What do you think?
Rate this book
Micro God
Richard Clarke is a man born with the unnatural ability to control all reality around himself. Whether it be granting himself immortality, stopping bullets in mid-air, or destroying his enemies with a mere thought, he is often feared as a god on Earth. However, outliving everyone he ever loved whilst losing friends to the limitations of his powers causes a heavy burden upon his shoulders, and in the 21st Century, Clarke is a stoic loner, traveling and living only to kill evil. He has no time for friends or family, but all that changes when he meets a dedicated doctor working in the dark streets of Detroit.
In Detroit, Clarke vows to eliminate all gangs terrorizing the city's populace. However, after delivering a junkie with a broken leg to a hospital, Clarke is given a chance to end his decades of rampages, killing criminals and villains. Instead, he is offered a chance to work in the hospital along the idealistic Doctor Chloe Hall. His powers give him an incredible edge in the emergency room and he soon realizes that he could save everyone who comes through the hospital doors. But the gangs are still out there, and Clarke has to make a choice. Should he keep killing, or should he begin saving lives?
"That which is destroyed cannot be repaired. That which is mended cannot be maintained."
In Detroit, Clarke vows to eliminate all gangs terrorizing the city's populace. However, after delivering a junkie with a broken leg to a hospital, Clarke is given a chance to end his decades of rampages, killing criminals and villains. Instead, he is offered a chance to work in the hospital along the idealistic Doctor Chloe Hall. His powers give him an incredible edge in the emergency room and he soon realizes that he could save everyone who comes through the hospital doors. But the gangs are still out there, and Clarke has to make a choice. Should he keep killing, or should he begin saving lives?
"That which is destroyed cannot be repaired. That which is mended cannot be maintained."
62 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 4, 2012
26 people are currently reading
491 people want to read
About the author
K.R. Martin
1 book181 followersKyle R. Martin, better known under the pseudonym "KrimsonRogue", is best known for his youtube video series, The Book Was Better, in which he compares film adaptations to their source material, usually books or book series.
There is more than one author with this name
There is more than one author with this name
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
July 10, 2021
I was drawn to KrimsonRogue's YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/KrimsonRogu...) by his epic, seven-hours-long, multi-part video review of Empress Theresa, then stayed for his own book. Micro God is a novellette-length story of an undying man who can alter reality at will, but only within a five-foot radius of himself. He wanders the world, using his power to try and eliminate evil where he finds it. In this story, he is in Detroit trying to eliminate the street gangs that have essentially taken over the city, when he meets a selfless ER doctor, prompting him to re-evaluate his role in the world.
It's . . . not particularly good. In his book criticism videos, Martin often displays an understanding of narrative techniques and how to effectively achieve certain aims in fiction writing, notably absent in the self-published manatee abortions he sometimes eviscerates. Micro God makes use of these basic skills, but my overall impression is that it's like something written for an undergraduate creative writing class. It was published almost ten years ago, and Martin is not exactly old now, so maybe this was indeed the case.
The concept is okay but under-explored, and the execution is generally OK, but the story is woefully brief, characters are unidimensional, the villains are all bland stereotypes referred to simply as "gangster" or "thug", and the world in the book is oversimplified. For example of this last, the ER doctor that the protagonist meets appears to be running the entire facility, from managing the backup generator to negotiating deals with local farmers to supply the cafeteria with healthy produce. I'm pretty sure even the most underfunded hospitals have administrators to handle those things.
Perhaps some of the unrealistic details are appropriate for a superhero or comic-book world, but on the whole I can only call it amateurish, if not without some skill. His Empress Theresa takedown gets five stars though.
It's . . . not particularly good. In his book criticism videos, Martin often displays an understanding of narrative techniques and how to effectively achieve certain aims in fiction writing, notably absent in the self-published manatee abortions he sometimes eviscerates. Micro God makes use of these basic skills, but my overall impression is that it's like something written for an undergraduate creative writing class. It was published almost ten years ago, and Martin is not exactly old now, so maybe this was indeed the case.
The concept is okay but under-explored, and the execution is generally OK, but the story is woefully brief, characters are unidimensional, the villains are all bland stereotypes referred to simply as "gangster" or "thug", and the world in the book is oversimplified. For example of this last, the ER doctor that the protagonist meets appears to be running the entire facility, from managing the backup generator to negotiating deals with local farmers to supply the cafeteria with healthy produce. I'm pretty sure even the most underfunded hospitals have administrators to handle those things.
Perhaps some of the unrealistic details are appropriate for a superhero or comic-book world, but on the whole I can only call it amateurish, if not without some skill. His Empress Theresa takedown gets five stars though.
October 1, 2021
Did I purchase a Kindle just to read this novella?Yes.
Do I regret it ? No.
Do I think that Martin is an enthusiastic writer? Yes.
Do I think he could do better? Also yes.
Do I regret it ? No.
Do I think that Martin is an enthusiastic writer? Yes.
Do I think he could do better? Also yes.
February 6, 2024
Its a good start.
A good premise, but it was too fast and short for my liking. If the intention of this story was to give a preview of K.R. Martin's writing style, it did a good job of that. The writing is great, a mistake here and there but it was minor, and the plot was really interesting. But as a story, it's frustratingly short! I would love to see this story expanded upon. I didn't hate it, but it left me wanting for more, which is probably a good thing, in the end.
A good premise, but it was too fast and short for my liking. If the intention of this story was to give a preview of K.R. Martin's writing style, it did a good job of that. The writing is great, a mistake here and there but it was minor, and the plot was really interesting. But as a story, it's frustratingly short! I would love to see this story expanded upon. I didn't hate it, but it left me wanting for more, which is probably a good thing, in the end.
December 22, 2020
Review posted on my blog The Writer's Library.
"It is only the damned that need fear me. That which is destroyed cannot be restored. That which is mended cannot be maintained."
I was introduced to K.R. Martin through his popular YouTube show The Book was Better. I thoroughly enjoy Martin's content and review style, and admire that he loves reading as much as he does. As such, I was looking at one of his videos one day, and in this video he mentioned that he wrote a book a while back. It interested me, but I didn't really think to pick it up just yet. I finally did yesterday, and I have to say that he did not disappoint.
This story, while told through a pretty cynical viewpoint, had a snap to it that made it very hard to put down. While I don't often enjoy books with a lot of action or peril in them, Martin takes what I would normally call boring, and makes it enthralling. He does so by creating an incredible, yet still believable, protagonist, a man weighed down by living a life ten times as long as real time.
While enthralling, Martin also makes the main character as humane as possible, showing a different kind of superhero: one who looks at the world in such a way that he will help it along as much as he can, even if his cynicism stops him from hoping for the best.
This is how Clarke starts out: frustrated and upset, with a loss of hope for the future. Mainly because he has lost hope for himself in living for an odd three hundred years, with no chance of escape from the world's evils. He has detached from humanity in the worst way possible, carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders, which as we can see, has weighed him down to the point of near dysfunction.
Martin's insight on a man who is weighed down in such a way is done to the point of being completely believable. While I tend to be an optimist, I could see clearly why Clarke is as cynical as he is. We may believe in our hearts that we want immortality and the inability to be hurt, but in giving Clarke just that, Martin makes a poignant commentary on what can happen when we use that power to put ourselves last and everyone else around us first. We cannot take care of others if we do not take care of ourselves first.
Martin points to WWII being the main start of Clarke's personal downfall. Clarke wasn't always like this, and we see what happens when trauma becomes a person's entire being. I found this portrayal particularly beautiful.
Herein lies Martin's main message, that when you let trauma define you, it does nothing but ruin how you look at life. Cynicism plagues Clarke's life, but deep down, he doesn't want that, and is finally able to admit that to himself once he realizes just how far he has gone.
The story ends somewhat abruptly, but it is that way so you get time to think about it. I thought it was rather abrupt at first, only to look back on it and think over what it really meant. That's really the biggest strength of this book. The significance of it won't hit you right away, but when it does, it is beautiful.
Bottom line, I enjoyed it much more than I expected to and I'm really happy I came across Martin's work (both on YouTube and in the literary world).
