The Gentle Giants Of Ganymede By James P Hogan: Spoiler Q
Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25 million years ago, on a planet named Minerva (where the asteroid belt
is now), there was a race of giant humanoids known to humans as
Ganymedes (since scientists first discovered evidence of their existence
on the Jovian moon Ganymede). When the Ganymedes first evolved, they
had a poisonous secondary circulatory system which early Minervan
animals had developed to protect themselves from carnivores. As a
result, there were no carnivores on the land. This secondary system
made the Ganymedes very vulnerable to accidents. Even the slightest cut
would kill them be releasing the poison into their primary circulatory
systems. The Ganymedes figures out how to neutralize their secondary
systems, first by eating certain plants and molds, then via surgery,
then by eliminating the gene that creates that system. Unfortunately,
the Ganymedes eliminated their ability to tolerate high carbon dioxide
levels when they eliminated their secondary systems, so their geese were
cooked when CO2 levels started to soar.
PP 149-150 of paperback: Danchekker tells Hunt how the Ganymedes tried
to solve the CO2 problem. They considered holding down the CO2 level
through artificial means, but they feared that they would destroy
Minerva's greenhouse effect in the process, freezing the planet. They
worked out a way to heat up the Sun to compensate, but a test of that
method by the Ganymede ship Shapieron on the star Iscaris blew up that
star. They considered moving to Earth, but didn't think they could
survive with Earth's predators, and couldn't stomach the idea of wiping
out Earth's life forms. Why didn't the Ganymedes deploy solar mirrors
in orbit for the purpose of heating up Minerva if the greenhouse effect
got destroyed?
In the end, its discovered that the Ganymedes imported terrestrial life
forms for experiments to see if the Ganymedes could incorporate the
Terran CO2 tolerance method into their genomes, but the Ganymede
experiments made the terrestrial animals smarter and more aggressive (by
removing something called the "self immunization" system, in which the
animals introduce toxins into their systems to stimulate antibodies.
These toxins had inhibited the development of sentient brains. The
elimination of the self immunization system made it possible for humans
to evolve on Minerva, and later settle on Earth after they blew up
Minerva).
Robert Carnegie
You seem to be interested in the question: why didn't they use space
mirrors to concentrate solar heat on their world?
Without reading the book:
(1) Because if they did then the plot wouldn't turn out with humans
exploring the solar system and finding places that the Ganymedes used
to be. Story necessity.
(2) The biological experiments were cheaper.
(Either mirrors or shades in space, depending on your plans, would be
very expensive for /us/.)
(3) It was against their religion, e.g. they believe reflections are
immoral. I have no evidence for this.
There is a point of view that James Hogan has developed an interest in
eccentric beliefs about the physical history of the solar system that
greatly impairs his writing. I'm not sure whether you liked this one
or whether you threw the book at the wall when you didn't like the
Ganymedes' idea of how to deal with ecological disaster.
Come to think, while the asteroid belt as exploded planet solves fewer
science problems than it creates (have we discussed "Bode's Law" in
science before?), is it a concept of Velikovsky's, or is it too normal
for him? I'd suppose that he'd have the asteroids composed of deep-
frozen manna, or something.
Johnny1a
>
> There is a point of view that James Hogan has developed an interest in
> eccentric beliefs about the physical history of the solar system that
> greatly impairs his writing. I'm not sure whether you liked this one
> or whether you threw the book at the wall when you didn't like the
> Ganymedes' idea of how to deal with ecological disaster.
This was before he really started getting that way, a lot of the plot
is based on fairly traditional time scales and concepts of evolution.
The dynamics of the Solar System are goofy, though.
The truth is that the Giant books get stranger as they go, they're
space opera, with some bits of harder science mixed in, esp. in the
first (and best, IMHO) of the three, _Inherit the Stars_. In it, the
backstory assumption of Solar history are totally lunatic, but the
scientists are shown deciphering that truth in a rational, believable
way. It's not their fault that the truth, in that universe, is goofy,
and thus they reach a goofy conclusion.
William Hyde
>
> This was before he really started getting that way, a lot of the plot
> is based on fairly traditional time scales and concepts of evolution.
> The dynamics of the Solar System are goofy, though.
>
> The truth is that the Giant books get stranger as they go, they're
> space opera, with some bits of harder science mixed in, esp. in the
> first (and best, IMHO) of the three, _Inherit the Stars_. In it, the
> backstory assumption of Solar history are totally lunatic, but the
> scientists are shown deciphering that truth in a rational, believable
> way. It's not their fault that the truth, in that universe, is goofy,
> and thus they reach a goofy conclusion.
