Fallen Angels
Larry Niven Jerry Pournelle Michael Flynn
Read 128 reviews from the world’s largest community 
    for readers. Having been shot down over the North Dakota glacier, two Space Habs astronauts find themse…
/favicon.ico
Goodreads
November 26, 2017

EDIT: I've been quoting and recommending this book a lot since I read it, which means I liked it more that I originally thought. Therefore I added an extra star.

This book is both fun and depressing. Fun because of quirky characters and snappy dialogue. Depressing because of the setup- humanity, in particular the United States, having turned their back on technology, is fighting a losing battle against an Ice Age. The government writes off whole regions and populations, spending resources instead on persecuting fans of science fiction as subversives. In different hands, this premise could create a dystopia in some ways bleaker than 1984. Instead, the cautionary tale is simply the backdrop for what is best described as a caper novel: a group of ragtag misfits staying one step ahead of the law. It's not a page turner, but I found it enjoyable. I find it hard to imagine the government coalition described here (Greens, feminists and... Christians? O-kay), but Greens are the main baddies, at least that we get to see. There are a couple of scenes towards the end that, literally, had my jaw dropping. If I were a feminist, I would get hopping mad; since I'm not, it was just hilarious and satisfying. I will definitely be checking out all three authors separately (I've only read one book by Michael Flynn), to see what kind of stuff they write on their own.

February 2, 2019

Niven & Pournelle’s “Fallen Angels" gets mixed receptions, here & elsewhere. It's a rare "Global Cooling" novel. N&P’s hypothesis, that AGW might be keeping the glaciers at bay, has stood the test of time, and is now (I think) a respectable hypothesis among climatologists. I’m continually amused at the constant bleatings about a degree or too of human-caused warming. The climate has generally been warming since the end of the last Ice Age. As you know, dear Reader. The real horror-show would be if the glaciers return. Which they will, someday. Maybe sooner if the “Decarbonization” enthusiasts get their way!

Granted, it’s no literary masterwork, and I’ve only read it once, many years ago. Fallen Angels does seem to be a good political touchstone: the right-leaning like it, the lefties don't. Personally, I found it great fun. And, yes, I lean rightward. 3.5 stars. Waffling about rounding up or down....

April 30, 2015

First, I have to note the amazingly ironic context in which I first heard of this book. In the C-Realm podcast #451, after John Michael Greer mentioned that his recent science fiction novel Star's Reach is the first to his knowledge that explicitly incorporates science fiction and science fiction fandom, the show's host KMO mentioned this title as another example of science fiction about science fiction. The irony is that the interview (and Greer's work in general) is about the very themes—concern for the environment, climate change, approporiate technology, etc.—that are satirized in this novel.

All of that said, this book is a fun, silly tale about a near-future world in which the "pro-science" folks (i.e., the Angels) live aboard two space stations in virtual exile while the world, or at least the U.S., has been taken over by a ludicrously unbelievable cabal of Christian fundamentalists, New Agers, liberal humanist academics, and radical environmentalists. (Ironically, this last group, in its attempt to stave off global warming by reducing pollution and embracing appropriate technologies, has instead created the next ice age. It's satire, got it?) The plot revolves around two "Angels" who crash on the North Dakota ice sheet in an aborted attempt to harvest a bit of Earth's air and the cadre of science fiction fans who rescue them and plan to send them back into space.

The book is unapologetic in its "libertarian" (more accurately anarcho-capitalist) techno-triumphalist bent, which can be either laudable, laughable, or lamentable, depending on the reader's predilections. I vacillated between the latter two as I made my way through the book.

The book satirizes "anti-science" folks, a broad, uncritical category that includes, among others: religious people; the Moral Majority; New Agers; academics, particularly in the humanities and social sciences; Greens and other environmentalists; ecologists, who apparently aren't "real" scientists; and people who don't want to spend tax money on space exploration. This satire is occasionally funny, always heavy-handed, and oftentimes frustrating, because the authors apparently know as little about the groups they satirize as these groups ostensibly know about science and technology. (Big example: the notion of "appropriate technology," articulated rationally and clearly by E.F. Schumacher, among others, is reduced to a caricature where "appropriate" no longer means "optimal in a given context" but instead is a touchy-feely buzzword implying little more than "inoffensive.")

