I agree with the substantive criticisms of the concepts in this story; you’re pretty much spot-on about the handwaving and the inconsistencies and all of that.
But I found the typographic shenanigans and the various other “playing with the medium” stuff to be a lot of fun. (I read the hardcover edition; I am not sure if the softcover is any different.)
I also enjoyed the “embedded story” parts, which stood largely apart from the main plot (though of course they were tied into it).
EDIT: The “weird typography” parts, like the one of which you include a picture in your review, gain a lot by being read aloud. Treat the typographic design choices as cues for a dramatic reading, and I think you’ll find that “hostile to the reader” is thereby transformed into “exhilarating for the performer and enjoyable for the audience”.
I did also like the Ascension story. It did a very good job of imitating 1960s sci fi magazine stories. In a way it shows off his talent as an author more than the main story does!
I agree with the substantive criticisms of the concepts in this story; you’re pretty much spot-on about the handwaving and the inconsistencies and all of that.
But I found the typographic shenanigans and the various other “playing with the medium” stuff to be a lot of fun. (I read the hardcover edition; I am not sure if the softcover is any different.)
I also enjoyed the “embedded story” parts, which stood largely apart from the main plot (though of course they were tied into it).
EDIT: The “weird typography” parts, like the one of which you include a picture in your review, gain a lot by being read aloud. Treat the typographic design choices as cues for a dramatic reading, and I think you’ll find that “hostile to the reader” is thereby transformed into “exhilarating for the performer and enjoyable for the audience”.
I did also like the Ascension story. It did a very good job of imitating 1960s sci fi magazine stories. In a way it shows off his talent as an author more than the main story does!