Beckett, Bernard: Genesis
Genesis (2009)
Written by: Bernard Beckett
Genre: Science Fiction
Pages: 150
I knew nothing of this book when I saw it on the bookshelf in the store. What drew me was the smallness of the hardcover and the really intriguing cover art. I glanced at the description, which didn't push me one way or the other in terms of buying it, but I did know that if I was going to buy it, I was going to get it as cheap as possible. After all, it's a tiny hardcover that's only 150 pages.
This book is deceptively difficult to review. So much so that when I tried to review it, I decided I couldn't wrap my head around what I wanted to say, so I read it again. Mind you, I didn't read it twice because it was such an awesome book I felt compelled to. I read it twice in order to seek understanding, to find the clues I missed the first time, and to really understand the structure of the book and why Beckett does what he does. So this review is based on back-to-back readings and a helluva lot of thought, which is appropriate, given the philosophical nature of the text.
The premise: Anaximander has spent the last four years of her life preparing for the grueling entrance exam to the Academy, the governing body of her land. She's chosen as her focus the life of Adam Forde, her long-dead hero; Adam was the driving force that broke down the standards of the Republic by simply saving the life of a young girl, and his actions inspired a nation. During Anax's exam, she realizes there's more to Adam's story than she ever knew, and learning these secrets inspires her to question who and what she is, and whether or not she truly wants to be a part of the Academy.
Review style: reverting back to my stream-of-conscious style, because sorting this book out in my head pretty much requires it. THERE ARE MASSIVE SPOILERS BEHIND THE CUT. If you don't want to be spoiled, simply jump to the "My Rating" portion of the review.
I figured out pretty quickly that there would be a TWIST to this book. The premise is too ridiculously simple, and rather boring to be honest, and the prose and story that follows is quiet, all telling and no real narrative. In order for this book to have any kind of effect on the reader, it was going to have to shock the reader by the end, and it does exactly that.
But that, actually, is the problem I have with the whole book. In order for twist endings to work, we have to firmly believe and know what's going on NOW so that when we get the twist, we realize things were never that way at all. When we get the twist, we should be able to go back through the story and catch all the clues we missed and realize just how clever the twist really is.
Beckett only fulfills half of this bargain. The twist that all of the characters--Anax, Pericles, the Examiners--are actually androids in the shape of orangutans, the offspring of Art, is actually done very well. Beckett is very careful in his descriptions of his characters, never tipping his hand to reveal that the characters we're reading about aren't even human. Again, it is done very well, and that's really the only satisfying part of the twist.
Everything else raises questions, because there's questions as to just what kind of society Anax currently lives in, and why, exactly, Adam Forde is considered such a hero. These questions make the twist, well, frustrating, and I'll explain why. And I'll go ahead and preface this whole thing with the acknowledgment that it may be the fault is my own rather than the author's, but bear with me, because based on the reviews I've seen on Amazon, I think other readers were confused as well.
The Republic: I get that. The history is explained well, and I understand the events leading up to its formation. I understand why Adam Forde made the decisions he did that got him arrested, and why he was a hero in the eyes of HUMANITY. The reason for his prison sentence also made a lot of sense, because while the government can't kill him, sticking him with an AI that could potentially go ape-shit (pun intended) and kill him is the best way to get rid of the man, because then it'd be an accident.
I also understand how Adam's interactions with Art, the AI, shaped Art's mind, consciousness, and programming. I have no trouble understanding that Art, in many ways, became Adam. Where I balk is the whole transference of the idea that happened at the moment of Adam's death at the hands of Art. The book stresses that the transference of the Idea didn't happen until the murder, but I disagree. Art became Adam long before the murder, and what happened when Art strangled Adam was simply the acknowledgment that yes, Art was truly conscious and making his own decisions in order to survive and that yes, Adam knew it and Art knew he knew it. At that moment, Art was no better than a human. His actions reflect Adam's at the watchtower, in which both characters murdered their friend/colleague for what they believe in.
Now, don't get me wrong, I like how the Idea is seen as an external virus, and I like that parallel to the plague that wiped out the rest of the world. In my second read, I almost wondered if, indeed, Adam had been infected with something when he saved that girl, and so at the point of the murder, that something infected Art. Call it the Idea or whatever, it'd made sense. But I don't think that's the case.
The problem is that I still can't grasp who Adam is to the ORANGS, not the humans. And for that matter, who is Art? Obviously, through Art and Adam's endless conversations, perhaps Adam represents ignorance and belligerence of humanity that refuses to accept life on any other terms but its own. That seems to be what the book suggests to be the historical standard. However, that doesn't tell me what Anax's controversial view is, and because I don't how Art is really considered save for being the sire of them all, I don't know how the Orangs view Art, except, perhaps, as something sacred, which is why the truth of his actions must be concealed.
But if that's so important, showing the truth of his actions to anyone, even someone infected by the Idea, is pointless. I get the impression that candidates like Anax had not even begun to reach the point of infection, where they will heap destruction upon their people, so showing them the truth is essentially signing their death warrant. Also, who is Anax truly a product of? Who is she meant to represent? Adam or Art? Or, because the idea that inspired Adam in turn inspired Art, both?