The authors' portrayal of all these disparate groups as monolithically "anti-science" reduces actual concerns, always serious and oftentimes clearly articulated and well-reasoned, to simplistic anti-science, anti-technology whinging. It also reduces "science" to a simple proposition that one either affirms (wisely, of course) or denies (foolishly, of course). The conspiratorial tone that pervades the novel also does little to explain why, a quarter-century after this novel's publication, the engineering end of my campus has all the enrollments, construction projects, and money, while the liberal arts and humanities continue to languish, even as people become more and more like the gadgets they cannot bear to part with.

The portrayal of the protagonists, the con-crazed science fiction fanatics who live as outcasts and political prisoners in a world where science fiction is outlawed (see note on satire above), is equally heavy-handed and annoying. I have been a lifelong reader and lover of science fiction, and I would never be caught dead hanging out with this crew of monomaniacal, arrogant dorks (they come packed full of "hard science" and overbearing "rational" opinions while utterly lacking any exposure to nuance or subtlety). If this were my introduction to science fiction fandom, I would probably never read science fiction again, just to avoid guilt by association.

And of course, the fact that the world is heating up due to centuries of industrial output now relegates these authors to the same world of "science-denial" that they decry throughout the novel. Oh the irony.

November 3, 2015

Another of the Baen ebook giveaways; this is Niven's, Pournelle's and Flynn's dystopian future-America novel where the Greens have won and dominated, at least, the north American political landscape. As a result, any anthropogenic global warming that there was is abruptly halted and instead a new ice-age sweeps down across the American landscape. While science is not banned outright, there is now the concept of appropriate science and inappropriate science. Inappropriate science is a large catch-all for anything deemed polluting, or wasteful, and means that NASA has been completely closed down ‒ stranding a community of astronauts on the space station. With no hope of a return home or any supply runs they are managing to become self-sufficient and, in order to top up their own gas supplies, have started scooping up gasses from the Earth's outer atmosphere (fuelling even more the hatred of the off-worlders by the green Earthers who view this as stealing more of Earth's resources). It's on one of these runs that the two spacemen, the fallen angels of the title, crash to Earth and the race is on to both avoid the authorities and see if they can even return to the space station.

Strangely, as well as making most branches of science illegal, the government has also cracked down on science fiction: both authors and fans are having to operate on the fringes of society. Presumably as science fiction glorifies the now banned sciences it's been included as well, but this device is what makes this novel. The fallen angels come down the day before the annual science-fiction convention, so a rag-tag group of sci-fi fans decide to jump in a van and go rescue them. The novel makes much of the complete cultural disconnect between the two angels, for whom space represents their quite functional, hand-to-mouth existence, and the sci-fi fans, for whom space represents some kind of romantic ideal. This disconnect, and the authors' clear understanding and enjoyment of fandom culture, also provides much of the humour of the book ‒ the angels clearly think the fans are mad throughout the whole novel, yet somehow the fans' optimism, and problem solving, keeps managing to get things done.

Much is written of the politics of this novel in other comments and it's clear that Niven, Pournelle and Flynn are writing from a libertarian, anti-AGW platform. That said, if you can bring yourself to see past that, science fiction at its core is supposed to be about 'what ifs'. The 'what if' of this novel, that the green movement took power and reversed the warming that was holding back the next ice age, is an interesting idea and is artfully told with a fair amount of humour and barely any of the political grand-standing that some of the other reviewers had suggested. What I found slightly more annoying was the heavy name dropping throughout the story, some of whom (like RMS) are foreshadowed as part of the latter story, and are then never mentioned again, and some annoying overuse of PoV switching in some of the later chapters that made those sections somewhat confusing to read.

March 17, 2012

I was absolutely stunned. I love Niven and Pournelle, and when they get into a threesome it usually works too.

I can't give this book an honest review because I gave up about 10 pages in. It was terrible!.

First, this was written in 2002, still believing that we're going to be going into another Ice age. Yeah, I've always known Pournelle was an unbeliever, but most scientists haven't believed that for over 20 years. It's true that naturally the Earth is in a cooling cycle - but we've been pumping out the greenhouse gases long enough to stall it indefinitely. Early on, a character laments that we'd had the technology to stop it. Well, duh!