"It is only the damned that need fear me. That which is destroyed cannot be restored. That which is mended cannot be maintained."
I was introduced to K.R. Martin through his popular YouTube show The Book was Better. I thoroughly enjoy Martin's content and review style, and admire that he loves reading as much as he does. As such, I was looking at one of his videos one day, and in this video he mentioned that he wrote a book a while back. It interested me, but I didn't really think to pick it up just yet. I finally did yesterday, and I have to say that he did not disappoint.
This story, while told through a pretty cynical viewpoint, had a snap to it that made it very hard to put down. While I don't often enjoy books with a lot of action or peril in them, Martin takes what I would normally call boring, and makes it enthralling. He does so by creating an incredible, yet still believable, protagonist, a man weighed down by living a life ten times as long as real time.
"Listen," Clarke said, baring his teeth. "First, I'm not a superhero. I don't want a sidekick. I don't need a sidekick. I don't fly through the air and stop Lex Luther from taking over the city. I just stop whatever evils I happen to see."
While enthralling, Martin also makes the main character as humane as possible, showing a different kind of superhero: one who looks at the world in such a way that he will help it along as much as he can, even if his cynicism stops him from hoping for the best.
"Second, about how I got my powers. I've been asked that very question by every fan, friend, casualty, reporter, naysayer, detractor, cop, and every federal agent of every country I've visited, plus four Kings and Queens of Britain, and twelve United States Presidents, and I'm going to give you the same answer. I don't fucking know! I was just born with them and they are a natural extension of my will!"
This is how Clarke starts out: frustrated and upset, with a loss of hope for the future. Mainly because he has lost hope for himself in living for an odd three hundred years, with no chance of escape from the world's evils. He has detached from humanity in the worst way possible, carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders, which as we can see, has weighed him down to the point of near dysfunction.
Martin's insight on a man who is weighed down in such a way is done to the point of being completely believable. While I tend to be an optimist, I could see clearly why Clarke is as cynical as he is. We may believe in our hearts that we want immortality and the inability to be hurt, but in giving Clarke just that, Martin makes a poignant commentary on what can happen when we use that power to put ourselves last and everyone else around us first. We cannot take care of others if we do not take care of ourselves first.
"Richard Clarke aimlessly wandered the streets of downtown Detroit. Derelict buildings towered above him on all sides. He looked at home in the dismal setting with his wrinkled trench coat and days old beard. He hadn't showered in almost a week and his short disheveled hair showed it. However, despite his poor hygiene, any passerby would have sworn he smelled like a freshly cut lawn. Clarke chose the smell since it was one of the few things left that made him feel anything."
Martin points to WWII being the main start of Clarke's personal downfall. Clarke wasn't always like this, and we see what happens when trauma becomes a person's entire being. I found this portrayal particularly beautiful.
"He was just going in circles, extinguishing what little he could. He was tired of leaving place after place, reestablishing himself in each new city. World War II had ruined him, and he had been killing ever since."
Herein lies Martin's main message, that when you let trauma define you, it does nothing but ruin how you look at life. Cynicism plagues Clarke's life, but deep down, he doesn't want that, and is finally able to admit that to himself once he realizes just how far he has gone.
"He had all the power he could ever want, but it still wasn't enough. He was human, just like everyone else, with flaws, failings, and too much anger for one man."
The story ends somewhat abruptly, but it is that way so you get time to think about it. I thought it was rather abrupt at first, only to look back on it and think over what it really meant. That's really the biggest strength of this book. The significance of it won't hit you right away, but when it does, it is beautiful.
Bottom line, I enjoyed it much more than I expected to and I'm really happy I came across Martin's work (both on YouTube and in the literary world).
December 10, 2019
I read the book because I enjoy the author's content on YouTube, and I had high hopes for the novel. The writing style was good, and grammar mistakes were very few and minor. However, the novel fell flat for me because of the protagonist, Richard Clarke. I think the concept of his power is interesting, but I find his philosophy to be startlingly close to the philosophy Martin criticized Onision for using in his Onision literature series. The combination of Clarke's constant angsty philosophical ramblings and his apparent superiority complex make him an intolerable character. If the story was longer, Martin might have had time to flesh out the character and explain his motives. But at this length, the relationships seemed rushed, and Clarke came across as an unlikable, jaded murderer.
January 19, 2021
Like many of the other readers here, I am a huge fan of the YouTube channel KrimsonRogue. I think his criticism is often clear and valid, and his jokes wildly accurate. I had high expectations going into this piece because of the way he scrutinizes others' writing. I think a lot of reviews have been much too generous.
I'll start with the actual syntax. There are a few typos here and there as some have mentioned, but that's not really the issue. There is a lot of telling and a grave lack of showing. His dialogue tags are varied, but much too frequent, and often have an unnecessary action attached to them. For example, when main character Richard Clarke comes across a familiar young gangster named Clarence, he approaches Clarence and we receive the following dialogue:
"Wai-wait!" Clarence said, pushing himself back away from the encroaching bum.
Followed by,
"I don't care," Clark said, nearing his target (although we've already established he's walking toward Clarence)
"No, no, no, no, no!" Clarence said, finally finding the strength to use his legs.
I've left out one sentence of dialogue after Clarence pushing himself away from the "encroaching bum." Although this seems minor in just a few sentences here, with it coursing throughout the piece, it’s an annoyance for the reader. Good dialogue and scene setting often speak for themselves and don't need constant action wording for the reader to get an understanding of what is happening. In that small section of the book, we get told Clarke is approaching his target in three different ways. The sentence before all the dialogue is "He [Clarke] simply stepped out of the alley and strode towards the scrawny gangster." My point is, we got it way before the author made us get it.
Often, the action after these dialogue tags just repeat what we were already told. For example, on that same page, we get Clarence in an empty alley on his way to lure Clarke back to the gang. He is doing this unwillingly, and we are told "he was nervous and just wanted one of them [another gangster] to get impatient and take over the job for him." We are also told that Clarence turns back to find himself alone in the alley and worried he'd been abandoned. So, for whatever reason, we are still met with this dialogue:
"Guys?!" Clarence yelled, terrified to be on his own.
I know "?!" and "!!!" is not incorrect grammatically, but used too often in books (as it is in this one) it feels sloppy, as if you can't create the tension with words and setting alone, so you have to use extra punctuation to really show your reader that this person or event is serious!!! See what I mean???
I would have liked to see Clarence fidgeting, maybe tripping over nothing or engaging in another self-soothing activity like many of us do when we are nervous and alone. Some of us constantly check our watch or scratch at our neck or chew at our lip. All of these things could show that Clarence is nervous without telling us "hey, this dude is nervous." This happens a lot in the book too; rather than using action to demonstrate feeling, or developing a stronger sense of personality within the character so that simple dialogue or scene setting gives us a feel of how the character experiences the world, we get multiple sentences like: "Clarence felt completely disconnected from the rest of them."
I have a few other things I could touch on, but I think the last one I will mention is the author's use of passive language. It's pervasive. If someone were to strain through each sentence and reduce as much passivity as possible without rewriting, the book would be half as long. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a "was" or a "to be" or a "becomes" or a "trying to" here and there, but when it's extraneous words and phrases, it's taxing for a reader and feels amateur.
Now, on to context.
The story premise itself contains potential. Richard Clarke is an ageless man with power to manipulate energy around him. He can change his being, influence objects, influence other's bodily functions, and kill, maim, or support them. He has a history of saving lives and taking lives, an obvious point of torture for his psyche although he claims death does not affect him anymore. He is confident in his skill. We don't learn much about Richard's "will", or his power, other than he was born with it. He is in Detroit to rid the area of some troublesome gangs, but gets more involved with Clarence's life and Chloe's life (a young thug and a doctor) than he intended.
