I So Wanted To Love Crimson Worlds

My politics are apparent to anyone with access to NSA intercepts. So, I read a comment about a series of Military Science Fiction novels by Jay Allan that led me to believe him to be a fellow-traveler. No, he's not a Whig, but he loves freedom like I do and he believes in TANSTAAFL, which is close enough to make traditional publishers dismiss his prose out of hand.

So, sight unseen, I bought a prequel (Tombstone) and Marines, The Cost of Victory, A Little Rebellion, The First Imperium, and The Line Must Hold. Are these bad novels? Not really. Are they badly written? Not really. Are the stories bad? Not really. Should I have purchased books so indiscriminately? Not really.

It's not that these books are full of typos and misspellings. Really, they're quite clean for self-published work. Mr. Allan should be happy with his copy editor(s) who have done a good job. And it's not as if Mr. Allan is a bad writer. I think he displays several rookie mistakes, but they're not as bad as some others I've complained about here.

I'm not happy with these novels because I wanted to love them, but they let me down. They let me down by peeving me.

Do you write with an Omniscient POV? You shouldn't. Do you tease the reader with what you know and what the reader does not? You shouldn't overdo it. Do you repeat things you already disclosed to the reader previously? You shouldn't overdo it. Do you write scenes wherein the antagonist and his cabal explain to the reader what insidious plans they have in mind for the protagonist? You shouldn't overdo it. Does Mr. Allan do all these things? Yup.

In short, I was repeatedly peeved with Mr. Allan's novels. But I kept on hoping my peevishness would go away by the end of the series. Ultimately, I ran out of patience.

Should you read Jay Allan's novels? Yes. Should you stop at A Little Rebellion? Yes. Should you stop at  First Imperium and read Perry Rhodan translations instead? Yes.

Specifically, what disappointed me with First Imperium was the physics of anti-matter. I'm pretty good at handwavium and I can tell when someone is faking it. In the case of Mr. Allan, I could tell that he was just taking big numbers and multiplying them by 10x or 1000x depending upon whether he's talking about g-loads or about megaton-yields.

And I'm disappointed with his vision of technological advancement. Consider if you will, the difference between the technology of today with the technology of a thousand years ago. The stuff we're doing today is completely incomprehensible to William the Conqueror. We have things like arrows, shields and cavalry, but they're not just quantitatively scaled-up versions, but qualitative improvements and categories of warfare inconceivable and unimaginable to him.

Further, consider the rate of technological change that has dramatically accelerated over the last few decades. The some stuff we're doing today is completely incomprehensible to William Tecumseh Sherman or William Westmorland.

Should humanity encounter advanced aliens who are above our level of technological development, the difference won't be that they have antimatter and we don't. They are far less likely to be deploying robotic infantry, but making our sun go nova or opening big-bang-style white-holes near our space fleets. At least that's what I have my advanced aliens intending to do.

I like the idea of a young human race encountering an old alien race in decline, but I am peeved by the way that Mr. Allan handles it.

For these reasons, I want to give these novels more than 4 stars, but am so peeved at them that I think this unduly generous.

Little Did I Suspect

This isn't as much a deep or profound observation on writing as much as an annoyed gripe about a pet peeve.

I'm amidst of reading some military SF and the narrative is first-person. I just read these words: "I would get an answer to that question, but not until years later."

First, let me tell you how good it feels for the writer to tip his hand like this. It is like exulting in one's godhood.

Second, it tells the reader too much. Sure the narrator is in space armor on an alien world with lots of hostile forces arrayed agains him. We fully expect him to go into battle and face insuperable odds. And we fully expect him to have to face and conquer his inner fears. Most likely, things that should work will break, and expected allies will betray him. All at the worst times imaginable.

But we know this guy is going to survive for years to come. Moreover, he'll survive in a manner that he'll be in a position to know the answer to his question. He's immortal. Though he may be wounded, he won't be killed. Though he may be captured, he'll escape with his mind intact. And we know the timetable for resolution of the matter is years in the future.

The writer is tipping his hand on what's coming and the reader need never fear for the narrator's safety.

I think this damages the relationship between reader and writer. OK, if we know our hero is going to make it, cut to the chase and take us to something we don't know. This isn't fair of me, because the reader ultimately wants to know HOW the hero wins the day. But I think this is a poor transaction on the writer's part. S/He gets an ego-boost. The reader gets an quantum of reduced suspense.

It's my opinion that the reader should get maximal suspense as most story questions are answered after a chapter or two except for The Big Story Question being raised in the opening pages and answered in the novel's climax. Something like the "little did I suspect" passage throws this pattern into a cocked hat. Is it a major infraction? Probably not.

It is just a pet peeve
.