But the straw that broke the camel's back was the completely silly idea that reading Science Fiction could get you blacklisted. Sure, we SF fans don't get no respect, but something has to matter before anybody would do something so drastic, and their premise was that SF wasn't considered real writing.

Are Niven & Pournelle running an author factory these days? This bears no resemblance to any of the great books they've written independently or together.

October 10, 2009

What is with the global-warming denial? Granted, this was written over 10 years ago, but I had already been reading about global warming in the early 80's at college. Sad, sad, sad. Does anyone know if these authors have come around?

November 9, 2014

For many years, I have used this book as a reference point to which all other science fiction books are measured. This book is absolute zero on my quality scale. I hated literally everything about this book.

March 28, 2015

This book was ok, but it didn’t really grab me and keep me interested throughout the entire book. The premise is that, instead of the global warming that most people predicted, Earth entered into an ice age. Everybody’s attempts to "go green" and limit pollution actually helped hasten that ice age. The book is very U.S.-centric and we don’t really learn what’s going on in the rest of the world but, in the U.S., there’s a glacier moving its way across the U.S. People are cold, resources are limited, and, oddly enough, science is taboo so people aren’t able to find ways to improve things. Even science fiction fans are persecuted, and possessing science fiction paraphernalia can get you arrested.

There are a group of people still living in space stations orbiting earth from before NASA was shut down. These people periodically send scoopships into Earth’s atmosphere to collect gasses that they need, and people from Earth try to shoot them down. The book starts off with two men flying a scoopship and getting shot down. Closet science fiction fans try to find them and get them somewhere safe before the government finds them.

This book I guess was written largely for people who are more involved with, or at least familiar with, the “fandom” scene. The science fiction fans were the heroes of the story and some of them were as over-the-top as one would expect based on stereotypes of fandom culture. I learned all sorts of new terms and acronyms such as fafiated, gafiated, FIAWOL, and FIJAGH. Since I’ve never been to a convention and don’t really participate in any of that, this stuff often dragged me out of the story. There was a constant barrage of it. However, most of the terms were easy enough to understand within their context and others were explained. The two men from the space station, one of whom was born in space and the other of whom had left Earth with his parents as a very young child, were unfamiliar with fandom so they served as an excuse for the authors to explain things to the uninitiated reader.

Some parts of the story held my interest well, and other parts bored me. There were some very funny parts in the book that made me laugh out loud. Sometimes I was drawn into the story, but I was never really drawn into caring about the characters. I never felt that concerned about what happened to them, and sometimes I was annoyed by them. I also wish we’d been told more about the space stations -- how they were established, what their original intent was, whether they had ever attempted to reach any agreement with people on Earth, etc. They were never really explained in detail, aside from occasional snippets about what life was like on them as told by the characters who were from the space stations.

My e-book edition of this book also had a LOT of errors. Spelling errors, grammatical errors, punctuation errors, you name it – more errors than I’ve ever seen in a book published by a traditional publisher (Baen). And there, were commas, in really, weird, places. Everywhere, commas. In, places where they, made no sense. The book was originally published in 1991 (and it showed its age more than some older books I’ve read), so perhaps the e-book was created using OCR and various spots on the page were read in as commas? Or maybe it was supposed to be some sort of a homage to William Shatner’s delivery method as Kirk in the original Star Trek series. I have no idea, but it was annoying.

In any case I found some enjoyment in the book and I’ve certainly read worse books, but I was happy to reach the end of it so I could move onto something else.

January 10, 2015

A dated book, and definitely not Niven and Pournelle's best. Instead of global warming, the Earth is being covered by glaciers, thanks to those silly environmentalists and all their anti-pollution laws, which literally reversed the Greenhouse Effect. Two astronauts from the space habitats still orbiting the Earth are shot down over North America, and have to be rescued, by sci-fi fans. (Hah, see me use "sci-fi" deliberately just to annoy all the SF pedantists?) Half ego-fluffing for SF fandom, half polemic against environmental laws and politicians who cut the budget for the space program, this novel read like ranty fan fiction, and the writing, honestly, was not much better. I gave it three stars mostly because of my lingering fondness for Niven and Pournelle and because I'm just geeky enough to have caught most of the in-jokes, but if you're going to read this, I highly recommend getting the free ebook from the Baen Free Library.

