Dan Simmons and Hyperion

[Christopher Lee]

So I'm looking for opinions on Dan Simmons' novel Hyperion. From what I've read about him I was surprised to find he doesn't have a thread in the authors section.

First off, I'm not the most avid Science fiction reader, mostly fantasy and horror. But lately I've been interested in delving into some science fiction. I started reading Leviathan Wakes and quit because another book I'd been waiting on was released. But I plan to return to it eventually.

I've read positive things about Hyperion and just wanted to get some of your opinions on it. Thanks for your help!

 

[Ajid]

I very much enjoyed the first book of The Hyperion Cantos. We are taken through various individuals stories all with the feel of a slightly different Sci-Fi or Fantasy genre. The framing story was both intriguing and at times very gripping. The various worlds and factions of humanity are described incredibly well. I found most of the characters were wonderfully well developed and the locations, technology and ideas expressed exceptionally well. If you read this book you will need to read The Fall of Hyperion and my advice would be to have it ready immediately after, it really is one story in two halves.

The Fall of Hyperion tells the story from a different perspective, or maybe I should say we understand the perspective a little more. This deals much more with the galactic events as they are playing out. I enjoyed this but not as much as the first book. This started to fall into the realm of a more typical Sci-Fi book but there are some interesting ideas covered here aswell. Where the first book is based mostly on the Canterbury Tales this focuses much more on John Keats and his work.

Watch out for quite a few easter eggs and nodds to other great sci-fi writers hidden throughout the first two books.

Endymion and The Rise of Endymion I would suggest needs a thread of it's own to discuss but I would warn you these are very different books and by the time you reach the Rise of Endymion you get the distinct feeling that Simmons has reached a point where the publishers don't feel the need to proof read his work or don't have the guts to tell him to cut large sections of the story. I'm afraid there are huge sections of that book that are just waffle. Having said that I dod enjoy the last two books but I'd advise a long break between the first two and the second two and go into the second two expecting something very different.

I would say more. But some of the issues in the second two books are directly related to contradictions with the first books and how Simmons deals with these and I wouldn't want to give anything away.

 

[Fried Egg]

I rather enjoyed it. I felt that there wasn't much resolution at the end of it however and that one would need to read the sequel pretty soon afterwards. Having said that, I read this three years ago and still haven't read the sequel...

 

[Peter V]

I like the cantos as a whole but agree that the Endymion novels are very different in tone. In reality they are two novels in two parts so should always be read as pairs. I thoroughly enjoyed both 'halves' of the cantos and found the Endymion books extremely rewarding and "Rise" a real emotional rollercoaster. I know opinion is divided on this but I personally found it quite brilliant. Do not hesitate, read it.

 

[Gonk the Insane]

I loved Hyperion and The Fall of Hyperion, but I don't think I ever got round to the Endymion books (if I did they clearly didn't make the same impression). The first two, I thought, were great reads though and I still remember them fondly.

 

[Christopher Lee]

Well thanks, everyone! I'm sold. Going to start it after I finish Robert Mccammon's Swan Song.

 

[Emphyricist]

I liked the Hyperion books a lot, though I don't agree that they work as a novel on their own. They felt somewhat unfinished. Endymion finishes them, but the ending that it produces is distinctly unsatisfying. I've noted elsewhere that he combines two devices for ending a story which are common in SF (one is common in literature generally, one seems to be a popular feature of modern SF) and that I don't like either one. So basically, I don't like the destination, but the journey is a lot of fun.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Just finished Hyperion by Dan Simmons, and I'm left thinking: Huh?

This isn't a novel - it's a few short stories tacked together with no real overall narrative. It's hugely disappointing, and I really don't get what all the hype is about.

The story about Rachel was wonderful and deserving of a novel in itself - the detective's story about Keats was great, too, and promised some profound revelation.

In the end, though, there was none - no ending, and the different stories were never brought together and tied up.

Instead, we have some bizarre reference to the Wizard of Oz and that's it?

Considering just how long this book, I was expecting something, not nothing.

 

[Venusian Broon]

I'm a little more forgiving of it Brian, I think it manages to hold up the mystery of the Shrike quite well. And there is a revelation at the end, regarding its nature. Finally all the tales come together and we see why the pilgrims have been chosen and how they all connect...

Personally I didn't like the Noir bit - not fond of Noir.

...however I've finished The Fall of Hyperion that takes on the story from that point and everything is then explained. Actually I feel it's a bit too much of a feel-good ending, in a way, and the mystery is evaporated away by plot mechanics. Not sure they can walk away from a time-travelling god the way they do, but if you need some closure, I'd advise you read that.

EDIT: I think you have to think of these books as a paean to John Keats - he is of course referenced, hinted at (and even makes an appearance) throughout the book. And Keats' Hyperion was unfinished, so Dan Simmons is cheekily doing the same and leaving it 'unfinished'.

