What do you think?
Rate this book
Incrementalists #1
The Incrementalists
"Secret societies, immortality, murder mysteries and Las Vegas all in one book? Shut up and take my money." —John Scalzi
The Incrementalists—a secret society of two hundred people with an unbroken lineage reaching back forty thousand years. They cheat death, share lives and memories, and communicate with one another across nations, races, and time. They have an epic history, an almost magical memory, and a very modest mission: to make the world better, just a little bit at a time. Their ongoing argument about how to do this is older than most of their individual memories.
Phil, whose personality has stayed stable through more incarnations than anyone else’s, has loved Celeste—and argued with her—for most of the last four hundred years. But now Celeste, recently dead, embittered, and very unstable, has changed the rules—not incrementally, and not for the better. Now the heart of the group must gather in Las Vegas to save the Incrementalists, and maybe the world.
The Incrementalists—a secret society of two hundred people with an unbroken lineage reaching back forty thousand years. They cheat death, share lives and memories, and communicate with one another across nations, races, and time. They have an epic history, an almost magical memory, and a very modest mission: to make the world better, just a little bit at a time. Their ongoing argument about how to do this is older than most of their individual memories.
Phil, whose personality has stayed stable through more incarnations than anyone else’s, has loved Celeste—and argued with her—for most of the last four hundred years. But now Celeste, recently dead, embittered, and very unstable, has changed the rules—not incrementally, and not for the better. Now the heart of the group must gather in Las Vegas to save the Incrementalists, and maybe the world.
304 pages, Hardcover
First published September 24, 2013
About the author
Steven Brust
95 books2,254 followersSteven Karl Zoltán Brust (born November 23, 1955) is an American fantasy and science fiction author of Hungarian descent. He was a member of the writers' group The Scribblies, which included Emma Bull, Pamela Dean, Will Shetterly, Nate Bucklin, Kara Dalkey, and Patricia Wrede, and also belongs to the Pre-Joycean Fellowship.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/steven...
(Photo by David Dyer-Bennet)
http://us.macmillan.com/author/steven...
(Photo by David Dyer-Bennet)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 362 reviews
February 25, 2013
Yeah, so, this is the first time I've rated something I've written. It goes against every bone in my Minnesota body, but I tell myself that it's Skyler's parts I'm rating.
Several years ago, Tappan King suggested to me the idea of an immortal secret society dedicated to making the world just a little better. After I read Skyler's first two novels (and Falling, Fly; In Dreams Begin) I very much wanted to work with her. Hanging out with her one day, Tappan's idea came to mind, and we started kicking it around, and this book is the result.
I am more geeked about it than anything I've ever done--and that's saying something, because I tend to be a geeky fanboy about my own work (I mean, that's why I do it, right?).
Writing it was a joy--we kicked it back and forth and told each other a story. Revising it was a joy, "Hey, you know what would be even COOLER?" I'm still discovering subtleties and resonances in the parts she wrote. Rereading it is still a blast.
So, yeah. I'm psyched about it. I only hope it doesn't disappoint.
Several years ago, Tappan King suggested to me the idea of an immortal secret society dedicated to making the world just a little better. After I read Skyler's first two novels (and Falling, Fly; In Dreams Begin) I very much wanted to work with her. Hanging out with her one day, Tappan's idea came to mind, and we started kicking it around, and this book is the result.
I am more geeked about it than anything I've ever done--and that's saying something, because I tend to be a geeky fanboy about my own work (I mean, that's why I do it, right?).
Writing it was a joy--we kicked it back and forth and told each other a story. Revising it was a joy, "Hey, you know what would be even COOLER?" I'm still discovering subtleties and resonances in the parts she wrote. Rereading it is still a blast.
So, yeah. I'm psyched about it. I only hope it doesn't disappoint.
January 17, 2014
Let me be honest: I’m a fan of Steven Brust. I like his complex world-building, his characters and his willingness to integrate challenging issues of race and class (and occasionally gender) into his writing. Unfortunately, while I was predisposed to love The Incrementalists, it fell flat for me.
Narrative is first-person, shifting between Phil and Renee, often multiple times in the same chapter. Someone decided to use some pretty cursive typeset to head the sections with “Phil” or “Ren,” and to my (apparently) aging eyes, sometimes I had to look twice to verify who I was reading. You should infer, then, that there was a problem in characterization, that I needed to consciously identify narrator when the options are a two-thousand year old personality who is currently a male poker player living in Vegas or a thirty year-old single female program designer with a penchant for telling people off. Or something. Characterization never really succeed, and worsened when it evolved into mutual longing. Besides Phil and Ren, there’s a group of main Incrementalists (Oskar, Irina and others), the personality that is grafted onto Ren’s, Celeste, and a brief appearance of a couple of Ren’s connections. Celeste is by far the most dimensional; the rest feel like the ‘not-Brad, not-George’ remainder of the team in Ocean’s Eleven.
Continued at:
http://clsiewert.wordpress.com/2014/0...
OR, if you prefer, here:
http://carols.booklikes.com/post/7632...-
Because that way, it won't ever be deleted.
Narrative is first-person, shifting between Phil and Renee, often multiple times in the same chapter. Someone decided to use some pretty cursive typeset to head the sections with “Phil” or “Ren,” and to my (apparently) aging eyes, sometimes I had to look twice to verify who I was reading. You should infer, then, that there was a problem in characterization, that I needed to consciously identify narrator when the options are a two-thousand year old personality who is currently a male poker player living in Vegas or a thirty year-old single female program designer with a penchant for telling people off. Or something. Characterization never really succeed, and worsened when it evolved into mutual longing. Besides Phil and Ren, there’s a group of main Incrementalists (Oskar, Irina and others), the personality that is grafted onto Ren’s, Celeste, and a brief appearance of a couple of Ren’s connections. Celeste is by far the most dimensional; the rest feel like the ‘not-Brad, not-George’ remainder of the team in Ocean’s Eleven.
Continued at:
http://clsiewert.wordpress.com/2014/0...
OR, if you prefer, here:
http://carols.booklikes.com/post/7632...-
Because that way, it won't ever be deleted.
September 25, 2013
Walking around in a constant state of confusion might be the best way to sum up my feelings on this tale. If this muddled state actually led me to some definitive suppositions on the universe, or put me in touch with all the answers to THE INCREMENTALISTS, or even offered me a sense of well-being, I would have been okay with my scrambled brains and possibly the head scratching as well. But that wasn’t the case here. Instead, I felt a bit exhausted after finishing this tale, like I’d been running a race in the wrong direction.
The dialogue stood out for me (and there was a quite a bit of it), but not in a good way. The Old English felt a bit ham-handed, although it could just as easily have been me. But I like to think that’s not the case. Even focusing on just the modern times, the dialogue proved a bit pretentious and stilted and a bit too heavy handed. Aside from the dialogue, though, there seemed a few too many clichés. As for the pace, I’d equate it to walking through molasses.
None of the characters resonated with me. While this is fantasy, and the argument could be made that I shouldn’t have identified with the characters, I enjoy a story much more when I do. And I found myself racing to the end, so I could set this book aside and move to the next one on my TBR list.
I can’t help but feel like there was some flaw in the execution of this tale. Maybe it was a case of trying to do too much in such a short amount of time, or maybe it was a case of not doing enough, or maybe it was a case of blending universes and realms that shouldn’t be blended. But whatever it was, I found disappointment lingering on my lips.
The premise certainly intrigued me with secret societies and unbroken lineages and cheating death and making the world better and meeting in Las Vegas, but that excitement quickly dwindled away, and I was left with a tainted aftertaste.
I received this book for free through NetGalley.
Cross-posted at Robert's Reads
The dialogue stood out for me (and there was a quite a bit of it), but not in a good way. The Old English felt a bit ham-handed, although it could just as easily have been me. But I like to think that’s not the case. Even focusing on just the modern times, the dialogue proved a bit pretentious and stilted and a bit too heavy handed. Aside from the dialogue, though, there seemed a few too many clichés. As for the pace, I’d equate it to walking through molasses.
None of the characters resonated with me. While this is fantasy, and the argument could be made that I shouldn’t have identified with the characters, I enjoy a story much more when I do. And I found myself racing to the end, so I could set this book aside and move to the next one on my TBR list.
