Peter F. Hamilton

[Grunkins]

Good to hear it Grunkins
I have to go back and read at least the last part of that one to get it back in my head before getting into the third one (Evolutionary). It's a bit of a daunting prospect but I'll get around to it one of these days

I hate to say it, but I'm putting the book down . I'm 400-something pages into it and it's feeling "chorey" to me.

My TBR stack is too huge to spend as long as it will take to get through a 2k page epic if it isn't fully sucking me in. I gave it a good go. And that's not to say I won't go back to it at some point in the future.

I do have a few Alaister Reynolds books in my stacks, and they look very appealing. I'll likely hit those soon.

 

[Vertigo]

Ah well, 'tis true at 400 pages you have certainly give it a good run. Horses for courses and all that

 

[williamjm]

**BUMP** (would like to see a Peter Hamilton link on front page)

A few questions:
1. Should I read Pandora's Star and Judas Unchained before I start the Void trilogy?
2. Is the Void trilogy as good as Night's Dawn?

1 - As other have said, you should read the Commonwealth books first, since many characters reappear in the Void book (incidentally, I did think it was a bit excessive how many characters appear in both considering there's almost a millennia between them).

2 - I like the Night's Dawn, Commonwealth and Void books. It's difficult to say which is best, they have different strengths and weaknesses. Although I really like Night's Dawn the last book was disappointing, particularly the ending. The Commonwealth Saga is probably the most consistent of Hamilton's big series, although again the second book isn't quite as good as the first. The Void trilogy is split into two plotlines, I thought the pseudo-Epic Fantasy of the plotline set inside the Void was excellent, but the Space Opera plotline outside the Void wasn't as good as his previous attempts at Space Opera.

Ironically, I seem to have read the collection A Second Chance at Eden first, then read the 900+ page novel Fallen Dragon and, while it wasn't terrible, I knew I'd never read it again, got rid of it, and will probably never read any other Hamilton novel - but may pick up that second collection.

But I am definitely biased in favor of shorter lengths. And weird.

For an author infamous for his long books (I remember Ken Macleod proposing that the Hamilton should be the unit of measurement for book length, with one Hamilton equal to 1000 pages), I think he has written some good short fiction. A Second Chance at Eden has quite a few good shorts (although maybe nothing exceptional), and I really liked his novella Watching Trees Grow which packs in more plot and world-building than most authors manage in full-length novels.

I'm waiting for the paperback for Manhattan In Reverse - since I've already read some of the stories in it (such as the aforementioned Watching Trees Grow), I didn't think the hardback was good value for money.