There are context clues given for the time period throughout the book but the way the characters talk and act is confusing. I don't know many gangsters that call their leader "boss", nor do I know many gangsters who would purposefully attack a generator or a hospital just to retrieve drugs or cause harm. Most are too focused on their street credibility, rising up in the ranks, and making money in the importation and exportation of drugs like heroin and cocaine. Were they attacking the hospital to increase credibility, to thwart a rivals plan, or something else selfish--in fact, were there any motive at all, it would have made sense. Before anyone jumps on my back, I understand that the concept of "thug" often means someone who causes havoc or destruction, or simply put, a "criminal", but that concept is not interchangeable with the term gangster, particularly if the piece is set in this time period.
In my head, I took this lack of realistic action as an indicator the author wanted this setting reminiscent of a dystopian-George Orwellian city, where low rates of employment and corrupt governments make for dark, dingy streets, green fog, and mixed up priorities among locals. Otherwise, the gangsters/thugs are entirely unbelievable.
This is where I will agree with others commenting here. The book is much too short for the sake of the story. We don't get much character development nor do we get a good look inside Clarke's head, Chloe's head or even Clarence's head. We get previews of them: Clarke attempts neutrality in his action, seeking only to help those if possible and preventing crime if possible; Chloe believes every life is worth trying to save and proves this in her life's work; Clarence is a mixed up kid afraid for his life, but with great potential when given some support. All of these things would have been great to explore: Clarke's duality (and what does he really believe?), Chloe's positivity (and what happens when she sees the world for what it really is?) and Clarence's potential (when he starts focusing on studying, it's said that he picks things up well. Perhaps this trait could have been shown by him outsmarting the gangs a few times?). Instead, we get a story that's mostly tugged along by unceasing action and a mere glimpse of who the characters could be.
I am still a fan of Martin's YouTube channel, and probably always will be. I think there's something wonderful about writers learning from writers and writers teaching writers. I would hope if he ever saw any of these reviews that he would take the positive and the negative as equal, and improve where he feels is necessary. I can't say I enjoyed the book for what it was, but I can say I enjoyed imaging what it could be, and I look forward to seeing improvement over the years if Martin chooses to write more.
I'll start with the actual syntax. There are a few typos here and there as some have mentioned, but that's not really the issue. There is a lot of telling and a grave lack of showing. His dialogue tags are varied, but much too frequent, and often have an unnecessary action attached to them. For example, when main character Richard Clarke comes across a familiar young gangster named Clarence, he approaches Clarence and we receive the following dialogue:
"Wai-wait!" Clarence said, pushing himself back away from the encroaching bum.
Followed by,
"I don't care," Clark said, nearing his target (although we've already established he's walking toward Clarence)
"No, no, no, no, no!" Clarence said, finally finding the strength to use his legs.
I've left out one sentence of dialogue after Clarence pushing himself away from the "encroaching bum." Although this seems minor in just a few sentences here, with it coursing throughout the piece, it’s an annoyance for the reader. Good dialogue and scene setting often speak for themselves and don't need constant action wording for the reader to get an understanding of what is happening. In that small section of the book, we get told Clarke is approaching his target in three different ways. The sentence before all the dialogue is "He [Clarke] simply stepped out of the alley and strode towards the scrawny gangster." My point is, we got it way before the author made us get it.
Often, the action after these dialogue tags just repeat what we were already told. For example, on that same page, we get Clarence in an empty alley on his way to lure Clarke back to the gang. He is doing this unwillingly, and we are told "he was nervous and just wanted one of them [another gangster] to get impatient and take over the job for him." We are also told that Clarence turns back to find himself alone in the alley and worried he'd been abandoned. So, for whatever reason, we are still met with this dialogue:
"Guys?!" Clarence yelled, terrified to be on his own.
I know "?!" and "!!!" is not incorrect grammatically, but used too often in books (as it is in this one) it feels sloppy, as if you can't create the tension with words and setting alone, so you have to use extra punctuation to really show your reader that this person or event is serious!!! See what I mean???
I would have liked to see Clarence fidgeting, maybe tripping over nothing or engaging in another self-soothing activity like many of us do when we are nervous and alone. Some of us constantly check our watch or scratch at our neck or chew at our lip. All of these things could show that Clarence is nervous without telling us "hey, this dude is nervous." This happens a lot in the book too; rather than using action to demonstrate feeling, or developing a stronger sense of personality within the character so that simple dialogue or scene setting gives us a feel of how the character experiences the world, we get multiple sentences like: "Clarence felt completely disconnected from the rest of them."
I have a few other things I could touch on, but I think the last one I will mention is the author's use of passive language. It's pervasive. If someone were to strain through each sentence and reduce as much passivity as possible without rewriting, the book would be half as long. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a "was" or a "to be" or a "becomes" or a "trying to" here and there, but when it's extraneous words and phrases, it's taxing for a reader and feels amateur.
Now, on to context.
The story premise itself contains potential. Richard Clarke is an ageless man with power to manipulate energy around him. He can change his being, influence objects, influence other's bodily functions, and kill, maim, or support them. He has a history of saving lives and taking lives, an obvious point of torture for his psyche although he claims death does not affect him anymore. He is confident in his skill. We don't learn much about Richard's "will", or his power, other than he was born with it. He is in Detroit to rid the area of some troublesome gangs, but gets more involved with Clarence's life and Chloe's life (a young thug and a doctor) than he intended.
There are context clues given for the time period throughout the book but the way the characters talk and act is confusing. I don't know many gangsters that call their leader "boss", nor do I know many gangsters who would purposefully attack a generator or a hospital just to retrieve drugs or cause harm. Most are too focused on their street credibility, rising up in the ranks, and making money in the importation and exportation of drugs like heroin and cocaine. Were they attacking the hospital to increase credibility, to thwart a rivals plan, or something else selfish--in fact, were there any motive at all, it would have made sense. Before anyone jumps on my back, I understand that the concept of "thug" often means someone who causes havoc or destruction, or simply put, a "criminal", but that concept is not interchangeable with the term gangster, particularly if the piece is set in this time period.
In my head, I took this lack of realistic action as an indicator the author wanted this setting reminiscent of a dystopian-George Orwellian city, where low rates of employment and corrupt governments make for dark, dingy streets, green fog, and mixed up priorities among locals. Otherwise, the gangsters/thugs are entirely unbelievable.
This is where I will agree with others commenting here. The book is much too short for the sake of the story. We don't get much character development nor do we get a good look inside Clarke's head, Chloe's head or even Clarence's head. We get previews of them: Clarke attempts neutrality in his action, seeking only to help those if possible and preventing crime if possible; Chloe believes every life is worth trying to save and proves this in her life's work; Clarence is a mixed up kid afraid for his life, but with great potential when given some support. All of these things would have been great to explore: Clarke's duality (and what does he really believe?), Chloe's positivity (and what happens when she sees the world for what it really is?) and Clarence's potential (when he starts focusing on studying, it's said that he picks things up well. Perhaps this trait could have been shown by him outsmarting the gangs a few times?). Instead, we get a story that's mostly tugged along by unceasing action and a mere glimpse of who the characters could be.
I am still a fan of Martin's YouTube channel, and probably always will be. I think there's something wonderful about writers learning from writers and writers teaching writers. I would hope if he ever saw any of these reviews that he would take the positive and the negative as equal, and improve where he feels is necessary. I can't say I enjoyed the book for what it was, but I can say I enjoyed imaging what it could be, and I look forward to seeing improvement over the years if Martin chooses to write more.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 31, 2018
A Fun Story and Intriguing Concept
This story was fun to read in a lot of ways and centers around the frustration that comes with being powerful, but not powerful enough. It does so convincingly and earnestly, reminding me of the struggles I've heard many people in power express.
That said, it seemed to me to fall at the wrong length: too short to bring as much of an emotional impact as the author seemed to hope for, yet too long to leave the ideas as a strong and haunting impression, like a short story might've. This work seems to be almost written like a pilot episode: a struggle to display all the ideas of a story and a character while keeping an extremely condensed narrative. Intentionally or not, it succeeds in this regard, and I would be inclined to read a longer treatment of the character. There were a number of minor typos, though nothing particularly egregious and not too many for a self-published work.
All in all, it was a fun and short bus ride read. For $0.99, it's a good way to spend an hour or so.