I can’t help but feel like there was some flaw in the execution of this tale. Maybe it was a case of trying to do too much in such a short amount of time, or maybe it was a case of not doing enough, or maybe it was a case of blending universes and realms that shouldn’t be blended. But whatever it was, I found disappointment lingering on my lips.
The premise certainly intrigued me with secret societies and unbroken lineages and cheating death and making the world better and meeting in Las Vegas, but that excitement quickly dwindled away, and I was left with a tainted aftertaste.
I received this book for free through NetGalley.
Cross-posted at Robert's Reads
August 15, 2015
These people are oddly obsessed with putting bathrobes on after showering. She used his bathrobe, so he had to settle for a towel—what, you don’t towel off and then put on a bathrobe?
I was hesitant to borrow this from the library—the description screamed “generic pseudo–science-fiction thriller.” Neverthless, I resolved to give it a chance. I swear I didn’t notice that John Scalzi had blurbed it until I started reading. And it makes sense that Scalzi would blurb this, because it’s in his wheelhouse—but neither Steven Brust nor Skyler White writes it the way Scalzi does. The Incrementalists is a bizarre mix of John Scalzi and Tim Powers (I like one and not the other, but it’s the worst of both, so don’t take this as a recommendation).
Now, I love me some Scalzi, but I’ll happily admit that there are things about his style I don’t like. He writes great, snappy dialogue—a lot of great, snappy dialogue. Too much, sometimes, to the point where all of his characters just feel so snappy and sarcastic and witty that they fade together. Scalzi is not a hugely descriptive writer. And that’s OK—not every writer needs to be descriptive or should be. And I get that thrillers, as a genre, tend to be lighter on description and heavier on dialogue and action. The fact that I only enjoy this occasionally, like I only occasionally enjoy a whipped topping dessert, is one reason I don’t read them that often.
Unfortunately, The Incrementalists seems to reside towards the lower end of the scale. It’s particularly nondescript, except when it gets way too descriptive. I just opened to a random page (303) and was confronted with this gem:
This is only really a problem when it comes to the scenes in the Garden, where description is everything. I admit I’m not the best person to critique stuff like this, because I don’t visualize places as they are described when I read. But everything about this book just seems like a confusing mish-mash of same-same.
Even Ren and Phil feel very similar. The first-person perspective jumps between them within chapters. Now, I recently ran across an identical narrative device in Trouble. It worked fine there, because Pratt managed to differentiate between the two main characters. Here, I often forget whether Ren or Phil was the narrator, reminded only if the other character was in the scene and being referred to in the third person.
The basic premise of The Incrementalists is great. It’s like reincarnation lite—personality continuity suspended in a kind of symbiosis, with an agenda on top to “make the world better.” I liked it, and I genuinely liked how Brust and White handled the concept. Even the plot—Celeste, a recently deceased Incrementalist, is running a Xanatos gambit (TVTropes) that could destabilize the entire operation—is fantastic. By all rights, this should be a fun thriller.
Other than the stylistic and narrative issues, though, I just feel let down by the execution of that plot. The main characters spend far too much time sitting around talking about the Garden, explaining the Garden to Ren, “grazing” in the Garden, or mumbling pseudo-scientific stuff. It’s all very Roger Zelazny (or, as I mentioned, Tim Powers), in that it’s the magical realist equivalent of science fiction. But the most tense moment has to be when Celeste and Phil are at odds over a gun—that was exciting. The rest of the book is just work trying to follow the meandering, sometimes thorny explanations that Brust and White serve up to shore up an increasingly fractured “magic” (for lack of a better term) system.
Look, if you have a higher tolerance for this type of novel, you might enjoy this, just as I have a much higher tolerance for the pedantic hard SF technobabble of Alastair Reynolds than a lot of other people just as, if not more, intelligent as me. To each their own, right? But just because other people might enjoy this novel doesn’t mean it’s well-written or even all that good, in the same way that a serviceable cup of Tetley orange pekoe tea is nowhere near as good as loose-leaf. I drink the former pretty often when I’m too lazy to steep it properly—but I don’t pretend it’s amazing.
I was hesitant to borrow this from the library—the description screamed “generic pseudo–science-fiction thriller.” Neverthless, I resolved to give it a chance. I swear I didn’t notice that John Scalzi had blurbed it until I started reading. And it makes sense that Scalzi would blurb this, because it’s in his wheelhouse—but neither Steven Brust nor Skyler White writes it the way Scalzi does. The Incrementalists is a bizarre mix of John Scalzi and Tim Powers (I like one and not the other, but it’s the worst of both, so don’t take this as a recommendation).
Now, I love me some Scalzi, but I’ll happily admit that there are things about his style I don’t like. He writes great, snappy dialogue—a lot of great, snappy dialogue. Too much, sometimes, to the point where all of his characters just feel so snappy and sarcastic and witty that they fade together. Scalzi is not a hugely descriptive writer. And that’s OK—not every writer needs to be descriptive or should be. And I get that thrillers, as a genre, tend to be lighter on description and heavier on dialogue and action. The fact that I only enjoy this occasionally, like I only occasionally enjoy a whipped topping dessert, is one reason I don’t read them that often.
Unfortunately, The Incrementalists seems to reside towards the lower end of the scale. It’s particularly nondescript, except when it gets way too descriptive. I just opened to a random page (303) and was confronted with this gem:
He was all that mattered. The taste of his mouth on mine, the solid unyieldingness of his body that my body wanted to wrap and mold and form itself around. Everything else felt irrelevant and trivial to me, and we almost shedded our clothes trying to get free of them fast enough to fill our hands and mouths with each other again. There was no fear, no pulling away or even holding back, nothing reserved or restrained or considered. His hands hurt me, and I wanted them to. His mouth took from me and I wanted nothing left behind.
This is only really a problem when it comes to the scenes in the Garden, where description is everything. I admit I’m not the best person to critique stuff like this, because I don’t visualize places as they are described when I read. But everything about this book just seems like a confusing mish-mash of same-same.
Even Ren and Phil feel very similar. The first-person perspective jumps between them within chapters. Now, I recently ran across an identical narrative device in Trouble. It worked fine there, because Pratt managed to differentiate between the two main characters. Here, I often forget whether Ren or Phil was the narrator, reminded only if the other character was in the scene and being referred to in the third person.
The basic premise of The Incrementalists is great. It’s like reincarnation lite—personality continuity suspended in a kind of symbiosis, with an agenda on top to “make the world better.” I liked it, and I genuinely liked how Brust and White handled the concept. Even the plot—Celeste, a recently deceased Incrementalist, is running a Xanatos gambit (TVTropes) that could destabilize the entire operation—is fantastic. By all rights, this should be a fun thriller.
Other than the stylistic and narrative issues, though, I just feel let down by the execution of that plot. The main characters spend far too much time sitting around talking about the Garden, explaining the Garden to Ren, “grazing” in the Garden, or mumbling pseudo-scientific stuff. It’s all very Roger Zelazny (or, as I mentioned, Tim Powers), in that it’s the magical realist equivalent of science fiction. But the most tense moment has to be when Celeste and Phil are at odds over a gun—that was exciting. The rest of the book is just work trying to follow the meandering, sometimes thorny explanations that Brust and White serve up to shore up an increasingly fractured “magic” (for lack of a better term) system.
Look, if you have a higher tolerance for this type of novel, you might enjoy this, just as I have a much higher tolerance for the pedantic hard SF technobabble of Alastair Reynolds than a lot of other people just as, if not more, intelligent as me. To each their own, right? But just because other people might enjoy this novel doesn’t mean it’s well-written or even all that good, in the same way that a serviceable cup of Tetley orange pekoe tea is nowhere near as good as loose-leaf. I drink the former pretty often when I’m too lazy to steep it properly—but I don’t pretend it’s amazing.
Read
April 14, 2021Started out okay, but I found the plausibility of the plot thin. Characters accepted too much at face value and, as more folks were introduced, I had a hard time distinguishing them. Ren and Phil felt interchangeable and their romance convenient and rushed. Weird.
The plot is interesting, but left high and dry while characters run around eating pizza and drinking coffee. The idea of the Incrementalists is also pretty damned cool, but not explored enough for my satisfaction.
I kinda had to force myself to keep reading this one, hoping my effort would be rewarded. Not so much.
