Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cepu!ucla-cs!srt
From: srt@ucla-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: To Reign in Hell (Stephen Brust)
Message-ID: <4628@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 2-Apr-85 15:01:37 EST
Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.4628
Posted: Tue Apr  2 15:01:37 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Apr-85 08:00:47 EST
Reply-To: srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (Scott Turner)
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 60
Summary: 


  Just finished reading this book, which I don't think I would have
normally picked up, but since the author is a net type person...

  The book concerns a struggle in Heaven, between the various of the
Heavenly Host.  The premise is to show how events like the fall of Satan,
etc., might have actually happened quite differently, but still have given
rise to the standard interpretation.

  The problem with writing this sort of a book is that the author has
started off by placing severe limitations upon himself.  First of all, he
has to write a story that supports the standard interpretation of the
struggle in heaven.  Secondly, he has to craft the story so that the reader
is left with an entirely different viewpoint about what happened.  Third,
within this framework he has to write a story.

  Brust handles the first two points nicely.  I'm not well read on the
various myths about the fall of Satan, etc., but the story fit in well with
what I do know.  The story also left me with a new view on the fall of Satan,
so it succeeded on the second point as well.

  However, the story fails (somewhat) on the third point.

  I'm of the opinion that a story must be personal in order to succeed.
That is, even if you intend to tell the story of some sweeping historical
change, you must show how that change has some personal effect on someone.
LOTR does this admirably.  Although the story is, on one level, a struggle
between good and evil, it succeeds because it shows how this struggle is
reflected in the life of Frodo.

  To Reign In Hell doesn't do this.  If you've read the book, ask yourself
who the main character is.  Satan?  Well, much of the action does revolve
around Satan, but he isn't (strangely) central to the story.  In fact, the
story doesn't have a main character, and that, I think, is its major failing.

  By not having a personal side, and by not showing a great deal of
character development, etc., TRIH fails to be a complete story.

  On to some unrelated comments.

  I found two ideas in TRIH to be fairly fascinating.  First, there is the
idea that the angels were at some time ignorant of morality.  This idea is
only hinted at and then abandoned.  The hint is when they question whether
or not they have the right to force other angels to do something.  At first
they seem surprised by the question (and, indeed, Michael never does see
the point), but the issue is never fully developed, and there are plenty of
actions by angels that contradict this premise (i.e, Abdiel worries about
what he is doing, Jaweh feels love, etc.).

  Still, this is a fascinating idea.  Suppose you had a world full of
creatures who had no morality at all.  What would they (and their society)
be like?

  The second idea is the implication that Jesus Christ was the SECOND
coming, and not the first.  I'm not sure if Brust intended this or not,
but it occurred to me while reading the book, and I found it to be an
interesting idea.  I'm not sure how this can be used in a story, but it
makes a fascinating premise.

					-- Scott Turner