I liked the second book for two reasons. One, it was much better plotted (the first book reaches it’s climax with about 150 pages to go). And two, there was a lot more of the girl, who really was the only interesting character in the book. The character has been done in genre millions of times (though I can’t think of any specific examples right now), so it was good to see her show up in mainstream.

The prose for both books was rough as cobblestones under a bicycle tire, but I don’t know whether that’s the fault of the author or the translator. And all the villains sounded exactly the same. Worst of all, the man who is actually the main protagonist is a Gary Sue if there ever was one (a journalist like the author who gets to sleep with every pretty woman in the book - hello, Ian Fleming).

But I did like the second one. A fast, simple airplane read with a couple of nice surprises. Plus Larsson writes much better fight scenes than Iain M. Banks.

I will not, however, be reading the third one. The sample chapter at the end of the second book resets that book’s victory, with villains escaping for the flimsiest of reasons. Plus I have no more long oplane rides in the near future. Pass.

But I didn’t like the book. For a number of reasons.

My biggest problem was my dislike of the protagonist. I’m sure I wasn’t supposed to like him, as the protag is fighting on the wrong side, but still, the book is an adventure story. If I don’t like the protag, I’m not going to care whether he wins or loses. And if I don’t care whether the protag wins or loses, why am I reading an adventure story? Especially one that’s twice as long as typical adventure fiction? It didn’t help when the protag blasted his way out of a refugee ship killing unknowable numbers of innocents in the process without blinking an eye, either, especially as the character wasn’t portrayed as particularly bloodthirsty anywhere else in the book.

I’ve read three books by Banks now. I really enjoyed parts of all of them, but none of them really satisfied me. Each one was just too detached for my taste. The worlds are marvelous, the writing generally superb, but ultimately? Meh.

Horribly so.

The conditions described are so post-apocalyptic they could almost be called SF. It’s not just that most of the Congolese have returned to pre-industrial conditions, but that they are being preyed upon by the remnants of the industrial world around them - their own elites, the various bush military organizations, and mining companies. An awful, bloody mess.

The idea of the anthology is simple. Gilgamesh has managed to get himself attached to a bar for eternity. Each story will feature the appearance of the bar at some place (and time) in Earth’s history (and future). My own story is titled Why The Vikings Had No Bars and features the All-Father, shapeshifting (of course), and too much aquavit.

Everyone else’s stories will of course be much more interesting.

Check it out through the link! (No cover art yet.)

At the Atlantic.

http://michaelaventrella.wordpress.com/