I don't like giving unfavourable reviews, but not everyone is going to enjoy every book.
The plot is interesting, but left high and dry while characters run around eating pizza and drinking coffee. The idea of the Incrementalists is also pretty damned cool, but not explored enough for my satisfaction.
I kinda had to force myself to keep reading this one, hoping my effort would be rewarded. Not so much.
I don't like giving unfavourable reviews, but not everyone is going to enjoy every book.
April 4, 2014
As a left-brainer, my thoughts often stop me from fully enjoying stories. I don't need every little thing explained in extensive detail, but something more than vagueness. For a novel filled with symbols and analogies, my experience was less than optimal.
Logic-fail kept me from falling under The Incrementalists's spell. When even immortality sounds more believable than the concept herein, it's a sign the world-building is somewhat flawed. An incrementalist's memories can be implanted into someone else via A BURNING SPIKE TO THE FOREHEAD. Only because there's no mention of seared flesh or brain damage, the burning memory-spike may be symbolic/analogous and therefore not real. And that kind of stuff really gets my goat.
The whole novel takes place over a week, so there's insta-love. That could be explained due to meddlework, but the two parties seem relatively cool with the fact they were basically pimped, minds meddled with so they'd fall in love with one another. That's hella creepy, and yet our characters seem nonplussed. Huh.
And for a secret society dedicated to making the world a better place, a little bit at a time, they do no such thing in the main storyline - they just focus on themselves. Sure, they may have done some bettering in the past (though the references to real life events really irk me - YOU BROKE THE FOURTH WALL, BOOK!), but apparently nothing in connection to the major plot.
P.S. Early on a character checks their Google Reader, and I immediately thought, "Ha! You just dated yourself, book!" Then I realised the email above the reference is dated...2011. Yep, listing the year in the emails dates the book even more than Google Reader. We really only need to see the messages, and the to/from section. Dates are irrelevant. (Unless there's a particular reason the novel's set in 2011, other than that's when the authors wrote it. If there is a story-based reason, I missed it.)
Logic-fail kept me from falling under The Incrementalists's spell. When even immortality sounds more believable than the concept herein, it's a sign the world-building is somewhat flawed. An incrementalist's memories can be implanted into someone else via A BURNING SPIKE TO THE FOREHEAD. Only because there's no mention of seared flesh or brain damage, the burning memory-spike may be symbolic/analogous and therefore not real. And that kind of stuff really gets my goat.
The whole novel takes place over a week, so there's insta-love. That could be explained due to meddlework, but the two parties seem relatively cool with the fact they were basically pimped, minds meddled with so they'd fall in love with one another. That's hella creepy, and yet our characters seem nonplussed. Huh.
And for a secret society dedicated to making the world a better place, a little bit at a time, they do no such thing in the main storyline - they just focus on themselves. Sure, they may have done some bettering in the past (though the references to real life events really irk me - YOU BROKE THE FOURTH WALL, BOOK!), but apparently nothing in connection to the major plot.
P.S. Early on a character checks their Google Reader, and I immediately thought, "Ha! You just dated yourself, book!" Then I realised the email above the reference is dated...2011. Yep, listing the year in the emails dates the book even more than Google Reader. We really only need to see the messages, and the to/from section. Dates are irrelevant. (Unless there's a particular reason the novel's set in 2011, other than that's when the authors wrote it. If there is a story-based reason, I missed it.)
October 22, 2013
I hadn't purchased a hardcover new release in years, but the flashy cover grabbed my attention in Powell's and it jumped into my cart. The cover (with it's impressive John Scalzi quote) might have been the best part.
Biggest issues:
The book is written in the first person, which is fine, but it jumps between POV several times in a chapter. That would also be fine if it added to the story. But, since the main characters are in a passionate, lust-filled relationship and unable to leave each other's side for more than five minutes without whining about it, two points of view are unnecessary for all but one chapter in the book.
The romance comes from out of left field and is so obnoxious I was rooting for the so-called villain. You know that couple that can't stop fondling each other? They're prudes compared to the amount of touching and rubbing going on between these two at insanely inappropriate times.
For me, the Garden was poorly executed and seemed to have multiple loopholes that no one realized could happen despite their being around for the entire history of humanity.
The entire collective remains unexplained. There's definitely a back story somewhere, and it could be great, but I guess the writer was more worried about creating a Twilight-ish romance than exposition.
Don't be me. Save your money for a story worthwhile.
Biggest issues:
The book is written in the first person, which is fine, but it jumps between POV several times in a chapter. That would also be fine if it added to the story. But, since the main characters are in a passionate, lust-filled relationship and unable to leave each other's side for more than five minutes without whining about it, two points of view are unnecessary for all but one chapter in the book.
The romance comes from out of left field and is so obnoxious I was rooting for the so-called villain. You know that couple that can't stop fondling each other? They're prudes compared to the amount of touching and rubbing going on between these two at insanely inappropriate times.
For me, the Garden was poorly executed and seemed to have multiple loopholes that no one realized could happen despite their being around for the entire history of humanity.
The entire collective remains unexplained. There's definitely a back story somewhere, and it could be great, but I guess the writer was more worried about creating a Twilight-ish romance than exposition.
Don't be me. Save your money for a story worthwhile.
September 28, 2013
The Incrementalists is in my opinion a lazy book. Two authors have clearly come up with a brilliant concept - immortal beings who 'meddlework' with us humans, ostensibly for the better, and preserve their lengthy lives by storing their memories jointly in a celestial garden and occasionally trading their psyches into a new body.
The laziness is apparent in the book lacking anything other than a great concept. The characters have little personality (despite the constant discussions about personalty modification.) Even though the majority the characters are beings that have experienced eternity, there is a noticeable lack of epic in the story. The entire piece happens in Vegas, which may be some form of symbolism, there are several references to dramatic meddlework but little real consequence and certainly no big world changing actions within the story.
Finally it felt like there were no stakes in the story. What was I the reader supposed to be rooting for? Worrying about? The final conclusion of a diluted love story and existential development, was not saved by the overly vivid sex scenes, which were awkward as all get out compared to the shallow flighty tone of the rest of the novel.
The laziness is apparent in the book lacking anything other than a great concept. The characters have little personality (despite the constant discussions about personalty modification.) Even though the majority the characters are beings that have experienced eternity, there is a noticeable lack of epic in the story. The entire piece happens in Vegas, which may be some form of symbolism, there are several references to dramatic meddlework but little real consequence and certainly no big world changing actions within the story.
Finally it felt like there were no stakes in the story. What was I the reader supposed to be rooting for? Worrying about? The final conclusion of a diluted love story and existential development, was not saved by the overly vivid sex scenes, which were awkward as all get out compared to the shallow flighty tone of the rest of the novel.
September 24, 2013
I got to read an advance review copy of this book some time ago, and as I am drawn to books that not only defy genre, but actively buck it, The Incrementalists and I quickly became fast friends. Brust and White have created a complex and fascinating world that kept me thinking about it long after I put the book down. From a plot perspective, there's plenty here to keep you reading -- secret societies, mystery, romance, and a fascinating premise -- but it's the deeper threads and questions that stay with you after you've read the last page that take it to a new level. Issues of identity, of immortality, and of free will, for starters. I can't wait to see what they do with the second book -- and what slice of this fascinating other world I'll get to experience next time.
July 14, 2013
3.5 stars. My copy of this book was an ARC I received from the publisher in exchange for an honest review. Thank you Tor Books and NetGalley for making that happen! My recent positive experiences with the Vlad Taltos series by Steven Brust had made me curious about this novel, so I was looking forward to checking it out.
The concept behind The Incrementalists is a very interesting and original one, and it only gets wilder as you read more of the story. Phil and Celeste are part of a secret society of two hundred people with an unbroken lineage of memories reaching back to the dawn of humankind. Their ongoing mission: to make the world better a little bit at a time through a process called "meddling" or "meddlework", which they achieve through influencing others by nudging them gently towards a certain inclination.
With Celeste's recent death, Phil goes looking for a new recruit for her next reincarnation, which is how he meets up with Renee "Ren" in Las Vegas. The book is told in alternating parts by these two characters, though Celeste remains a prominent presence in their lives. Always an unstable personality in life, Celeste is no different even in death. Now not only has her meddlework jeopardized Ren's initiation, her plans also extend to affect her fellow Incrementalists, changing the rules and putting them all in danger.
