I suspect you’re picking up on the same thing that drethelin did: the heavy exposition dump that comes right at the beginning.
Some of that can and will be smoothed out, but yeah, the interest at the beginning is mostly supposed to come from the setting and the culture. So the reason I actually suggested the story is not for you was your offhand reference to “generic sci-fi/space opera setting.” If you’re sick of sci-fi and space opera conventions—if you’re not the kind of reader who’s approaching the set-up with some degree of interest just because, “cool, it’s Mars, let’s find out how things work here, hunh, the Sleepers, what are they, they’re not really dragons are they, that would be stupid—whoa, what’s happening here, was that telepathy-via-bacteria? Gonna have to see how that’s handled before I decide what to think of it...”
If you’re not that kind of reader, then the story probably isn’t for you.
I suspect you’re picking up on the same thing that drethelin did: the heavy exposition dump that comes right at the beginning.
That sounds right.
If you’re sick of sci-fi and space opera conventions...
Hmm… yes and no.
I’m perfectly willing to read/watch/play space opera if it’s executed well. For example, despite having heard it praised for long time, I never got around watching Firefly until a few months back. When I finally did, I loved it. Also, right now I’m playing a character in a game that’s set in the Warhammer 40,000 universe, and finding it enjoyable. Heck, I’ve been known to still buy the occasional Star Wars novel.
So it’s not like I’d get an instant allergy from anything space opera-ish. But at the same time, you’re right in that I don’t have an intrinsic interest in exploring the details of just any space opera setting (or just any fantasy setting, for that matter) - I’ve seen enough of them that most of them tend to register as “just the same old”. Telepathy-via-bacteria is a neat and pretty original idea, but by itself minor enough detail that it doesn’t make the entire setting interesting. Being shown that the setting incorporates a dozen (or even half a dozen) other ideas on the same level of neatness and originality would be another matter. Alastair Reynolds’ Revelation Space setting strikes me as fresh and original, even if one might reasonably argue that he doesn’t really have that many original ideas in his world. It’s all in how you combine them.
I don’t count a setting registering as “just the same old” (JTSO) as a minus by itself, and I can grow attached even to a rather generic setting if the characters or the writing is good enough, but it’s not a plus either. On the other hand, even though a setting being JTSO isn’t a minus by itself, it’s often a warning sign. There are more mediocre sci-fi authors than great ones, and mediocre sci-fi authors often tend to have rather generic-feeling settings. So if I see a story start with what seems like a generic setting, and it isn’t accompanied by clearly exceptional writing, my instinct tends to be to assume that this is a mediocre work. I think my judgement might have been subconsciously influenced by that as well.
I suspect you’re picking up on the same thing that drethelin did: the heavy exposition dump that comes right at the beginning.
Some of that can and will be smoothed out, but yeah, the interest at the beginning is mostly supposed to come from the setting and the culture. So the reason I actually suggested the story is not for you was your offhand reference to “generic sci-fi/space opera setting.” If you’re sick of sci-fi and space opera conventions—if you’re not the kind of reader who’s approaching the set-up with some degree of interest just because, “cool, it’s Mars, let’s find out how things work here, hunh, the Sleepers, what are they, they’re not really dragons are they, that would be stupid—whoa, what’s happening here, was that telepathy-via-bacteria? Gonna have to see how that’s handled before I decide what to think of it...”
If you’re not that kind of reader, then the story probably isn’t for you.
That sounds right.
Hmm… yes and no.
I’m perfectly willing to read/watch/play space opera if it’s executed well. For example, despite having heard it praised for long time, I never got around watching Firefly until a few months back. When I finally did, I loved it. Also, right now I’m playing a character in a game that’s set in the Warhammer 40,000 universe, and finding it enjoyable. Heck, I’ve been known to still buy the occasional Star Wars novel.
So it’s not like I’d get an instant allergy from anything space opera-ish. But at the same time, you’re right in that I don’t have an intrinsic interest in exploring the details of just any space opera setting (or just any fantasy setting, for that matter) - I’ve seen enough of them that most of them tend to register as “just the same old”. Telepathy-via-bacteria is a neat and pretty original idea, but by itself minor enough detail that it doesn’t make the entire setting interesting. Being shown that the setting incorporates a dozen (or even half a dozen) other ideas on the same level of neatness and originality would be another matter. Alastair Reynolds’ Revelation Space setting strikes me as fresh and original, even if one might reasonably argue that he doesn’t really have that many original ideas in his world. It’s all in how you combine them.
I don’t count a setting registering as “just the same old” (JTSO) as a minus by itself, and I can grow attached even to a rather generic setting if the characters or the writing is good enough, but it’s not a plus either. On the other hand, even though a setting being JTSO isn’t a minus by itself, it’s often a warning sign. There are more mediocre sci-fi authors than great ones, and mediocre sci-fi authors often tend to have rather generic-feeling settings. So if I see a story start with what seems like a generic setting, and it isn’t accompanied by clearly exceptional writing, my instinct tends to be to assume that this is a mediocre work. I think my judgement might have been subconsciously influenced by that as well.