12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
But .... nothing happens in this book!, July 8, 2005
I first have to admit that I read Humans very quickly. As a sequel to a book I enjoyed, Sawyer's "Neanderthals", I was looking forward to it. At first, I was happy - present is Sawyer's sheer readability and his knack for suspense. The book is crafted in flashback mode, where Ponter, our favourite Neanderthal physicist, describes to his therapist how he's done something terrible (and certainly illegal, in both his own version of Earth and in ours). What is the crime? How does it affect our heroes? Keep reading the book to find out!
Sawyer's universe is well thought-out, including the alternate-reality Neanderthal version of Earth. He also brings back a number of our old favourites from "Neanderthals" - Mary the geneticist, Reuben the Jamaican doctor, Louise the human physicist. He also provides some neat science - he picks a side in the debate over whether Neanderthals were their own species, and convincingly describes the science and its dissemination. Reading the book is like watching a familiar TV show - we know the characters and their surroundings, and are thrilled to hear more about them.
Unfortunately, nothing really happens! It's like Sawyer is killing time between the previous book and the next one (which I hope is much better!). I was reminded of the second Star Wars trilogy - Episode II was nothing but filler to get between Ep. I and III. Hopefully "Hybrids," the third book, continues the pattern established by Star Wars, where Ep. III is the best.
Once I realised nothing was going to happen, little things started to irritate me more. Things like the social commentary that is relentlessly in favour of the pro-socialist Neanderthal society (and I'm a socialist myself!). Further: how can a society without war, with a very low (180 million) global population, have technology that is generally superior to our own? Sawyer's Neanderthals believe in a static universe - how could such an advanced particle science not yet have discovered the Theory of Relativity (which predicts an expanding universe)? Why doesn't Sawyer know that Canada has not, in fact, always allowed dual citizenships?
So what is the verdict? This book is filler. It's generally enjoyable filler - I like the alternate universe for all its implausibility, and I like the characters - but it's filler nonetheless.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Candide gets on his soapbox, October 14, 2006
After the excellent Hominids, Humans is somewhat of a let down. The series remains above the average SF fare, both in terms of contents and execution. But Humans wouldn't win any awards on its own though (PC award excepted).
Rather than exploring new ground, Mr. Sawyer has Ponter (the main Neanderthal character) repeatedly asking questions that highlight how we humans are so unpleasant to each other. This is not a bad thing in itself, but it is not a substitute for a plot either. By the time Ponter asks his 4th or 5th such question, with Mary providing an uninspired pro forma defense, the trick is as stale as my hiking socks. I especially "liked" the cocktail discussion with Mary's colleagues, with verbatim quotes from Jared Diamond's excellent Guns, Germs and Steel.
The Neanderthals' policy of castrating criminals and their immediate relatives smacks of eugenics, despite recent statistical research on the hereditary component of criminality. How did they avoid judicial errors, before the oh-so-convenient alibi machines? Is that policy ever defended? Nope, no need to, they are perfect after all.
Like others, I wonder how the Neanderthals can have such advanced technology, without our population base, our manufacturing base, or indeed our wars. I see several possibilities, and I would have welcomed more insight from the book.
a) Not having civilization collapses is more efficient in the long term (tortoise vs. hare).
b) The Neanderthals are smarter as they have bigger brains. What is Ponter doing with Mary then?
c) Technological research has been long been driven by the military, though nowadays, consumer/business oriented research seems to be more important. But pure science may be less influenced by military spending.
d) Having one language/civilization might speed up the transfer of ideas. More likely, it would introduce serious groupthink.
e) The Neanderthals' socialism implies universal access to education which could maximize the potential of gifted individuals.
All in all, the author rests on his laurels and Humans doesn't add anything fresh to Hominids' storyline. Instead, he falls back into his usual habit of throwing "subtle" barbs at our southern neighbours. Gee, Mr. Sawyer, you live in Canada and prefer it to the US. Living in Canada, I sympathize, to an extent. But, need we be reminded, at length, in _all_ your books??? Hominids was much the better for being unusually subtle on that matter.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Social Satire At Its Worst, July 5, 2005
Normally inserted references to another work by the author make me cringe. Sawyer's throw-away reference to his book Illegal Alien however, made me sigh with the memory of a good book. Humans is undoubtably Sawyer's worst. The social satire is at best heavy-handed and preachy and at worst simply eye-glazing. If the satirist's weapon is the rapier, Sawyer uses a sledge hammer. The use of news clips is a familar device in Sawyer's writings, its abscence here is missed. I didn't really get a sense of how the world was reacting to the re-opening of the portal and relations with the Neanderthals.
This book did give me a better insight into our own world however. After the upteenth time a Neanderthal criticized us I realized why our ancestors had wiped them out.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