The idea behind the Incrementalists' work was what initially attracted me to this story. Personally, I felt the hints of both sci-fi and fantasy in the way their meddling process operates, which makes me think this would be an excellent book for readers who love cross-genre speculative fiction. To influence people, the Incrementalists would gather a list "switches" which are essentially memory and sensory factors which would trigger a reaction from their individual target. The Incrementalists themselves experience a sort of memory and personality "immortality" for as long as their consciousness stays stable through the reincarnations. All their collective knowledge or history of the world is seeded to the memory "Garden", available for any Incrementalists to "graze" from. This concept feels almost magical to me in a way.
This would also be perfect for those looking for something more cerebral and abstract, as the book is also heavy on symbolism and metaphors and would be positively mind-bending for someone not expecting it. The story mostly focuses on the Incrementalists and their own inter-societal crisis that Celeste has wreaked, but I would have loved it even more if there had been more on their history, or if their mission goals of making the world "better" had been expanded upon.
I also enjoyed the writing style. Of the two authors, I'm not familiar with Skyler White, though after this book I may be open to checking out more of her writing. But from what I've read of Steven Brust's fantasy novels, this definitely has the distinct feel of his work. The storytelling is so fast-paced, the reader has to be quick on their feet to keep up and you can't zone out for a second lest you miss something. I like that the book isn't bogged down with superfluous details, and in fact starts off with very little information, so you have to trust to the fact that more will be explained as the story progresses.
Overall, a great read if you're looking for something a little fun, a little strange, and a little different!
More reviews at The BiblioSanctum
The concept behind The Incrementalists is a very interesting and original one, and it only gets wilder as you read more of the story. Phil and Celeste are part of a secret society of two hundred people with an unbroken lineage of memories reaching back to the dawn of humankind. Their ongoing mission: to make the world better a little bit at a time through a process called "meddling" or "meddlework", which they achieve through influencing others by nudging them gently towards a certain inclination.
With Celeste's recent death, Phil goes looking for a new recruit for her next reincarnation, which is how he meets up with Renee "Ren" in Las Vegas. The book is told in alternating parts by these two characters, though Celeste remains a prominent presence in their lives. Always an unstable personality in life, Celeste is no different even in death. Now not only has her meddlework jeopardized Ren's initiation, her plans also extend to affect her fellow Incrementalists, changing the rules and putting them all in danger.
The idea behind the Incrementalists' work was what initially attracted me to this story. Personally, I felt the hints of both sci-fi and fantasy in the way their meddling process operates, which makes me think this would be an excellent book for readers who love cross-genre speculative fiction. To influence people, the Incrementalists would gather a list "switches" which are essentially memory and sensory factors which would trigger a reaction from their individual target. The Incrementalists themselves experience a sort of memory and personality "immortality" for as long as their consciousness stays stable through the reincarnations. All their collective knowledge or history of the world is seeded to the memory "Garden", available for any Incrementalists to "graze" from. This concept feels almost magical to me in a way.
This would also be perfect for those looking for something more cerebral and abstract, as the book is also heavy on symbolism and metaphors and would be positively mind-bending for someone not expecting it. The story mostly focuses on the Incrementalists and their own inter-societal crisis that Celeste has wreaked, but I would have loved it even more if there had been more on their history, or if their mission goals of making the world "better" had been expanded upon.
I also enjoyed the writing style. Of the two authors, I'm not familiar with Skyler White, though after this book I may be open to checking out more of her writing. But from what I've read of Steven Brust's fantasy novels, this definitely has the distinct feel of his work. The storytelling is so fast-paced, the reader has to be quick on their feet to keep up and you can't zone out for a second lest you miss something. I like that the book isn't bogged down with superfluous details, and in fact starts off with very little information, so you have to trust to the fact that more will be explained as the story progresses.
Overall, a great read if you're looking for something a little fun, a little strange, and a little different!
More reviews at The BiblioSanctum
October 11, 2013
40000 years ago, some folks figured out how to archive memories in the collective unconscious -- up to and including their own personalities. Result: a gang of more-or-less immortals, slipping under the radar of civilization, not trying to rule the world (their hold is not so sure) but to make it suck a little less.
This is a strange, low-key book. It doesn't much resemble SF or fantasy, although it works hard to make the memory-architecture of the Incrementalists feel like an interesting "magic system". Perhaps it's more of a cozy murder mystery?
My usual gag about Gene Wolfe is that, having written the last word on the Unreliable Narrator, he went on to invent the Incompetent Narrator. Now Brust has found the next step, the Narrator Whose Head Has Been Deliberately Screwed With. All our narration comes through Phil (the oldest immortal) and Renee (new recruit), but if you're expecting a traditional rookie-eye info-dump, guess again. Renee winds up implanted with the personality of the dead immortal Celeste, which means that by chapter 5 she's explaining things *to* Phil. Only Celeste is more involved in the situation than either of them initially suspect. Quite a lot of the storyline involves recalling first-person narration and trying to figure out who has *influenced* it, and how. Do you see what I mean?
Let me put this a different way: the book is, among other things, a romance between Phil and Ren. It is, to my mind, a singularly unconvincing romance. But is there a *reason* for that? It turns out that there is. Maybe that doesn't reconcile you to reading the thing, but you can't say the authors didn't think about the question.
So: very sneaky use of narrative convention. Whether that makes the book... I enjoyed it but wasn't swept away. Unsurprisingly, I worry that I've just missed some fraction of the point. (Wolfe has the same effect on me.)
The metatextual twist at the end hardly requires comment; Brust can do that sort of stuff in his sleep. (I don't mean to neglect Skyler White, his co-author; I just don't know anything about her beyond this book.) Browse through incrementalists.org if the mood strikes you. I approve of the challenge ("what can *you* do to make the world suck less?") but I'm not sure how the book (and site) can help such a mentality snowball. But then, on the third hand, can I complain that the authors are trying?
This is a strange, low-key book. It doesn't much resemble SF or fantasy, although it works hard to make the memory-architecture of the Incrementalists feel like an interesting "magic system". Perhaps it's more of a cozy murder mystery?
My usual gag about Gene Wolfe is that, having written the last word on the Unreliable Narrator, he went on to invent the Incompetent Narrator. Now Brust has found the next step, the Narrator Whose Head Has Been Deliberately Screwed With. All our narration comes through Phil (the oldest immortal) and Renee (new recruit), but if you're expecting a traditional rookie-eye info-dump, guess again. Renee winds up implanted with the personality of the dead immortal Celeste, which means that by chapter 5 she's explaining things *to* Phil. Only Celeste is more involved in the situation than either of them initially suspect. Quite a lot of the storyline involves recalling first-person narration and trying to figure out who has *influenced* it, and how. Do you see what I mean?
Let me put this a different way: the book is, among other things, a romance between Phil and Ren. It is, to my mind, a singularly unconvincing romance. But is there a *reason* for that? It turns out that there is. Maybe that doesn't reconcile you to reading the thing, but you can't say the authors didn't think about the question.
So: very sneaky use of narrative convention. Whether that makes the book... I enjoyed it but wasn't swept away. Unsurprisingly, I worry that I've just missed some fraction of the point. (Wolfe has the same effect on me.)
The metatextual twist at the end hardly requires comment; Brust can do that sort of stuff in his sleep. (I don't mean to neglect Skyler White, his co-author; I just don't know anything about her beyond this book.) Browse through incrementalists.org if the mood strikes you. I approve of the challenge ("what can *you* do to make the world suck less?") but I'm not sure how the book (and site) can help such a mentality snowball. But then, on the third hand, can I complain that the authors are trying?
October 19, 2013
Review courtesy of All Things Urban Fantasy
THE INCREMENTALISTS novel is one of those novels I expected to pick up and immediately love. I mean, c’mon, it’s set in Vegas, involves secret societies and is co-written by the amazing Steven Brust. Needless to say my hopes were extremely high when I started this book and then they quickly came crashing down.
I freely admit that my score for this novel is partly based on the expectations I had for THE INCREMENTALISTS. Reviews are entirely subjective and it shouldn’t bug so much, but it does. This is a good book and I feel that if I hadn’t known who the authors were or what the book was about going in I would have enjoyed it a whole lot more.