September 20, 2012

"If life always fell short of your expectations, that was no argument for lowering them."

Finally, fiction about fans, rather than fan fiction. Best "free" book yet. Niven, Pournelle and Flynn take us on a fast and fun adventure that is all the more fun for the improbability of it.

It's hard to know what was meant seriously and what tongue in cheek. I abandoned my quibbles and go with the flow. Published in 1991 describing a future right about now (2012), the book reminds us how the rapid changes electronics have changed our world so much, so quickly. The authors thought we'd still depend on fax machines and pay phone booths. They recognized the existence, but not the potential of, cell phones.

The usual poor quality of Bean e-books. You'd think they'd be more concerned about products carrying their name.

Maybe not worth four stars, but what the heck?

December 14, 2020

This was not a book I would have usually picked up if I wasn't familiar with the authors. I did enjoy the experience, but I'm having trouble deciding if it's something I would recommend to a fellow sci-fi fan.

I enjoyed Larry Niven's Ringworld, but I didn't care for The Gripping Hand, but I adored The Mote In God's Eye. So, even though I own many Niven books, I find the quality polarizing. Fallen Angels was mostly made fun through the characters, which is a good thing, granted. Maybe I'm just more of an action-oriented reader, or maybe I'm still waiting to read something from Niven that was as good as The Mote In God's Eye--I don't know.

Would I read Fallen Angels again? No. Does that mean it was bad? No. Does it deserve another half-star because I didn't ditch it after 100 pages? Perhaps.

June 27, 2018

It's the future. Now you can voluntarily go up into space and live there in space shuttles for the rest of your life. However, this doesn't mean that everybody is living in space and wanting to. This also doesn't mean that people down on Earth who are still living the way they started out like the idea of people living in space. This is because (apparently) space shuttles up in space are taking all the warmth in the Earth's atmosphere so Earth has become very very cold. More often snow blizzards, and more often deaths due to the cold. Anyways, there are two pilots(from the space shuttle) flying a plane(just a simple plane where nobody is on it but just the two pilots) in Earth's atmosphere for practice. Then suddenly the plane gets hit by a missile(because they were flying through a war zone) and starts to fall towards the snow/ice on Earth. They both wake up and find out that they've been 'rescued'. This story is about how the two pilots(aka the fallen angles because the people on Earth call the people living in space angels or aliens) get 'rescued' by some people who help them get back to their home, space. I didn't like this book because I just thought that for a kind of simple story, the author just dragged it too long and it was just a boring book.

Idk why but this book reminded me of the drama series 'The 100' a lot.

May 20, 2021

In an world gradually disappearing under ice and where space exploration has been abandoned, a pair of orbital colony residents flying a nitrogen scoopship, are shot down over the northern U.S. and despair of rescue. Meanwhile, SF fans have been outlawed as technophiles, and through a network of trufans and sympathizers, launch a rescue and head to the last remaining rocket in the country. Their trials and tribulations along the way include no computing, no rocket fuel and pursuit by zealous Greens and (mun)danes. The plot has a lot of holes…but the good news is that the plot is mostly irrelevant if you are a die-hard SF fan! Written with copious in-jokes and veiled references to famous book, fans and authors, it is a fun game to detect just who they are writing about. If FIAWOL and GAFIATION ring bells for you - this is your book. If not you may find the whole thing a bit puzzling and self-indulgent. I didn’t! The three writers - Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle and Michael Flynn seem to have conflicting political viewpoints and occasionally the ‘authors’ messages’ are contradictory, but overall it was enjoyable enough. (Completely misreads all the signs of climate change though.)

April 20, 2023

This story is kind of a silly time

June 14, 2021

ספר מד"ב חביב ביותר, הומר גס אבל חביב, ממליץ

January 18, 2015

Subversively hilarious. It's the near future and Earth has slipped into an ice age, brought on by environmental activism. Turns out only soot has kept back the ice age since early in human history, and with the Greens in power, an insistence on clean energy has allowed the glaciers to take over with lightning speed. The government is committed to political correctness rather than actual science, which is overstated only in degree. Most of the examples of government overreach are based on actual events.

