Dozois, Gardner: The New Space Opera
The New Space Opera (2007)
Edited by: Gardner Dozois and Jonathan Strahan
Genre: Short Stories/Science Fiction
Pages: 517 (Trade Paperback)
Disclaimer: won in giveaway from publisher
I got this book early last year in a giveaway from Eos Books. The Hugos for 2007 had just been announced, and Eos was giving away copies of The New Space Opera to celebrate having two of their stories nominated. I entered and ended up with a copy. And of course, I did what I always do and set it on the shelf.
But since I've been on an SF kick lately, I really wanted to get this title under my belt. I also wanted to examine the anthology as a whole, because The New Space Opera 2 is now available, and while it showcases authors I enjoy reading, I wanted to see how this anthology was handled before I spent any money on it. For the record, now that I'm done with volume one, I will be picking up volume 2 at a future date.
The premise: with anthologies, I always laugh when I force myself to define a "premise" but I will say that the stories--all original to the anthology--are based on upon the premise that space opera, as a genre, has evolved from its roots and become something rather different, maybe harder to define, and each of these stories illustrates that. The editors didn't want to pigeon hole readers into a specific definition of what "new space opera" is, and instead let the readers try and figure it out for themselves, based on the stories in the anthology.
Review style: for this anthology, I really have no interest in sitting down and discussing each individual story (there's 18!), so I'm grouping each story into categories with perhaps a sentence or two commentary for each. No spoilers here, just generalities and story premises.
A note on links: if you see the author's name and it's a link, note this: if you want the author's personal webpage or blog, click on his/her name in the "list of contributors." If you want to see all the works I've reviewed of a specific author, then click their name when I discuss their specific story. Obviously, in this case, not every author's name will be linked, as in some cases, this is the first time I've read said author. Clear as mud? Good!
List of Contributors
Gwyneth Jones
Ian McDonald
Robert Reed
Paul J. McAuley
Greg Egan
Kage Baker
Peter F. Hamilton
Ken Macleod
Tony Daniel
James Patrick Kelly
Alastair Reynolds
Mary Rosenblum
Stephen Baxter
Robert Silverberg
Gregory Benford
Walter Jon Williams
Nancy Kress
Dan Simmons
One thing I want to get out of the way: I didn't feel there were any BAD stories. There were stories I didn't like in the slightest, stories I felt didn't fit any kind of definition of space opera even if you beat them with a stick, and stories that I really wanted to skip over. But as far as the writing goes? None of it was bad. All of it competent (gee, one would HOPE for that in a published anthology). Just some stories were more successful than others. And most of these stories, I felt, should be space "arias" rather than operas, because operas are big, epic, and include several acts. In my mind (that of a former classical voice major), the term "space opera" and "short story" don't really fit together. Hence my little joke: "space aria." :) Moving on:
Best story of the anthology, for me, was Mary Rosenblum's "Splinters of Glass" -- a rather modern re-telling of the Snow Queen fairy tale, this is a chase scene that takes place on the moon Europa, with a bit of love story at its center. This is not, by any stretch of my imagination, a space opera or even an aria, but it's a great story. Solid tension with characters you root for, and Rosenblum's weaving of the fairy tale is just absolutely lovely. It made me want to read more of her work, and that's saying something, since I've already read her novel Horizons.
Another story that got me more interested in its author was Alastair Reynolds's "Minla's Flowers." It didn't start out so hot for me. In fact, I was bored with the tale pretty quickly, and that was in part due to the fact I knew the story was linked to one I haven't read "Merlin's Gun." That said, once the tale picked up, I found myself fascinated by the direction of the story and the morality and ethics involved. By the end, I decided to pick up my copy of Revelation Space and move it to the stop of my reading pile. I've heard wonderful things about Reynolds as an author, but just haven't had the courage to really sit down and give him a try. I think I'm ready now.
Greg Egan's Hugo-nominated "Glory" also had me interested in following up on more of the author's work. The very beginning of the story bored me to tears, because there were no characters to experience the action through, but once the characters were introduced, I was compelled and interested. The story ending was a little abrupt, and if you're not paying attention, you're going to miss what really happens after the story's over, but I found it quite enjoyable and intend on picking up more of Egan's work when I can.
Also enjoyable were the following: Dan Simmons's "Muse of Fire" (loved the Shakespearean plays driving the tale, and I especially loved how the very last play was performed), Nancy Kress's "Art of War" (though I found myself wanting more from the characters and the end), and Robert Silverberg's "The Emperor and the Maula" (surprisingly! I pretty much have disliked every Silverberg story I've read).
