Re: Cold Storage By E. S. Strout
Posted: May 01, 2013, 01:05:38 AM
Well, I sure wish Bill would show up for this . . . I'm on shaky ground here, science-wise. That said . . .
The part that doesn't seem right to me (science-wise) goes like this: One particle of antimatter should destroy one particle of 'normal' matter, shouldn't it? And it should stop there. But here we have some-odd pico-quantity of antimatter eating two times ten to the umpty-dozenth times it's own weight -- and quite passively, at that; no bang, not even a noiseless flash. Stuff just disappears. Am I behind the times on theory, or does this seem wrong to someone besides me?
'Tame' and 'untamed' antimatter -- ?? Huh??
Aside from that, I got a little annoyed at all the product placement. Generic equipment names work just fine. Adding specific make and/or model numbers is a distraction; it draws the reader's attention away from the story. I don't mind seeing "iPad;" it's become a word like "kleenex." But why Zeiss binoculars instead of Swarovsky? Or (eww) Bushnell? Don't use brand names unless you have a very good reason, as in, that brand is essential to some aspect of the story.
Also, when the two profs who were(n't) an item meet Beatrice, why do they stop and stare at her? Was it merely because she dresses like Rachel? I had to stop and reread the passage, and still couldn't figure it out. So, that took me out of the story -- again.
And this trans-lightspeed gravity engine, again. Painfully clear, it's a plot device, used to explain the rapid turnaround time of that space mission. Gee, how convenient. What if they didn't have that, though? Consider how the story would change: the characters start on this project, and don't have conclusive evidence -- yet -- but the probe brings back the needed sample in time for their children's generation to solve the problem! I think I might have liked that better than the way it was here.
Which brings me to another thing . . . Gino's stories always seem to be in too much of a hurry. Race to the finish-line, very exciting, all life as we know it is at stake. Trouble is, there's no variation in the pace, and that in itself generates a kind of monotony.
The part that doesn't seem right to me (science-wise) goes like this: One particle of antimatter should destroy one particle of 'normal' matter, shouldn't it? And it should stop there. But here we have some-odd pico-quantity of antimatter eating two times ten to the umpty-dozenth times it's own weight -- and quite passively, at that; no bang, not even a noiseless flash. Stuff just disappears. Am I behind the times on theory, or does this seem wrong to someone besides me?
'Tame' and 'untamed' antimatter -- ?? Huh??
Aside from that, I got a little annoyed at all the product placement. Generic equipment names work just fine. Adding specific make and/or model numbers is a distraction; it draws the reader's attention away from the story. I don't mind seeing "iPad;" it's become a word like "kleenex." But why Zeiss binoculars instead of Swarovsky? Or (eww) Bushnell? Don't use brand names unless you have a very good reason, as in, that brand is essential to some aspect of the story.
Also, when the two profs who were(n't) an item meet Beatrice, why do they stop and stare at her? Was it merely because she dresses like Rachel? I had to stop and reread the passage, and still couldn't figure it out. So, that took me out of the story -- again.
And this trans-lightspeed gravity engine, again. Painfully clear, it's a plot device, used to explain the rapid turnaround time of that space mission. Gee, how convenient. What if they didn't have that, though? Consider how the story would change: the characters start on this project, and don't have conclusive evidence -- yet -- but the probe brings back the needed sample in time for their children's generation to solve the problem! I think I might have liked that better than the way it was here.
Which brings me to another thing . . . Gino's stories always seem to be in too much of a hurry. Race to the finish-line, very exciting, all life as we know it is at stake. Trouble is, there's no variation in the pace, and that in itself generates a kind of monotony.