The year is 2010. The world is overcrowded and, as a result,
most nations have implemented strict eugenics program and children have become
a rarity. A scientist in the socialist nation of Yatakang has discovered a way
to eliminate genetic defects. The United States is fighting a Vietnam-style war
with the Chinese. Mr. and Mrs. Everywhere dominate television. The tiny African
nation of Beninia contracts its development to multinational conglomerate
General Tectonics. Men are called “codders” and women are known as “shiggies”.
This is the world of John Brunner’s 1969 Hugo Award winning novel Stand on Zanzibar.
And
what a world it is. Whatever feelings I have for Stand on Zanzibar (and I have many and they are often in conflict),
Brunner created an interesting and complex world which is impressive
considering that I read the book in 2012 and it was mildly amusing to think
that the book’s future setting was actually two years in the past. That being
said and as I mentioned earlier, I have conflicting feelings about this book. I
found it, at times, to be each of the following: brilliant, silly, clever,
annoying, very realistic, and absolutely ridiculous. Let’s start with the plot
and then start deconstructing my feelings on the book.
The
plot is mostly focused on two characters: Norman House and Donald Hogan, two
gentlemen that share an apartment (and occasionally shiggy) in New York. Norman
is an African American (called an Afram in this book) Muslim who used his race
to become a vice president in the General Tectonics (GT) conglomerate at the
age of 26. That is not to say that Norman is stupid or untalented, for he
neither of those things. Rather he is very ambitious and not afraid to use
whatever means he can to succeed. For example, early in the novel, Norman
personally stops a “mucker” (slang for a person running amok) that is attacking
the GT computer by freezing her arm off with liquid hydrogen. Norman is a tough
guy and he eventually takes of GT’s administration and development of Beninia.
Brunner sums up Donald in one sentence: “Donald Hogan is a spy.” At the
beginning of the novel he is more of a spy in waiting and is later activated
for a special mission to Yatakang, a fictional country that is a combination of
Indonesia and Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam and Thailand. Until he is
called up, Donald is meek and bookish and seems unsuited for his role. While
Donald and Norman are roommates they aren’t actually friends and their paths
cross in strange ways once they move to their eventual roles.
While
what I described is the main plot, it is hardly the only one. The novel is
broken up into a number of sections titled "Continuity" (Most of the linear narrative is contained in
these chapters), "Tracking with Closeups" (focusing closely on ancillary
characters before they become part of the main narrative, or simply serve to
paint a picture of the state of the world), "The Happening World" (
These chapters consist of collage-like collections of short, sometimes single-sentence,
descriptive passages), and
"Context" (These chapters provide a setting for the novel).
From what I have read this is similar to the structure of John Dos Passos’s U.S.A. Trilogy, a series of novels that
I have not read. The structure works, for the most part, though not all side
stories are created equal. Some feel needless, or worse, seem to be setting up
a side story that goes nowhere. But it gives a good feeling for the world that
Brunner has created.
What I
just mentioned was some of the good elements of the book but there are others
as well. Brunner’s writing is good. Dialogue is believable and it doesn’t have
some of the clunky workmanlike sentence structure and pacing that I noticed in
earlier Hugo winners. In general I liked the story except there were a few
sections that went on needlessly long such as at a party where it jumps around
to different conversations for nearly 50 pages. Or at least what I imagine was
50 pages. I read Stand on Zanzibar on my Kindle so judging pages can be
difficult.
Slang
in science fiction is a tricky thing. Often times it feels dated, silly, or
annoying or all three at once such as fracking in the new Battlestar Galatica. Or anything from the Jetsons. That said, the slang in Stand on Zanzibar is mostly pretty good. There is a slight 60s vibe
to some of it but for the most part it seems reasonable. Saying “whereinole”
for “what the hell” feels right and I absolutely love Afram for African
American. Since the correct word has changed so many times of the last few
decades Afram seems very logical to me. “Shiggy” as a word for a woman works
well in the book, though I would not recommend it for daily use. My wife was
not too keen when I called her my favorite shiggy.
What I disliked
was how dystopian the book is. Nearly every aspect of this future is terrible.
The U.S. government has become increasingly authoritarian with strict eugenics
rules and forced conscription for what feels like any ongoing Vietnam War. Not
that those are ideas for a novel but Brunner doesn’t really give an explanation
on why this is. He mentions overcrowding and a U.S. population around 400
million but that hardly seem justified for the draconian measures taken by the
U.S. government. George Orwell’s 1984
was bleak but at least we knew why. With all the world building that takes
place in Stand on Zanzibar some
explanation seem necessary. I find it hard to understand a great deal of
science fiction takes place in the near future is so dystopian rather than being
like the present, some stuff is good and some stuff is bad.
Another
aspect I found somewhat maddening was the character of Chad Mulligan. Chad
himself does not appear until a good way into the book but excerpts from his
books are fixtures of The Happening World sections. I found Chad Mulligan to be
a pompous self-righteous prick, which won’t be a problem if the book didn’t
treat him like a genius and prophet. Everyone has met someone like Chad: an
individual who spouts garbage on how the world really is and if we only opened
our eyes we would see it like they do. Personally, I find Rand Paul supporters
to be like this. Even the titles of his books are self-important. What would
you think of a person whose books are titled things like You’re an Ignorant Idiot and You:
Beast?
While
Stand on Zanzibar is not my favorite Hugo winner, I did like it and I would
recommend it to anyone who wants to read a different, more literate science
fiction. It is worth your time.
That is
it for the 1960s. For my next blog I will write about the decade as a whole and
what I thought of it. Spoiler alert: for the most part the 60s were better for
Hugo awards than the 50s.
No comments:
Post a Comment