Scan barcode
racketmensch's review against another edition
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.0
This is, without question, the worst book I've ever finished reading. Had I not made a commitment to read every Hugo award winning novel, there is no way I would have been able to drag myself all the way to the end.
This book feels like it was written by an angst ridden teenage boy who thinks that everyone in the world is an idiot, and that he is uniquely suffering the tragedy of being a genius in a world where no one "gets him". It feels this way because that is the plot. A young man, who is just so right about everything that he is literally psychic (and the world's only psychic), psychically controls some real dumb professors at the university to create the worlds most advanced computer. The computer can make people young and immortal and psychic like him, but only if you aren't stubbornly holding onto the dumb beliefs that normies all hold onto. It even makes an old lady young and smokin' hot! What are the beliefs holding people back? A good question, that a good writer might have attempted to wrestle with. This book seems instead to simply say 'too bad everyone but me is dumb', and hopes that you will smugly answer 'me too'.
This book has virtually no narrative arc, flat characters devoid of growth, and the most unconsidered misanthropic vibe I have ever come across. Please don't read this book for any reason ever.
This book feels like it was written by an angst ridden teenage boy who thinks that everyone in the world is an idiot, and that he is uniquely suffering the tragedy of being a genius in a world where no one "gets him". It feels this way because that is the plot. A young man, who is just so right about everything that he is literally psychic (and the world's only psychic), psychically controls some real dumb professors at the university to create the worlds most advanced computer. The computer can make people young and immortal and psychic like him, but only if you aren't stubbornly holding onto the dumb beliefs that normies all hold onto. It even makes an old lady young and smokin' hot! What are the beliefs holding people back? A good question, that a good writer might have attempted to wrestle with. This book seems instead to simply say 'too bad everyone but me is dumb', and hopes that you will smugly answer 'me too'.
This book has virtually no narrative arc, flat characters devoid of growth, and the most unconsidered misanthropic vibe I have ever come across. Please don't read this book for any reason ever.
kidclamp's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
Science fiction of a certain vintage often suffers in modern reading. A computer is devised to test the mind of humans, and we find out just how bad our minds are. Critical of society and government, but almost Randian in admiration of a self made man, the characters are caricatures. The concept is good, the writing is better than expected, but the plot and characters left it a bit flat
jclermont's review against another edition
5.0
I'm glad I didn't read any reviews before reading the book. I'm completely baffled why this book is panned so heavily. I thoroughly enjoyed the book. Yes, there were some typos in the printing. Big deal. I thought the story was captivating and there was some interesting commentary on human psychology, especially toward the end.
Avoid the naysayers and give this book a try. I think the majority of the negative reviews are from people who have accepted the opinion that this is "the worst book to win a Hugo" as fact, without question. Sort of interesting for a book that talks so much about opinion control and the vain certainty of our beliefs.
Avoid the naysayers and give this book a try. I think the majority of the negative reviews are from people who have accepted the opinion that this is "the worst book to win a Hugo" as fact, without question. Sort of interesting for a book that talks so much about opinion control and the vain certainty of our beliefs.
spindleshanks22's review against another edition
4.5
Early 50s sci-fi, so of course it has psionics! Besides that though, its message is as applicable today as it was then.
matthewbrand's review against another edition
4.0
I don't know why this gets so much hate as "the worst Hugo winner". I really loved this book. I thought it explored some areas I haven't seen before. Particularly, I liked how he focuses so much on the whims of society.
tofumeow's review against another edition
First couple of pages were fascinating about an abused Pysic kid then turned into moralizing screeds about the dangers of AI which felt like a run on reddit post and ugh no thanks
ninj's review against another edition
3.0
I have to say, within the first page I was already groaning and thinking this was a poor choice: the telepath wandering along and using his ESP powers to sense out the other minds on the street. But it all turned into a very interesting and enjoyable story. Some lengthy ramblings and paragraphs of metaphors and expositions, but otherwise pretty good.
abibliophagist's review against another edition
3.0
(2/63) In my Hugo Read-Through
They’d Rather be Right (The Forever Machine) by Mark Clifton and Frank Riley, was originally serialized in Astounding Science fiction in 1954. It controversially received the second Hugo Award for a novel in 1955. Historically this book has been regarded as the “worst” Hugo Award winner ever and has been accused of plot holes, poor writing, and even has made some critics question the public who chose it for a win.