I actually have this series, as a result of a book club error decades
ago. Is Mr Bruening's description of the Ganymedians biology and
consequent problems accurate? Because that is sufficiently stupid
(not crazy, lunatic, creative, lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes,
but stupid) as to quell any lingering interest I might have in
actually finishing a Hogan novel.
William Hyde
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
The biology doesn't play into the first one, _Inherit the Stars_
which is quite good. I think it was Hogan's debut book, and made him
seem like an author with a lot of promise.
You can stop there.
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Scott Lurndal
_The Two Faces of Tomorrow_, the _Genesis Machine_ and _Thrice upon a Time_
are also worth reading. IMO.
scott
Wayne Throop
::: consequent problems accurate? Because that is sufficiently stupid
::: (not crazy, lunatic, creative,
::: lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes, but stupid) as to quell any
::: lingering interest I might have in actually finishing a Hogan novel.
:: The biology doesn't play into the first one, _Inherit the Stars_
:: which is quite good. I think it was Hogan's debut book, and made him
:: seem like an author with a lot of promise.
: sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
: _The Two Faces of Tomorrow_, the _Genesis Machine_ and _Thrice upon a
: Time_ are also worth reading. IMO.
Mine too. I'd tenatively even say "Code of the Lifemaker" wasn't
yet into his horrid phase. Doesn't seem to digress into Velikovskianism,
nor take any pot-shots at evolution as it could.
Whether GGoG et al is into his horrid phase... I dunno. The biology
is indeed (putting it as kindly as possible) wildly implausible,
but then, is it really any more than an order of magnitude worse
than Pak biology?
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
William Hyde
> ::: Is Mr Bruening's description of the Ganymedians biology and
> ::: consequent problems accurate? Because that is sufficiently stupid
> ::: (not crazy, lunatic, creative,
> ::: lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes, but stupid) as to quell any
> ::: lingering interest I might have in actually finishing a Hogan novel.
>
> :: The biology doesn't play into the first one, _Inherit the Stars_
> :: which is quite good. I think it was Hogan's debut book, and made him
> :: seem like an author with a lot of promise.
>
> : sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> : _The Two Faces of Tomorrow_, the _Genesis Machine_ and _Thrice upon a
> : Time_ are also worth reading. IMO.
>
> Mine too.
Tried "thrice" and found it unreadable. Forced my way to about page
90. Not so much a case of the science bothering me (though his take
on graduate education was unintentionally hilarious), just didn't
like anything about it, starting with every character.
I'd tenatively even say "Code of the Lifemaker" wasn't
> yet into his horrid phase.
I did buy that (somehow Hogan always seemed like the kind of writer I
should like) but got even less far.
> Whether GGoG et al is into his horrid phase... I dunno. The
biology
> is indeed (putting it as kindly as possible) wildly implausible,
> but then, is it really any more than an order of magnitude worse
> than Pak biology?
Worse, I'd say from the above, but more than an order of magnitude
worse? Isn't there an absolute zero on the science scale that we
can't go below?
So if I want to give early/middle period Hogan another try, which of
"Giants", "Thrice" or "Code" should I try ? Just because I hated
"Thrice" two decades ago doesn't mean I will hate it now. Recommending
a fourth book won't do me any good - I'm not spending another dime on
him.
William Hyde
Greg Goss
>Come to think, while the asteroid belt as exploded planet solves fewer
>science problems than it creates (have we discussed "Bode's Law" in
>science before?), is it a concept of Velikovsky's, or is it too normal
>for him? I'd suppose that he'd have the asteroids composed of deep-
>frozen manna, or something.
I don't think V did anything with an ex-planet at the asteroid belt.
He had a bunch of near-encounters between Earth and Venus after Venus
emerged from Venus and before Venus settled down into a perfect orbit.
I think he might have had a wandering Mars, too. But I don't recall
anything involving a Minerva-equivalent.
I remain fascinated by Velikovsky-style catastrophism, though. What
if we take his reports and try to connect them to a proto-Encke rather
than a proto Venus?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_Encke#Effects_on_Earth
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/phaeth.html
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
>::: Is Mr Bruening's description of the Ganymedians biology and
>::: consequent problems accurate? Because that is sufficiently stupid
>::: (not crazy, lunatic, creative,
>::: lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes, but stupid) as to quell any
>::: lingering interest I might have in actually finishing a Hogan novel.
>
>:: The biology doesn't play into the first one, _Inherit the Stars_
>:: which is quite good. I think it was Hogan's debut book, and made him
>:: seem like an author with a lot of promise.
