27 Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

1. As the official a priori cause of this particular podcast, I will tell you that Hyperion is a work of genius, not merely as science fiction, but as literature, and as a meta-commentary on literature.
   I don’t want to spoil the book for anyone, but I can say this without doing so: from it’s construction, to the people and places referenced in it, to actual characters, Simmons weaves classic English literature into a far-future mileiu that leaves one with no doubt that he is one author who has researched his craft exhaustively.
   As a science fiction fan, this is a great book. As a fan of classic literature, this is a great book. It has the whizbang gadgets that would make it a great action film and might even serve to help some SciFi fans realize that there ARE genres other than SciFi, which is no bad thing.
   I think the book stands on its own, but as the opening volume of the Hyperion Cantos, it is the first several stories of what becomes an epic which crosses lightyears and centuries, and I cannot understand Summer’s stubborn refusal to read the rest of it.
   

   Comment by Sean — September 26, 2005 #

2. Also, I am pretty sure the Shrike qualifies as a Kick-Ass Mystic Ninja. Discuss.

   Comment by Sean — September 26, 2005 #

3. I think that the first two books in the Hyperion saga must be taken together. The first book ends right in the middle of the story; to read that alone would be akin to stopping after “Fellowship of the Ring”. It’s been awhile, so the events of the first 2 books are hopelessly blended in my memory.
   That said, Hyperion is a work of literary genius, fusing elements and references from across the SF and classic lit board. Wonderfully inventive settings, on a planetary AND universal scale; great battle scenes, imagined technologies, and prose. I really enjoyed this book (and series).

   I’d suggested the Shrike for Duel of the Fates. What a great character/construct!

   Comment by Jack — September 27, 2005 #

4. It’s not that I refused to read it. Sean bought it for me in 1999, and I read it, but was not impressed. At Sean’s badgering, I read it again about a year later, and still was not impressed. Sean’s a persistent cuss, so I tried to read it again two years after that, and gave up before I got halfway through it.

   Now, Hyperion was published in May 1989, Fall of Hyperion was published February 1990. So, if we’re “needing” to take the first two books together when they weren’t published together… explain to me how that works.

   Especially the part about the first one winning a Hugo without having the benefit of having read the second one… the second one which didn’t win a Hugo.

   Comment by Summer — September 27, 2005 #

5. I guess it’s like the “Kill Bill” thing. The whole story was too long to release at once, so it was broken in two (double your profits). His latest duo: Ilium and Olympos, is the same deal. The first book had no real ending, then you had to wait a year for the conclusion to release.

   I was blown away by Hyperion. I don’t know its competitors for those Hugo years, but I think that even with the non-ending, it’s worthy of an award (especially with 20/20 hindsight knowledge that the 2nd half is just as good as, if not better than, the first).

   Comment by Jack — September 27, 2005 #

6. The 1990 Hugo Nominees were:

   The Boat of a Million Years by Poul Anderson
   Prentice Alvin by Orson Scott Card
   A Fire in the Sun by George Alec Effinger
   Hyperion by Dan Simmons
   Grass by Sheri S. Tepper

   It’s been forever and a day since I read Grass, and therefore am fuzzy on it, but I know I reacted to it a ton better than I did to Hyperion. I haven’t read any of the others.

   Fall of Hyperion was not nominated for the 1991 Hugo.

   And I am working on a way to get Sean in on this conversation when we record it. He needs to be there.

   Comment by Summer — September 28, 2005 #

7. I Haven’t read it yet, and ever since God-Emperor of Dune I’ve tried to keep a safe distance from multi-volume epics, or at least keeping to the first volumes. Also, I really like variety in SF, instead of getting stuck in a handful of repetitive series. So I’m interested in knowing if it’s really worth diving into the 1,000+ pages of the two parts - not to mention Endymion.

   Comment by Eric — September 28, 2005 #

8. I know I read Hyperion…I might still have in on my bookshelf at home, but can’t for the life of me remember the story. I’ll have to see if I have it…I’m just about done re-reading Stephen R. Donaldson’s Gap series (for the umteenth time).

   Comment by Kari — September 28, 2005 #

9. Eric, I’m guessing that both Jack and Sean could provide you with enough details to make a choice on whether to read them or not.

   Kari, I’m wondering if you had the same problems with it I did, since you’re saying you can’t recall the story (something that’ll torque Sean big time

   Comment by Summer — September 29, 2005 #

10. Astounding and confounding aren’t necessarily exclusive terms.

    I think that some aspects are extremely confounding (time travel stuff tends to be very confusing) but it is a really notorious novel.
    I also don’t remember the overall arc very well, but some of the stories of the pilgrims really moved me; particularly the Sol Weintraub/Rachel history. That was some of the most emotive, compelling stuff I’ve ever read (Sci-Fi or not).