I went into this book apprehensively, not looking forward to it and with my brain filled with all the negatives. I finished it utterly surprised and honestly confused to why it received such scathing reviews. This is not a bad book, it is not a bad concept, it is not poorly written. The only thing I can personally think of in regards to why so many hate it, is that it just isn’t exciting.
While reading this book I often wondered if I'm not intelligent enough to see what's wrong with this book, I can't see all the glaring plot holes and awful contradictions and repetitions that other reviewers rant about. I read it from the beginning looking for these things and couldn't find them. The only thing I could find that might account for peoples distaste is that this reads like a Philosophy book. It argues the philosophical ideas of man being limited by itself, about being freed from those limitations, and whether being freed from those limitations and progressing is better than slow progression but having the freedom to essentially be convinced your right.
The general plot to this story isn't an exciting one, but it's an interesting one that I feel is a very important concept in science fiction as well as in life. It revolved around the development of an intelligent computer (Bossy) who has only unbiased, provable facts as her basis. The main character Joe, argues that as a society we are unable to truly advance because everyone, whether they realize it or not, are hindered and limited by their own thoughts on how things are. Even scientists believe that what they believe is what is right. This concept is explained beautifully at one point when the author discusses the 5% that would be able to use Bossy, and how everyone in their own mind belongs in that 5%, the mechanic feels himself superior because he knows how an engine works and has difficulty comprehending how the man having his car fixed can't see what a simple fix it is, while the man who is getting his car fixed just discovered a link in art history between two cultures, and is frustrated that the mechanic wouldn't understand the significance, and in that moment, both believe that they are in the 5% and the other is not. Everyone see themselves as right and whether they realize it or not are somewhat closed to the idea of other potentials.
Confusing? Like I said, it reads like a philosophy book. Bossy is able to release man from all these limitations, able to, on a cellular level, get your body functioning right and without any limitations, any restrictions, it argues that things like illness all come from the weights of life, and once freed of those our cells are able to work at their full potential, like changing the oil of a car. This leads to a sort of immortality; your cells are rejuvenated and able to work right, so aging is reversed and illness eliminated (however you have to undergo it again later in life as more weights and such pile back on). Many reviewers act as if this is some sudden magic thing the book does, and it's not, it's explained, and honestly with very little suspension of disbelief it's believable. You can already see arguments for the potential of this in people now. Look at a man who remains active in body and mind that looks 45-50 but is actually in his 70s, and look at a man who has allowed himself to vegetate and stagnate and appears 70 when he's only 50.
All in all the book primarily focuses on these aspects of each of us, that make up who we are, these societal influences and moors, that come from education and upbringing and exist in us whether we know it or not, are limiting our progression as a species. Bossy can fix that, so what do we do with bossy? Who gets this computer that can give immortality and enlightenment to those who are completely willing to shed themselves of all the things they are convinced are right and true, and be willing to except that maybe they aren't right, and others might have right answers to.
There is no murder mystery like its predecessor in the Hugos, there is no excitement or midnight chases, this is just a book about an idea, and a philosophical one at that, it just happens to have a sci fi wallpaper.
Maybe that's what people don't like about it? It's not exciting; it's not the easiest to read. That brings into the question what is more important? Ideas or writing? Is it more important that a book is well written than what its subject matter is? This book is teeming with ideas, just maybe not presented in the best way, but should we write it off so severely for that. Does it really deserve that just because it wasn’t exciting? I’d ask anyone who approaches this book to just look at the concept it’s giving you, step back and really look at it.
For me, I'll take a good story, and good ideas, over perfect writing any day. Maybe that's why I liked this book so much.
In Conclusion
This book is a very different style from the first Hugo winner. It’s a book the focuses on philosophy and ideas, and that is the plot. It’s not an exciting book by any means. But just because it’s style isn’t overly popular doesn’t mean we can disregard the importance of its message. I hope this is the worst Hugo, because that means I’m in for some great reading, because I honestly really liked this book.