Among the "I liked it but found myself really confused by the world-building" falls Gwyneth Jones's "Saving Tiamaat," and Ian McDonald's "Verthandi's Ring." I've heard that the Jones story is part of a universe she's already written in, so that might explain my confusion there. With McDonald, well, he just has a way of throwing me for giant loops and making me slow down so I can understand what the hell is happening.
In the "I liked it okay" category, we have Paul J. McAuley's "Winning Peace" (nothing wrong with this, but it didn't stand out one way or the other in terms of characterization or story, but the writing was solid), and Tony Daniel's "The Valley of the Gardens" (I felt the two storylines had trouble coming together by the end, though there was certainly beauty in each individual storyline), and Stephen Baxter's "Remembrance" (though I keep forgetting what the story is about when I simply look at the title--ironic, huh? I have to flip to the story to refresh my memory of it!).
Stories I just didn't care for were Robert Reed's "Hatch" (his work is really hit-and-miss with me anyway, more often miss, and it's obviously a part of a much larger series (of books/shorts) he's got going on and is pretty inconsequential and pointless for someone who DOESN'T READ THAT SERIES), Peter F. Hamilton's "Blessed by an Angel" (really jumpy in terms of POV and the end could've hinted a little stronger in terms of what we were supposed to walk away with, though I think I know), Ken Macleod's "Who's Afraid of Wolf 359?" (no offense to the author, but this got nominated for the Hugo? Really? I found the ending rushed and I didn't care about anything, let alone the narrator), James Patrick Kelly's "Dividing the Sustain" (this disappointed me, as I've never read his work before and was really looking forward to it. This read to me, probably in part due to the one character having a second head) like one of those kind of stories that ABC would've produced for their short-lived Masters of Science Fiction series, which I didn't care for in the slightest. Also, I'm not sure what Kelly was trying to say about homosexuality, and I'm not sure I want to know), and Gregory Benford's "The Worm Turns" (there were scenes that read like a chick-lit novel in space. I'm not kidding. It kind of pissed me off, given how much chick-lit and urban fantasy (or anything that has a sexually-aware heroine) gets little to no respect, and here's a guy doing the same thing, but is he getting any flack? Maybe he is, but I just haven't found it yet).
Stories that I really wanted to STOP READING but didn't because I'm a GLUTTON FOR PUNISHMENT were Kage Baker's "Maelstrom" (this wasn't written badly, but I was in no mood for anything tongue-in-cheek and clever and was very, very bored by the story--the end, however, was surprisingly fitting and I appreciated that. Also, this is the second Baker story I've read that takes place in something she's already created, and I'd really like to read a short story by her that COMPLETELY STANDS ALONE, even though this specific story does stand on its own two feet, I'll give it that) and Walter Jon Williams's "Send Them Flowers" (I was just bored. So very, very bored).
My Rating
Buy the Paperback: and by that I mean the mass-market, which is all you'll really find in stores anyway, unless you're going through Amazon. It's a good anthology overall, and while I feel that only half of these stories might fit any sort of definition for space opera, new or old, I do feel that whatever your story preferences, you're probably going to like more stories than not. IF, and only IF, you are a fan of 1) space opera and 2) space-based and planet-based SF in general. The stories in this anthology cover a large spectrum in terms of taste, and my faves might be someone else's hates and vise-versa. For my buck, the stories that make this anthology worth the cash are the Mary Rosenblum, Alastair Reynolds, Greg Egan, Dan Simmons, Nancy Kress, and Robert Silverberg. However, depending on your SF tastes, your mileage may vary. I liked this volume enough that I'm going to pick up the second volume, and if I have one complaint about the anthology as a whole, it's this: while all the stories are original to THIS anthology, some are written in the author's existing universes. In some cases, the author pulls off a story that works as a stand-alone, but in other cases, the author doesn't even try and that gets frustrating: knowing that you're reading something that you know you don't have the big picture on since you haven't read the related work. At least only a handful of stories do this. For the most part, it's worth the cash, and I applaud the editors for publishing (much like Pyr does with its Fast Forward anthologies) an anthology of ORIGINAL work, rather than a bunch of reprints.
Cover Commentary: it's bright and shiny and colorful, but I keep forgetting it's a Stephen Martiniere until I see his name on the back of the cover. But it's bright and shiny and colorful, and that's all the really matters, because it's eye-catching and fits the subject matter perfectly.
Next up: A Song in Stone by Walter H. Hunt