    And I think that’s one of the most unique aspects of the novel; the fact that it is extremely multi-faceted. Even if you don’t like some part of it, you will surely find some bit that you really like.

    I totally recommend it.

    Comment by Agustí — September 29, 2005 #

11. I read this book about the same time I read Number of the Beast and lumped it into the WTF category. I didn’t get it. Of course I was 14 at the time I read it and was more into The Belgariad (Eddings) and Magician (Fiest) and a splash of Gor (Norman). May have been something to do with my mindset during the 80s. Now that it’s been brought up, I may have to dust off my copy (yes, I’ve got a crap-load of books from the 80s and 90s still) and give it another shot.

    Comment by J.R. Murdock — September 29, 2005 #

12. Hyperion was the book that restored my faith in the future of science fiction. And I haven’t been disappointed since. I see Simmons in the company of writers like Gene Wolfe who are attempting to give science fiction the credibility that it deserves in the the literary community. As an ex-English teacher, I immediately recognized the relationship between Hyperion and Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. Simmons continues his connection to classic literature with Ilium and Olympos (haven’t read Olympos yet–it’s on my shelf–but I was blown away with Ilium. When was the last time you heard Marcel Proust discussed in a sci-fi novel? And who the heck is Marcel Proust anyway? All you Python fans will recognize him from the famous “Summarized Proust Contest,” I’m sure )

    From the moment I started the book, I knew I was in the hands of a master writer. Connecting to the primordial tales is what gives a story its longevity. Just like the original Star Wars trilogy was tied to the Hero’s Quest (see Joseph Campbell), Simmons’ attachment to mythology is what gives his stories their strength.

    I don’t think every story needs this kind of foundation (I like gun battles and explosions as much as anyone), but you can tell those stories that do and those that don’t. Firefly/Serenity does; the new Star Wars trilogy does not, IMHO.

    Comment by Steve — September 29, 2005 #

13. Hyperion, Just plain genius. I gave book one to my boss, When he finished I asked for a wage rise or he wouldn’t get book two. The sod went and ordered the book two from Amazon, in front of me!. Anyway I came across a compilation of the first three books in a gleeman train station. It was the only English book on the shelf and I had a long journey. I was on that train for 4 hours solid missed my stop. It must be a classic.

    Good luck with the new podcast.

    MaxDamage , UK

    Comment by MaxDamage — September 29, 2005 #

14. Again, not saying that the book wasn’t well-written. Taking the story from an evaluation of the prose only, it’s damned fine… steps above most of the stuff out there around the same time.

    However, from the perspective of an SF story with depth and meaning, the depth of the universe Simmons built up was there, but there was no story there. This might as well have been a short story collection like Borderlands or Wild Cards; a series of vignettes with a common thread and no useful purpose whatsoever except to mash a bunch of stories together.

    Each individual story was well done. Taken together as a whole story to be told, WTF doesn’t even come close. After I finished the book both times, I knew it was Canterbury Tales in Deep Space, but that still didn’t make it Hugo worthy, especially with the “to be continued” ending that didn’t make me compelled to continue.

    To me, Hyperion is proof you can have the best prose in the world and still have a worthless story to tell, which means that somewhere out there is a damned fine story that was poorly written.

    Comment by Summer — September 29, 2005 #

15. I’ve always been a bigger fan of Fantasy than SciFi…. But this book really turned me on my head! It’s been so long since I’ve read it, most o f the details are a little fuzzy; however, I do recall the main plot points and characters. I remember enjoying the Canterbury Tales-esque nature of the stories, and the Shrike is an interesting mystery character. It was one of the first books my girlfriend actually finished — and went on to read the whole series! For me, ranks at the top with the first Dune novel, the Dune prequels, and Peter Hamilton’s Naked God series.

    Comment by Sid Omar — September 30, 2005 #

16. Odd.. I’ve not gotten Show 1 through the aggegrator yet.. I’m gonna have to download it manually this weekend

    Comment by Dave — September 30, 2005 #

17. I can see both Summer’s and Sean’s points. I loved Hyperion. It’s beautifully written–notice the different styles for each story–but Summer is right: nothing really happens in the book. We just get 6 background stories. It really is a reworking of Canteburry Tales. So, the novel is really more of an anthology than anything else.

    Hyperion is like Chinese food: You may enjoy it while you are eating it, but you are hungry again an hour later.