They’d Rather be Right (The Forever Machine) by Mark Clifton and Frank Riley, was originally serialized in Astounding Science fiction in 1954. It controversially received the second Hugo Award for a novel in 1955. Historically this book has been regarded as the “worst” Hugo Award winner ever and has been accused of plot holes, poor writing, and even has made some critics question the public who chose it for a win.
I went into this book apprehensively, not looking forward to it and with my brain filled with all the negatives. I finished it utterly surprised and honestly confused to why it received such scathing reviews. This is not a bad book, it is not a bad concept, it is not poorly written. The only thing I can personally think of in regards to why so many hate it, is that it just isn’t exciting.
While reading this book I often wondered if I'm not intelligent enough to see what's wrong with this book, I can't see all the glaring plot holes and awful contradictions and repetitions that other reviewers rant about. I read it from the beginning looking for these things and couldn't find them. The only thing I could find that might account for peoples distaste is that this reads like a Philosophy book. It argues the philosophical ideas of man being limited by itself, about being freed from those limitations, and whether being freed from those limitations and progressing is better than slow progression but having the freedom to essentially be convinced your right.
The general plot to this story isn't an exciting one, but it's an interesting one that I feel is a very important concept in science fiction as well as in life. It revolved around the development of an intelligent computer (Bossy) who has only unbiased, provable facts as her basis. The main character Joe, argues that as a society we are unable to truly advance because everyone, whether they realize it or not, are hindered and limited by their own thoughts on how things are. Even scientists believe that what they believe is what is right. This concept is explained beautifully at one point when the author discusses the 5% that would be able to use Bossy, and how everyone in their own mind belongs in that 5%, the mechanic feels himself superior because he knows how an engine works and has difficulty comprehending how the man having his car fixed can't see what a simple fix it is, while the man who is getting his car fixed just discovered a link in art history between two cultures, and is frustrated that the mechanic wouldn't understand the significance, and in that moment, both believe that they are in the 5% and the other is not. Everyone see themselves as right and whether they realize it or not are somewhat closed to the idea of other potentials.
Confusing? Like I said, it reads like a philosophy book. Bossy is able to release man from all these limitations, able to, on a cellular level, get your body functioning right and without any limitations, any restrictions, it argues that things like illness all come from the weights of life, and once freed of those our cells are able to work at their full potential, like changing the oil of a car. This leads to a sort of immortality; your cells are rejuvenated and able to work right, so aging is reversed and illness eliminated (however you have to undergo it again later in life as more weights and such pile back on). Many reviewers act as if this is some sudden magic thing the book does, and it's not, it's explained, and honestly with very little suspension of disbelief it's believable. You can already see arguments for the potential of this in people now. Look at a man who remains active in body and mind that looks 45-50 but is actually in his 70s, and look at a man who has allowed himself to vegetate and stagnate and appears 70 when he's only 50.
All in all the book primarily focuses on these aspects of each of us, that make up who we are, these societal influences and moors, that come from education and upbringing and exist in us whether we know it or not, are limiting our progression as a species. Bossy can fix that, so what do we do with bossy? Who gets this computer that can give immortality and enlightenment to those who are completely willing to shed themselves of all the things they are convinced are right and true, and be willing to except that maybe they aren't right, and others might have right answers to.
There is no murder mystery like its predecessor in the Hugos, there is no excitement or midnight chases, this is just a book about an idea, and a philosophical one at that, it just happens to have a sci fi wallpaper.
Maybe that's what people don't like about it? It's not exciting; it's not the easiest to read. That brings into the question what is more important? Ideas or writing? Is it more important that a book is well written than what its subject matter is? This book is teeming with ideas, just maybe not presented in the best way, but should we write it off so severely for that. Does it really deserve that just because it wasn’t exciting? I’d ask anyone who approaches this book to just look at the concept it’s giving you, step back and really look at it.
For me, I'll take a good story, and good ideas, over perfect writing any day. Maybe that's why I liked this book so much.
In Conclusion
This book is a very different style from the first Hugo winner. It’s a book the focuses on philosophy and ideas, and that is the plot. It’s not an exciting book by any means. But just because it’s style isn’t overly popular doesn’t mean we can disregard the importance of its message. I hope this is the worst Hugo, because that means I’m in for some great reading, because I honestly really liked this book.
" Man represents a mutation of life wherein the intellect will get its chance to prove survival worth. It hasn't done that yet, you understand. All sorts of life forms flourish grandly for a while and then die out. But universal time is a long time. Remember the giant reptiles flourished for forty million years. Man will have to better that record before he can truly say that intellect is superior to a massive bulk and a thick hide. against that forty million years, man has about seven thousand years of historical record. But man acts as if, and apparently really believes, he already has the answers, that there is nothing left for mankind to do for the next forty million years except imitate the man of today."
justiceofkalr's review against another edition
2.0
1955 Hugo award winner. I've been trying to read all the Hugo winners, and I've definitely been putting this one off for a while. Probably because it's known as the worst book ever to win a Hugo award. So, not something I was particularly looking forward to reading. And it lived up to its reputation. Somewhere in there, there was a half-way interesting book. Unfortunately it was buried under crappy philosophical rambling and boring characters.
The main character, Joe, you first meet as a kid trying to hide/deal with being the only person to have telepathy. And that was kind of interesting. Then suddenly there's a time jump and he's a college student who is terribly pretentious and decides it's perfectly justified to just manipulate everyone's mind because as a telepath he knows best. Okay, well he does hesitate, but then his professor says that in the case of working on their project, influencing people's minds is okay. And then suddenly Joe is just doing it all over the place.
And the machine. Bossy. They name the machine Bossy. After cows. Which, uh, okay. Anyways, I'm kind of iffy on what exactly Bossy is supposed to be. Some kind of general super computer. But I was never really clear exactly what the intention was. But Joe decides he can use it to fix people. Or something. He uses it as a therapy machine to remove people's ingrained preconceptions and this magically makes them young and fixes all their health problems. What the fuck. Uh okay. But only people who aren't convinced they're right. So it only works on skid-row washouts because all the intellectuals, or "Brains" as the book annoyingly calls them, are too convinced they're right to become immortal.
Basically this book was a huge mess that never went anywhere and droned on about crap instead of developing a coherent plot. Joe's lone telepathy was kind of interesting, the idea of "opinion control" was an interesting dystopian little idea, and the fighting for control of the immortality machine also was interesting. But they were really lost in the whole mess. So somewhere in there was a potentially interesting novel/novella that just got buried in mountains of boring and no direction.
The main character, Joe, you first meet as a kid trying to hide/deal with being the only person to have telepathy. And that was kind of interesting. Then suddenly there's a time jump and he's a college student who is terribly pretentious and decides it's perfectly justified to just manipulate everyone's mind because as a telepath he knows best. Okay, well he does hesitate, but then his professor says that in the case of working on their project, influencing people's minds is okay. And then suddenly Joe is just doing it all over the place.
And the machine. Bossy. They name the machine Bossy. After cows. Which, uh, okay. Anyways, I'm kind of iffy on what exactly Bossy is supposed to be. Some kind of general super computer. But I was never really clear exactly what the intention was. But Joe decides he can use it to fix people. Or something. He uses it as a therapy machine to remove people's ingrained preconceptions and this magically makes them young and fixes all their health problems. What the fuck. Uh okay. But only people who aren't convinced they're right. So it only works on skid-row washouts because all the intellectuals, or "Brains" as the book annoyingly calls them, are too convinced they're right to become immortal.
Basically this book was a huge mess that never went anywhere and droned on about crap instead of developing a coherent plot. Joe's lone telepathy was kind of interesting, the idea of "opinion control" was an interesting dystopian little idea, and the fighting for control of the immortality machine also was interesting. But they were really lost in the whole mess. So somewhere in there was a potentially interesting novel/novella that just got buried in mountains of boring and no direction.
awilderm23's review against another edition
2.0
'There is not now, there never has been, any real issue between science and faith. Both strive for the same identical goal, both seek comprehension, both wish to benefit man that he live happier, healthier, more harmoniously with himself and with his neighbors. Man seeks to comprehend, to understand the forces which govern his life. The apparently different paths taken by science and faith are of no consequence in comparison with mans yearning to know.'