Agent of Chaos

by Norman Spinrad

Published in the 60s, Spinrad was among the 1st to perceive the totalitarian implications of a cradle-to-grave welfare state. Yet he was too radical to be considered conservative. The result was Agent of Chaos.
Boris Johnson wants democracy. In the course of his adventures he discovers that democracy to him means freedom. It's a banned concept from the Millennium of Religion. Like god. He finds himself dealing with a byzantine political situation worthy of anything from the banned past. The dictatorship is the Hegemony. Opposition is provided by the aptly named agents of CHAOS. Meanwhile, the Brotherhood of Assassins plays a game none can fathom. Whose side are they on? Whose fool are you? Then aliens are discovered. A starship is sent to meet them. The Hegemonay doesn't like that.
Spinrad explores his philosophical theme in a manner rare in contemporary sf. The problem is that Order always tries to eliminate random factors. Its very nature encourages opposition. That feeds the forces of chaos. But chaos has built-in problems too. Its victories feed the forces of reaction, of order. The heroes here opt for personal freedom. The villains try to establish a dictatorship over the very nature of reality itself.

Genres: Science Fiction, Fiction, Science Fiction Fantasy, Dystopia, Novels, Fantasy, Literature

157 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1967

About the author

Born in New York in 1940, Norman Spinrad is an acclaimed SF writer.

Norman Spinrad, born in New York City, is a graduate of the Bronx High School of Science. In 1957 he entered City College of New York and graduated in 1961 with a Bachelor of Science degree as a pre-law major. In 1966 he moved to San Francisco, then to Los Angeles, and now lives in Paris. He married fellow novelist N. Lee Wood in 1990; they divorced in 2005. They had no children. Spinrad served as President of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA) from 1980 to 1982 and again from 2001 to 2002.

Reviews

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

You can probably read this book without thinking and end up thinking that this is an "ok" book with mediocre plot. And indeed from that perspective you would be right. But you would have missed the critical 5% of this book that is the hidden golden gem. And this is the dialogues about entropy, chaos, order, society and human evolution and freedom. Don't speed read this book and your mind will be happy and more hungry. If I could make a cinema metaphor about this book, I would say it is a sci-fi dystopian movie with "Waking Life" movie interruptions. It's like someone looking at a stellar map and saying "ok cool" only to realize that there are black holes in the map. Do yourself a favour and jump into the black hole.

----------------------

Θα μπορούσε κανείς να διαβάσει αυτό το βιβλίο στα γρήγορα χωρίς πολλή σκέψη και να καταλήξει στο συμπέρασμα ότι είναι ένα "οκ" βιβλίο με μέτρια πλοκή. Και πράγματι υπό αυτή την άποψη θα είχε δίκιο. Αλλά θα είχε χάσει το σημαντικότατο 5% του βιβλίου που είναι το πραγματικό διαμάντι. Και αυτό είναι οι διάλογοι για την εντροπία, το χάος, την τάξη, την κοινωνία και την ανθρώπινη εξέλιξη και ελευθερία. Μην διαβάσετε αυτό το βιβλίο βιαστικά και το μυαλό σας θα γίνει πιο πεινασμένο και παράλληλα χαρούμενο. Αν θέλαμε να κάνουμε μια μεταφορά αυτής της ταινίας στα πλαίσια του κινηματογράφου, θα έλεγα ότι είναι μια δυστοπική ταινία επιστημονικής φαντασίας με σύντομα διαλείμματα για ταινίες σαν το "Waking Life". Είναι σα να κοιτάς ένα χάρτη του διαστήματος και να λες "οκ ωραίο είναι" μέχρι να αντιληφθείς την ύπαρξη μαύρων τρυπών στον χάρτη. Κάντε μια χάρη στον εαυτό σας και πηδήξτε μέσα στη μαύρη τρύπα.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another book I read in the 1970's. It spawned the "pie-in-your-face" movement of political activism during that time. Not one of Spinrad's best, but certainly influential to the Baby Boomers that were either in high school or college at the time it was written (1967) when we still had the "Leave It To Beaver" mindset.