    This is one of my favorite books, but I can certainly see why some people would not like it. Fortunately, Fall of Hyperion is a more traditional SciFi book.

    Comment by Dave C — September 30, 2005 #

18. Ack! This is going to be the type of show I’ll need to read the book before the show! I guess I need to renew my B&N membership.

    Comment by Kevin — October 3, 2005 #

19. I am glad to see your new podcast is starting off with such a book. Hyperion has to be one of the greatest works of SF. The story underneath the story is what is important. Yes it is like the Cantabury tales because of the religious overtones in the book(s). The discussions in the book about the nature of God and it’s role in our lives and the Universe is paramount to the understanding and enjoyment of the story. Abraham and Isaac from the Bible is one of the blatent underpinnings in the story. The theory that Abraham was testing God while God was testing Abraham points to a move in religion where a give and take exsist between creator and created is quite fascinating. So this retelling of Canterbury is a pilgramage that decides the outcome between two warring god intelligences. Now thats a story. Also the book had me hook,line, and sinker from the first story but really roped me in at the poet’s tale.

    Comment by Jezcoe — October 4, 2005 #

20. Ok…I went and bought Hyperion today. The story actually doesn’t sound familiar although the cover was very familiar. Must have been all that time working at Waldenbooks in high school.

    Comment by Kari — October 4, 2005 #

21. You really should pick up Fall of Hyperion too, since Hyperion will leave you hanging.

    Apparently, there are a lot of literary references in both books, but being an Engineer, I missed many of them. Fortunately, Google is your friend.

    After reading all 4 books, I think the Shrike has to be one of the most intersting “villains” in all of SF. I wonder why Jack Mangan didn’t include him in the Duel of the Fates?

    Comment by Dave C — October 5, 2005 #

22. I really enjoyed the first book in this series. It was quite different from the usual SF book. The follow ups haven’t been as enjoyable for me.

    Comment by Rico — October 6, 2005 #

23. Well, the promise of this podcast has prompted me to take this one down off the shelf and dig in. I’m not too far in now, about 30 pages - just as the Priest’s Tale is beginning, but I’m loving what I’ve read so far.

    Comment by Shawn — October 11, 2005 #

24. Ok…I read Hyperion on my trip to Baltimore and finished it last night. I will most likely go out today and buy Fall of Hyperion. It was a good book, but didn’t knock my socks off. The story is definitely intriquing (hence the buying of the sequel) and I look forward to hearing your show about it. I’m sure I missed a lot of the hidden references.

    Comment by Kari — October 12, 2005 #

25. It’s clear that the Hyperion saga was never meant to be a single novel (and, as we know, it stretched into four). If for some reason, Simmons had ended it with Hyperion, I would have been perplexed and wondered what was going to happen as the story had so many loose ends to it. But it certainly doesn’t downplay the fact that this is an amazing accomplishment. Simmons is such a skillful language and idea maestro that he continues to astound me. Another thing to consider is the page length issue that often comes into play when a publisher releases a book. There are very few science fiction novels that can compete with the page length that epic fantasy can get away with. Fantasy sells much better than science fiction, and fantasy fans want their books big. If the first two Hyperion books had been released as a single book, many of the problems that people have with the story might not be there, or at least they would be lessened. I always recommend that people read the first two together. The next two belong together as well and complete the story.

    Comment by Steve — October 12, 2005 #

26. Hyperion seems to be a book that divides opinions. Personally I fall on the side of loving it, but there is one big reason why a lot of people I know didn’t get into it - it does not follow a traditional narrative structure (ok, it does follow the structure of The Canturbury Tales, and you can’t get more tradional in the English language than that, but you get what I mean). Whenever a book departs from the basic structure of storytelling it is a dangerous thing. Those rules are these for a reason and breaking them is taking a serious risk. Personally I think Simmons pulled it off with aplomb, but it is always going to be a very personal thing. I agree with Summer, it was released on its own and it has to stand on its own. Given that it is based on a book that the author died before completing, I appreciate the fact that Simmons’ book has a similar unfinished feel to it.

    Comment by Luke — October 15, 2005 #

27. I read Hyperion between senior year and college. The priest’s tale, to me, was one of those golden moments in science fiction that flipped the top of my head off, stir-fried my brain, and put it back still sizzling. I still get chills when I think about that one part of the book. The Abraham tale was nearly as good, but not quite; I didn’t find the others memorable.

    To whomever said the two books have to be taken as a seamless whole, however: no. The plot may need the second book to give it closure, but the styles of the two books are too different to even compare them. And of the two inspirations, Canterbury Tales is a lot more fun than Keats.

    Comment by Stephen Eley — October 15, 2005 #

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.