New Testingstan

So, let's talk Roadside Picnic.

I'll throw out some starting thoughts while I have the time.

Firstly, I was most caught by the implicit anti-humanist message. The idea that there are intelligences, and laws of the universe, which are fundamentally beyond human existence and which we have to change our lives to account for instead of taking control of.

Second, I was also really caught by the way individual identity gets trapped in the activities we do. No matter how succesful Vulture gets, no matter how wealthy he is, no matter what his (sphere obtained?) family life looks like, no matter how he acts he will always be a stalker. The narrator is especially interesting on this point, and how his entire life becomes caught up in either being a stalker, or the effects that his career has on his life. Even when offered a chance away, or a chance to go 'legitimate', the thought is alien because his very ontology is caught up in being a Stalker.


Third, Red's kid and father. Damn.

So, yeah. Y'all's thoughts?

I'm gonna echo that first item. The second thing that struck me was how poorly the zones themselves were described.

Maybe it was deliberate and I'm missing the point by being irritated by it, but all I know is that hell slime turns some things (but evidently not some subset of ceramics) into more hell slime and does bad things (tm) to human flesh, shriekers are very loud, bug traps crush you rather thoroughly and instantly, grinders do something similar but more slowly and with twisty implications (are they animate or just mobile?), black sparks may be pocket universes, and there's some unknown interaction that turns the children of stalkers into gorilla-like ab-humans and possibly raises the dead. What is the burning fuzz? What's the deal with those cobweb things Red was seeing? What does the zone itself actually look like?

All these seem to be cases where Red or somebody else would know more than was explained, unless I missed or just didn't read far enough into something.

On an unrelated note, the various characters seemed to me to treat women like accessories. It was kind of off-putting.

All in all an interesting read, and I didn't find it nearly as irritating nor depressing as I expected.

I've since moved on to Neuromancer, btw.

It was... well, I didn't really find it that interesting tbh. The best thing IMO was the main character, I liked the way he became an increasingly bitter asshole, until at the end he killed of Vulture's son in part to get back at the Vulture.

The 'anti-humanist' stuff was... eh. It felt more like the beginning of an idea than a fully fleshed-out concept. Just a load of lolrandom stuff happening for some unexplained reason, I just didn't find it very interesting.

If the authors had just wrote 'what if one day aliens cause some weird stuff to happen and then nobody can figure out why they did it?', it would have had the same impact on me as the 'sci-fi' bits of the book did. The characters were... OK, though Red was the only one I actually cared about at all.

Hello Straha,

(Everything below is just my opinion. Since the other posters didn't appreciate the book I address your analysis. Parts of it I disagreed with but you made some points which made me open up a few websites to re-read some things, and I thank you for that.)

Humanism as I understand the philosophy is exhibited by those who value incentiveless mutual cooperation, despise profit, embrace pacifism; basically Christianity without Christ and morality without God. I think Red is the ultimate humanist as far as the constraints of his environment allows it. He authentically walks the walk and not just covers the talking points through restricting his natural urges with will power.

That would have made him dull and as disingenuous as the replica of his father. He goes to the zone not for profit, though he doesn't object to selling his swag - but enriching himself , a clever businessman he is not, as he looks on with disdain at the enterprise of providing lunches at the edge of the zone by some enterprising stalker. He also refuses to sell the clay jar initially and only discloses its location when he is on the run facing prison and knows his family will need to be cared for.

His act of sacrificing Arthur can't be looked at in any other way but him sacrificing a non-human replica produced by a wish, so it’s fair to say he assumes that another wish can just as easily have Arthur recreated by the sphere for the second time with no harm done. He cares about his boss enough to risk telling him about the full empty and possibly face prison time because he wants him to be happy, bright eyed and bushy tailed again.

His temper and heavy drinking causes his violent outbursts, never aimed at his daughter, father, wife or close friend but at those who endangered people he knew. Humanists are those imaginary philosophical constructs whose perfection can be achieved but by bees or ants, and when a human tries, the authentic result is someone like Red .

About your phrase '...laws of the universe...that we have to change our lives to account for instead of taking control of.' The presence of gravity, the inability of man to alter the boiling point of water at constant pressure, speed of light in a vacuum are no different than bug traps, witch's jelly or full empties. Just as humans have to change their lives to account for global warming so does Red the hero of the book, takes control over the alien artifacts.

He lives his life according to his own understandings and whether it is attacking law enforcement, setting off a screecher in a bar restroom, or sacrificing Arthur to the meat grinder, no force will he accept as his master.

Even the sphere at the end is addressed by him without pomp or ceremony.. 'Oh great ones, hear my wishes...', nothing like that but instead in my opinion he makes his wish almost in the same way he would have ordered a round of beer on the house at the Bar - "Hey Bartender, drinks are on me for everyone and no funny business. Don't you let anyone leave here sober.'

Best Regards,

Nick Nasty