A few holdouts in orbit represent what is left of the space program. The governments have disavowed them so they are on their own, with no supplies sent. While on a mission to scoop needed nitrogen from the Earth's air, some "Angels" are shot down. They are rescued by an underground of scifi fans, gathered at one of their periodic conventions.

It takes a little suspension of disbelief - but not a lot - to believe that the fans could pull this off. There is a race to see if the Angels can be sent home, and how.

The science is fairly well done. The authors point out the correlation between burning of wood and coal, and climate. They also show that in the last ice age, Britain was covered in glaciers in less than a century. The ice age is plausible. If it happens, orbital sunlight reflectors or beamed microwaves may very well represent our only way to hold back the ice.

August 9, 2017

Essentially, this book is wish fulfilment, casting SF fans as the heroes who have to rescue astronauts from a crashed spaceship. It's had a certain amount of influence, e.g. Imperial College Science Fiction society have adopted the "Psi Phi" logo (mentioned in the book) for their T-shirts. That said, some of the terminology is a bit dated; I've never heard anyone use terms like "gafiate" in real life, and modern fandom is more likely to use phrases from TV Tropes. Still, that's not a problem: the astronauts aren't familiar with all the words either, so that allows a bit of exposition.

The back cover blurb refers to the year 2073, but ignore that. It was published in 1991, and I'd say that it was set about 5-10 years into the future. Reading it in 2017, some parts are no longer feasible (e.g. space station Mir was destroyed in 2001), and I think that the "new ice age" theory is largely discredited now.

More generally, the book presents a conflict between the Green government and science. Personally, I'm sympathetic towards both sides: I'm concerned about the environment, and I'd like to reduce air pollution, but I wouldn't want to see homeopathy replace conventional medicine. I went to a convention recently, where some people (particularly older women) said that they keep quiet about their links to fandom because it could be a career-limiting move. So, it's not too much of a stretch to imagine a new form of McCarthyism which targets science fiction.

As a content warning, there are a couple of sex scenes in here, but they're very brief and there aren't any details; I don't think the book even mentions genitalia at all. The problematic aspect is that one of those scenes has an ... aggressive seduction, bordering on sexual assault.

The scene in question comes in chapter 20, near the end of the book. A woman strips naked in front of a man, and backs him up against a wall, then this dialogue follows:

"I'll be taking your seed with me."

"I don't, uh ---"

"I didn't ask."

Whatever happens next is behind closed doors and "off camera"; the next time the man appears, he's very relaxed about the situation, with no complaints. So, in one sense, there's no harm done. However, if the roles had been reversed, with a man telling a woman that they're going to have sex and not even offering her an opportunity to consent, I would call that rape.

Now, I realise that the characters' actions don't necessarily reflect on the authors. For instance, there's another scene in the book where several bodies are dangling from a building: they were hanged by a mob for being nuclear physicists. That's clearly presented as a bad thing, and I think that it is legitimate for a fictional story to include elements like that. My concern here is that the seduction seems to be presented as a neat solution to a problem.

Earlier in the book, another woman reflects that: "To some men, 'no' meant 'maybe' and 'maybe' meant 'yes'." Bob (the man who was coerced) wasn't particularly respectful of other people's boundaries, so maybe the author(s) felt that turnabout is fair play? On the other hand, this may reflect a relaxed view towards consent in general, suggesting that it's more of a personal quirk than an outright immoral action.

There's quite a large cast of characters, and I think it might have been better to trim it down a bit. There are a couple of times where the group splits up, and I hadn't even noticed that one or two characters were missing until they turned up again later. I also found it a bit tricky to distinguish between some of them, e.g. Bruce and Mike. If this story was adapted into a film or TV series then it would probably be a bit easier, since the people would look different.

On a more positive note, there are a few scenes with direct cameos by real fans (rather than characters who are based on real people). Those work well, because each scene is just a few paragraphs long. There aren't loads of characters present at the same time, and you can forget about the details of the cameo after you've read it; the overall effect is similar to a montage.

