Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Bryan's Reviews > Quicksilver

Quicksilver by Neal Stephenson
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
2904866
's review

it was amazing
bookshelves: sf, historical_fiction, favorites

This book is just too vast to give justice to it in the few lines of this review that I might come up with now.

If you are ready to read this, here are some suggestions:

1) Start with Cryptonomicon first. You don't need to read this first, but it will help you get used to Stephenson's style, and you'll appreciate Quicksilver better having done so.

2) Before reading Quicksilver, spend some time brushing up on some basic English history. (Did you know that London burned? Do you know what the Monmouth Rebellion was, and the Bloody Assizes that followed? Do you know about the interregnum? Do you know that William III deposed James II in a coup?)

It would be nice if a timeline could be provided that summarizes the main points of English history that serve as context for this book - I admit I did not know enough myself of the history involved to get full appreciation of the book on my first reading... so now I'll have to read it again some time after doing some historical readings.

Perhaps read the wikipedia page on the diary of Samuel Pepys (if not the diary itself). Although he's really just a minor figure in this novel, his diary covers many of the same events that you'll encounter in Quicksilver.

3) Be prepared to deal with long digressions and elaborate descriptions. Instead of seeing them as tedious, look for the humor. Stephenson inevitably tries to put some humor into these, and although it's often very dry, it's quite amusing when you see how he's looking askance at the goings-on of the times and persons.

4) Beyond the history, take care to understand the geography.

5) Take some time to consider the cryptography used in the novel. When you understand just how a "letter within a letter" can be written, you'll appreciate more of Stephenson's particular genius.

6) Even though this is hardly a science-fiction novel, it does deal largely with scientists in the Royal Society. Be prepared, then, for descriptions of events seen through the eyes of a trained scientific observer. Something as simple as the motion of a boat's mast can be used scientifically to provide information about how the boat is loaded, as you'll find in the novel. Again, these portions of the book are trademarks of Stephenson's ingenuity, and I enjoyed them immensely.

7) Be patient. This is a long book, and not an easy read. If you can keep track of the main characters, you can actually put it away for a time, and return to it later to resume reading. I actually started this book some time ago, reading it only when I had uninterrupted opportunities to digest the novel. (I read other, lighter, works in the interim to keep me occupied and entertained).

In fact, after starting this book, I actually began work on a Master's degree, and completed the Master's degree faster than completing the book. That was perhaps a bit too slow, but also tells more about how busy I was instead of describing the nature of the book.

8) Revel in the richness of this book. It is indeed a masterpiece, and you can certainly gain more with each reread. This type of book is indeed rare, and its peculiar idiosyncrasies just make it more distinctive in its majesty, not lessening its achievement in any way.
270 likes ·  âˆ� flag

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read Quicksilver.
Sign In »

Quotes Bryan Liked

Neal Stephenson
“Whenever serious and competent people need to get things done in the real world, all considerations of tradition and protocol fly out the window.”
Neal Stephenson, Quicksilver


Reading Progress

November 3, 2009 – Shelved
Started Reading
November 13, 2009 –
page 650
70.12%
November 13, 2009 – Finished Reading
November 16, 2009 –
page 695
74.97%
November 29, 2009 –
page 738
79.61%
April 5, 2010 –
page 792
85.44%
April 7, 2010 –
page 820
88.46%
April 15, 2010 –
page 854
92.13%
April 16, 2010 –
page 866
93.42%
April 20, 2010 –
page 872
94.07%
April 25, 2010 –
page 944
100%

Comments Showing 1-15 of 15 (15 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Chris I'm reading this for the third time.


Mark Hebwood Not so. I managed to distil his plot into five lines and I do not think I took anything essential away - check out my review to see whether you agree. Ok so I already know you do not but can I ask one question: In your 8-point guide to reading Neal's book, you did not include one that identifies the point of this work. Do you see one? I'd love to know what it is, in your view. Cheers - Mark


Keith Robideau Sean did you read the other installments in the Baroque Cycle? Cuz as a whole it sure delivered.


Mark Hebwood This is the problem with books of epic magnitude. It is always possible to push back criticism by referring to a part the critic has not read. I see the same dynamic on reviews talking about Game of Thrones: "ah yes but you only read to page 2300. Had you read all 5000 pages, you would have realised that it is really good." :-)

This is meant to be a lighthearted comment, though - I am not contending you are wrong, Keith (in particular because you did not even address your comment to me...). It's just that, if you have to read more than 1/3rds into a a 3000-page oeuvre before it gets good, in my view the expository phase is a bit too long.


Campbell I'm only 200 pages in and I can already see a point (perhaps not *the* point, but why must there only be 1 point?) of the book. Science is interesting and the history of Science and how it came to exist is equally, if not more, interesting.