I've noticed that those giving this book a good review are of my generation (that lived through all the socio-political upheaval) and many-to-most of the bad reviews are from people under the age of 40.

[César Bustíos · Rating 3 out of 5]

Entertaining book. An "okay story" with some interesting dialogues about entropy and order.

3.5

[Steven · Rating 1 out of 5]

1.5 stars. Hard to get through. Started off as a cool concept but the dialogue was so cheesy and wooden, the characters lacked depth. Just not for me.. had sort of high hopes for this one. So far I haven't really liked Spinrad at all, let's hope that Bug Jack Barron saves the day :). That will be the next Spinrad book I read.

[Andy Wixon · Rating 2 out of 5]

I bought - well, okay, I didn't actually 'buy' this book, it was in the FREE BOOKS box outside one of the local second-hand shops along with a pile of Michael Moorcocks - I picked this up on the strength of the author's name and because of the blurb on the back (more on this later).

I read Bug Jack Barron years ago and was really impressed by the thoughtfulness and energy of the story. Agent of Chaos was written earlier and it definitely shows: this book is incredibly clunky and uninvolving. It's a very hackneyed rebels-versus-totalitarian-government story with wafer-thin characterisation (everyone involved is a man, too), given some marginal interest by the inclusion of some moderately engaging political ideas...

...actually I think I'm getting that backwards. This isn't really a novel incorporating some political thinking. It's a treatise on political theories with the barest minimum of a novel wrapped around it. All the characters are defined almost entirely by which of the story's three factions they belong to, with hardly any other details provided. Spinrad seems solely interested in the idea of Chaos as a political force (possibly significant given his association with Moorcock around the time this book was written - Chaos being a Moorcock leitmotif - but then again Spinrad describes himself as an anarcho-syndicalist, so maybe not).

When you start with a theme or an idea you want to write about and then cobble the story around it, you're always on dodgy ground - you're going to end up with something that seems didactic or mechanical or even melodramatic, and Agent of Chaos is all of these things. Everything I gained from reading this book I think I could have got out of a much shorter and more interesting essay.

That said, time has turned Agent of Chaos into a piece of priceless comedy gold, for British readers anyway: the blurb on the back which impelled me to read it runs 'Boris Johnson brushed his hands against the reassuring bulge of his laser gun.' Inside we learn that 'Boris Johnson, head of the Democratic League, was public enemy number one' and hear much more about Boris Johnson's surprising activities.

Norman Spinrad, obviously, could have had no idea back in 1967 that a man called Boris Johnson would become a popular, if slightly buffoonishly eccentric, politician in the UK, and that as a result his book would seem even sillier than on its original printing. But the fact remains that this is the case. Even so, the unintentional comedy isn't enough to make Agent of Chaos anything more than a way of passing the time. I acquired this book for free - and having read it, I think that paying anything more would have been a mistake.

[Garidation · Rating 4 out of 5]

Δεν ξέρω τι να γράψω γι' αυτό το βιβλίο, κριτική για την υπόθεσή του ή τις δικές μου σκέψεις;
Θεωρώ ότι αν ασχοληθεί κάποιος με την υπόθεση αυτή καθεαυτή, νταξει δεν λέει και πολλά: είμαι σίγουρη ότι υπάρχουν άλλα 100 καλύτερα δυστοπικά sci-fi εκεί έξω με σαφώς καλύτερη και πιο δομημένη πλοκή. Αλλά! Αλλά... Σ' αυτό εδώ το, για μένα, διαμάντι δε θα έλεγα ότι η πλοκή είναι το δυνατό του σημείο όσο οι ιδέες και τα θέματα που πραγματεύεται, και αυτό είναι κάτι το οποίο τελευταία παρατηρώ αρκετά (μιλάω πχ για τη Σκουπα και το Σύστημα του Wallace, το Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy του Adams, ακόμα ακόμα και το Αντίο Μπάτμαν του Θεοφίλου). Διαβάστε με προσοχή παρακάτω σε περίπτωση που θα σας ενδιέφερε η πλοκή γιατί μάλλον θα σας σποιλεριάσω~

