What is Reamde? It starts by sketching out the idea that a World of Warcraft-like game can be used as a hub for real-world economic transactions, investing the pretend battles with actual human consequences. Then it becomes something different, with spy novel and crime novel overtones. Some of the action takes place inside a computer game, but not in a sci-fi way -- it's real people using a game as a tool in a realistic way. There is no magic, no science that doesn't actually exist right now (except for maybe an unrealistically advanced algorithm for modeling geology, a gag that is not essential to the plot), and no interaction with historical figures. And yet I think this is among Stephenson's most genre-specific works -- it is a Tolkein questing novel.
Because, when you think about it, what is The Lord of the Rings about? (Bear with me here -- I haven't read that series in over 30 years and I only watched one of the movies and part of another on a plane.) On one level, sure, it's about a ring and a dragon and magic. On another level, it is just about a diverse group with little in common other than a suddenly urgent goal. So the hobbits and the warrior men and the elf and the dwarf and the wizard form a fellowship to throw the magic ring into the fire mountain, thereby keeping the orcs from overrunning the world. And Reamde is basically the same story -- the tale of a hobbit and some warriors from antagonistic tribes and an ogre and an elf and a fairy and a wizard fighting against a bad wizard and his orc army, except that instead of magic and middle earth, they're recognizable people in a recognizable world.
Reamde, incidentally, is the third questing novel I've read in the last couple of months, having been through Lev Grossman's The Magicians (recommended) and The Magician King (less recommended). Those books, it seems to me, share Reamde's goal of modernizing the questing novel, but in a different way. Unlike Stephenson, Grossman overtly adopts the magical trappings and tropes of the Tolkein-Harry Potter tradition, but invests them with a meta self-consciousness and an early- postadolescent petulance. Reamde is Tolkein for people who don't believe in magic; The Magicians is Garden State for people who do.
In other words, I just wrote about Neil Stephenson, Tolkein, and magicians. I am exhausted by my nerdness.
"<span>It starts by sketching out the idea that a World of Warcraft-like game can be used as a hub for real-world economic transactions, investing the pretend battles with actual human consequences."</span>
ReplyDeleteInteresting..reminds me of Charlie Stross' Halting State, which I thought was an excellent take on the idea.
(Bear with me here -- I haven't read that series in over 30 years and I only watched one of the movies and part of another on a plane.)
ReplyDeleteI haven't read any of the books referenced outside of Tolkein, but I was struck by the quote above because I often re-read books in much the same way that I would re-watch favorite movies or TV shows. Sometimes its a stand alone want and sometimes its spurred on by a new movie or book. For example, I did go back and read the Tolkein books and <span>Watchmen</span> before I watched the respective movies, I read Homer before I read Mason's <span>The Lost Books of The Odyssey</span>, I read <span>The Catcher in the Rye</span> when Salinger past away, etc. Am I alone?
As I can't stop saying to Spacewoman, I hate reruns. I've rewatched Deadwood, Freaks & Geeks, Undeclared, and the Wire (in progress), and I'll occasionally rewatch episodes of Parks & Recreation. There are a few movies I'll watch more than once, but unless forced to watch by my kids, I usually have to wait until I've already mostly forgotten them. I've reread All the King's Men, Cryptonomicon, Game of Thrones (just the first book), and, I think, Life of Pi, though I'm not positive about that one. I've quit in the middle of re-reads of books I absolutely loved -- Midnight's Children, Catch-22, Sophie's Choice. I just rarely get as much out of something the second time through.
ReplyDeleteThe way it works in the book is completely believable. In fact, the way it works in the book kind of makes it seem like this is already happening and has been happening for a long time, except that the game makers have tried to stifle it.
ReplyDeleteThere are some books filled with familiar characters and enjoyable settings, which I will return to from time to time just for the warm comfort of it. There are other books filled with delightful twists, which surprise and delight me the first time. I don't re-read the second kind, because it would be impossible to relive the surprise and delight.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I'll make an exception for a book that really caught me off-guard, and I'll re-read it to see if I can pick up clues that I missed the first time. Even then, I'm reading to measure myself and the author, more than I'm reading for pleasure.