>
>: sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>: _The Two Faces of Tomorrow_, the _Genesis Machine_ and _Thrice upon a
>: Time_ are also worth reading. IMO.
>
>Mine too. I'd tenatively even say "Code of the Lifemaker" wasn't
>yet into his horrid phase. Doesn't seem to digress into Velikovskianism,
>nor take any pot-shots at evolution as it could.
>
I thought the rationale for robot sex was pretty weak..
Johnny1a
> ::: Is Mr Bruening's description of the Ganymedians biology and
> ::: consequent problems accurate? Because that is sufficiently stupid
> ::: (not crazy, lunatic, creative,
> ::: lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes, but stupid) as to quell any
> ::: lingering interest I might have in actually finishing a Hogan novel.
>
> :: The biology doesn't play into the first one, _Inherit the Stars_
> :: which is quite good. I think it was Hogan's debut book, and made him
> :: seem like an author with a lot of promise.
>
> : sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> : _The Two Faces of Tomorrow_, the _Genesis Machine_ and _Thrice upon a
> : Time_ are also worth reading. IMO.
>
> Mine too. I'd tenatively even say "Code of the Lifemaker" wasn't
> yet into his horrid phase.
I love the opening sequence of _Code of the LIfemaker_.
>
> Whether GGoG et al is into his horrid phase... I dunno. The biology
> is indeed (putting it as kindly as possible) wildly implausible,
> but then, is it really any more than an order of magnitude worse
> than Pak biology?
>
> Wayne Throop thro...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
At least he extrapolates from biology to psychology in an interesting
way, thought the final result has more than a hint of wish-fulfilment
fantasy about it, IMHO. The Ganymeans from the _Shaperion_ are a
little too much like a Certain Sort of Alien, where I get the
impression that it's an expression of how he wishes humans were/are.
Wayne Throop
: So if I want to give early/middle period Hogan another try, which of
: "Giants", "Thrice" or "Code" should I try ? Just because I hated
: "Thrice" two decades ago doesn't mean I will hate it now. Recommending
: a fourth book won't do me any good - I'm not spending another dime on
: him.
If it has to be one of those three, I'd say try "thrice" twice.
I thought he had an interesting take on time signalling, and
managed to have a nice story, and the characters didn't annoy
all that much. In Giants and Code he gets closer to ranting
and farther away from just telling a story. IMO.
JimboCat
> Is Mr Bruening's description of the Ganymedians biology and
> consequent problems accurate? Because that is sufficiently stupid
> (not crazy, lunatic, creative, lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes,
> but stupid) as to quell any lingering interest I might have in
> actually finishing a Hogan novel.
Yeah, it's accurate. But it is the humans' reconstruction of events
long ago. It's wacky that anyone (a main character is a top biologist)
would *believe* it, but you don't have to.
The trilogy is a space-opera romp. It's full of implausibilities, but
I gave 'em a pass on the biology, and parsed it down to:
The ganymean's planet was becoming uninhabitable to them. For whatever
reason.
They tried a few things - fix the planet, fix their biology - and
couldn't get it to work, so they evacuated the planet (now, THAT is
implausible).
The last one out opened the zoos and let the genegineered Earth
primates out: they eventually evolved into modern humans.
25 million years later, these humans destroyed the planet. That's the
biggest implausibility, but at the time I read it I was unaware of
just how much energy that takes, so it didn't make me throw the book
at the wall.
A few of them made it to Earth, lost their tech, and became Cro-
Magnon.
The wacky solar-system dynamics are hand-waved as magic-tech that
wasn't quite ready for prime-time.
The trilogy does include a typical Hogan conspiracy-theory: there
really *was* a sekret society of self-described supermen in charge of
Earth behind the scenes. They were the ultimate source of all
superstition because they'd used their tech to wow the rubes with
"magic" for thousands of years. But they get their comeuppance.
I still like the space battle featuring a complete-fantasy computer-
generated EarthFleet attacking the PlanetOfTheBadGuys and throwing
their leaders into confusion for the critical few hours the good guys
need.
I don't know if you'll like the trilogy, but I did and actually still
do.
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
'The Bible is the rear-view mirror of reality, and it's labeled
"Objects In Fossil Record Are Closer Than They Appear".' [huey
callison]
Scott Lurndal
>On Mar 18, 6:23=A0pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
>> ::: Is Mr Bruening's description of the Ganymedians biology and
>> ::: (not crazy, lunatic, creative,
>> ::: lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes, but stupid) as to quell any
>> ::: lingering interest I might have in actually finishing a Hogan novel.
>>
>> :: The biology doesn't play into the first one, _Inherit the Stars_
>m
>> :: seem like an author with a lot of promise.