Also it clearly references Chaucers' Canterbury Tales and that does not have an ending either.

So with reference to these earlier works, I'm fine with the ending.

 

[Danny McG]

Enjoyed them all, must admit I got "lost in the waffle" several times and felt a bit of good editing might have helped.

The trouble with that happening is, fair enough, you then have a 'normal' story with a beginning, a middle and an end but sometimes, just sometimes, you lose the unique sparkle of a tale being told in an offbeat manner

 

[The Judge]

I enjoyed Hyperion thanks to the terrific world-building and interesting characters, even though I suffered a good deal of confusion regarding the plot and general history all the way through, because of the way the seven "pilgrims" tell their backstories to each other, though I appreciated why he used the story-within-a-story technique which I quite liked. I wasn't so forgiving of the multiple questions left unanswered at the end, though, as there seemed to be no resolution of anything, which left me a bit dissatisfied. (And I was wholly unimpressed by the unhealthy interest in John Keats, whose poetry is mostly too self-consciously hyper-poetical for my taste.)

Brian, I'd second VB's suggestion that you read The Fall of Hyperion, which initially entranced me and seemed, at first at least, to be an even better book. My thoughts at the time: I'm over half-way through already as I can hardly put it down, and so far it has everything – vivid description, imaginative worldbuilding, fierce action scenes, nuanced characters who are interesting and real, genuine pathos, drama, political intrigue, thought-provoking themes and ideas, suspense, and poetry, even if it is by Keats.

However, four days later: I finished The Fall of Hyperion in one long, late-night read, but with some dissatisfaction that grew over the last quarter of the book as things were wrapped up. Sentimentality, which had been kept well at bay up until then, came to the fore, as did some rather contrived and unrealistic episodes which to me short-changed the whole novel, not to mention what appeared to be gaping plot-holes. A disappointing ending to an otherwise very good book.

 

[ralphkern]

Hyperion is best viewed as a kind of primer for the main story, which commences in Fall.

Overall, this series probably ranks as one of my favourites - and one of the few I enjoy revisiting on a semi regular basis.

I very much hope Bradley Cooper manages to create his movie / series adaption.

 

[BAYLOR]

You might want to check out his book Prayers to Broken Stones .

 

[ratsy]

That's too bad Brian. As I've said, I loved it. Sure it was a little confusing, and was a mixture of short stories of the pilgrims paths there, but I liked that about it. It felt almost too smart at times, but the universe was so solid. It felt so real. I am 120 pages into Fall, but have put it aside while I read 4 other things, but will eventually meander back this month to finish it.

 

[urrutiap]

Earlier today i started reading Fall of Hyperion for the first time. but then I had to go back re-reading Hyperion to refresh my memory etc of what the heck is going on.

the only character backstory that I read was the priest's tale. Then I pretty much speed read skimmed the rest of the regular main story in the book.

Been a long long time since i read the first Hyperion book since i was in high school back in the mid 1990s. My opinion, Hyperion is one of the few good hard science fiction from 30 years ago or whatever.

These days you dont ever see any actual good new hard science fiction stuff

 

[hitmouse]

Earlier today i started reading Fall of Hyperion for the first time. but then I had to go back re-reading Hyperion to refresh my memory etc of what the heck is going on.

the only character backstory that I read was the priest's tale. Then I pretty much speed read skimmed the rest of the regular main story in the book.

Been a long long time since i read the first Hyperion book since i was in high school back in the mid 1990s. My opinion, Hyperion is one of the few good hard science fiction from 30 years ago or whatever.

These days you dont ever see any actual good new hard science fiction stuff

This is a good book but it is not really hard sf, and imho there has bee some pretty good hard sf written in the last 30 years, if that is what floats your boat.

 

[Rodders]

I read both the Hyperion and Endymion books several years ago and enjoyed them very much. Although I thought the Hyperion pair were the better novels, but I seem to more memories of the Endymion books. For some reason, I have never gone back for a re-read.

There are too many fantastical elements to consider them hard SF in my opinion. Matter transference, time travel, FTL etc, etc, etc.

 

[urrutiap]

well i think Hyperion is hard science fiction. Thats my opinion.

Newer stuff these days try too hard anyway

 

[BAYLOR]

well i think Hyperion is hard science fiction. Thats my opinion.

Newer stuff these days try too hard anyway

The Killing Star by Charles Pelligrino and George Zebrowski .

 

[Peter V]

In reply to urrutiap, hard SF is based around actual science, albeit often extrapolated (such as Stephen Baxter, Greg Bear) but Hyperion is classified as Space Opera (not a negative term by any means). If you like Simmons and Space Opera as a genre, check out Peter F Hamilton. Start with the Nights Dawn trilogy, which I thought was pretty impressive and then see how he has polished his "world building" with his Commonwealth series. Also I would check out the late Iain M Banks Culture novels. SO is arguably my preferred SF genre.