lilyn_g's review against another edition
3.0
The Watcher is a ‘soft’ piece of science fiction in which two people from cultures at extreme opposite ends of the technology spectrum. Tian’s tribe eschews even agriculture, sticking to a purely hunter-gatherer way of life. Mori’s people are anthropologists who are so technologically advanced that they have implants connecting them to a system-wide ‘cloud’. When things start to go horribly wrong, Mori and Tian join forces to save her people. This interaction – which had been strictly forbidden to Mori’s people in the past – is a difficult one for the both of them. They struggle to overcome it even as they race towards conflict.
I’ve said it before – philosophy in science fiction is not my thing. It’s probably because I’m very action-driven, and thinking deep thoughts takes me away from my happy spot in Death! Fights! Blood! Battles! Space Disaster! Anyways. However, The Watcher does raise some interesting points. Like: Does a refusal to break from an established traditions strangle any chance of a society truly living? They can survive, true enough, but can they live? There’s a line where someone says “We’d rather fight the same ‘x’ a thousand times rather than kill them in cold blood.” Is it worth it to stick to your peace-loving beliefs when it puts the safety of your community at risk? Finally, if you have technology that could change someone’s life for the better, but would fundamentally alter their society… should you do it?
As you can see, those are some questions that can spur hours of debates if you let them. (Albeit the last one is the one most people are probably familiar with if they’ve thought about time travel at any length.) So, yes, if you like philosophy, you’ll like The Watcher. You can tell the author put a lot of thought into every aspect of his story. There are several levels to the story including young desiring change versus the crafty old codgers.
Overall, I can say that even though it didn’t suit me, I can see where people would love the book. The Watcher is not a light read. Some of the cruelest aspects of humanity are at the forefront. So you’ll have your philosophy with a side of death (and more). There’s only one thing that stops me from strongly recommending the book to certain people at this point. It badly needs edited. Really, really badly. You have double quotes in place of apostrophes, and errors that look like changes were suggested but not fixed. Eventually you grow numb to it, but it doesn’t make a good first impression on the reader. It’s knocked it down an entire level on my rating scale.
Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book free from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
I’ve said it before – philosophy in science fiction is not my thing. It’s probably because I’m very action-driven, and thinking deep thoughts takes me away from my happy spot in Death! Fights! Blood! Battles! Space Disaster! Anyways. However, The Watcher does raise some interesting points. Like: Does a refusal to break from an established traditions strangle any chance of a society truly living? They can survive, true enough, but can they live? There’s a line where someone says “We’d rather fight the same ‘x’ a thousand times rather than kill them in cold blood.” Is it worth it to stick to your peace-loving beliefs when it puts the safety of your community at risk? Finally, if you have technology that could change someone’s life for the better, but would fundamentally alter their society… should you do it?
As you can see, those are some questions that can spur hours of debates if you let them. (Albeit the last one is the one most people are probably familiar with if they’ve thought about time travel at any length.) So, yes, if you like philosophy, you’ll like The Watcher. You can tell the author put a lot of thought into every aspect of his story. There are several levels to the story including young desiring change versus the crafty old codgers.
Overall, I can say that even though it didn’t suit me, I can see where people would love the book. The Watcher is not a light read. Some of the cruelest aspects of humanity are at the forefront. So you’ll have your philosophy with a side of death (and more). There’s only one thing that stops me from strongly recommending the book to certain people at this point. It badly needs edited. Really, really badly. You have double quotes in place of apostrophes, and errors that look like changes were suggested but not fixed. Eventually you grow numb to it, but it doesn’t make a good first impression on the reader. It’s knocked it down an entire level on my rating scale.
Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book free from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
More...