>>
>> : sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> : _The Two Faces of Tomorrow_, the _Genesis Machine_ and _Thrice upon a
>>
>> Mine too.
>
>Tried "thrice" and found it unreadable. Forced my way to about page
>90. Not so much a case of the science bothering me (though his take
>on graduate education was unintentionally hilarious), just didn't
>like anything about it, starting with every character.
>
>> yet into his horrid phase. =A0
>
>I did buy that (somehow Hogan always seemed like the kind of writer I
>should like) but got even less far.
>
>biology
>> is indeed (putting it as kindly as possible) wildly implausible,
>> but then, is it really any more than an order of magnitude worse
>> than Pak biology?
>
>Worse, I'd say from the above, but more than an order of magnitude
>worse? Isn't there an absolute zero on the science scale that we
>can't go below?
>
>So if I want to give early/middle period Hogan another try, which of
>"Giants", "Thrice" or "Code" should I try ? Just because I hated
>"Thrice" two decades ago doesn't mean I will hate it now. Recommending
>a fourth book won't do me any good - I'm not spending another dime on
>him.
>
>William Hyde
>
I'd go with _The Two Faces of Tomorrow_. If you liked the TP Ryan's
_The Adolescence of P-1_, or D.F. Jones _Colossus_.
scott
Scott Lurndal
>On Mar 18, 5:23=A0pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
>> ::: Is Mr Bruening's description of the Ganymedians biology and
>> ::: (not crazy, lunatic, creative,
>> ::: lets-give-it-a-pass-for-story-purposes, but stupid) as to quell any
>> ::: lingering interest I might have in actually finishing a Hogan novel.
>>
>> :: The biology doesn't play into the first one, _Inherit the Stars_
>m
>> :: seem like an author with a lot of promise.
>>
>> : sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> : _The Two Faces of Tomorrow_, the _Genesis Machine_ and _Thrice upon a
>>
>> Mine too. =A0I'd tenatively even say "Code of the Lifemaker" wasn't
>> yet into his horrid phase.
>
>I love the opening sequence of _Code of the LIfemaker_.
>
>
>>
>> is indeed (putting it as kindly as possible) wildly implausible,
>> but then, is it really any more than an order of magnitude worse
>> than Pak biology?
>>
>
>At least he extrapolates from biology to psychology in an interesting
>way, thought the final result has more than a hint of wish-fulfilment
>fantasy about it, IMHO. The Ganymeans from the _Shaperion_ are a
>little too much like a Certain Sort of Alien, where I get the
>impression that it's an expression of how he wishes humans were/are.
>
Isn't that a pretty common meme in most fiction? Whether a protag is
a Mary Sue, or an "expression of how [the author] wishes humans were"?
Manticore, Miles, Honor, Beta Colony all held as shining virtues (often
with minor and sometime major failings, easily forgiven (Miles & the courier)).
scott
Michael Stemper
You call that *easy*?
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Economists have correctly predicted seven of the last three recessions.
Scott Lurndal
>In article <yFOon.65210$1q5....@news.usenetserver.com>, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>Johnny1a <sherm...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>On Mar 18, 5:23=A0pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
>
>>>little too much like a Certain Sort of Alien, where I get the
>>>impression that it's an expression of how he wishes humans were/are.
>>
>>Isn't that a pretty common meme in most fiction? Whether a protag is
>>a Mary Sue, or an "expression of how [the author] wishes humans were"?
>>
>>Manticore, Miles, Honor, Beta Colony all held as shining virtues (often
>>with minor and sometime major failings, easily forgiven (Miles & the courier)).
>
>You call that *easy*?
Yes. He spent no time in prison. He was made Lord Auditor. Not bad for
someone who was the proximate cause of Homicide of a fellow Vor.
scott
(I do quite enjoy all of the Miles stories, regardless of the above).
Robert Carnegie
Operation_, in which agents from the 1970s travel back in time with a
brilliant plan to stop Hitler winning the Second World War...
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
If that's the one I recall, I hated it because it was a secret history.
Christian Weisgerber
> I still like the space battle featuring a complete-fantasy computer-
> generated EarthFleet attacking the PlanetOfTheBadGuys and throwing
> their leaders into confusion for the critical few hours the good guys
> need.
I found the third novel forgettable, I can't even remember the title
offhand, but one part that stuck with me is the scene where the
villains try to run away with interplanetary shuttles and woefully
underestimate the Shapieron. She may be 30 million years old,
ridiculously obsolete, and STL only, but, by God, she is a _starship_!
ZORAC and the Shapieron rock.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de