The book is told from the alternating first person viewpoints of Phil and Renee. Phil is an old hand at being an Incrementalist and has existed in one form or another for thousands of years. The Incrementalist society itself is an incredibly cool idea; they’re a secret society consisting of exactly 200 people that exists to make the world a better place a little bit at a time through a process known as “meddling”. They use this power to nudge the powers that be along a path that the Incrementalists have decided is the best course for mankind as a whole. Neat, right?
But then there’s those two alternating first person views. There are only a few series told in the first person that I like to begin with so dealing with a book that has two (and, really, three) first person views was an exercise in frustration. It also didn’t help that I never made much of a connection with any of the characters. They’re all cool in concept, but quickly lose their charm after a couple hundred pages.
Brust and White are both excellent writers and the book does move and extremely brisk pace. I couldn’t help but wish that it had slowed down a bit and explored more of the world they created. Even so THE INCREMENTALISTS is still worth picking up if you’re looking for something completely different than the other urban fantasy novels currently out there.
Sexual content: Graphic sex.
THE INCREMENTALISTS novel is one of those novels I expected to pick up and immediately love. I mean, c’mon, it’s set in Vegas, involves secret societies and is co-written by the amazing Steven Brust. Needless to say my hopes were extremely high when I started this book and then they quickly came crashing down.
I freely admit that my score for this novel is partly based on the expectations I had for THE INCREMENTALISTS. Reviews are entirely subjective and it shouldn’t bug so much, but it does. This is a good book and I feel that if I hadn’t known who the authors were or what the book was about going in I would have enjoyed it a whole lot more.
The book is told from the alternating first person viewpoints of Phil and Renee. Phil is an old hand at being an Incrementalist and has existed in one form or another for thousands of years. The Incrementalist society itself is an incredibly cool idea; they’re a secret society consisting of exactly 200 people that exists to make the world a better place a little bit at a time through a process known as “meddling”. They use this power to nudge the powers that be along a path that the Incrementalists have decided is the best course for mankind as a whole. Neat, right?
But then there’s those two alternating first person views. There are only a few series told in the first person that I like to begin with so dealing with a book that has two (and, really, three) first person views was an exercise in frustration. It also didn’t help that I never made much of a connection with any of the characters. They’re all cool in concept, but quickly lose their charm after a couple hundred pages.
Brust and White are both excellent writers and the book does move and extremely brisk pace. I couldn’t help but wish that it had slowed down a bit and explored more of the world they created. Even so THE INCREMENTALISTS is still worth picking up if you’re looking for something completely different than the other urban fantasy novels currently out there.
Sexual content: Graphic sex.
September 30, 2013
THE INCREMENTALISTS is not an easy book to talk about. From the blurb, you get pretty much everything you need going in: secret society, two main characters, subtle magic, modern day.
What you don't get is the beauty. The way the early confusion unfolds like a night-blooming desert flower, revealing not just cleverness but compassion for the reader. You don't get the laugh-out-loud jokes and the quiet harmonies. You don't see two masterful writers using all of their art to create a work of tremendous humanity.
Brust's admiration of the work of Roger Zelazny is well known. As I read THE INCREMENTALISTS for the first time, I realized that this is his & White's CHRONICLES OF AMBER. A reader familiar with Zelazny's masterwork will recognize dynamics, thematic elements, and structural decisions. It's not an overt relationship, and will not hinder anyone who's not read the earlier work. It does provide a beautiful counterpoint nonetheless.
THE INCREMENTALISTS is not an action-packed thrill-ride through bizarre worlds. It doesn't boast a high body count or world-shaking threats. It is a quiet, deeply-thought exploration of memory, identity, and love.
It's not a book that will please everyone. It is a book that profoundly pleased, and moved, me.
An aside: the audiobook, read by Ray Porter and Mary Robinette Kowal, is one of the finest I've ever heard. If you have the opportunity to listen to it, do.
What you don't get is the beauty. The way the early confusion unfolds like a night-blooming desert flower, revealing not just cleverness but compassion for the reader. You don't get the laugh-out-loud jokes and the quiet harmonies. You don't see two masterful writers using all of their art to create a work of tremendous humanity.
Brust's admiration of the work of Roger Zelazny is well known. As I read THE INCREMENTALISTS for the first time, I realized that this is his & White's CHRONICLES OF AMBER. A reader familiar with Zelazny's masterwork will recognize dynamics, thematic elements, and structural decisions. It's not an overt relationship, and will not hinder anyone who's not read the earlier work. It does provide a beautiful counterpoint nonetheless.
THE INCREMENTALISTS is not an action-packed thrill-ride through bizarre worlds. It doesn't boast a high body count or world-shaking threats. It is a quiet, deeply-thought exploration of memory, identity, and love.
It's not a book that will please everyone. It is a book that profoundly pleased, and moved, me.
An aside: the audiobook, read by Ray Porter and Mary Robinette Kowal, is one of the finest I've ever heard. If you have the opportunity to listen to it, do.
September 25, 2013
The Incrementalists was a book that I was very excited about. Its was co-written by Steven Brust whose Jhereg series was intriguing. This book however failed to capture my attention throughout.
The book has a very interesting take on immortality & human perceptions in regards to immortality. I couldn't connect with main two characters through out the story and in the end at least for me this book was something that I finished reading but didn't want to review.
This will have its fans & again it's a simple amtter of taste, for me The Incrementalists just felt flat & too much love with the main concept. Perhaps a novella would have worled better than the longer form.
November 3, 2013
When I get on with Steven Brust, we get on extremely well. Although it doesn't happen as often, when I don't get on with him, I get really, really aggravated, as happened here. (No idea how much of that was the co-author.) The book sounded very interesting, but I didn't kill it with high expectations - just couldn't understand why this group of special people was supposed to be anything other than arrogant creeps. Add to that writing that seemed designed to leave the reader following with maximum difficulty and alternating first-person narrative voices that were far too often indistinguishable, and this one was a big miss for me.
June 7, 2013
Interesting concept, strong start- weak finish...
August 1, 2018
After reading Steven Brust's most recent work and finding it intriguing but ultimately a little incoherent, I was delighted to go back and discover one of his earlier works that reminded me why I find his work so compelling. It's especially remarkable given that it tries some of the same narrative tricks, notably that it's written in first person from two different perspectives. The technique gives it something of an off-balance feeling that worked better for me with the story being told. It may well also play into melding the voices of the two authors, because this was a collaboration with Skyler White, someone with whom I'm sorry to say I wasn't previously familiar (and I'll clearly have to address that gap if this book is any indication.) I'd love to know more about how the collaboration worked. Did they each give one of the primary characters a voice? However it worked: it works.
The Incrementalists is a dizzying read, full of the kinds of compelling ideas I enjoy in the best science fiction and fantasy. Just pondering the basic premise leads in all kinds of interesting directions that I'm still letting sink in before I start in on the sequel. It reminds me of the first time I read Roger Zelazny's Nine Princes in Amber, only there's more than simple escapism to be found here. There are themes that feel especially relevant now, several years after the work was originally written.
In fact, it feels a little glib to write it off as science fiction or fantasy. I came away with a distinct impression that this belongs to a genre I'd like to see tapped more: philosophical fiction. PhilosoFiction? Presumably if you take the time to read it you'll understand what I mean.
Heartily recommended if you don't mind some mental gymnastics while reading.
The Incrementalists is a dizzying read, full of the kinds of compelling ideas I enjoy in the best science fiction and fantasy. Just pondering the basic premise leads in all kinds of interesting directions that I'm still letting sink in before I start in on the sequel. It reminds me of the first time I read Roger Zelazny's Nine Princes in Amber, only there's more than simple escapism to be found here. There are themes that feel especially relevant now, several years after the work was originally written.
In fact, it feels a little glib to write it off as science fiction or fantasy. I came away with a distinct impression that this belongs to a genre I'd like to see tapped more: philosophical fiction. PhilosoFiction? Presumably if you take the time to read it you'll understand what I mean.
Heartily recommended if you don't mind some mental gymnastics while reading.
October 4, 2013
What a terrific premise, I thought, when I read the book description. A secret society--the Incrementalists--has existed for all of human history and they "meddle" with people with a goal of bettering society. Sometimes that works out well, sometimes not. Incrementalists have finite bodies, but their memories and wisdom are immortal, because they are "stubbed" into a new recruited Incrementalist.