Λοιπόν για να μη φλυαρώ άλλο, περιγράφει κάποιες κατηγορίες ανθρώπων: τον φανατικό κακό, τον φιλόδοξο/καιροσκόπο κακό και τον ψυχρό ορθολογιστή από τη μια και απ την άλλη τον ευφυή θεωρητικό καλό (λίγο παίζεται αυτός, παίζει να 'ναι και λίγο φανατίκλας μέσα σ' όλα), αυτόν που ακολουθεί τυφλά κάτι και αυτόν που ακολουθεί χωρίς να ξέρει ακριβώς γιατί ή μάλλον, που δεν μπορεί να εκφράσει γιατί το ακολουθεί αλλά που διαισθητικά ξέρει ότι είναι το σωστό. Ξέρει ότι είναι αυταπόδεικτο ας πούμε ότι είναι κακό να έχεις ένα βραχνά από πάνω σου, ακόμα και αν αυτός ο βραχνάς έχει εξαλείψει πολέμους, αρρώστιες, πείνα, φτώχεια... Μόνο και μόνο που δεν έχεις την ελευθερία σου λόγω αυτού του βραχνά είναι αρκετά καλός λόγος για να εξεγείρεσαι. Και η συνειδητοποίηση που του έρχεται εκεί προς το τέλος ότι η εξέγερση που έκανε ήταν άσκοπη γιατί αντιδρούσε τυφλά χωρίς να έχει να αντιπροτείνει κάτι και στην ουσία ήταν μέρος του συστήματος. Η συνειδητοποίηση που έκανε μετά, ότι μάλλον όλοι θα έχουν κάτι να προσφέρουν, κάτι που κάποιος θα το ζηλεύει σε αυτούς - ακόμα κι αυτοί που φαινομενικά τα έχουν όλα, η τα έχουν όλα ξεκαθαρισμένα στο μυαλό τους. Ασυνάρτητες σκέψεις 3μιση η ώρα τα ξημερώματα, αλλά έτσι κι αλλιώς δε θα μου κολλούσε ύπνος.
Κι όπως μου είπε ένας φίλος: αν δεν έχεις ένα σωρό σκέψεις όταν τελειώνεις αυτο το βιβλίο, κάτι δεν έχεις καλά. Συμφωνώ.

4 αστέρια!

ΥΓ: Δεν με χάλασε κιόλας, αλλά το παρατήρησα: δεν υπάρχει ούτε μία γυναίκα. Ούτε η παραμικρή αναφορά σε κάποια συγκεκριμένη χαρακτήρα. Μια γυναίκα, μια κόρη, μια συν-αντάρτισσα, μια Χαοτικιά, μία κάτι.

[Steve · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book in Junior High School and it made me question everything I knew at the time (which wasn't much), while embracing a life of pranks. In retrospect, this book was a turning point for me in that it shed light on politics, anarchy, chaos and more. In a Post 9/11 world the final act of the Brotherhood of Chaos might be considered just too much. But fuck that- it's fiction.

In retrospect, it doesn't seem as revolutionary as it did to my eager young mind at the time. But it remains thought-provoking, pitting three forces in dynamic opposition: the evil Hegemony, the ineffectual Democratic League and the weird Brotherhood of Assassins who perform chaotic, unexpected actions. My advice is to read the epigraphs that head each chapter. They are from a fictitious book called The Theory of Social Entropy by Gregor Markowitz. If they grab you, then this SF take on '60s revolutionary groups may be for you. It's a quick read, too, and full of useful information.

[Norrin2 · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've got a feeling this is one of those books that you have to read at the right time in your life. And the right time is probably freshman year of high school, which, fortunately for me, was when I read it. And its lasting impact on my thought processes is immeasurable. To this day, I cannot believe wholly in any politician, and in any situation I can step back and take a larger view. Good and bad, this book changed my perception of reality and my process of perceiving. If you're not 14 years old your mileage may vary.

[Beth · Rating 3 out of 5]

This 60s-era sci-fi delivers unintentional humor today because its main character is named Boris Johnson, so of course I could only picture the British prime minister. It’s a mediocre story with a bit of philosophical depth and no women at all, except one who briefly screams in a crowd and is described as fat.

