The Slow Lesbian River

First off I have nothing against lesbians but I would prefer to read a book that doesn't use it as a major plot element two thirds of the time. I did like that everything in the book was simply there and did not try to explain the how or why of things being the way they were. The cyberpunk elements were downplayed even the biotech that made up most of the tech in the story was barely used. It was strange reading a book that tried to encompass three stages of the same persons life with a minimum of time involvement. The characters were remarkably shallow for how much of the story was spent building them up and were unrealistic, even for a future society. Slow River is a good title for it because it takes a very long time to wander to a point that is not far from where it starts just like a slow moving river does in reality, except for the fact that real rivers are faster and accomplish more with less wandering.

my opinion

I do bot think Slow river was all that feminist. At least not in the traditional sense.
There can not by gender distinction when all the major characters and most of the minor ones are female the is nothing to be feminist about.
also i do not think there was enough tech in this book to be considered cyberpunk

Slower... slower... too slow! too slow!

Now, first of all, I must comment on the author's projection of herself on the story. I understand she's gay and everything, and that's fine, but did she have to make everyone else gay too? I mean aside from the men, I can hardly find a woman in the book who wasn't a lesbian. Her boss, her rescuer, her mother even...kind of... It was a good book, no question, but I find it rather unprofessional to make almost every character in the author's image- at least so far as sexual preference anyway. Was the author really preposing that everyone in the future will be gay? Or does she justify all of this with a string of coincidences? And I mean a lot of coincidences. Whatever...
Now, on to the book itself. Is it cyberpunk? I don't think so. There was really no matrix-style computer interfacing in the book. Mainly, the futuristic aspects were the slates and the PIDA's. Aside from the casual references to the tubes and the "library", this book was pretty straight forward. At times, I felt as if I was reading a space opera. The pages weren't exactly soaked with drama, but it was still there- just, not in space... But it's not space opera. It's not cyberpunk. And it's definitly not hard science, so what is it? Why are you asking me? I'm no sci-fi geek. I'm a horror man.
Frankly, I really like the way the book read. It was kind of like Deepness in the Sky, except there were three different narratives, and they were in shorter sections, which I think is better. No matter which part I was reading, I was gaining a deeper insight as to who this "Lore" character was. And I was never disappointed when one section ended and the next began, because then I was able to apply what I had learned to this next perspective. This system made for a very enjoyable read.

Slow Rivers.

I have to disagree with people who said that this book is not sci-fi, it very much is, I think it made me believe the world it was in more than any other book I have read so far.

It is slow, but the slowness is thorough, every chapter ties in with the next, it is an easy read which makes it quite enjoyable, the elements of cyberpunk? Slates, pretty much Spanner is the biggest element of cyberpunk in the book, the science? Hello biology chemistry and prosthetic-limbed-Paolo? There is your science, mind you in some parts it is very hard science, which made me dislike the book a little, I am not a fan of biology.

Rapnatida made me remember The Island of Dr. Moreau, only not so. It is a well-written book, it is very laid-back I have to admit, for sci-fi at least, but it's enjoyable and I have to say my favorite book thus far in the series, I think the only reason it didn't win more awards is because it wasn't as "hardcore" as say, Neuromancer, I still really enjoyed it.

Slow River and such....

Well, while some parts seemed to really drag before jetting off the ground, I did end up liking the book. Kinda. It had interesting albeit seemingly unnecessary science (I think this novel could have played closer to modern times and been just as good), and the story really did keep you intrigued by tossing you just a sliver of information and then following it up satisfyingly (unlike Cosmonaut Keep, which tossed you a sliver and then did nothing with it). It also had fascinating gender reversal in a lot of key roles, including one that was disturbing in new ways. And that's why one part of this novel really puzzled me.

Male characters. I'm not saying I need male characters to be interested in a story, but if you're going to have them...use them. The male characters in this story serve largely as foils for other characters, especially Lore, to appear stronger in the comparison. Which really isn't necessary because Lore, as well as the other female characters, are well rounded with flaws and strengths already. 

Her relationship with Tok is a glaring flaw with this. Sure, she was close to him. Why? Because she says she was? That is not enough for a narrative this deep, this character driven. There is a law in most narrative mediums, that characters only use words to lie, even to themselves. While this isn't literally true, what it means is that you must back up what a character says with actions and events, or the words feel hollow, which is how I feel in this case. 

Now male writers do this quite a bit, but they don't get to walk away unscathed. Nicola Griffith does this and wins awards. Not that this isn't a great book, award-winning indeed, but almost no one criticizes her writing for this. Whilst male SF writers, and to a lesser degree, male writers in general, must tread eggshells when it comes to their female characters. This double standard is ever-present in many aspects of modern society, especially our expressive forms. And I thought double standards were what feminists were against. 

But, in the end, I still thought it was a good book, and if Paul hadn't practically forced us to look at this from a "This is how a girl writes Sci-Fi" perspective, I probably wouldn't even be talking about this. 

WTF?!

Should this book even be considered sci-fi? I feel that achieves the bare-minimum requirement to get into the genre, if there is such a thing. Not that it isn't a bad story or anything, better than all the others we've read already. A good conflict starting slowly and building up at a reasonable pace until the conclusion, a likeable protaganist, villains that I really wanted to throttle on her behalf, the whole shebang. Some of the sexual stuff kind of got to me though, and not in a good way either. Sure, I've gotten used to it happening in our reading assignments by now, and the fact that it was a lot of lesbian stuff was just fine. But that stuff that Lore did with porn and sex clubs and all just made me want to kick the crap out of her parents for being so damn negligent. On a lighter note, Spanner throwing a party just to get a load of people uncontrollably horny so they could be caught on camera just struck me as the funniest thing in this book LOL. Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is this: is it just me, or is it a bit sad that this book would be more interesting because of sexual content than for it's sci-fi content, despite being in the sci-fi category? I also couldn't help noticing that this is the fourth book with smut and an award attached, coincidence? Not bloody likely. These academics giving out these awards need to get their heads out of the gutter and start noticing all the zombies that need to be shot, 'nuff said.

Slow River indeed.

I loved how quick and easy this book read. There was a lot of things about Lore that I couldn't figure out until they actually said it. One thing that did anger me is that it seemed every woman in there was lesbian.....obviously one wrote but not every woman is one. With each book in the past, a man had wrote and woman were pretty much sex objects or poorly/very messed up chacters. But this one has woman being the strong creatures and men as weak. A lot of people don't like to think of woman being strong minded indivaduals. But when you think about it most woman in this world would choose a man only because it is convenitent and they don't get in the way...notice how I didn't say all, I do know some women so dependent on men that it isn't worth breath trying to talk them out of it. Anyways, I really thought the ending was twisted, most people assume that the father does all the molesting and whatnot, but here it was the mother, which also brings another point, that even though all the woman in this book were strong and powerful, they were also twisted. Which makes this book more like a role reversal, in other books the men would have done what the women did and the women what the men did. So in a case of role reversal this book was extremly well written.
However, I think that some of the men should have played a more important role in this book, like not being as stupid...........
Lore's father and her brother, are not very well rounded chacters, they are one sided and it is very poor, I would have loved to see more Lore and Tok, they could have been very close, but the family could have been to messed up for any family relationships to contuine further then they would have.
Spanner...didn't like her much, a simple mind for a very messed up person. I really did not like her in the end when she said there was no choices for her, she had to stay where is was and couldn't change it. Lore should have gotten rid of her a long ass time ago...