Mark Hebwood Campbell wrote: "I'm only 200 pages in and I can already see a point (perhaps not *the* point, but why must there only be 1 point?) of the book. Science is interesting and the history of Science and how it came to ..."

Yes, I could not agree more with you on this - the history of science is fascinating, especially in England at the time of the Restoration. But if I want to know about this (and I do), I will turn to scholarly monographs examining these developments (and I did), rather than to a disjointed narrative that looks at the time through a kaleidoscope (if we can agree that is what Neal does).

Neal's book is clearly not a scholarly treatise on 17th Century history of ideas. But so what is the point? I am not being sarcastic - I genuinely do not understand why this book was written.


Campbell Perhaps I should withhold judgement until I finish the book, but where's the fun in that? :)

Perhaps Mr Stephenson wanted to reach out to those who don't enjoy reading (supposedly) dry scientific non-fiction? Or perhaps he felt he just wanted to write it for his own amusement and, being an author with a successful track record, his publisher went among with him (much in the way that Doubleday let Asimov wrote whatever he felt like, happy to publish his whims in return for continued loyalty)?

Or perhaps some books, like life itself, have no objective "point" but rather the answer to the question "what is the point of this book?" can only be answered by the person asking the question. Who knows? I'm just sort-of free-form speculating wildly here (as I'm sure you can tell!). All I can say for sure, being only 200-odd pages in, is that I'm enjoying the journey and its means of conveyance and not overly worried about the destination.


message 8: by Mark (last edited Sep 09, 2015 01:06AM) (new) - rated it 2 stars

Mark Hebwood Perhaps I should withhold judgement until I finish the book, but where's the fun in that? :)

Absolutely! In particular as this has 1000 pages or so. We'd never get on with saying anything... :-)

Or perhaps he felt he just wanted to write it for his own amusement Ha ha he certainly did not write it for mine :-)

the answer to the question "what is the point of this book?" can only be answered by the person asking the question Ah. Good. None then. Next!

I'm enjoying the journey and its means of conveyance and not overly worried about the destination. Oh! There is the point! Found it and thanks for pointing (no pun) this out. I totally get it - enjoy the ride, and if you still like it on p1000, you can look forward to two (three, actually, plus the prequel) more tomes of this nature. And perhaps you still have time to read around the subject, as a friend of mine did. The time is fascinating, and I did enjoy parts of the book. Wait until you get to the minute descriptions of 17th C London - for a while I was looking at spaces in London with the eye of somebody living here in the 17th C. Enjoy!

P.S. - what I thought of the book, I expressed in my longish review... no reason you should read it but if you are interested what I really thought (but why would you :-), that would be the source. Cheers, Mark


Campbell Thanks for the interesting discussion Mark, I'm definitely interested to see your thoughts on it in more detail so I'll be sure to go and read your review :)


message 10: by C (new) - added it

C Cowell I can barely get through the first 100 pages. As someone who must picture scenarios in order to understand descriptions of any kind, I find your review exceedingly useful, thanks Bryan!
It will definitely be a feat if I complete that book.


message 11: by Jim (new)

Jim Campbell wrote:

that Doubleday let Asimov wrote whatever he felt like, happy to publish his whims in return for continued loyalty

I'd be surprised if Doubleday lost money on anything that the Good Doctor wrote.

Having tried (and given up on) this ramble, and knowing that Stephenson probably has some good ideas in there, I'd pay for an Asimovian synopsis - if not his outright rewrite.


message 12: by Patrick (new)

Patrick Malley Very well constructed review. Helpful! I never thought a book could be as out there as Cryptonomicon.
There you go.
I bought this book about 6 years ago. I'm on attempt 5 now I would say. My issue is(nothing to do with the book itself), is I always start from the beginning each time. i don't trust myself to remember each and detail. So, hopefully, this time!


 beyondzero Ok, now you make it sound a bit ponderous, but well, I guess it is. But I came here to say that your #1 is great advice. I might start with D.O.D.O. to really get the idea how fun this stuff can be FUN, then Cryptonomicon just starting with the idea that multiple lines/timeframes of narrative can be fun.


message 14: by Donna (new)

Donna Thanks for this. I have indeed read Cryptonomicon and it is one of my favorites. But its been about 15 years ago. My interest in this stems from some newly discovered "history" regarding the Rothschilds and the formation of the British East India company. Hiding in plain sight of course. Since this deals with financial entities of the time (and this new info is about how the bankers controlled the Royals even back then) I wanted to see if Stephenson had slyly slipped it into this novel. I loved Cryptonomicon but never really got into the rest of the Baroque cycle before. Perhaps this sparks a renewed interest.


Mark's endless quest I think this comment may scare some potential readers .It's just historical fiction. People can just take the occasional peek at Wikipedia while they'r reading this novel ;)


back to top