This story was fun to read in a lot of ways and centers around the frustration that comes with being powerful, but not powerful enough. It does so convincingly and earnestly, reminding me of the struggles I've heard many people in power express.
That said, it seemed to me to fall at the wrong length: too short to bring as much of an emotional impact as the author seemed to hope for, yet too long to leave the ideas as a strong and haunting impression, like a short story might've. This work seems to be almost written like a pilot episode: a struggle to display all the ideas of a story and a character while keeping an extremely condensed narrative. Intentionally or not, it succeeds in this regard, and I would be inclined to read a longer treatment of the character. There were a number of minor typos, though nothing particularly egregious and not too many for a self-published work.
All in all, it was a fun and short bus ride read. For $0.99, it's a good way to spend an hour or so.
January 30, 2022
I really like Krimson on YouTube, which is why I read this book. And because I like him, I feel that giving him honest 2 stars is better than giving 4 stars just because. I think he really has a lot of potential, and I hope that he continues writing, but this novel didn’t feel finished. It felt more like a long reading sample cut out from the middle of a longer book. It could be the first entrance in a short Story collection about Clarke and the stuff he’s doing, though. The concept is nice after all.
February 28, 2020
Intriguing but underutilized concept
The idea of having unlimited power albeit only in a limited space gripped me from the start. I just wish that the implications of such power were explored more. Although the length of this book doesn't allow for deep explanation, some paragraphs about the ways Clarke used his powers previously in his long life would have helped a lot in giving a more concrete picture of his abilities. Also, Clarke's adversaries were pretty lackluster. His "fights" with the petty gangsters get boring really quickly. Overall, I am left wondering what a manga or comic writer could have done with this concept. Still, I praise the author for this effort and hope he writes more stories set in this universe.
The idea of having unlimited power albeit only in a limited space gripped me from the start. I just wish that the implications of such power were explored more. Although the length of this book doesn't allow for deep explanation, some paragraphs about the ways Clarke used his powers previously in his long life would have helped a lot in giving a more concrete picture of his abilities. Also, Clarke's adversaries were pretty lackluster. His "fights" with the petty gangsters get boring really quickly. Overall, I am left wondering what a manga or comic writer could have done with this concept. Still, I praise the author for this effort and hope he writes more stories set in this universe.
July 31, 2021
Disappointed because I love his youtube videos. Just not my cup of tea.
May 30, 2023
My main criticism is that Micro God doesn’t understand that Richard Clarke imposing his values of goodness and decency on the world is not benevolence, but brutality.
Micro God follows in the vein of superheroes, police procedurals, and other stories about police, where there is a person or small group of persons who are so righteous and competent that they alone know best how to judge the wicked in a system that is too inept, weak, or corrupt to do what is necessary.
This is not, by itself, a bad premise. At its most exaggerated, this is superhero fiction. Batman, or Superman, or whoever, knows the right thing to do and will save the day. But, unlike Batman or Superman, Richard Clarke lacks the restraint necessary for justice, and Micro God lacks the nuance to fully interrogate Clarke’s macabre sense of obligation.
If you'll allow me a digression for a moment, one of my favourite television shows of all time is The Closer, a late-2000s police procedural that follows a very similar character (in personality) to Richard Clarke. Unlike Batman and Superman, but as with Richard Clarke, the main character of The Closer is a paragon of moral certitude who thinks herself responsible for justice, and for whom the ends always justify the means. For both these characters, there is a clear, insolvable right and wrong, and neither one has any qualms about doing some truly dark shit in order to achieve a result that is ‘right.’
I think, in a way, it is a comforting notion that there are people out there who are so benevolent and just that they alone can keep the world from spiraling into oblivion—that yes, these people might sometimes behave unethically or illegally, but it is always for the greater good. It speaks to that impatient, vengeful part of us that does not want justice as much as we want to see a witch burn. In a fantastical way, it is a comfortable fiction we’ve created that these people exist. It is far kinder to think an ultra-competent, benevolent hero is going to save us, rather than having to acknowledge the truth that many people responsible for our personal and geographical securities are just normal people who are sometimes incompetent, stupid, apathetic, or wholly corrupt. In fact, I would even suggest that many of the people who become corrupt do so not only for greed, but because they erroneously and arrogantly believe themselves to know better—that their professions or positions are just, so therefore their actions are just; that, like the paragons of morality in modern media, they can only be just.
That is really what I find most frustrating about this novella. Yes, the prose is clunky, the characterization is not particularly strong, and the writing feels juvenile, but that is also kind of how I would describe the first Dresden Files book, and that one was, you know, fine, I guess. But with Micro God, what really frustrated me was that so few of the repercussions of being this character were explored.
Inside of five feet, Richard Clarke can do anything he wants. He stands next to a broken generator all night to keep it running, and only when he leaves its side does it break. When bullets are shot at him, they disintegrate, or turn into birds, or else he can simply catch them. When an addict named Steve breaks his leg from falling bricks, staying inside Clarke’s god radius allows his leg to be healed.
That stuff is cool, and I think this is a pretty interesting idea, but the novella doesn’t delve into the character’s psychology other than to say that, having lived three centuries, Clarke has become something of a loner who is disinterested in personal relationships. That might be who he thinks he is, but outwardly Richard Clarke is a spectre of death who spends most of this novella murdering people. Further, the book seems to posit that because his victims are gang members—that they are criminals—they have summarily forfeited their lives and he is justified in killing them.
I think this is a really compelling idea, but the book doesn’t explore the idea of Clarke being a paragon at all. It doesn’t even question Clarke’s assumptions about what it is to be ‘good.’ Clarke knows what ‘good’ is, and he punishes those who are not ‘good,’ and there is no discussion to be had.
At one point, the police briefly attempt to apprehend Clarke, but when they realize there’s nothing they can do to him, they give up easily. Here’s a man who just goes around murdering a city’s worth of gang members—in a city overflowing with gang members—and there is never any mention by anyone that this is fucked up. There are no protests from the family of gang members killed or people upset over one vigilante mad with power, and there are no police trying to talk him down. He’s just running through the alleys like some Machiavellian tomcat with a limitless taste for blood.
Maybe these criminals were all murderers and rapists and maybe you, as a person, think that’s worthy of a death sentence, but why should you or any one person get to decide that outside of the law? And I so dearly wish the book had asked that question, because it never seriously considers that someone could be in a gang for reasons other than wanting to do violent crime. A gang member saved by Clarke receives Clarke’s mercy because he has only been in the gang for a month or two, so he’s seen as untainted, but the novel suggests to me that this gang member is the only one worth saving. Clarke could have made similar offers to other gang members he runs into off-page, but nothing like that is ever expressly stated. Instead, it is suggested that he just shows up at gang hideouts and starts killing people, and, if you try to defend yourself when he shows up, get fucked, I guess.
Clarke doesn’t question if what he’s done is bad, only that he hasn’t done enough good. Killing in the name of good is completely okay with him, and he even relates an anecdote about how, in the First World War, he was a doctor until he realized he could do more good by fighting and killing the enemy than by healing the sick and wounded.
Clarke keeps this mentality throughout the entire novella and never questions it. At the end of the story, Steve, the addict who Clarke helped at the start and who is now off drugs, tells Clarke that he intends to run for a city council position because of Clarke’s intervention, and that makes Clarke realize that the world is worth fighting for—calamity and cruelty will always exist, but if you can do even a little good then you should persist if only to make the world that much better.
This is, as Jeff Winger says, “Profound, but technically meaningless.”
The good that Clarke perceives himself as doing revolves around killing people, and I think the truth is that Richard Clarke kills people because no one can stop Richard Clarke from killing people. He has given himself extralegal jurisdiction to act on behalf of good. Not for an objective, universal ideal of good—which does not exist—but for his own moral interpretation of good. Rather than discuss Clarke’s good deeds in a way that repudiates or acknowledges that helping some people may not be a good counterweight to the stacked bodies of his enemies, the novella ends by reasserting Clarke’s position as the moral arbiter of the world.
