Also, I'm reading The Rise of Endymion. Dan Simmons's Hyperion books were definitely stronger. The Endymion series demonstrates the weaknesses of an alternating plot structure. In Endymion every other chapter was written from the antagonist's perspective and ended with the apparent destruction of at least one protagonist, which you know can't happen because the author has clearly fated the characters to greater things.
With an alternating structure, if one of the storylines is more engaging, the other will feel like filler. If they are equally engaging, then you still need to decide if you really have two works there instead of just one. Hyperion was more than the sum of its parts, but Endymion isn't. The Rise of Endymion adds to the flaws by increasing the number of sides I don't care about, and I am just skimming some pages completely.
Still, I have to hand it to him for creating a universe in which
- Characters can be resurrected in a long, error-prone process.
- Instantaneous interstellar travel is possible, but...
- ...it's fatal
Also, he apparently floods the entire Earth just so he can have a character kayak through the St Louis Arch. I appreciate that.
Oh, in other news the next adventure post concerns the library in Winnipeg. I want to include lots of special effects and it is hard to do on a blogger's budget, so it is likely to be delayed.
Nice, I would like to point out thought that Lord of the Rings has an alternating story structure. Pffft!
ReplyDeleteTolkien alternates books rather than chapters, which may be easier. There is still that feeling of getting whipped around when the viewpoint changes, so it's best kept to a minimum. I do think Endymion might have been improved by collecting chapters from the same viewpoint into larger units, and this might have cut down on some of the cheap tricks he uses.
ReplyDelete