Customer Reviews

The Trigger

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

[As someone who does not judge a book by the back of its dustjacket, this review has no spoilers whatsoever.]

I've been a devoted reader of Michael Kube-McDowell since his first book, _Emprise_, which is on my personal top 10 list, having read it 3 or 4 times now.

_The Trigger_ aspires to be another _Emprise_. In fact, when I first started reading _The Trigger_, I was quite excited since it seemed to be telling the story of the prolog to _Emprise_, wherein an "antidote" for nuclear reactions is discovered, which throws the world into chaos following the political and energy ramifications.

Unfortunately, _The Trigger_ is not as far-reaching, and I think it could have explored its premise much more than it did. Mind you, it follows the plot on a larger scale more than most novels, which is one of the things that I like about it.

It is an addicting read, and, like the previous Amazone reviewer, I "could not put it down". However, I also felt the ending was weak and uninspired, not following the premise far enough.

As far as the collaboration with Clarke goes, I have to admit that I didn't see any "Clarke" in this book. So, if you're an Arthur C. Clarke fan, I can't say you should read it on that basis alone.

In summary, I recommend _The Trigger_. But if you like it even a little, I suggest you try to track down some of Kube-McDowell's better books, such as _Emprise_, or _Alternities_.

I'm in agreement with some of the other readers...spends way too much time describing politics and not enough with the technology. In addition, in trying to describe the sociological effects of this "trigger" device (which is used to explode munitions containing nitrates) the author seems to overlook the fact that humans have been killing each other with edged weapons for thousands of years. This kind of lapse makes the story rather laughable as this component is not offered to display effects the trigger has on societies. In addition, it is offensive to see the gun lobby portrayed the way it is in this book. This book is clearly anti-gun and anti-American in the way it portrays our government and our established laws. Mr. Clarke, quit lending your name to works that don't deserve it!

... a fantasy where techo-magic can uninvent firearms and, when the Great and the Good wave that wand, people decide to love each other and study war no more. The gun controllers get all the good lines and the Other Side is composed of scary, evil leaders and ordinary gun owners who are their useful idiots. The book is set in the near future with electronic technologies that are somewhat plausible, but without the personality alteration technology that would be needed to actually make it work.

To review, researchers accidentally discover a device which can detonate explosives and ammunition remotely (the Trigger). Later on, they discover that this is only one aspect of a more powerful technology that allows them to change the chemical structure of matter from a distance and with precision.

The immediate application that they seize on is to disable firearms and explosives. Much ink is expended on the political fallout from this, and how it will make the world a better place. What is glaring to me is what is missed: these supposedly smart people don't notice that firearms and explosives can still work with minor redesign. They focus on the more capable technology only as a way to uninvent the gun even more thoroughly (the Jammer) - no one notices that it makes weapons possible that are far more deadly than guns. For example, if you can turn nitrocellulose back into inert cotton by pointing a ray emitter at it, why can't you turn all the proteins in a man's body back into individual amino acids? Answer, you can, and the victim would collapse instantly into a puddle of goo. This occurs to none of the characters. Instead, they reinvent Medeival weaponcraft - the crossbow and the quarterstaff - but somehow forget about the sword, the mace, and the halbard. This allows the Good Guys to win battles without spilling blood - luckily, they don't have to fight anyone who actually knows how. Plus, there are far too many long, preachy passages that would fit better into a Handgun Control Inc broadsheet than into a sci-fi novel people are expected to pay their own money for and then read for entertainment.

Bottom line, some people will like this book, some will hate it, and most will find it boring. If you know someone who has a "Beyond War" bumpersticker and wants Charles Schumer to run for President, then this book would make a great gift. If you value the right to self-defense, this book will not be good for your blood pressure. If you are looking for good sci-fi, where the initial premise is worked out carefully and logically and with respect for the reader's intelligence, look somewhere else.

For those who enjoy stretching their knowledge of science to the limits, here's some serious mind expansion from the all time SF guru, Arthur C. Clarke. "Trigger" is built around wave physics and how much more can happen in that field - someday, sometime.

The non-scientifically inclined reader will also enjoy the book's extensive examination of the issues around gun control and ownership - the prime target of the authors. Using the Columbine High shootings as a case in point, they repeatedly engage with the many arguments put forward by proponents of the 2nd Amendment to prevent arms control initiatives.

But the scientific jewels hidden along the way are what make this a real delight. First, there is the Trigger - a wave-emitting device that automatically detonates any kind of explosive material, rendering any conventional arms and munitions more dangerous to the user than to their intended victims. The resulting reversion of security forces to pre-gunpowder weapons such as crossbows and maces may sound amusing, but certainly worth more than a passing thought.

Then comes the intellectual high point of the book - the concept that everything can be defined in terms of energy and information. This is totally mind blowing - if you take the concept of zooming in and out for more or less detail on a subject and couple it with the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, that's what the guru is postulating. To quote " Information organizes and differentiates energy". The kick is in the converse - if you can remove information from a subject, you destabilize it - it ceases to exist! From this exquisitely neat hypothesis arises the Jammer - the antithesis of the Trigger - instead of blowing up arms and ammunition, it simply makes them cease to exist!