He has the power, so he makes the rules.
Earlier in the novella, Clarke explains to another character that he cannot create food to eat. Well, he can, but it has no nutritional value. It simply exists. He explains that energy cannot be created or destroyed, and so he isn’t an endless font. This is quite striking to me in a novella about the ends justifying the means, and I find it to be a metaphor that is both apt, but also strangely at odds with the story. On the one hand, like creating food, Clarke cannot change the world on a whim, but instead can only create the illusion of change at a local level. He can destroy the gangs, but he ultimately doesn’t solve any of the world’s problems. His solution, like the food he can summon, is without substance.
On the other hand, though, I find it artfully ironic that the man who decides the fate of hundreds of people throughout the novella, who is a ‘micro god,’ doesn’t even have the power to make any substantive change to the world. He is like a clumsy, egotistical superhero running amok in the streets, forcing the world to obey his own code of morals and ethics, regardless of anyone else’s will. He is the divine personification of the strongman who is not overly interested in what people think or feel, but who believes with singular purpose that he can set the world right by force. If Clarke were only a corrupt police captain, or an egomaniacal superhero throwing his weight around that might be concerning, but Clarke is so much worse than that. He is the only one like himself, and he essentially cannot be killed or defeated in any demonstrable way, so he is locked in a cycle of perpetual violence with a world that can do nothing but watch him murder his way through it.
This could be an incredible setup for an anti-hero or villain like a malevolent Superman. But the novella never explores this facet of Clarke’s personality. It never considers what it is to do ‘good,’ such as asking if Clarke’s impact on the world was good despite his predilection for violence. At the novella’s ending, it simply confirms that Clarke’s actions and morals are just through Steve the addict, validating all that’s he done. Yes, he hasn’t solved the world’s problems, but he has improved one person’s life, so his path is righteous.
But this frustrates me because that completely disregards the people in the world, and I think undermines what is meant to be a bittersweet ending. All these people Clarke kills, they had families, they had social relationships. Some gang members might be complete psychos who like to hurt people, and maybe most have actually hurt people, but a lot of people get involved in gangs because of an incredibly complex web of social, political, and familial issues. And at no point does Micro God attempt to examine Richard Clarke’s black and white code of morality and its relationship with justice. It doesn’t ask any questions about good and evil, because it never considers the world to be more complex than a Saturday morning cartoon.
Clarke even suggests early on that bad people only exist because they are morally weak. If you do bad things, it is not because the world is a cocoon of circumstance, it is because you are weak, and that makes it your fault.
I mean, that’s pretty fucking rich coming from someone who cannot die.
I’m sure that some, maybe even all, of the people Richard Clarke kills in this book have done bad things, but that the book uncritically supports the wholesale slaughter of criminals is wild. And, like, on its own, that’s a fine idea. Judge Dredd and Robocop have no regard for casualties, and it doesn’t make you a bad person or a bad author to deal with that subject matter, but it’s frustrating that the book doesn’t contend with the idea. In Micro God, if you're a criminal, there is no potential for redemption, no potential for forgiveness. There is only good, and bad, and the indomitable Richard Clarke who has come to balance the scales. It’s a missed opportunity that the book failed to acknowledge and grapple with this aspect of its story, and I dislike that it chose to simply and uncritically validate Clarke’s blood-soaked rampage at the end.
That’s my main fault with this. In writing this book, Martin has reminded me of a friend I’ve known for many years—this incredibly good-natured guy who is supportive and generous, but who also has a rather simplistic and decisive view of the world. This is not to say that I think him to be a simple person, or unintelligent—in fact, I think there are many smart people who see the world as a many-sided panopticon of which they alone have the unspoiled view—but in reading the text of this book, I couldn’t help but feel the crush of that simplism. From the way the characters talk, to the worldbuilding, there is something so unchallengedly fixed about the world that it renders a very interesting concept utterly inert.
As I mentioned earlier, the writing at the line-level needed work, too. This book has at least a few instances of bad ‘telling.’
The dialogue can also be slightly awkward.
And the novella also has some trouble with keeping its POV straight. It ends up being third person omniscient, but I don’t know if that was an intentional choice. Martin writes kind of more like a movie script than a book, and sometimes it feels as if the POV is unintentionally shifting as a result of where he might put the camera as a director, rather than whose point-of-view he wants to be experiencing a scene through as the author.
I wouldn’t recommend this to most people, but it's not complete and utter trash. It was plagued by an interminable youthful enthusiasm that really refused to engage with the world the story was setting up, but it's not the worst YouTuber book I've read.
2 stars
Micro God follows in the vein of superheroes, police procedurals, and other stories about police, where there is a person or small group of persons who are so righteous and competent that they alone know best how to judge the wicked in a system that is too inept, weak, or corrupt to do what is necessary.
This is not, by itself, a bad premise. At its most exaggerated, this is superhero fiction. Batman, or Superman, or whoever, knows the right thing to do and will save the day. But, unlike Batman or Superman, Richard Clarke lacks the restraint necessary for justice, and Micro God lacks the nuance to fully interrogate Clarke’s macabre sense of obligation.
If you'll allow me a digression for a moment, one of my favourite television shows of all time is The Closer, a late-2000s police procedural that follows a very similar character (in personality) to Richard Clarke. Unlike Batman and Superman, but as with Richard Clarke, the main character of The Closer is a paragon of moral certitude who thinks herself responsible for justice, and for whom the ends always justify the means. For both these characters, there is a clear, insolvable right and wrong, and neither one has any qualms about doing some truly dark shit in order to achieve a result that is ‘right.’
I think, in a way, it is a comforting notion that there are people out there who are so benevolent and just that they alone can keep the world from spiraling into oblivion—that yes, these people might sometimes behave unethically or illegally, but it is always for the greater good. It speaks to that impatient, vengeful part of us that does not want justice as much as we want to see a witch burn. In a fantastical way, it is a comfortable fiction we’ve created that these people exist. It is far kinder to think an ultra-competent, benevolent hero is going to save us, rather than having to acknowledge the truth that many people responsible for our personal and geographical securities are just normal people who are sometimes incompetent, stupid, apathetic, or wholly corrupt. In fact, I would even suggest that many of the people who become corrupt do so not only for greed, but because they erroneously and arrogantly believe themselves to know better—that their professions or positions are just, so therefore their actions are just; that, like the paragons of morality in modern media, they can only be just.
That is really what I find most frustrating about this novella. Yes, the prose is clunky, the characterization is not particularly strong, and the writing feels juvenile, but that is also kind of how I would describe the first Dresden Files book, and that one was, you know, fine, I guess. But with Micro God, what really frustrated me was that so few of the repercussions of being this character were explored.
Inside of five feet, Richard Clarke can do anything he wants. He stands next to a broken generator all night to keep it running, and only when he leaves its side does it break. When bullets are shot at him, they disintegrate, or turn into birds, or else he can simply catch them. When an addict named Steve breaks his leg from falling bricks, staying inside Clarke’s god radius allows his leg to be healed.
That stuff is cool, and I think this is a pretty interesting idea, but the novella doesn’t delve into the character’s psychology other than to say that, having lived three centuries, Clarke has become something of a loner who is disinterested in personal relationships. That might be who he thinks he is, but outwardly Richard Clarke is a spectre of death who spends most of this novella murdering people. Further, the book seems to posit that because his victims are gang members—that they are criminals—they have summarily forfeited their lives and he is justified in killing them.
I think this is a really compelling idea, but the book doesn’t explore the idea of Clarke being a paragon at all. It doesn’t even question Clarke’s assumptions about what it is to be ‘good.’ Clarke knows what ‘good’ is, and he punishes those who are not ‘good,’ and there is no discussion to be had.
At one point, the police briefly attempt to apprehend Clarke, but when they realize there’s nothing they can do to him, they give up easily. Here’s a man who just goes around murdering a city’s worth of gang members—in a city overflowing with gang members—and there is never any mention by anyone that this is fucked up. There are no protests from the family of gang members killed or people upset over one vigilante mad with power, and there are no police trying to talk him down. He’s just running through the alleys like some Machiavellian tomcat with a limitless taste for blood.
