In a message dated 2/14/2006 12:06:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> What I found interesting about the first two books was not the SF > portions of it nearly as much as the *human* portions. The stories of > the pilgrims were all gripping, and that's what I liked about Hyperion > more than the future conflicts and all. It was the people in the > books, not the events surrounding them, that really spoke to me. In > fact, to some extent Simmons' insistent EYKIW's (everything you know > is wrong) in Endymion irked me, and I felt cheapened the first two a > little bit. I still liked them, but for different reasons and > certainly not as much as the Cantos. > I agree. I thought the first two books were about the people. The story of Rachel was unbelievably touching and sad. At the end of "Fall" I thought that Simmons had wrapped everything up wonderfully. I felt that in the Endemyon books he had jumped the shark (or to be more accurate the Shrike). I enjoyed these books but they were totally different in tone and style. Much more good but not unique sf. At first I was angry but then I realized that one has to be realistic. Simmons is a professional writer. He had created a universe and characters that were of value so why not use them? _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