Just these alone would have been more than enough for any Arthur C. Clarke fan - but the authors leave the reader salivating for more right at the end - the discovery of a biological Trigger that can zero in on any specific DNA pattern and vaporise it - the Killer.

Overall, a taut thriller-class read with some elegant physics for those so inclined - what more can one ask for ?

Arthur Clarke's book is so preachy that even a strong gun control advocate like myself was grinded down by the final page. Way over the top! The book has all the elements of a winner, but never delivers. He introduces us to several "Einstein" like characters that could be facsinating, however his character development is so bad, that you never get to know these brillant minds. Oh how I was left totally unsatisfied! Yes I did keep reading,but I found myself rapidly skimming the the pages to get to the end of this dreary gun control lecture. I was surprised that this has 4 stars. In terms of this being a science fiction work, forget it, it's not.

This review was going to be "only" four stars, but I was only at page 400 at that point. What an ending. One of the rare wonderful times I have seriously gotten chills down my spine from reading a book. (And some of the other times have been with Clarke as well!)

I suspect Mr. Kube-McDowell took the majority of the writing on this one, based on recent collaborations of Clarke's with Baxter and McQuay, but this novel is certainly worthy of the Clarke seal of approval.

You can get the plot preview from other reviews, so let me just say that the preachiness might get to some people, and once in a while it made my eyes roll as well, but in the end I think it's deceptively well-balanced. It never forgets the other side, although most of the enemy characters are near-cartoonish villains. But I can seriously overlook it! (Also, two of the main characters of the beginning seem to disappear about 2/3 through.)

The style is similar to recent books by Gregory Benford: scientist makes schocking discovery...social issues arise...scientist gets personally involved. Of course, I know nothing of Benford's gun-control stance.

Tone down the preachiness just a tad, and this could make a good movie. This book begs to be optioned for a screenplay.

This book has some interesting what if situations, based on the invention of a device that triggers all weapons within a specified range. This invention virtually renders all conventional weapons (guns, bombs) useless. Where the book lacks is in character development and plot. Instead of writing this book, Clarke could have choose to write an political essay on the plusses and minuses of using the technology introduced in the story.

First of all, it is peculiar to see how readers---among which I include myself---tend to use this space that Amazon.com provides to---rather than write a review---either vent their anger on or explode in praise for the book they have just read and dreaded or loved, accordingly. Unsurprisingly so then, the following will just be an example of the first case above.

Once again---I'm talking about the Rama sequels---I have stumbled over the same stone, falling pray to Arthur C. Clarke's name on the cover of a book which, again, for the most part he hasn't written. Isn't it suspicious that most (all?) books written by Clarke together with someone else systematically fail to live up to the standards that Clarke alone got us used to?

The Trigger is no exception to the rule. The science behind the new technology depicted takes up a minuscule fraction of the whole book, which for the most part of its more than 600 pages occupies itself with extremely detailed political and governmental issues and analyses around it. For anyone who likes science-fiction first for the science and then for the fiction, this book is bound to turn out terribly long-winded and boring, and certainly hard to finish. The only moment it becomes a so-called page-turner is when one is skipping pages.

I would recommend this book to a lawyer or to a political analyst or the like but never to a physicist, who'd rather wait until The Trigger comes to the big screen---if ever---, where it would certainly make up for an entertaining evening.

Politics and personal agendas aside, Kube-Macdowell and Clarke have written a pretty good book. One cannot overlook the absurb portrayal of some pro-armament characters, but the unbalanced portrayals do not detract from the central question presented by the primary storyline - what if it were possible to eliminate all nitrate based explosives?

I only wish the book had reached a larger audience than sci-fi readers. Some of the posted opposition to it harkens back to Lewin's 1967 satirical piece "Report From Iron Mountain", where a government commission (later shown to be fictitious) recommended development of a contingency plan in the event war was eliminated.

THE TRIGGER is nothing more than a speculative work of science fiction; at its base, the story of the accidental development of a technology that in real life may never be achievable, even if desired. Like all good fiction, this story comes from the fertile minds of contemplative people. Literature has been the locale of social commentary throughout the written history of man (of course, I haven't checked my "wormcam" yet).

Whether you agree with the authors in this instance is secondary to examination of the possibilities associated with implementation, or elimination, of any social policy. THE TRIGGER addresses one conceivable outcome of a non-reality and it is presented in a very enjoyable manner.

Christians and social conservatives, especially second amendment advocates, will be outraged. Their positions, as well as their own good selves, are viciously caricatured by two professionals who do it with great style and savagery. It would be ridiculous to call a work of fiction dangerous, but this one is certainly unhelpful. Those who most fear the violence of the world around them tend to either support firearms ownership or firearms abolition. Those of either persuasion who read this book will be more polarized than ever. Shame on both Messrs. Clark and Kube-McDowell!