Maybe these criminals were all murderers and rapists and maybe you, as a person, think that’s worthy of a death sentence, but why should you or any one person get to decide that outside of the law? And I so dearly wish the book had asked that question, because it never seriously considers that someone could be in a gang for reasons other than wanting to do violent crime. A gang member saved by Clarke receives Clarke’s mercy because he has only been in the gang for a month or two, so he’s seen as untainted, but the novel suggests to me that this gang member is the only one worth saving. Clarke could have made similar offers to other gang members he runs into off-page, but nothing like that is ever expressly stated. Instead, it is suggested that he just shows up at gang hideouts and starts killing people, and, if you try to defend yourself when he shows up, get fucked, I guess.
Clarke doesn’t question if what he’s done is bad, only that he hasn’t done enough good. Killing in the name of good is completely okay with him, and he even relates an anecdote about how, in the First World War, he was a doctor until he realized he could do more good by fighting and killing the enemy than by healing the sick and wounded.
Clarke keeps this mentality throughout the entire novella and never questions it. At the end of the story, Steve, the addict who Clarke helped at the start and who is now off drugs, tells Clarke that he intends to run for a city council position because of Clarke’s intervention, and that makes Clarke realize that the world is worth fighting for—calamity and cruelty will always exist, but if you can do even a little good then you should persist if only to make the world that much better.
This is, as Jeff Winger says, “Profound, but technically meaningless.”
The good that Clarke perceives himself as doing revolves around killing people, and I think the truth is that Richard Clarke kills people because no one can stop Richard Clarke from killing people. He has given himself extralegal jurisdiction to act on behalf of good. Not for an objective, universal ideal of good—which does not exist—but for his own moral interpretation of good. Rather than discuss Clarke’s good deeds in a way that repudiates or acknowledges that helping some people may not be a good counterweight to the stacked bodies of his enemies, the novella ends by reasserting Clarke’s position as the moral arbiter of the world.
He has the power, so he makes the rules.
Earlier in the novella, Clarke explains to another character that he cannot create food to eat. Well, he can, but it has no nutritional value. It simply exists. He explains that energy cannot be created or destroyed, and so he isn’t an endless font. This is quite striking to me in a novella about the ends justifying the means, and I find it to be a metaphor that is both apt, but also strangely at odds with the story. On the one hand, like creating food, Clarke cannot change the world on a whim, but instead can only create the illusion of change at a local level. He can destroy the gangs, but he ultimately doesn’t solve any of the world’s problems. His solution, like the food he can summon, is without substance.
On the other hand, though, I find it artfully ironic that the man who decides the fate of hundreds of people throughout the novella, who is a ‘micro god,’ doesn’t even have the power to make any substantive change to the world. He is like a clumsy, egotistical superhero running amok in the streets, forcing the world to obey his own code of morals and ethics, regardless of anyone else’s will. He is the divine personification of the strongman who is not overly interested in what people think or feel, but who believes with singular purpose that he can set the world right by force. If Clarke were only a corrupt police captain, or an egomaniacal superhero throwing his weight around that might be concerning, but Clarke is so much worse than that. He is the only one like himself, and he essentially cannot be killed or defeated in any demonstrable way, so he is locked in a cycle of perpetual violence with a world that can do nothing but watch him murder his way through it.
This could be an incredible setup for an anti-hero or villain like a malevolent Superman. But the novella never explores this facet of Clarke’s personality. It never considers what it is to do ‘good,’ such as asking if Clarke’s impact on the world was good despite his predilection for violence. At the novella’s ending, it simply confirms that Clarke’s actions and morals are just through Steve the addict, validating all that’s he done. Yes, he hasn’t solved the world’s problems, but he has improved one person’s life, so his path is righteous.
But this frustrates me because that completely disregards the people in the world, and I think undermines what is meant to be a bittersweet ending. All these people Clarke kills, they had families, they had social relationships. Some gang members might be complete psychos who like to hurt people, and maybe most have actually hurt people, but a lot of people get involved in gangs because of an incredibly complex web of social, political, and familial issues. And at no point does Micro God attempt to examine Richard Clarke’s black and white code of morality and its relationship with justice. It doesn’t ask any questions about good and evil, because it never considers the world to be more complex than a Saturday morning cartoon.
Clarke even suggests early on that bad people only exist because they are morally weak. If you do bad things, it is not because the world is a cocoon of circumstance, it is because you are weak, and that makes it your fault.
“You… are going to spare me?” Clarence asked.
“Hardly,” Clarke said. “By giving in to the gang and joining them, you’ve only helped strengthen their numbers and domination. You should have fought them.”
“Are you kidding?!” Clarence shouted. “They would have killed me!”
“Better to die on one’s feet than live on one’s knees.”
I mean, that’s pretty fucking rich coming from someone who cannot die.
I’m sure that some, maybe even all, of the people Richard Clarke kills in this book have done bad things, but that the book uncritically supports the wholesale slaughter of criminals is wild. And, like, on its own, that’s a fine idea. Judge Dredd and Robocop have no regard for casualties, and it doesn’t make you a bad person or a bad author to deal with that subject matter, but it’s frustrating that the book doesn’t contend with the idea. In Micro God, if you're a criminal, there is no potential for redemption, no potential for forgiveness. There is only good, and bad, and the indomitable Richard Clarke who has come to balance the scales. It’s a missed opportunity that the book failed to acknowledge and grapple with this aspect of its story, and I dislike that it chose to simply and uncritically validate Clarke’s blood-soaked rampage at the end.
That’s my main fault with this. In writing this book, Martin has reminded me of a friend I’ve known for many years—this incredibly good-natured guy who is supportive and generous, but who also has a rather simplistic and decisive view of the world. This is not to say that I think him to be a simple person, or unintelligent—in fact, I think there are many smart people who see the world as a many-sided panopticon of which they alone have the unspoiled view—but in reading the text of this book, I couldn’t help but feel the crush of that simplism. From the way the characters talk, to the worldbuilding, there is something so unchallengedly fixed about the world that it renders a very interesting concept utterly inert.
As I mentioned earlier, the writing at the line-level needed work, too. This book has at least a few instances of bad ‘telling.’
Tears formed like a stiff branch as his body went into shock. It was an incredibly painful death.
The dialogue can also be slightly awkward.
“Richard?” Chloe said, gripping his arm out of concern.
“I’m fine,” he answered. “Just tired. I haven’t had a real home since the end of World War II. I’ve forgotten what it was like to stay in one place.”
And the novella also has some trouble with keeping its POV straight. It ends up being third person omniscient, but I don’t know if that was an intentional choice. Martin writes kind of more like a movie script than a book, and sometimes it feels as if the POV is unintentionally shifting as a result of where he might put the camera as a director, rather than whose point-of-view he wants to be experiencing a scene through as the author.
I wouldn’t recommend this to most people, but it's not complete and utter trash. It was plagued by an interminable youthful enthusiasm that really refused to engage with the world the story was setting up, but it's not the worst YouTuber book I've read.
2 stars
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 31, 2019
Okay, I have thoughts! First I am a HUGE fan of K.R. Martin (KrimsonRogue)! He's awesome, intelligent, and when I first found out about his novel I was super excited! But, I also went into this novel with expectations. Which is fine, everyone has them. I didn't want to be overly critical because I'm a fan, and I didn't want to gloss over things I didn't like because that wouldn't be honest. If you stumbled on this review/book by chance...sweet, go find his youtube channel, it'll change your life. Now, on to my thoughts. I don't know how to break this down.
I liked the main character, the plot was simple, the side characters were engaging, but some of the Thugs were repetitive stereotypes. The main villain isn't even really a villain, he's a mild annoyance. I feel like this book was more man vs. self than man vs. man. There was a lot of exposition, and this story could have taken place in one to two nights. To me, it feels like a lot of telling and not a lot of showing.
