Sign in with Facebook
J.G. Keely's Reviews > The War in the Air
The War in the Air
by
by
J.G. Keely's review
bookshelves: uk-and-ireland, novel, science-fiction, post-apocalyptic, reviewed
Nov 27, 2012
bookshelves: uk-and-ireland, novel, science-fiction, post-apocalyptic, reviewed
A remarkably progressive book, but then Wells did like his politics. His constant observation that Europeans are no more civilized than the other races of man, and no less prone to violent, dominant, cruel behavior is refreshing amongst the variety of Victorian sci fi and adventure stories I've been taking in.
However, it is rather disappointing that these comments and insights are rarely tied into the warp and woof of the narrative, but are added on as little observational essays in the voice of the abstracted narrator. It would have been much more effective if he'd found a way to demonstrate these ideas in his story--otherwise, what's the point of writing a bit of fiction in the first place when he could easily have made it into a tract?
But then, even those elements which he does manage to get into the story can be rather shoe-horned, as our main character is such an example of type that he barely possesses individuality outside of what he's meant to represent (and there can be no question of what that is, since the narrative voice reminds us with regularity); and then, after switching back and forth between essays and our representative story, he breaks off and ends the thing with an unrelated short story--the structure of the work is its greatest weakness.
However, the book has many clever spots, points of wit, insights, and a rather visceral, desperate tone maintained throughout much of the story. I admit that I was surprised that the story ends up resolving itself in a post-apocalyptic 'Dark Age' reversion right out of DeFoe's 'Journal of the Plague Year', but this outcome was just Wells' way of doom preaching that the invention of the airplane would destroy all modern society across the whole world (which might not be a bad thing, apparently).
It's always unfortunate when novelists start to turn into pamphleteers, for there was never a book that was improved by adding a digressive essay to the middle of it at the expense of a narrative-driven story about actual characters and events. Indeed, it confuses me that authors so often mistake books for pulpits, since books are, on the whole, not as tall.
However, it is rather disappointing that these comments and insights are rarely tied into the warp and woof of the narrative, but are added on as little observational essays in the voice of the abstracted narrator. It would have been much more effective if he'd found a way to demonstrate these ideas in his story--otherwise, what's the point of writing a bit of fiction in the first place when he could easily have made it into a tract?
But then, even those elements which he does manage to get into the story can be rather shoe-horned, as our main character is such an example of type that he barely possesses individuality outside of what he's meant to represent (and there can be no question of what that is, since the narrative voice reminds us with regularity); and then, after switching back and forth between essays and our representative story, he breaks off and ends the thing with an unrelated short story--the structure of the work is its greatest weakness.
However, the book has many clever spots, points of wit, insights, and a rather visceral, desperate tone maintained throughout much of the story. I admit that I was surprised that the story ends up resolving itself in a post-apocalyptic 'Dark Age' reversion right out of DeFoe's 'Journal of the Plague Year', but this outcome was just Wells' way of doom preaching that the invention of the airplane would destroy all modern society across the whole world (which might not be a bad thing, apparently).
It's always unfortunate when novelists start to turn into pamphleteers, for there was never a book that was improved by adding a digressive essay to the middle of it at the expense of a narrative-driven story about actual characters and events. Indeed, it confuses me that authors so often mistake books for pulpits, since books are, on the whole, not as tall.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
The War in the Air.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
November 27, 2012
–
Started Reading
November 27, 2012
– Shelved
February 1, 2013
–
Finished Reading
February 15, 2013
– Shelved as:
uk-and-ireland
February 15, 2013
– Shelved as:
novel
February 15, 2013
– Shelved as:
science-fiction
February 15, 2013
– Shelved as:
post-apocalyptic
April 6, 2015
– Shelved as:
reviewed
Comments Showing 1-3 of 3 (3 new)
date
newest »
newest »
Well, I'm not saying it's bad for a book to have meaning or purpose, or even for a book to represent the author's worldview, but there's a difference between a carefully-constructed narrative that illustrates the author's points for them and a fiction book that's full of long rants and diatribes about ideas because the author couldn't figure out how to express themselves using characters and scenes.
That's fair. He was clumsy in all the ways you observe. He fascinates me because her's so early, in creating independent female characters (not this novel) a la Henry James and his numerous, prescient, dystopias which prefigured Brave New World. Wells made many able observations bout what was scientifically possible. And possible in politics and war.
it confuses me that authors so often mistake books for pulpits, since books are, on the whole, not as tall
I think I can only claim to have read 95% of Atlas Shrugged - since I pretty much skipped the 30,000-word radio address.
(and I'll once again claim to be a good guesser - I found a webpage which claimed the "full text" - MSW word count indicated 32,900 words and change)
Issues of style notwithstanding, this leaves nearly 600,000 words of prose fiction that I did read. To my mind this explains "why fiction and not a tract".
Rand knew that fiction would be far more broadly recieved than political non-fiction - she certainly worked far harder on her novels than on any of the much shorter non-fiction collections that followed. And they certainly sold much better - by more than an order-of-magnitude.
Orwell's Animal Farm sold pretty well, too - far better than any of his essays I would guess.
I suppose one could say that Wells was lazy with his discursive narration.