Ask Neal Stephenson

Our latest Slashdot interview victim... err... guest... is Neal Stephenson, author of (among others) Snow Crash, CRYPTONOMICON, the much-discussed essay, In the Beginning was the Command Line, and more recently a series of books he calls The Baroque Cycle. (Last month Slashdot reviewed the series' third volume, The System of the World.) Now you can ask Neal whatever you want. As usual, we'll send him 10 -12 of the highest-moderated questions and post his answers verbatim when we get them back.

The abrupt endings

[thesandtiger]

Your books always seem to go on forever, and then rapidly accelerate and then just *stop*. What's the deal? I love the prose, love the ideas, and have read all your stuff - but this sudden impact always leaves me a bit... stunned, like a cow who's just been air-hammered between the eyes... when I finish one of your books.

Your Endings

[That's Unpossible!]

Typically most on Slashdot love your books, but are not happy with your endings, citing how they often come to a very swift, and some may say, abrupt, conclusion.

Do you feel this is an accurate portrayal of your books' endings, and would you like to address this issue?

For brevity, I will cut this question short.

MOD PARENT UP: Re:Singularity

[Cade144]

To expand a smidge further: as covered earlier on Slashdot [slashdot.org], the problem that the singularity presents to futurists is troubling. By definition the singularity is the point at which the rate of technological change is faster than can be imagined.

How does that sort of thing bother you as an author of futurist/speculative fiction? Wouldn't you rather there be a nice crash of civilization to keep the pace of technological advancement slow enough so that predictions in your books get outpaced by the march of technological "progress"?

Of course, given said crash of civilization, you'd best have most of your assets in gold [google.com]. And it might be unlikely that your publisher would continue writing you checks, but that's a different story.

Re:Enoch Root and Finux...

[kiolbasa]

I think he answered the Finux question a while ago, but I can't quite remember where I read it. The basic idea was that he wanted an operating system like Linux in the book, but he wanted to have some creative leeway with it to fit the story. He didn't want to confuse the real Linux with his fictional OS, so he named it Finux, thus avioding volumes of hate mail from Comic Book Guy types.

SF Depression

[mydigitalself]

(insert all the usual kudo's here)

Neal, I read a lot of science fiction (yourself, gibson, asher, mm smith, banks...to name a few) and as much as enjoy reading the genre I can't but help get mildly depressed by the fact that I know that all this stuff will eventually happen in some way/shape/form and I won't be around to experience it.

And I'm not just talking about tech (eg. molly's eyes in Neuromancer) here, I'm also talking fundamental societal shifts and advancements that often underpin the great SF works.

Do you ever get depressed or get this sinking feeling that you were born a century or two too early, and how do you deal with it?

Re:MOD PARENT UP: Re:Singularity

[king-manic]

Don't assume the curve is exponential, it is more likly to be a logrithmic curve and we're just on the psuedo exponential portion. there are limits to everything, nothing is truly exponential.

Re:Ending consultants?

[ediron2]

W00t!

I'm browsing now, looking for prior questions before posting the following:

"What happens to you at the end of the books you write? Every one of your novels starts out breathtakingly rich and full of stuff that is some of the best near-future SF I've read in 30+ years, but staged within a context that is conventionally acceptable. But each of the few novels of yours I've read swerves wierdly in late chapters. Are you schizophrenic, is there a hidden agenda here, or what?"

Yeah, I'm really masochistic/stupid enough to RATFC's.

Hope you get the Q.

Re:The Ending -- *SPOILERS*

[booch]

Thank you -- that's exactly what I think of (most of) Stephenson's endings. Yes, they can be abrupt. But they don't try to wrap everything up cleanly for you so that you don't have to use your imagination and/or deductive skills. Personally, I hate the trend in modern movies to have happy endings with everything nicely wrapped up.

Theories developed from your own work?

[smackthud]

Power appears as a broad theme in much your writing. You repeatedly show the deep impact on individuals (and groups, cultures, religions, etc.) from the direct use of influence, secrets, technology, ideology and capital.

Have you developed any theories or ethical guidelines that you believe make power effective or not effective; and has your perspective on real life has been influenced by your own research/work in this area?

Re:Add to the question about book endings!!!

[ediron2]

Strange Attractor wrote ( shades of the infamous Shatner SNL skit):

Also, I'd asked you this in person when you had given a talk at Georgia Tech - about the endings of your books, to which you had replied that you were quite happy with them the way they were.

But -- if you could have ended them differently, what kind of alternate endings do you think you would have come up with?

Shatner: Um... That mare had a foal?!

Moderators and editors - PLEASE add this thought to the highly-moderated question earlier about Neal's endings. I'd rather hear this followup, rather than waste one of of 10-12 questions on a reiteration of "I'm happy with them the way they are".

Or let's just not mod StrangeA's question up.

1. The underlying question remains asked and answered *to StrangeA* (dodging the question is an answer),
2. it smacks of "Da Vinci, what other expressions would you like to paint on the Mona Lisa?", if you'll forgive the highfalutin' comparison of NielS to DaVinci. They're done. Fiddlin' with finished art gains nothing, and damages the ambiguity that lets the same piece give many messages.
3. As a writer, I would loathe seriously answering a question like this. I can *forever* keep tweaking my writing, but by the end I am always quite happy. And looking back is hard work, since adjusting the ending would mean weeding out inconsistencies, adjusting plot, dialog, reveals, ordering, pacing. That's just ugly, compared to starting over with blank paper.
4. And to what good could this rethink-your-work effort ever come? If Niel's lucky, he'll find StrangeA's fanfic ending adaptation published online in a year. If he's unlucky, critics and readers will forever hold his own criticism against him. Eeew, yuck.
5. The only time I'd put up with this question is if it came from a trusted friend, informally, over beers. And even then, I'd let them lead the way. That's the only way anyone gets to ask me what-if's capable of turning my livelihood upside-down.
6. Did I mention the question sounds a bit too basement-boy? I'm really sorry, StrangeA, but that is the vibe you're putting out by overpursuing this question. There's a whole realm of real-world examples of fans overstepping their relationship boundaries with their favorite celebrities/stars/writers. Again, eew-yuck.

Coincidentally, I love his books, but I feel NS's endings are sucky and wierd. I just feel that this question sucks more.

Oh, and most nonfiction by favorite SF authors includes useful insight into the mind of an SF writer, if that could help you to get some of what you're after here, StrangeA. Asimov's stuff, Harlan Ellison's editorial comments in his books, Spider Robinson's old book review columns, online interviews, boingboing.net, etc. In fact, the only author whose nonFic ramblings seldom taught me a thing about writing was Jerry Pournelle (Chaos Manor).

Re:MOD PARENT UP: Re:Singularity

[rthille]

And someone with guns or respect (friends) would take it from you :-(