But, all of that isn't to say I didn't like the book. I liked it, I just wasn't blown away by it. I know this is K's first publication. I'm glad I got to read a book by someone I respect as a writer and a reviewer. This book has some surprises that I loved. The dialogue is amazing and heartfelt. The side characters that mattered felt real, their interactions were real. The giddy bloodshed was done very well. I appreciated that it didn't go over the top when it could have. There is a lot I could say about this book but I don't want to write too much on it. it was enjoyable. I liked it!
I liked the main character, the plot was simple, the side characters were engaging, but some of the Thugs were repetitive stereotypes. The main villain isn't even really a villain, he's a mild annoyance. I feel like this book was more man vs. self than man vs. man. There was a lot of exposition, and this story could have taken place in one to two nights. To me, it feels like a lot of telling and not a lot of showing.
But, all of that isn't to say I didn't like the book. I liked it, I just wasn't blown away by it. I know this is K's first publication. I'm glad I got to read a book by someone I respect as a writer and a reviewer. This book has some surprises that I loved. The dialogue is amazing and heartfelt. The side characters that mattered felt real, their interactions were real. The giddy bloodshed was done very well. I appreciated that it didn't go over the top when it could have. There is a lot I could say about this book but I don't want to write too much on it. it was enjoyable. I liked it!
February 25, 2019
This was a pretty fun read. I've been watching the authors youtube channel for a while and finally found a space in my TBR pile for this short story.
It was pretty good. The plot was a tad predictable but I really loved the characters - they were what kept me reading. The only problem I really had with the story was the ending. I won't spoil it but it felt a little rushed to me. I feel that the author could have stretched the book out to novella length and examined a rather interesting situation in his characters life. That's how I felt about the whole book in a way; deep but it could have been deeper.
There were a number of errors that I think an editor or a couple of outside proofreaders would have caught. But in this day and age of self-publishing, these minor mistakes were completely forgivable.
If you're at all into superhero stories I believe you would enjoy this story. And you can check out the authors Youtube channel 'The Book Was Better.'
Still, this was an interesting read and I'm really looking forward to seeing what else K. R. Martin comes up with.
It was pretty good. The plot was a tad predictable but I really loved the characters - they were what kept me reading. The only problem I really had with the story was the ending. I won't spoil it but it felt a little rushed to me. I feel that the author could have stretched the book out to novella length and examined a rather interesting situation in his characters life. That's how I felt about the whole book in a way; deep but it could have been deeper.
There were a number of errors that I think an editor or a couple of outside proofreaders would have caught. But in this day and age of self-publishing, these minor mistakes were completely forgivable.
If you're at all into superhero stories I believe you would enjoy this story. And you can check out the authors Youtube channel 'The Book Was Better.'
Still, this was an interesting read and I'm really looking forward to seeing what else K. R. Martin comes up with.
December 19, 2020
I had somewhat high hopes for this book. It wasn't bad, and by far it wasn't the worst book I've ever read.
But.
The writing was kind of robotic and cold. It was especially jarring when I first began reading it, but once I got used to his writing style it didn't bother me as much as it first did.
That being said I'm really tired of the old 'woman becomes a man's beacon of hope and changes him and then she's dramatically ripped away to serve a higher lesson' kind of plot. But if I overlook that, it wasn't half bad. Especially for someone's first published work.
But.
The writing was kind of robotic and cold. It was especially jarring when I first began reading it, but once I got used to his writing style it didn't bother me as much as it first did.
That being said I'm really tired of the old 'woman becomes a man's beacon of hope and changes him and then she's dramatically ripped away to serve a higher lesson' kind of plot. But if I overlook that, it wasn't half bad. Especially for someone's first published work.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 11, 2020
It was okay. The protagonist was a little too powerful. You knew that that one when was any real threat to him. There was only one way the story could have ended. I would like to see more stuff from the writer.
September 25, 2022
The plot of this book follows Richard Clarke, a guy with an admittedly unique power set within fiction, as he experiences one particularly, almost strangely, calm part of his immortal life. While he does battle gangs in this book, which is actually more of a novella that you can shoot through in 2 hours, the narrative weight is actually shifted more towards his potential outside of violence. That being said, what makes this book distinctive?
The first thing that comes to mind is the prose. Martin is quite skilled at setting the scene and selling the dimension and sensation of the story. Buildings groan, various rooms are filthy, beds are cramped and hard, machines grind and spark, it all builds upon this almost post-apocalyptic tableau that the author is painting here. Another aspect that comes to mind is the presentation of Richard Clarke’s powers. He does in effect have the powers of a god, but they have a limited range, which he can extend to a certain degree, but not for long. I can tell Martin had a bit of fun with that aspect of the writing, experimenting how to best present them, and wondering what kind of manifestations these powers could have. Richard himself is a quite interesting figure, not just due to his background, which is actually underemphasised throughout this story, but more in how he considers and assesses situations, and the lengths he goes to when he decides upon a course of action. I’m not really a fan of his lack of wisdom, given his supposed age and experience level, and some of the attitudes he holds towards what the common good is and what meaningful contributions towards society look like are bizarrely simplistic, but, overall, he is still an interesting character.
Of the rest of the cast, Dr Chloe Hall is the definitive stand-out. Idealistic, resolute, proficient, empathetic, she at times comes alive to a greater extent than any other character, though, given how simplistic and underdeveloped most of the cast is, that doesn’t really say much. I still know who they are and what they did throughout the story, but that’s more because I read it over the past week, the characters didn’t really hold my interest to the point where I really was invested in their outcomes. Thankfully, the dialogue of this story was somewhat better. It at times went into gangsta speak, but it managed to pull at least some of that off well, and the rest of it was more in line with everyday speech. I do, however, appreciate the distinctive flair each character received when in dialogue segments. There weren’t many of it, but I was glad to encounter them in this book.
One thing I have to be critical on, however, is the plot, how it loses its bearings around the half-way point and scrambles to find something else. It could have been a really cool mixture of action thriller and crime drama, it could’ve been an exploration on the nature of redemption, it could have been a character piece focused on a man learning to reassess and change his relationship towards violence, and the seeds of all of these concepts are in the story, but the plot superficially jumps between them, and none of them really get the attention and development that would benefit them. It is a disjointed mess, which also relies on some undercooked cliches, unfortunately. Overall, in spite of its missteps, I would still recommend this book if you have 2 hours to kill and think any of its elements will resonate with you.
The first thing that comes to mind is the prose. Martin is quite skilled at setting the scene and selling the dimension and sensation of the story. Buildings groan, various rooms are filthy, beds are cramped and hard, machines grind and spark, it all builds upon this almost post-apocalyptic tableau that the author is painting here. Another aspect that comes to mind is the presentation of Richard Clarke’s powers. He does in effect have the powers of a god, but they have a limited range, which he can extend to a certain degree, but not for long. I can tell Martin had a bit of fun with that aspect of the writing, experimenting how to best present them, and wondering what kind of manifestations these powers could have. Richard himself is a quite interesting figure, not just due to his background, which is actually underemphasised throughout this story, but more in how he considers and assesses situations, and the lengths he goes to when he decides upon a course of action. I’m not really a fan of his lack of wisdom, given his supposed age and experience level, and some of the attitudes he holds towards what the common good is and what meaningful contributions towards society look like are bizarrely simplistic, but, overall, he is still an interesting character.
Of the rest of the cast, Dr Chloe Hall is the definitive stand-out. Idealistic, resolute, proficient, empathetic, she at times comes alive to a greater extent than any other character, though, given how simplistic and underdeveloped most of the cast is, that doesn’t really say much. I still know who they are and what they did throughout the story, but that’s more because I read it over the past week, the characters didn’t really hold my interest to the point where I really was invested in their outcomes. Thankfully, the dialogue of this story was somewhat better. It at times went into gangsta speak, but it managed to pull at least some of that off well, and the rest of it was more in line with everyday speech. I do, however, appreciate the distinctive flair each character received when in dialogue segments. There weren’t many of it, but I was glad to encounter them in this book.
