The Grand Illusion
The other day I read a reader review of Isolate, the first book of “The Grand Illusion,” my newest series, which features a junior military security officer essentially ordered to work as an aide for a senior politician, in a constitutional empire with a mandated three party system. In this world electricity doesn’t work as a power source, and a tiny percentage of the population have empathic talents, either as empaths who can read and project emotions or as isolates whose emotions cannot be read or influenced by empaths. The book begins with the main character and his partner fending off an empath attack on the politician as they leave the capitol building.
What I found both amusing and slightly appalling was that the reader gave Isolate a five star review (which I certainly appreciate) with the sole comment of: “A little too political at times but a good read if you like his books.”
I’m still shaking my head about it, because the book is avowedly political. Everything revolves around the politics and how those politics influence everything from the politicians to the large corporations and the poorest field workers. I can see a reader who doesn’t like politics disliking the book, but saying that a science-fantasy political novel is a little too political leaves me baffled, especially with such a good rating.
I suppose it’s possible, and perhaps it’s happened, but I wonder if anyone would say that a thriller is a little too thrilling at times, or that a detective novel has a little too much detecting, or a romance novel has a bit too much romance.
It’s the fact that you’re an author who touches a lot of different genres to be frank. And I don’t mean that as a aim at you but at how we tend to function.
A very savy YouTuber once pointed out that for a channel to grow it needed to be focused. Because the algorithm doesn’t support a wide spread channel. It means that in that medium, people will often run multiple channels for simple divisions of focus (The YouTuber in question has 4 separate channels, one for theories about games, one for theories about film/tv, one for theories about food and a fourth channel for their live streaming.).
So, the flaw her is in the reader, they read Recluce most likely, maybe Corean.. I honestly have no idea how you could read Spell Song or Imager and not expect politics.
Then they picked up Isolate, which is marketed as a fantasy book, and were confused it branched away from that.
If anything, while the reviewer is a bit off, I hope it helps people branch out. Admittedly back in the day I never would have cared for any book involving sci fi or fire arms. It was the nature of your Recluce books and then Corean that let me slip into them and realize I was being too narrow.
I agree. I think this is simply a case of “reviewer expected sword-and-sorcery fantasy” but got a political allegory instead.
SInce the ideology is not heavily slanted, it works, and even for those who wouldn’t really appreciate a political* novel per se, as part of a detailed world that has assorted plausible activities to make it complete of which politics is but one, it might not be an obstacle. But some may find it too much politics, just as some may not be especially fond of mysteries even though every story is a bit of a mystery insofar as the end is not told at the beginning.
* Try Level 7, flat out pacifist propaganda, relentlessly heavy-handed, always manipulative even with some literary allusions. Wrecked me for a weekend, when I read it at 10 or so; as contrasted with at least the optimism (maybe not plausibility 🙁 )of L. Neil Smith’s libertarian future.
It’s possible that the reader saw (real or imagined) allusions to real-life politics, and the story as a commentary thereon. It’s not too much of a stretch as this has been done through science fiction for its existence.
Yes, I’d back it as being plot events that match my political views = good story, plot events that are contrary to my political views = overly “political”.
The story explicitly involves guarding a politician who endorses redistribution of wealth in the society and who fights corruption.
It’s like complaining an orange tastes too much like an orange.
Dune is political as well, a friend noted the parallels there are closer to the Russian/
Caucasus struggles, than the Berber struggles of North Africa,
maybe a list of terms might be helpful
I feel like I have never read a Modesitt book that was not political. This was not by far the worst. Maybe they just didn’t like that the novel had a lot of actual nuts and bolts politics.