Celeste, Phil's lover for the last 400 years, give or take, has died in her physical body and Phil chooses user interface designer Renée, called "Ren," as his recruit to receive Celeste's stub. He finds himself falling for Ren, which is nice for them, except that Celeste's personality wants to rampage to the forefront, not only of Ren, but all the Incrementalists.
I was thinking I'd be reading an adventure through the history of Incrementalists meddling in history. Aside from a couple of brief asides, that didn't happen. Disappointment number one. The story is almost entirely focused on battling Celeste and following the progress of Phil and Ren's burgeoning relationship. That turned out to be disappointment number two, because the characters of Phil, Ren and the several other Incrementalists brought into the story were shallow and uninteresting. Celeste was the most vibrant character, which is not much of a compliment considering she was supposed to be dead.
The story's focus was also a disappointment because author Stephen Brust never makes us understand that there is much at stake in the battle against Celeste. I think we're supposed to believe that there are huge consequences for not only Phil, Ren and the other Incrementalists, but all of humankind. But I never saw that there was all that much at stake because the Incrementalists' work was never described in anything but vague and fleeting terms.
Something might have been salvaged if the Phil/Ren story had been engaging, but the characters lacked both substance and chemistry, and the couple of TMI sex scenes were a big turn-off.
And now we come to the biggest disappointment of all: the audiobook narration. Because the story is told in alternating chapters by Phil and Ren, the audiobook includes a male reader and a female reader. Ray Porter, reading as Phil, uses a consistently PO'd, hard-boiled and aggressive voice, which was unappealing and didn't feel at all right for the character. Mary Robinette Kowal, reading as Ren, has an insubstantial, almost Valley Girl voice, which is also unsuited to what is supposed to be a strong female character. Her reading of male voices is awful to the level of being cringeworthy. I felt sorry for the authors that these voices were used for the story, because they were so wrong for what I felt was the flavor and style they'd been going for.
What's more, in the audiobook there are many inconsistencies and errors. The book contains dialogue by characters other than Phil and Renée, and each of the leads must also speak that dialogue. Bizarrely, when Porter, reading Phil's chapters, speaks as the character Oskar, he uses a (bad) Russian-ish accent, while Kowal, reading Ren's chapters, uses no accent. When she speaks Jimmy's lines, she uses a (bad) French-ish accent, but Porter does not. Kowal mispronounces several words and, inexplicably, both readers consistently pronounce the name Ramon as "Raymond." Considering the high prices charged for audiobooks, it seems inexcusable to me to have such slipshod production values as to allow miscast and, in Kowal's case, poor voices, but especially so many inconsistencies and errors.
Not recommended.
Celeste, Phil's lover for the last 400 years, give or take, has died in her physical body and Phil chooses user interface designer Renée, called "Ren," as his recruit to receive Celeste's stub. He finds himself falling for Ren, which is nice for them, except that Celeste's personality wants to rampage to the forefront, not only of Ren, but all the Incrementalists.
I was thinking I'd be reading an adventure through the history of Incrementalists meddling in history. Aside from a couple of brief asides, that didn't happen. Disappointment number one. The story is almost entirely focused on battling Celeste and following the progress of Phil and Ren's burgeoning relationship. That turned out to be disappointment number two, because the characters of Phil, Ren and the several other Incrementalists brought into the story were shallow and uninteresting. Celeste was the most vibrant character, which is not much of a compliment considering she was supposed to be dead.
The story's focus was also a disappointment because author Stephen Brust never makes us understand that there is much at stake in the battle against Celeste. I think we're supposed to believe that there are huge consequences for not only Phil, Ren and the other Incrementalists, but all of humankind. But I never saw that there was all that much at stake because the Incrementalists' work was never described in anything but vague and fleeting terms.
Something might have been salvaged if the Phil/Ren story had been engaging, but the characters lacked both substance and chemistry, and the couple of TMI sex scenes were a big turn-off.
And now we come to the biggest disappointment of all: the audiobook narration. Because the story is told in alternating chapters by Phil and Ren, the audiobook includes a male reader and a female reader. Ray Porter, reading as Phil, uses a consistently PO'd, hard-boiled and aggressive voice, which was unappealing and didn't feel at all right for the character. Mary Robinette Kowal, reading as Ren, has an insubstantial, almost Valley Girl voice, which is also unsuited to what is supposed to be a strong female character. Her reading of male voices is awful to the level of being cringeworthy. I felt sorry for the authors that these voices were used for the story, because they were so wrong for what I felt was the flavor and style they'd been going for.
What's more, in the audiobook there are many inconsistencies and errors. The book contains dialogue by characters other than Phil and Renée, and each of the leads must also speak that dialogue. Bizarrely, when Porter, reading Phil's chapters, speaks as the character Oskar, he uses a (bad) Russian-ish accent, while Kowal, reading Ren's chapters, uses no accent. When she speaks Jimmy's lines, she uses a (bad) French-ish accent, but Porter does not. Kowal mispronounces several words and, inexplicably, both readers consistently pronounce the name Ramon as "Raymond." Considering the high prices charged for audiobooks, it seems inexcusable to me to have such slipshod production values as to allow miscast and, in Kowal's case, poor voices, but especially so many inconsistencies and errors.
Not recommended.
December 5, 2013
The Incrementalists creates an interesting vision of a secret society of individuals who have unlocked the potential of the human mind. Not only are they able to subtly influence individuals - a process they call "meddling" - to do their bidding, but they have learned how to store and access memories remotely through The Garden... essentially a communal memory palace. Moreover, they're capable of actually cheating death by implanting the memories and personality of dead members in a new body.
So what does a society of mind-controlling technical immortals do?
Well... theoretically try to make the world a better place. How one defines "better" is a subject of much debate, but for the most part, they're the good guys. Very human, but well intentioned.
This all goes out the window when one of their members may or may not have been murdered. And possibly has gone insane.
The *idea* of the Incrementalists is interesting. The way they influence others is highly reminiscent of both neurolinguistic programing (NLP) and the meta-language wizardry of Max Barry's Lexicon. The way they cheat death by essentially spiking their personalities into another body - running the risk of the body's personality overwriting the implanted one but keeping the memories - actually brings to mind the way the Doctor changes with each regeneration; he's the same man, but different every time.
It's just a shame that there's really no there, there. You never really get a feel for the stakes in this book. It's told through the perspective of Phil - one of the oldest Incrementalists - and Ren - the new recruit and as a result... well, you never really get a feel for the level of influence they've actually had. There's a lot of "tell, don't show" here; we're told over and over again that they've been changing the world, but you never feel any sort of impact. So when we're told that Celeste has gone dangerously insane and is planning on bringing down the Incrementalists, it's really hard to care. It has the same sort of feel of reading about somebody plotting to take over their Harry Potter Facebook fan community - somewhat important to the people involved sure, but otherwise sort of ho-hum to the rest of us.
It also doesn't help that we never get a feel for anybody OTHER than Phil or Ren. Celeste is a mostly off-stage presence who's talked about a la Gordot, but you don't feel the sense of menace that she's supposed to represent. The other Incrementalists who DO show up are largely flat, a sketch of informed attributes without much in the way of actual personalities. There's no real feel of conflict that rises above the level of a couple of geeks trying to take control of their local anime club. Even one of the presumed antagonists' trying to get on the "leadership council" of the Incrementalists has no drama because, as they say, it's less of a leading position and more of a "debate club" with no real concrete power.
I did enjoy the relationship between Phil and Ren; it's an interesting way of threading the needle between a long-established romance and a new one just starting to blossom all at the same time. But in and of itself, it's not terribly compelling.
On the whole, it's not a BAD book, just a disappointing one. Lots of unused potential with no real build up or pay-off.
So what does a society of mind-controlling technical immortals do?
Well... theoretically try to make the world a better place. How one defines "better" is a subject of much debate, but for the most part, they're the good guys. Very human, but well intentioned.
This all goes out the window when one of their members may or may not have been murdered. And possibly has gone insane.
The *idea* of the Incrementalists is interesting. The way they influence others is highly reminiscent of both neurolinguistic programing (NLP) and the meta-language wizardry of Max Barry's Lexicon. The way they cheat death by essentially spiking their personalities into another body - running the risk of the body's personality overwriting the implanted one but keeping the memories - actually brings to mind the way the Doctor changes with each regeneration; he's the same man, but different every time.