There are a couple of bits where the book refers to Larry Niven (one of the authors). It's not quite self-insertion, and the characters discuss several other SF authors so it's reasonable for them to be aware of his work too. However, there's a risk of seeming self-congratulatory; I'll give the benefit of the doubt, and assume that one of the co-authors wrote those parts.

There's also a discussion at one point, where a character compares classic literature (e.g. Jane Austen) to speculative fiction (i.e. science fiction). His conclusion was that the classics are better for character development, whereas SF is better for plot (describing the things that happen). I think there's some truth in that, particularly as it applies to this book. At the same time, there are some nice character moments where various people show how much they value the space program.

Some of my comments are a bit negative, but overall this is one of my favourite books which I've re-read several times. I turned to it recently to give myself a break from another novel that I'm slowly trudging through (John Dies at the End), and I was struck by the contrast: it's a genuine pleasure to read a story like this.

If you liked this book then I also recommend Falling Free. That has some similar concepts, exploring what it would be like to live in "zero gravity" (more correctly in freefall) and there's a heist/caper aspect to it. Out of the two, I prefer "Falling Free", but they're both worth reading.

November 15, 2017

It took me about three years to read this book. It's a novel of near future (written in 1991), where USA is falling apart because the Green Party has the power and glaciers are approaching from north (the ice age is their fault because they stopped pollution and reversed the global warming). Science fiction is illegal, suspected technophiles are arrested and conventions are held underground. SF fans come to rescue when two men from the space station shipwreck on earth. Can they avoid the evil anti-technology government and get the "angels" back to space? The book is full of SF fandom vocabulary like fanac, 'danes, FIAWOL, SMOF, etc. The novel was partly funny (fandom references were fun to spot) and partly annoying for a person like me who is both green-leftie AND an SF fan.

One other thing: real American SF fans appear as characters in this book, because they paid for it. How very... American.

November 15, 2007

Small band of valiant romantics against the Proxmires (think early Algore types) of the world. Having grown up in Wisconsin, I used to play in Kettle Moraine, carved out by the glaciers 10,000 years ago. Personally, a little global warming ain't so bad. This book is great fun.

October 22, 2021

I think some people in this thread don't quite understand the concept of science fiction. Especially the fiction part of science fiction. It's not realistic, it's not meant to be realistic. Is this climate fiction? Yes, but only in name. The plot is setting-based, but only as a catalyst for characters to make their decisions: it's not the end-all, be-all.

You can read the plot summary elsewhere: I'll just cover my analysis of the book.

The two main characters, Alex and Gordon, exist. Their backstories are underdeveloped, especially Gordon's, but going into their backstories would only muddle the plot. Their predicament is the only thing that matters: they can't move themselves, they have to rely on the goodwill of others, and they have to leave Earth. Why bother with who they are as people? One's cold, one's a romantic, and they both know what's necessary for them to keep moving. That's all that's necessary.

Sherrine, Bob, Steve, Thor, Hudson, and the rest of the background characters are fun, if a little 2D. Again, the book really isn't character-driven.

It's laugh-out-loud at moments, and the dialogue is even quotable at times. The prose leaves a little to be desired, but it's more of a "what if?' vibe, and trying to raise philosophical musings is merely incidental, if at all included.

On to the elephant in the room: the setting itself. The Greens, femenists, and religious right have merged into a technology-hating coalition bent on preserving the environment, no matter the cost. Here's where calling the book "climate fiction" breaks down a little. It's only climate fiction as a result of being political dystopian. Someone rises to power with an answer to the world's problems, assimilates other groups as supports, and assumes control of the population to solve the problems, no matter the cost.

Is it unrealistic? Yes. Is it a reflection of what's going to happen? No.

People lambast this as a libertarian's book, an outlet to bash the government for all of the world's problems. That couldn't be further from the truth. We, the readers, know what happens when capitalism is corrupted (whose fault this is is a matter of debate not to be discussed on goodreads.com). This book gives the opposite example: a dystopia provided by government "assistance". Rapid climate change isn't good, no matter if it's freezing the world or heating it up. By providing us with an opposite, unrealistic example, Niven isn't arguing that we should let everyone go free reign and burn the world: he argues for moderation. Extremism, by the greens, by corporations, by anyone at all, isn't OK, and we should always be on the lookout for it in our politics, lest something as terrible as technophobes or outright anarchists do actually come to power.