That may be. But here's what worries me when all of the questioning is said and done: Anax is murdered at the hands of Pericles in order to contain the Idea, to contain the virus so that it does infect others and disturb the peace of society. So is the author trying to tell me that thinking outside the socially acceptable standard of history is a BAD THING, and those that do should be put to death for it? Is the author trying to tell me and all of his other readers that thinking outside of the box is a horrible thing and we should never do it? Or is the author trying to put a finer point on the issue by saying that radical thinkers lead to revolution, which leads to death, and therefore must be contained?
After reading this book twice and considering my reaction to the text, I want to say that the answers are all there, even though the author makes you work to figure out exactly what he means. No doubt, the author is intelligent: the prose is crisp and clean, and even someone who hasn't studied philosophy (like me) can recognize the plays and allusions on philosophy itself (a character named PLATO created a REPUBLIC; the characters have names from classic Greek history and philosophy). Where it gets tricky is that not every allusion seems to add up: I did a cursory search on the internet on the names of Anaximander and Pericles, just to see if I could gain insight into the characters based on the real peoples' history, but it didn't quite add up the way I was hoping. No doubt, I learned something, but for as intelligent and clever as this text is, I get the impression the allusions don't wholly add up. Someone who's well-versed in Classical history as well as philosophy can perhaps shed better light on this subject, so if you're one of those people, read the book and let me know.
Some other things that I admired: I liked the use of the Biblical creation story and how it relates to this book, with the choice of the name Adam (because in truth, he's more the father of AI than Art, because his interactions with Art created the AI that created the characters in the book) and how Art's actions are considered the Original Sin. I liked how Beckett seems to play with the classical Plato's Republic to create his futuristic fictional one, even though I don't know near enough about the original to truly appreciate the comparisons.
Things that bothered me were the fact that while the Examiners explained NO ONE is ever accepted into the Academy, I got the impression that other students, aside from those fascinated by the Legend of Adam, also underwent examinations. The purpose of those examinations I'm not sure about, other than to ensure that their people are staying in line, thinking what they're supposed to, and not speaking any heresy that would get them killed. Of course, no one is accepted into the Academy, but no one knows that. Though, that raises the question that if Pericles is only five years older than Anaximander, how did he come to work for the Academy?
At any rate, I figure those that have tutors like Pericles are the red flags, though I would say the subject matter of Adam Forde would be a flag in and of itself. Those students are encouraged to speak the heresy that's already fermenting in their minds, and once that damage is complete, they're shown the truth and killed for the knowledge.
Y'all, this bugs me. It bugs me a lot. It's creepy and cool in that it turns the utopia into a dystopia, but the lasting message of not thinking outside the box, to accept the state's/government's/authority's version of TRUTH rubs me to the wrong way. Maybe that makes me a revolutionary, and if I were a character in this world, I'd be dead in a heartbeat.
But more disconcerting is the fact that Bernard Beckett is a children's writer in New Zealand, and this particular text has won two awards for Children/YA novels. Now, while this book doesn't appear to be marketed as YA in the US, it really makes me wonder: does the author truly want to inspire children to not think outside the box? Surely, I applaud the fact that this book makes you sit down and think and reason your way through the text, but the final act, the final scene, with Anax dying for doing the very thing the authorities encouraged her to do... there's no vindication, no hope for revenge, no sense that the authorities will ever do anything to change their ways. If you were a young person reading this book, what would it teach you?
That's what worries me.
My Rating
Buy the Paperback: or find the hardcover really cheap, cause it's not worth the $20.00 price tag. However, this is a rare book that makes you think, and while other reviews have stated that there's nothing original about the ideas or world-building presented in this novel, I'd argue that's not the point. The point is the ultimate message and the journey that you as a reader has to take to get there. It's an intelligent book, and whether or not the final message leaves you with a sick feeling in your stomach like it did mine, I think the journey is worth it. Hell, I had to read it twice to really absorb what was going on. The premise might sound a little boring, and the structure of an oral exam reeks of telling over showing, but the author shows a little creativity in how knowledge is revealed within the story, and again, the book's going to make you think, even if you get angry that you're having to think it through so much. I don't recommend speed-reading this one, and if you're familiar with philosophy, you may have fun with this, even if you find the debates a little familiar and boring. In truth, it's not a boring book: it's a smooth read that has you constantly wondering what's going on, because nothing is as simple as it appears. I will say I'm not sure, despite the fact it was written for children/YA, that I'd recommend this book to that age group (which might explain why, in the US, it's marketed in the adult SF/F section) simply because the final message is disturbing and not one that I'd want my own child coming away with. But that's me.
Cover Commentary: I bought this book for the cover (and its cute, small size), and that's all there is to it. I love the coloring, the images, and that odd flow of hair right at the edge that just screams for your attention. The cover itself is something of a hint for what's to come, and it's a clever hint at that.