ꞙ𝓲𝕟𝕚𝓉ᶌ reviewed Zodiac by Neal Stephenson
Fantastic Eco Thriller
5 stars
Ended too quickly.
Paperback, 320 pages
English language
Published June 1, 1995 by Spectra.
Sangamon Taylor's a New Age Sam Spade who sports a wet suit instead of a trench coat and prefers Jolt from the can to Scotch on the rocks. He knows about chemical sludge the way he knows about evil -- all too intimately. And the toxic trail he follows leads to some high and foul places. Before long Taylor's house is bombed, his every move followed, he's adopted by reservation Indians, moves onto the FBI's most wanted list, makes up with his girlfriend, and plays a starring role in the near-assassination of a presidential candidate. Closing the case with the aid of his burnout roomate, his tofu-eating comrades, three major networks, and a range of unconventional weaponry, Sangamon Taylor pulls off the most startling caper in Boston Harbor since the Tea Party. As he navigates this ecological thriller with hardboiled wit and the biggest outboard motor he can get his …
Sangamon Taylor's a New Age Sam Spade who sports a wet suit instead of a trench coat and prefers Jolt from the can to Scotch on the rocks. He knows about chemical sludge the way he knows about evil -- all too intimately. And the toxic trail he follows leads to some high and foul places. Before long Taylor's house is bombed, his every move followed, he's adopted by reservation Indians, moves onto the FBI's most wanted list, makes up with his girlfriend, and plays a starring role in the near-assassination of a presidential candidate. Closing the case with the aid of his burnout roomate, his tofu-eating comrades, three major networks, and a range of unconventional weaponry, Sangamon Taylor pulls off the most startling caper in Boston Harbor since the Tea Party. As he navigates this ecological thriller with hardboiled wit and the biggest outboard motor he can get his hands on, Taylor reveals himself as one of the last of the white-hatted good guys in a very toxic world.
Ended too quickly.
I found this at the public library in Columbia, Missouri, back in 1988. I was at the bookstore placing an order a day or two later (a laborious process at that time). I've been a Stephenson fan ever since. I was able to get my first edition trade paperback signed when he came to St. Louis during the Fall tour. I reread this every 5 years or so and still enjoy it.
I found this at the public library in Columbia, Missouri, back in 1988. I was at the bookstore placing an order a day or two later (a laborious process at that time). I've been a Stephenson fan ever since. I was able to get my first edition trade paperback signed when he came to St. Louis during the Fall tour. I reread this every 5 years or so and still enjoy it.
The main character is an asshole; I believe this was the authors' intent. I've read this book a half dozen times. It doesn't really reward you for a rereading (vs, say Asimov or Tolkien), but it's a dang fun way to burn an evening.
The main character is an asshole; I believe this was the authors' intent. I've read this book a half dozen times. It doesn't really reward you for a rereading (vs, say Asimov or Tolkien), but it's a dang fun way to burn an evening.
An entertaining read, although not up there with the cryptonomicon or snow-crash.
Was ok. Not great, not terrible. Pleasant and entertaining I guess.
Was ok. Not great, not terrible. Pleasant and entertaining I guess.
Ok, I'm officially a Neal Stephenson fan. Here he makes toxic organic chemistry thrilling and brings Heyduke-style environmentalism into the era of heavy metal punks on angel dust. Most of it ages well and 80's nostalgia takes care of the rest. If any book could make you want to go plug up a sewer pipe, this is the one.
Ok, I'm officially a Neal Stephenson fan. Here he makes toxic organic chemistry thrilling and brings Heyduke-style environmentalism into the era of heavy metal punks on angel dust. Most of it ages well and 80's nostalgia takes care of the rest. If any book could make you want to go plug up a sewer pipe, this is the one.
bio-tech eco-thriller. it was ahead of its time (1980s).
So far it's not a bad book but it's not a great one either. It's an "eco-thriller" so I dig it because I am very interested in the environment. But because it's Neal Stephenson, it's more about the character than the environment and since the charcter's voice isn't terribly readable, this book isn't as good as his others. Still, I want to read it all the way through and am not bored.
So far it's not a bad book but it's not a great one either. It's an "eco-thriller" so I dig it because I am very interested in the environment. But because it's Neal Stephenson, it's more about the character than the environment and since the charcter's voice isn't terribly readable, this book isn't as good as his others. Still, I want to read it all the way through and am not bored.
As it says on the cover, "the eco-thriller". As bizarre as you would expect from the author of Snow-Crash, a story of pollution, PCBs, and attempted assassination. It isn't marketed as SF, but there is hard edge-of-reality science essential to the story: if molecular biology as a plot engine doesn't count, I don't know what does. This is yet another book with a first person viewpoint, which I am still curious about. Is the author writing from a first person p.o.v. more likely to turn that character into an idealised picture of him/herself? It would be very difficult to admit to seriously weird behaviour in that case. One writer who does that well is Jerzy Kosinski. His narrators have a deliberate detachment and lack of emotional involvement with the world around them. This could mirror a writer's feeling towards the world: that of interacting with it, but not really being …
As it says on the cover, "the eco-thriller". As bizarre as you would expect from the author of Snow-Crash, a story of pollution, PCBs, and attempted assassination. It isn't marketed as SF, but there is hard edge-of-reality science essential to the story: if molecular biology as a plot engine doesn't count, I don't know what does. This is yet another book with a first person viewpoint, which I am still curious about. Is the author writing from a first person p.o.v. more likely to turn that character into an idealised picture of him/herself? It would be very difficult to admit to seriously weird behaviour in that case. One writer who does that well is Jerzy Kosinski. His narrators have a deliberate detachment and lack of emotional involvement with the world around them. This could mirror a writer's feeling towards the world: that of interacting with it, but not really being a part of it when writing about it.