bobquasit: (Default)
[personal profile] bobquasit
In the Beginning (Babylon 5)In the Beginning by Peter David

My rating: 3 of 5 stars


I'm not a Peter David fan. Oh, I've read a few of his books, but I consider him to be a workmanlike author rather than an artist. Of course, I also consider him to be a newcomer, since I respect very few post-1980 authors (exactly three, in fact: Brust, Brin, and Watt-Evans).

But In the Beginning is surprisingly well-written. It was shot in the dark for me, quite literally; I don't remember where I'd originally picked it up, but I'm sure I didn't buy it new (the pencil marking inside says $2.95). It was late at night, I desperately needed something to read, and I'd just turned off the light in the den; it was pitch-black. So for a lark, I pushed aside the books in the outer layer of one of my bookshelves (I'm terribly short of shelf space), and pulled out a book at random from the row of books behind.

Now, I must admit up front that I was a big fan of Babylon 5. In fact, it was the last show that I would call myself a "fan" of; I think I got too old for the fan phenomenon after that. But from seasons 1-4 I was a big fan, and even wrote a one-shot zine for a Babylon 5 APA (amateur press association, a collection of zines on a topic).*

Anyway, I have to say that Peter David captured the voice of the narrator, Londo Mollari, extremely well. I could hear the voice just as Peter Jurasik performed it while I was reading it. I don't know if someone who isn't familiar with the show itself would get the same enjoyment out of the book, therefore.

In any case, I'd call it a successful novelization; it captured the plot and essence of the broadcast show extremely well. There was only one jarring note. On page 75, there's a line:
Indeed, the gravity on the Babylon 5 space station was achieved entirely through a steady rotation, the same as that on any planet.

Perhaps Peter David only meant to say that planets have a steady rotation, but it certainly seems as if he's saying that centrifugal (or is it centripetal?) force is the source of gravitation on planets - and of course, that's absolutely wrong! If planetary gravity was caused by rotation, everything not fastened to the planetary crust would be flung into space. Could a modern science fiction author really be that ignorant of basic physics? I have to wonder!

All in all, though, an enjoyable read. I was tempted to give it four stars. But if you're not a B5 fan, you're probably more likely to consider it a 3-star work.

----------
* - I'm not sure if this link will work, but if it does here's a link to that zine: http://www.maranci.net/babble-on5.pdf . It has been annotated from a years-later perspective.



View all my reviews

Date: 2011-03-28 08:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] klyfix.livejournal.com
I'm guessing that maybe he was meaning to say that the steady rotation of the station produced a "gravity" that was the same as any planet. Which would also not be quiet true, but a bit more true.

Now, a hollow planet where people lived on the inside might well have a "gravity" produced by centrifugal force; something Hollow Earth theorists tend to miss that on the inside of a sphere things would actually be essentially weightless as the pull of one side of the sphere would counter the pull of the other side.

Date: 2011-04-13 05:56 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wilukern.livejournal.com
I am doing research for my university thesis, thanks for your great points, now I am acting on a sudden impulse.

Date: 2011-04-13 09:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] qicaarmy.livejournal.com
Gratitude is the sign of noble souls.

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9 10 11121314 15
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 28th, 2017 03:06 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios