Consider Phlebas
Expectation management is key to enjoyment of a book — I liked Lawrence Watt-Evans’ Ethshar books as well as I did because I expected little out of them, and I was disappointed with Supreme because I expected more out of it than it delivered. So when I read Iain M. Banks’ Consider Phlebas, I tried to keep in mind that it’s not considered to be his best book — the general advice I hear is that you can start with Use of Weapons if you want to get the high points of his Culture novels, but Consider Phlebas is where you should start if you’re going for completeness.
And I’m quite the completist, so that’s where I started. Consider Phlebas is a blend of Nivenesque BDO exploration, far-future interplanetary war, and generic techtopia. It’s largely successful in that blending, but feels a bit too obviously sourced. There’s no shockingly new SFnal concepts in the novel; it’s all familiar stuff — stirred up and mixed around, to be sure, but still familiar.
Admittedly, the same could be said of a lot of SF. But when the background is just background, the personal level of the story needs to make up for it. Lois Bujold’s Barrayaran universe may not be startlingly original (though it’s still more novel than Banks’ universe), but the personal level is phenomenal. Unfortunately, Banks’ characters are cardboard and forgettable. Their relationships are shallow, their personalities thin, and I didn’t care much about their fates. Heck, I had trouble remembering which one was which, at times.
And since I’m pointing out faults, I might as well mention a rather odd problem I had with the book: I could never get spatial relationships straight from Banks’ descriptions. For instance, in one scene, a character is hanging onto the extended landing-ramp of a shuttle, and trying to pull himself inside. This is a tense action scene that goes on for some pages, and I had no idea what the hell was going on, because I couldn’t make the geometry in my mental picture correspond in any way to the actions that Banks described. When the character finally got inside the shuttle safely, I had no idea how he got there. This wasn’t an isolated incident, either — almost every scene where spatial relationships mattered gave me the same problem. Very bizarre.
But this is coming off to be a more negative review than it should be. I liked this book, and it kept me reading at a quick pace. It’s a very fine book, really — but there was nothing special about it, nothing to make me want to give the book to other people and tell them to read it. I hold out every reasonable hope, though, that Use of Weapons will be better.
Comments
For what it’s worth, I think Use of Weapons is head and shoulders above Consider Phlebas. I’ve read four Culture books so far (Look to Windward and Player of Games are the other two), and I’d say Consider Phlebas probably ranks as the weakest. Though, as you say, it’s still decent.
I read Use of Weapons first, and it’s really good stuff—in fact, I think it’s improved as it’s sunk in and sort of marinated in the back of my head. If you’re looking for a Bujoldian type of personal relationship stuff, you’re probably never going to find it in Banks. And Use of Weapons is pretty dark. But very good. (and it has a great little embedded anecdote with which I managed to totally gross out my Wills & Trusts professor following the class discussion on Simultaneous Death and Survivor’s Statutes, which was an added bonus).
So I just went to B&N to blow a gift certificate, and ended up buying Excession and Inversions. Anyone want to weigh in with whether or not it’s important to read the Culture novels in any particular order?
(And man, I can’t believe how expensive mass-market paperbacks are. Yeesh.)
Of the ones I’ve read, I think the only ones that really need to be read in the right order are Phlebas and Look to Windward (the second of which didn’t impress me as much as it impressed everyone else.)
Excession is clearly in the backdrop of Phlebas but reading it out of sequence didn’t hinder me. Player of Games likeiwse didn’t need any prior information, as it was the first one I read.
Relatedly: Is there a pronunciation for “Phlebas” that doesn’t sound either affected or stupid? I think the secondary reason I’d never recommend this book is that I wouldn’t want to pronounce the title.
Well, I always pronounce “Phlebas” to myself as “FLAY-bus”, but I’ve never yet had to say it out loud to anyone else, and have no idea if that’s correct.
And I’m mostly with Novak as far as Look to Windward. I thought it was good, but not “Spectacular! Spectacular!”.
P.S. did you fix my attempt to use tags manually, or did they just not get rendered at first?
I fixed ‘em, and changed the code so em tags should work properly in the future.
Inversions is sort of stealth-Culture and, as such, lacks the shiny SF tone of the overt Culture books.
So if you want SF fun, Excession should be next.
(I mentally say “Phelbas” as “FLEA-bass.” But I am terrible at pronunciation.)
And now I’m picturing a restaurant where you can order Chilean Phlebas. Thanks, Kate.
(And now the cite tag works. Sheesh, you people— can’t you just use italics like normal people?)
Eliot pronounces it “FLEA-bass” too (the recording, in several formats, is at http://town.hall.org/Archives/radio/IMS/HarperAudio/011894_harp_ITH.html)