It's just a shame that there's really no there, there. You never really get a feel for the stakes in this book. It's told through the perspective of Phil - one of the oldest Incrementalists - and Ren - the new recruit and as a result... well, you never really get a feel for the level of influence they've actually had. There's a lot of "tell, don't show" here; we're told over and over again that they've been changing the world, but you never feel any sort of impact. So when we're told that Celeste has gone dangerously insane and is planning on bringing down the Incrementalists, it's really hard to care. It has the same sort of feel of reading about somebody plotting to take over their Harry Potter Facebook fan community - somewhat important to the people involved sure, but otherwise sort of ho-hum to the rest of us.
It also doesn't help that we never get a feel for anybody OTHER than Phil or Ren. Celeste is a mostly off-stage presence who's talked about a la Gordot, but you don't feel the sense of menace that she's supposed to represent. The other Incrementalists who DO show up are largely flat, a sketch of informed attributes without much in the way of actual personalities. There's no real feel of conflict that rises above the level of a couple of geeks trying to take control of their local anime club. Even one of the presumed antagonists' trying to get on the "leadership council" of the Incrementalists has no drama because, as they say, it's less of a leading position and more of a "debate club" with no real concrete power.
I did enjoy the relationship between Phil and Ren; it's an interesting way of threading the needle between a long-established romance and a new one just starting to blossom all at the same time. But in and of itself, it's not terribly compelling.
On the whole, it's not a BAD book, just a disappointing one. Lots of unused potential with no real build up or pay-off.
October 16, 2013
Immediately after finishing this work by Steven Brust & Skyler White I felt as though somebody had scooped my brains out with a spatula, rearranged more than a few neurons and dumped it back in the cranial cavity.
"The Incrementalists" does so many things "right" on so many different levels, that I'll be pondering it for some time to come.
The duo of authors take common tropes (immortality, secret societies, etc.) and promptly scrambles it all into something new and undone before.
I won't/ can't go into details but this book has much more gravity and substance than the number of pages would lead you to believe. The characters are human, but not, complete with competing virtues and flaws. Each character is exceedingly well defined by their ACTIONS not their words which is something I wish more authors would take note of.
And I still maintain that pound for pound you'll be hard-pressed to find a writer who does dialogue as well as Stephen Brust. Most authors do it as a science, some transcend to art; Brust hangs out in whatever comes after art. He can convey more in 3 sentences of dialogue than many authors can in 3 paragraphs of info dump. And he does it without adverb tagging. "Look Ma! No hands!" Exceptional.
The story is rich and complex, existing on several different layers. At times the philosophical dialogue was like 2-3 sentences too long, but did not distract overall. Much of the dialogue is laugh out loud hilarious, as well.
The premise, characters, world-building and...ramifications of the book were spectacular.
The only aspects of the book which I did not entirely care for were;
- the pace seemed to be very evenly measured. I guess I was expecting more dramatic changes of tension and flow.
- in a few places the blocking which accompanied the dialogue actually distracted from the reading.
- there seemed to be certain portions of the book wherein characters would retire to rest in a specific bedroom. Nothing actually happened in the bedroom (mostly) except rest and sleep. I guess I was thinking of a parallel between a bed and Chekov's gun - "if you put a bed in the scene, you have to use it..for something other than sleep, ideally."
The other aspect of this work I enjoyed was the setting of Las Vegas, one of my favorite places in the world (in MODERATION, of course).
I had the pleasure of attending a writer's conference last year ("Viable Paradise") and Steven Brust was one of the instructors. In addition to learning a lot about the craft, we played a couple of poker games. One thing I learned was to sit down at the table, give Steve With the Hat all your chips, and learn. In addition I will make sure to read some other works by Skyler White. The chemistry between these two authors is evident in the book and very enjoyable. It seems like they had a great time writing this book between them.
"The Incrementalists" does so many things "right" on so many different levels, that I'll be pondering it for some time to come.
The duo of authors take common tropes (immortality, secret societies, etc.) and promptly scrambles it all into something new and undone before.
I won't/ can't go into details but this book has much more gravity and substance than the number of pages would lead you to believe. The characters are human, but not, complete with competing virtues and flaws. Each character is exceedingly well defined by their ACTIONS not their words which is something I wish more authors would take note of.
And I still maintain that pound for pound you'll be hard-pressed to find a writer who does dialogue as well as Stephen Brust. Most authors do it as a science, some transcend to art; Brust hangs out in whatever comes after art. He can convey more in 3 sentences of dialogue than many authors can in 3 paragraphs of info dump. And he does it without adverb tagging. "Look Ma! No hands!" Exceptional.
The story is rich and complex, existing on several different layers. At times the philosophical dialogue was like 2-3 sentences too long, but did not distract overall. Much of the dialogue is laugh out loud hilarious, as well.
The premise, characters, world-building and...ramifications of the book were spectacular.
The only aspects of the book which I did not entirely care for were;
- the pace seemed to be very evenly measured. I guess I was expecting more dramatic changes of tension and flow.
- in a few places the blocking which accompanied the dialogue actually distracted from the reading.
- there seemed to be certain portions of the book wherein characters would retire to rest in a specific bedroom. Nothing actually happened in the bedroom (mostly) except rest and sleep. I guess I was thinking of a parallel between a bed and Chekov's gun - "if you put a bed in the scene, you have to use it..for something other than sleep, ideally."
The other aspect of this work I enjoyed was the setting of Las Vegas, one of my favorite places in the world (in MODERATION, of course).
I had the pleasure of attending a writer's conference last year ("Viable Paradise") and Steven Brust was one of the instructors. In addition to learning a lot about the craft, we played a couple of poker games. One thing I learned was to sit down at the table, give Steve With the Hat all your chips, and learn. In addition I will make sure to read some other works by Skyler White. The chemistry between these two authors is evident in the book and very enjoyable. It seems like they had a great time writing this book between them.
October 29, 2018
Why did I enjoy this book? It beats me. As far as I can tell, it broke practically every rule I have for an enjoyable novel.
To begin, it's told from alternating viewpoints: Phil (I'm betting written primarily by Steven Brust) and Ren (Renée - presumably written by Skyler White). I'm a simple sort, and easily confused, so despite the fact that every section is headed by the name of the first-person character, I fairly often got a page into a change of viewpoint before realizing that I was thinking I was reading Phil when it was actually Ren.
Then, I like the basic premises of a story to be explained to me. I don't need it all up front, but by the time I get to the end, I want to be able to have understood what was going on. In this story, we have the titular Incrementalists, and the 'nemones' (or confusingly, the amnemones), who are every human who isn't an Incrementalist. But we never get an explanation, or even a guess, as to why the Incrementalists are different from other humans. My personal suspicion is that, in fact, Incrementalists are not remotely human; that they're a pure-energy lifeform which lives in symbiosis with humanity. However, the Incrementalists themselves are remarkably uninquisitive about their own origins, so your guess is as good as mine. My guess, though, would help to explain Celeste.
So we come to Celeste. Ren has been selected to be the new 'host' (Incrementalists call her a Second: another problem—so many words that have special meaning to Incrementalists are never explained, you have to work them out for yourself) for the deceased Celeste's memories. Celeste somehow seems to be manipulating Ren, Phil and others from beyond the grave, and we're never really given a hint how that could be possible (and at least one Incrementalist flat-out says that it isn't possible!)
Incidentally, the cover blurb says "The Incrementalists—a secret society… with an unbroken lineage reaching back forty thousand years." That's a very debatable point. The Incrementalists' personalities decay over their numerous human lifetimes, and Phil's personal memories only go back 2000 years (and he is the "oldest"). So you might consider it a very broken lineage, but he can access the memories of both his previous Seconds and those of any other Incrementalist.
For all the unanswered questions and confusing, to me, narration, I was hooked from the beginning. Ostensibly about "reincarnating Celeste", on a deeper level it's about the fact that Phil is, for all intents, 2000 years old, and what it costs a person to live that long and through so much.
September 17, 2013
Found an advance copy of this on the ‘free’ shelf at work, and was pretty enthused – I’ve read Brust before, and found his books to be good fun.
However, this one didn’t do it for me. The premise is engaging: an ancient secret society has knowledge of the technique of transferring memories from one body to another (as well as storing information in a kind of mental ‘cloud’ internet). The society is devoted to using their experience and knowledge to become adept at psychological manipulation, which they are vowed to use to make the world a better place through small, incremental changes.
Unfortunately, the society does very little ‘trying to make things better’ and instead does a great deal of bitchy, catty infighting and things of questionable ethics.
The main focus is on a new recruit to this society, whether she will be able to maintain her own personality, as she has to deal with an ‘upload’ of the mind of a particularly domineering individual, and whether she will fall in love with the guy who recruited her (a romance which I just wasn’t ‘feeling’ at all.) Is she being manipulated, and, if so, who is doing the manipulating, and for what agenda?
It’s very slow and soap-opera-esque. People do a lot of standing around arguing in circles about who is doing what, and why. I found it a bit tedious.
However, this one didn’t do it for me. The premise is engaging: an ancient secret society has knowledge of the technique of transferring memories from one body to another (as well as storing information in a kind of mental ‘cloud’ internet). The society is devoted to using their experience and knowledge to become adept at psychological manipulation, which they are vowed to use to make the world a better place through small, incremental changes.
Unfortunately, the society does very little ‘trying to make things better’ and instead does a great deal of bitchy, catty infighting and things of questionable ethics.
The main focus is on a new recruit to this society, whether she will be able to maintain her own personality, as she has to deal with an ‘upload’ of the mind of a particularly domineering individual, and whether she will fall in love with the guy who recruited her (a romance which I just wasn’t ‘feeling’ at all.) Is she being manipulated, and, if so, who is doing the manipulating, and for what agenda?
It’s very slow and soap-opera-esque. People do a lot of standing around arguing in circles about who is doing what, and why. I found it a bit tedious.
October 16, 2013
I need to learn not to trust the blurb, let alone the endorsement of people I admire.
What a disappointment this was...boring, muddled and with dialogues that alternate between "look how clever we are" and "sitcom with laugh-track".
We're told the characters are fighting this dangerous and possibly world-changing battle and yet...no urgency, no sense of danger, no energy at all.
The whole Incrementalist idea, this brilliant, brilliant idea is just used as a backdrop for a insta-love romance with serious consent problems.
And Ren...I honestly cannot remember a female character so passive. She's just there. The other constantly talk over her, discuss her and her future as if she where absent (or an object).
We're told (again and again, no showing here, no sir) that she's been chosen for her strenght. She describes herself as self-reliant and intelligent, going as far as listing her degrees (!) and yet she does nothing.
She just drinks tea and waits to be told what to do. Even when it's time to do her real job, something she's supposedly very passionate about, she lets a man swoop in and take over.
She's literally a stub and pretty much ok with it.
Her complacency about being moved about and manipulated is really, really creepy.
One star for the book, one for the audiobook production.
What a disappointment this was...boring, muddled and with dialogues that alternate between "look how clever we are" and "sitcom with laugh-track".
We're told the characters are fighting this dangerous and possibly world-changing battle and yet...no urgency, no sense of danger, no energy at all.
The whole Incrementalist idea, this brilliant, brilliant idea is just used as a backdrop for a insta-love romance with serious consent problems.
And Ren...I honestly cannot remember a female character so passive. She's just there. The other constantly talk over her, discuss her and her future as if she where absent (or an object).
We're told (again and again, no showing here, no sir) that she's been chosen for her strenght. She describes herself as self-reliant and intelligent, going as far as listing her degrees (!) and yet she does nothing.
She just drinks tea and waits to be told what to do. Even when it's time to do her real job, something she's supposedly very passionate about, she lets a man swoop in and take over.
She's literally a stub and pretty much ok with it.
Her complacency about being moved about and manipulated is really, really creepy.
One star for the book, one for the audiobook production.
January 28, 2014
This wasn't the book I wanted it to be.
It seemed to start out as a book about a secret society of immortal-ish people who "meddle" in human affairs to make things slightly better. I liked the idea of an Illuminati-lite, and I was willing to set aside the fact that I would have found it more interesting if they actually were immortal, rather than having a weird process of essentially taking over new hosts with old memories when they die.
But the whole process of how the memories are passed forward, along with the shared memory structure the Incrementalists used ended up being the whole book. I get that there are interesting questions raised about the nature and role of memory. But to me, running around in people's heads (sometimes literally) is not as interesting as seeing actual meddling (as in the same-universe short Fireworks in the Rain) would have been. I would actually read a sequel, if I could be persuaded it dealt with meddling rather than the inner workings of the Incrementalist organization.
In short, I wanted the Incrementalists, but I feel like I got the Mentalists.
It seemed to start out as a book about a secret society of immortal-ish people who "meddle" in human affairs to make things slightly better. I liked the idea of an Illuminati-lite, and I was willing to set aside the fact that I would have found it more interesting if they actually were immortal, rather than having a weird process of essentially taking over new hosts with old memories when they die.
But the whole process of how the memories are passed forward, along with the shared memory structure the Incrementalists used ended up being the whole book. I get that there are interesting questions raised about the nature and role of memory. But to me, running around in people's heads (sometimes literally) is not as interesting as seeing actual meddling (as in the same-universe short Fireworks in the Rain) would have been. I would actually read a sequel, if I could be persuaded it dealt with meddling rather than the inner workings of the Incrementalist organization.
In short, I wanted the Incrementalists, but I feel like I got the Mentalists.
September 25, 2013
... Brust and White are a powerhouse duo. The text flows smoothly. Their prose is often hauntingly beautiful and poetic, and filled with atmosphere. While this is a rather serious book that will make you work for it, the authors keep enough humor throughout to keep the serious, deeper notes from becoming too overwhelming. The Incrementalists is a gripping, keep-you-guessing, not-what-you-expect sort of read. It might be confusing. It is definitely deep and thought provoking. The first person perspectives might turn you off, but for those willing to put in a little effort, the payoff is extreme and wonderful. The Incrementalists takes a simple idea, like the domino effect, and blows it up. Readers will go on one hell of a ride in the process.
Read my full review here:
http://www.bookwormblues.net/2013/09/...
Read my full review here:
http://www.bookwormblues.net/2013/09/...
April 22, 2015
First Person. Las Vegas. Poker. Secret Society. Immortals. Reincarnation. Insta-Love™. Mind Control. Omphaloskepsis. Power Struggles. Lost Interest.
December 3, 2013
The Incrementalists is collaboration between authors Steven Brust and Skyler White. I was more familiar with White going in, having enjoyed her trippy novels and Falling, Fly and In Dreams Begin. My experience with Brust’s vast catalogue was sadly limited to having read The Sun, the Moon, and the Stars many years ago while obsessively collecting the FAIRY TALE SERIES. In The Incrementalists, Brust and White team up to create a millennia-old secret society dedicated to making the world better... incrementally.
The novel follows two points of view: Phil, a longtime Incrementalist, and Renee (called Ren), whom Phil has selected as a new recruit. Ren accepts, for secret reasons of ... Read More
http://www.fantasyliterature.com/revi...
The novel follows two points of view: Phil, a longtime Incrementalist, and Renee (called Ren), whom Phil has selected as a new recruit. Ren accepts, for secret reasons of ... Read More
http://www.fantasyliterature.com/revi...
September 25, 2013
Despite some of my reservations, I can’t deny that The Incrementalists is a unique and surprising novel about the power of memory and the impact of even the smallest actions. Its occasionally breezy tone masks a spectacular amount of depth and history. When it allows that depth to shine through, The Incrementalists is at its best. I’m glad I read it, and I’m glad there are authors who still manage to surprise even their long-time fans.
Read the entire review on my site Far Beyond Reality!
Read the entire review on my site Far Beyond Reality!
January 10, 2014
So many mixed feelings on this one. Some fascinating world-building, interesting characters, even though it's more philosophical than I usually like I was drawn into the philosophical ideas. Was surprised by the explicit sex scenes and thought they were for the most part unnecessary YMMV. Some if my issues have to do with how several of the women were portrayed and how sex was used to manipulate. To say more would be giving away spoilers. So as I said very mixed feelings with parts I loved and parts I hated. A very writery ending.
April 27, 2017
Talky, measured, solid.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 362 reviews