance at the goings-on of the times and persons.

4) Beyond the history, take care to understand the geography.

5) Take some time to consider the cryptography used in the novel. When you understand just how a "letter within a letter" can be written, you'll appreciate more of Stephenson's particular genius.

6) Even though this is hardly a science-fiction novel, it does deal largely with scientists in the Royal Society. Be prepared, then, for descriptions of events seen through the eyes of a trained scientific observer. Something as simple as the motion of a boat's mast can be used scientifically to provide information about how the boat is loaded, as you'll find in the novel. Again, these portions of the book are trademarks of Stephenson's ingenuity, and I enjoyed them immensely.

7) Be patient. This is a long book, and not an easy read. If you can keep track of the main characters, you can actually put it away for a time, and return to it later to resume reading. I actually started this book some time ago, reading it only when I had uninterrupted opportunities to digest the novel. (I read other, lighter, works in the interim to keep me occupied and entertained).

In fact, after starting this book, I actually began work on a Master's degree, and completed the Master's degree faster than completing the book. That was perhaps a bit too slow, but also tells more about how busy I was instead of describing the nature of the book.

8) Revel in the richness of this book. It is indeed a masterpiece, and you can certainly gain more with each reread. This type of book is indeed rare, and its peculiar idiosyncrasies just make it more distinctive in its majesty, not lessening its achievement in any way.

complete reread of the novel (and of course continuing with the sequels) - while I greatly enjoyed it the first time I read the series (in 2008), this time I have appreciated it even more; epic, memorable characters, adventures, intrigue and the birth of the modern world set on the twin pillars of formalized rational inquiry - what we call now science and was once called natural philosophy - and capitalism which forces innovation - which for most history was strongly resisted by societies - by competition

I'm re-reading this wonderful Historical revolving Daniel Waterhouse because I'm a huge fan of Stephenson and I have to admit that I never continued further than this first book of the first Cycle. I don't know why! Perhaps I just wanted more SF or Fantasy in my life at the time and it just fell away from me, but I feel like an idiot now. :)

SO. Rereading this brought me back fully into the world of post-Cromwell England, so full of details and concerned mostly with the heart of modern science... from Newton, Leibwitz, Hook, and Comstock. The stories themselves are endlessly fascinating, actually, and the man who ties them all together, Daniel Waterhouse, is equally so. His getting into the Invisible College at its inception and working closely with all these fantastic persons was great for both story, history and, more specifically, the history of science.

It's hugely detailed and interconnected, and if that wasn't enough, Stephenson throws in a huge discourse on the economics, political issues, the wars, the plague, and of coruse religion. This is a fantastically intelligent, broad, and detailed look at England, late 17th century and early 18th.

I remember being flabbergasted at the amount of research the first time and now that I know more the second time, I'm still flabbergasted at the amount of research. The fact that he can weave a cool tale and have everything hold together as one of the best historicals I've ever read is a testament to Stephenson. :)


A note, however. There's two sets of books or book collections out here that have gone a great way to confusing me as to what to read where and how. I'll just make a note to everyone else who might also be confused.

The Quicksilver novel shows up both as the first book in the first cycle, also called Quicksilver.

Yeah. Nuts.

So I'm reviewing the individual first novel in the Cycle here, with this, and then reviewing King of Vagabonds as part two (a full novel as well) of the Quicksilver Cycle, followed with Odalesque.

The two conventions would have us believe that there are either three Cycles bound together as three enormous books, or Eight Books altogether, separate. :) I'm going to review all eight, separately, because a lot happens everywhere. :)

This book is kickass.

Part 1 is thick and includes lots of philosophy. And dandy Englishmen doing dandy Englishmen things. Some good pirate parts in the current time. The flashbacks are more for background. I'm still not sure if they are going to form a computer that deals with God or what.

It picks up in Part 2 with the Vagabond King. Hell yeah! Turkish invasion of Vienna! Harem girl escapes with neutered man about to go crazy from the pox! Flashbacks of gritty youth spent with criminals! Fuck, now we're talking.

Go read this book. Skip the boring parts if you want. The Vagabond King is totally awesome. Daniel Waterhouse is okay, but only starts to get interesting in the last hundred pages of part 1. This is a book you'll have to be patient with but then when you do, oh wow.