One thing I have to be critical on, however, is the plot, how it loses its bearings around the half-way point and scrambles to find something else. It could have been a really cool mixture of action thriller and crime drama, it could’ve been an exploration on the nature of redemption, it could have been a character piece focused on a man learning to reassess and change his relationship towards violence, and the seeds of all of these concepts are in the story, but the plot superficially jumps between them, and none of them really get the attention and development that would benefit them. It is a disjointed mess, which also relies on some undercooked cliches, unfortunately. Overall, in spite of its missteps, I would still recommend this book if you have 2 hours to kill and think any of its elements will resonate with you.
November 29, 2022
Like many people here I found out about this book through KrimsonRogue’s Youtube Channel. As a fan of his harsh critiques and evident love for good books, I was curious to see what his first book was like. And after reading it, I have to say… it was bad. But that’s okay.
Sure. There are typos, errors of logic, and clunky dialogue scenes peppered throughout the story. But that’s okay because this is his first work. No one does anything perfect the first time they do something. And not only that but also this is a self-published work (as far as I know). Meaning he had no editor, or team of people working with him that could have helped him make this book better.
I believe he said (in one of his videos) that his goal was to make the reader question whether Richard Clarke’s actions were good or bad. Was he a villain or was he a hero? And to me, the answer comes down to whether you think the end justifies the means or not. Similar to the trolley problem: is it okay to kill one person if it means that you can save five people? To which I say: I don’t think so, because you have no right to make choices on other people’s behalf.
Oh. Does anyone know if the name Richard Clarke is a reference to Clark Kent?
Sure. There are typos, errors of logic, and clunky dialogue scenes peppered throughout the story. But that’s okay because this is his first work. No one does anything perfect the first time they do something. And not only that but also this is a self-published work (as far as I know). Meaning he had no editor, or team of people working with him that could have helped him make this book better.
I believe he said (in one of his videos) that his goal was to make the reader question whether Richard Clarke’s actions were good or bad. Was he a villain or was he a hero? And to me, the answer comes down to whether you think the end justifies the means or not. Similar to the trolley problem: is it okay to kill one person if it means that you can save five people? To which I say: I don’t think so, because you have no right to make choices on other people’s behalf.
Oh. Does anyone know if the name Richard Clarke is a reference to Clark Kent?
August 10, 2023
I read this book a few years ago on a random day during the summer and I very much enjoyed it. I still remember it to this day. It is very reminiscent of superhero stories, so if you are a comic book fan and want a short read I would absolutely recommend this. I also enjoyed being able to read a character that the author actually gave flaws and, despite not agreeing with the character’s worldview, I was able to still care about the main character and what happened to him. Most of the criticism I have seen about this book are tropes and storytelling styles that are often found in superhero stories and comic series’, which is likely why none of it bothered me and is why I would recommend it to comic book fans. Would read again, well done!
March 16, 2024
I am a fan of the author's YouTube page (and found out about the novel through it) which might be the reason I came in with very high hopes. Given how smart he is, and the critique he provides I was expecting something more polished.
The concept of the main character's power is interesting but he comes across as extremely edgy and unlikable. There is no real struggle in any way and everything comes easy for him. I feel like it is actually similar to many of the novels K.R. has critiqued in the past.
Other than this the writing style is good and simple, you can read it all in one sitting and it makes for an entertaining reading if you can get past the edginess.
The concept of the main character's power is interesting but he comes across as extremely edgy and unlikable. There is no real struggle in any way and everything comes easy for him. I feel like it is actually similar to many of the novels K.R. has critiqued in the past.
Other than this the writing style is good and simple, you can read it all in one sitting and it makes for an entertaining reading if you can get past the edginess.
September 5, 2019
This is the first e-book i ever bought because I was really curious about the story. Martin, you made me buy an e-book, I hate e-books, so that's one accomplishment. And I have to say, no regrets.
It's a good and fast read. With a main character who has very interesting powers, that could be explored way further. At first it felt like it was a section right out of a bigger book. But in the end it became it's own little story. For a debut, its a good one.
It feels as the start of a bigger universe. And I would gladly read it. (in a real book, please don't make me buy more e-books)
It's a good and fast read. With a main character who has very interesting powers, that could be explored way further. At first it felt like it was a section right out of a bigger book. But in the end it became it's own little story. For a debut, its a good one.
It feels as the start of a bigger universe. And I would gladly read it. (in a real book, please don't make me buy more e-books)
May 18, 2020
It was short but I totally enjoyed it.
Sure, the side characters lacked depth, but it is expected in a kind of action packed short story. Richard Clarke is an interesting character, mostly because no matter how bad he wants us to believe that he's old and tired and morose, he actually still cares, as shown by the way he ends up caring for Clarence in a father kind of way or with his feelings for Chloe.
I would have loved to read more of it, and I kind of want KrimsonRogue to get back to it and give us the entirety of Richard's past.
I recommend !
Sure, the side characters lacked depth, but it is expected in a kind of action packed short story. Richard Clarke is an interesting character, mostly because no matter how bad he wants us to believe that he's old and tired and morose, he actually still cares, as shown by the way he ends up caring for Clarence in a father kind of way or with his feelings for Chloe.
I would have loved to read more of it, and I kind of want KrimsonRogue to get back to it and give us the entirety of Richard's past.
I recommend !
January 22, 2017
Excellent
To describe this story as delightful would be in a rather stark contrast to its themes. Delighted however is the feeling I experienced having discovered this excellent story.
It stands at a decisive example of how to not only deal with but also excel when writing with a main character that can never really be put into peril, an issue i have pondered often. That said it is short and I hope to read more from this author soon.
To describe this story as delightful would be in a rather stark contrast to its themes. Delighted however is the feeling I experienced having discovered this excellent story.
It stands at a decisive example of how to not only deal with but also excel when writing with a main character that can never really be put into peril, an issue i have pondered often. That said it is short and I hope to read more from this author soon.
September 4, 2021
The concept of Clarke's abilities is great and I enjoyed thinking of all the ways he could use them, but I wish the story had been executed in a more creative way. The characters are entirely one dimensional, and Clarke's dialogue can get pretty info dump-y.
The setting is plain: city with generic gang problem with no clear motivation of these groups. I think if the novella was longer we could get the depth the story needs to make it interesting.
The setting is plain: city with generic gang problem with no clear motivation of these groups. I think if the novella was longer we could get the depth the story needs to make it interesting.
July 28, 2020
Giving it 5 stars. I very rarely give reviews even though I read a lot, but some books are worth the support. This one is one of them.
The concept is interesting, the hero is in no way perfect which makes it so easy to feel for him regardless of him beeing almost over powered.
This book made me think, feel and dream ))
Great job for an up and coming author! I recommend this one.
The concept is interesting, the hero is in no way perfect which makes it so easy to feel for him regardless of him beeing almost over powered.
This book made me think, feel and dream ))
Great job for an up and coming author! I recommend this one.
January 10, 2022
i started this book because i’m a fan of krimsonrouges youtube channel and i definitely don’t regret it! it was a very quick read but a very entertaining one. the events went by very quickly and had me kinda wishing they took a little longer but overall i cant be too mad. this was a great teaser about the authors abilities and i cant wait to read his future works! <3
April 1, 2024
It started kinda rocky, Clarke is a hard character to really like and empathize with but that is not terribly surprising. I think it improved a good deal by the end but it is still lacking in a lot of the subtleties that make a story truly excellent, but it is less than one hundred pages so it is very hard to get much subtlety. Overall I enjoyed it, short and to the point.
December 31, 2025
An interesting little short story, but that's kind of it...it's a short story. There wasn't enough time to really time to develop the characters and it felt rushed, especially at the end. It was an interesting concept though.
November 26, 2019
A great premise with a fun and loveable main character.
The story is well put together, the ideas are clear, and the all-over style is good.
WIll look forward to reading more from this author.
The story is well put together, the ideas are clear, and the all-over style is good.
WIll look forward to reading more from this author.
August 17, 2020
Kinda trashy revenge-style superpower short story. Felt like more could have been done around the concept of localised powers, but was fun enough to read
January 24, 2024
It feels underdeveloped, but that is to be expected.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews