When the front cover of a science fiction book, be it Penguin Books selection or
not, states that the book is “science fiction from a scientist,” my first
thoughts lurch towards a plot heavily reliant on dry yet thorough science with
little, if any, characterization. Books that heralded as being penned by real
scientists are often full of scientific detail, as if the entire novel is one
large playground for the author’s idiosyncratic dalliances. Some other examples
of hard science authors which failed to impress me: Charles Sheffield, Gregory
Benford, Ken MacLeod, and Michael McCollum. My hope for The Black Cloud low
but the synopsis was intriguing. Of Fred Hoyle’s fifteen adult science fiction
novels (many co-authored with Geoffrey Hoyle), this was his first foray into
the realm of speculative fiction.
Inside cover synopsis:
“In 1964 a cloud of gas, of which there are a vast number in the
Universe, approaches the solar system on a course that is predicted to bring it
between the Sun and the Earth, shutting off the Sun’s rays and causing
incalculable changes on our planet.
The effect of this impending catastrophe on the scientists and
politicians is convincingly described by Fred Hoyle, the leading Cambridge astronomer: so
convincingly, in fact, that the reader may feel that these events may actually
happen. This is science at its very highest level.”
------------
The Americans spot a black splotch in the deep night sky and ascertain
that a cloud is headed towards the solar system. Coincidently, the English spot
a disturbance among the orbits of the planets, which they hypothesize to be a
mass of an approaching body and alert the American astronomers. Together, they
gather their data and confirm the facts that a large body of interstellar gas
is approaching their solar system and will likely intersect with their orbit.
Both the American and English astronomy teams are unsure whether or not
to alert their respective governments. Eventually, the heads of government are
made aware of the possible threat but the high-minded scientists of England play a
dangerous game of cat-and-mouse with the thumb-sitting bureaucrats. The
Americans establish their own post to observe the cloud while the English
construct an elaborate laboratory to study the current and future effects of the
cloud’s arrival. Reinforced and stocked with provisions, the scientists in England have
the technological advantage and force their government to their own demands.
The effects of the cloud’s arrival are devastating to much of the
Earth’s inhabitants from pole to pole. The change in weather patterns, solar
energy input, and typical orbital bombardment ravage much of the Earth, but
still the vigilant scientists keep track of its anomalous trajectory. The cloud
seems to move under its own volition rather than being bound by the constraints
of physics, so the scientists invoke their communication prowess and establish
contact with the cloud.
Tedious and thorough at first, the English find that the cloud has
migrated to their star to feed. Its display of inertial power upsets the
American and Russian governments, who in-like respond with their own display of
power. However, the English scientists collude with the cloud and events take a
turn for the worse. The enigmatic cloud supposes many questions from the
scientists and the cloud, in turn, posits questions to the odd planet-based
life form known as humans.
------------
If you skim that short four paragraph synopsis, one will notice a
certain lack of names. This purposeful exercise of omitting names is indicative
of the lack of characterization in the novel. The suite of characters comes in
three flavors: the American scientists, the English scientists (inclusive of an
Australian and a Russian), and the government. For some texture, Fred throws a
few sprinkles on top: a woman secretary and a dull handyman. Penned by a
scientist, the reader can expect the scientists to be morally high-handed and
intellectually superior while the government toads are bureaucratic and
sluggish. The whole “super scientist” ploy resounds with as much cadence as a
bell made of pocket lint being struck by a starchy sock.
Exacerbating the lame cast are the lengthy tirades of scientific jargon
which include astrophysics (inclusive of some archaic belief in the Steady
State theory) and radio communication (inclusive of 12 pages of
trial-and-error). The heavy science is distracting to the greater mystery of
the cloud itself, but Fred actually pulls a few wonders out of his scientific
hat. Perhaps the technology was bit early for 1964, but Hoyle envisions
text-to-speech recognition software and light-read paper coding. Not all of the
science is as archaic as Hoyle long-term belief in a static universe, and his
insight into how science can benefit mankind at the hands of able scientists is
reminiscent of George O. Smith’s Venus Equilateral (1946).
Just when the novel is being drug down the pages ridden with
uninspiring stereotypes and protracted scientific details, Hoyle pulls an ace
out of the hat with a surprising insight into the intelligence of the
interstellar cloud. It’s not simply “intelligent” because it is, it has a
history, a reason for its being, a psychological and physiological make-up, and
has areas of ignorance as much as it does areas of enlightenment; it’s
fallible, mortal, and ignorant just like the humans attempting to study it.
------------
The flaws are cast in the shadow of Hoyle’s creativity with the cloud
entity and his insight into future technological progress. The Black Cloud
may be a reminiscent beacon of science fiction greatness to some, but
fifty-five years since its publication has dated it pretty badly. Dually
composed of dull stereotypes and idiosyncratic scientific dalliances, the
disappoint is offset in the last twenty percent by the wonderment of the cloud’s
intelligence and basic anthropomorphic similarities to the scientists who are
eager to understand it. This humanistic shot from the blue is a relief when
compared to the uninspiring individuals found within the book, but this doesn’t
save the book from its inherit weaknesses.
Has some amazing covers though....
ReplyDeleteFor example,
http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/images/4/4d/THBLCKCLDK1962.jpg
And some amazing dumb ones
For example
http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/images/2/2c/THBLCKCLDC0000.jpg
Hoyle had a ton of really interesting ideas (sentient stellar bodies being the big one) but he clung to weird and outdated theories---he helped revise the steady-state universe theory in 1948, and rejected the "Big Bang" theory until he died. Then again, he also pointed out that the carbon atoms that make up the human body can be traced back to dead stars, which is equally weird but at least scientifically acceptable.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, this is one of those books I've been tempted to pick up, but everything I've heard about it is very similar to what you've said---a bit dull and listless.
Which Carl Sagan reflected when he said "We're made of star-stuff." And THAT is the coolest thing I ever learned in science.
Delete