4 ms·

The first Hyperion book is excellent, the second is decent, but for anybody not in the know - do yourself a favor and skip the two that follow.

by vkou 3y ago

thriftwy 3y ago
I disagree, they have some stuff to think through, even if they're not as shiny as the first one. Perhaps he did himself a disservice by showing all he's got at the very begining of the series, though. That stuff has the Star Wars vibe where Ep 1-3 have much more grandiosity than the original series - luckily the weren't chronologically first.
- vkou 3y ago
  The problem isn't the highlights of it - it's the low-lights, which make up most of those books. The main POV character is incredibly annoying to follow around - he's a dense, not-too-intelligent, but incredibly-long-winded everyman, who is never told to shut up by anyone around him. I don't need an everyman perspective[1] on an epic science-fiction story! I am an everyman! I can form my own opinion of it! They are also rather heavy on author-dictated philosophy (which is not particularly interesting, or insightful, and manages to fall flat in a pretty major self-contradictory way) - whereas the first two Hyperion books have much less of an author's voice in them, and are much more of a presentation of an interaction of different, competing value systems. That is interesting! Listening to the chosen one go on and on about choosing again (when none of their disciples actually do) is not! The overall plot of them is fine. It's, unfortunately, all in the execution. [1] Or at least, not one that's hammered into me for ~60% of the book.
sideshowb 3y ago
I disagree. Yes #1 was best. I thought #2 was the weakest link, but with the redeeming feature of getting you to #3 and #4. Are they perfect, no, but they do have good moments aplenty and I thought the ending worth the journey. Edit: thinking back, the ending of #2 was bloody spectacular as well. I think the sheer volume of character/world building must help as preparation for impactful endings.
gpderetta 3y ago
Strongly agree. There are some enjoyable bits in 3&r4 ( I just enjoy episodic travel adventures), but for the most part they are pretty bad, especially compared to the masterpiece of the first one (the second was an adequate ending to the story).
- duskwuff 3y ago
  Endymion and Rise were to Simmons what The Dying Earth was to Silenus. ;) They're sequels set in the same setting, with a few cool ideas, but the literary flair -- the magic -- just isn't there.
wiredfool 3y ago
My recollection was 1 and 4 were enjoyable. 2 and 3 were less. Though, it's possible I got them out of order. The Canterbury Tales in Space framing took me way to long to pick up on.

The first Hyperion book is excellent, the second is decent, but for anybody not in the know - do yourself a favor and skip the two that follow.

by vkou 3y ago

The first Hyperion book is excellent, the second is decent, but for anybody not in the know - do yourself a favor and skip the two that follow.

thriftwy 3y ago

I disagree, they have some stuff to think through, even if they're not as shiny as the first one. Perhaps he did himself a disservice by showing all he's got at the very begining of the series, though. That stuff has the Star Wars vibe where Ep 1-3 have much more grandiosity than the original series - luckily the weren't chronologically first.

vkou 3y ago
The problem isn't the highlights of it - it's the low-lights, which make up most of those books. The main POV character is incredibly annoying to follow around - he's a dense, not-too-intelligent, but incredibly-long-winded everyman, who is never told to shut up by anyone around him. I don't need an everyman perspective[1] on an epic science-fiction story! I am an everyman! I can form my own opinion of it! They are also rather heavy on author-dictated philosophy (which is not particularly interesting, or insightful, and manages to fall flat in a pretty major self-contradictory way) - whereas the first two Hyperion books have much less of an author's voice in them, and are much more of a presentation of an interaction of different, competing value systems. That is interesting! Listening to the chosen one go on and on about choosing again (when none of their disciples actually do) is not! The overall plot of them is fine. It's, unfortunately, all in the execution. [1] Or at least, not one that's hammered into me for ~60% of the book.

sideshowb 3y ago

I disagree. Yes #1 was best. I thought #2 was the weakest link, but with the redeeming feature of getting you to #3 and #4. Are they perfect, no, but they do have good moments aplenty and I thought the ending worth the journey. Edit: thinking back, the ending of #2 was bloody spectacular as well. I think the sheer volume of character/world building must help as preparation for impactful endings.

gpderetta 3y ago

Strongly agree. There are some enjoyable bits in 3&r4 ( I just enjoy episodic travel adventures), but for the most part they are pretty bad, especially compared to the masterpiece of the first one (the second was an adequate ending to the story).

duskwuff 3y ago
Endymion and Rise were to Simmons what The Dying Earth was to Silenus. ;) They're sequels set in the same setting, with a few cool ideas, but the literary flair -- the magic -- just isn't there.

wiredfool 3y ago

My recollection was 1 and 4 were enjoyable. 2 and 3 were less. Though, it's possible I got them out of order. The Canterbury Tales in Space framing took me way to long to pick up on.