All in all, 4 stars. Would recommend.

December 23, 2018

This book was written for a specific audience, and alas I am not part of that group. The 'power of friendship' so often displayed in manga and anime as a kind of OP plot-solver is replaced here with the 'power of fandom.' (I kid you not) There are many allusions in here that cater to long-standing fans engrossed in SF fandom and not the casual reader or a person living outside of fandom. Basically it tries to revel in the 'ghetto' version of SF once was: you're a part of a secret, hunted society! This jars with how we view SF today: it is certainly not gutter trash nor something hidden or oppressed, nor was it (probably) in the early nineties when it was written. (I could be wrong as I wasn't around for that :P)

However, the plot is popcorn fun, quickly moving, crazy, and generally never stops from the second chapter. Some other irkings (including a 'blink-and-you'll-miss-it' rape, general disparaging of fantasy, and the complete apathy of characters to the BURNING OF A CITY FOR LATENT HEAT, wtf) bring this to a 2 star ranking.

February 2, 2022

Possibly the worst worldbuilding I have ever encountered.

Technology bad. But the big bad ecologists still use cars, radios, fax machines, airplanes, electricity- basically, everything that was used in the real world when this was written. Why? "it's a necessary evil". Alright, so no actual explanation.

Oh but you can be jailed for owning a computer.

And there's barely any science being taught in schools and universities. No explanation as to how the government can still manage the country when technology is so scarce.

Big bad ecologists KILLED SEVERAL SCIENTISTS and managed to get away with a "justified manslaughter". Alright.

No real explanation as to how technology became so hated. And science-fiction is despised. For some reason.

Rape scene that's passed as a joke because it's a guy. The only secondary female characters are cosplayers in tiny outfits.

This entire book was a weak attempt from the authors at making themselves look in power thanks to the great Power of Fandom

If I could give this book 0 stars I would.

March 1, 2020

In a future where global cooling has led to permanent winter and the growth of ice across the U.S. one of the few outposts of science remaining is an orbital satellite whose residents are called angels. When a spacecraft with two angels is shot down, the only people willing to save them, and fight the corrupt government, are science fiction fans. The book is full of thinly disguised real fans, some of whom paid for the privilege of being in the book. The authors' conservative politics are constantly on display as environmentalists are mocked and those on the left are accused of being science deniers. It is ironic that real life has turned into the exact opposite of what is in the book with global warming and the conservatives muzzling scientists. Still, the book is an exciting love-letter to sf fandom.

September 9, 2019

A world with environmentalism gone mad

I enjoyed this book immensely. I especially loved the environmentalist, global warming alarmism, run amok, even in the face of an ice age. I absolutely despise the pseudo science that we are bombarded with on a daily basis and I really appreciated how the anti-tech, anti-individuality movement was portrayed in a distopian, totalitarian fashion as I am certain it will descend to in our real lives. I feel this is a courageous work as I am sure it is unpopular in the arts community. Thank you again Larry for a good romp and a good read.

May 29, 2020

Been wanting to get to this one for awhile.

This was written in 1991 and assumes a timeline that didn't quite happen. Don't let that hold you back. If you are a fan of SCI-FI there are a ton of references dropped through this book. Very fun to read. Some attitudes written about still relative today.

If you are a fan of Niven's earlier work this is a good addition. It is strictly science-realistic. With the exception of what we know today about long-term human living in micro gravity. The characters were fun and developed.

June 11, 2017

Not as good as the other collaborations I've read by Niven/Pournelle. Just an average read. It was a nice touch to see the authors thumb their noses at the global warming crowd. Environmentalists purposely destroying the environment to further their cause and strengthen their stranglehold on the mantle of power was the hidden motif behind the story. Bravo to you three writers for having enough balls to stand up and call a spade a spade.

June 25, 2017

I hate writing reviews so long after reading a book. Unless I’m actively thinking about a book during that time, I lose so many of my thoughts. I finished this book a week ago, but I simply didn’t have the time to sit down and collect my thoughts. Finally, I have the time. I’ll try my best to convey why I think this book is a three star book.

Come visit my blog for the full review…

http://itstartedwiththehugos.blogspot...