[Tony Dibernardo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really good read, more so at the end. It was really heavy with the classic "hate for the Hegemony" but I understand that not being a product of his generation, it's hard for me to understand. The first third developed plot and characters slow enough to have me put it down for 2 months, then the last two-thirds were exciting and poetic to the end.

[Xabi1990 · Rating 3 out of 5]

7/10. Media de los 4 libros leídos del autor : 4/10

Única novela que salva de la quema de las pocas que he leído de Spinrad. Entretenido, no esperéis mucho mas. O lo fue hace años, no se que tal leer hoy en día esta obrita del 67.

[Peter Dunn · Rating 3 out of 5]

So I could spend some time discussing how this 1960s standard science fiction trope of lasers, aliens, and spaceships is used to explore forms of society such as: democracy, oligarchy, hegemony and anarchism. I could outline how the story then tumbles with increasingly fun but, I think, unintentional farce into something that looks like Ann Rand style Objectivism. Or I could just point out the unintentional prescience of having a main character called Boris Johnson who throws himself into wild courses of action for what he sees as the good of democracy only to find himself both betrayed by a close friend, and frustrated by other powers.

[John Jr. · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Science Fiction Encyclopedia, which I now turn to frequently in assessing my earlier reading, unceremoniously dismisses Agent of Chaos as a "commercial Space Opera…which depicts a garish Dystopia en passant" and says no more. When I read Norman Spinrad's early novel, in the late 70s or early 80s, it did more for me than that reading captures. It seemed vaguely political, even vaguely philosophical, in the way it described a conflict.

There's a big, bad government ruling Earth with a heavy hand, and a democratic rebellion that'd like to overthrow it. Each has some successes before encountering a setback; neither achieves victory. The conflict simply continues, like many political conflicts on Earth do: the Shining Path rebellion in Peru, the Tamil liberation movement in Sri Lanka (which ran for more than two decades before being crushed), the Karen insurgency in Burma (begun in 1949, still going as of this writing).

In the analysis of this book, each side wishes to impose its own order over all. This analysis is given by a third party, when we finally meet its members, whose aim is to prevent that final order from being established. This third group is the reason neither side of the conflict manages to win. It doesn't offer a third way; it wants to keep all ways open as possibilities. The synthesis it hopes for, to use Hegelian terms, is no synthesis at all. Thus it sows disorder--which can be a good thing to have, as sociologist Richard Sennett more or less argues in an aptly named book I read much later, The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life.

That's the gist of the story, as I remember it now (maybe with a few details wrong), and it's why I liked the book. I'm still inclined to think this way: too much order makes the thinking go blind. In the outcome of the Sri Lanka civil war, the Tamils haven't done well at all so far; the government and the Sinhalese majority have imposed their order. Not all conflicts end that badly, and Sri Lanka's was pretty nasty while it lasted. Still, there's something to be said for Spinrad's view, or at least Sennett's.

[Jedediah Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting to see reviews that put this in a Heinlein tradition when it is a very direct critique of the technocratic authoritarianism of works like "The Roads Must Roll." And while the prose is not as vivid and idiosyncratic as Spinrad's later work, it is very serviceable here. The character development is on par with most SF: fuller than Asimov or Clarke, thinner than Dick, but not wasted like the pointless verbosity of Kim Stanley Robinson and other current by-the-pounders. Thematically it is in keeping with the cynical radicalism of Spinrad's later novels although the conceits are less fully explored.

[Ernest Hogan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another book that just gets better with age and politics. It's damnear impossible to read it now without seeing the character Boris Johnson as the guy who's in the news, which makes a parody of the sort of story that eventually became Star Wars (but published a decade earlier) into more that it was intended. Along with laseguns a-blazing, there's the Theory of Social Entropy, that also seem more relevant in this century. I wonder what Acts of Ultimate Chaos we may see in the future? And I hope folks reading this book for it's current popularity try some of Norman's other books, too.

[Mr. Pe Mr. Pe]

this book is great i recommend this to everyone

[Cati · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book, loved it, I think any review is useless, if you really like SF, you will find it all too interesting :)

[Jan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unusual SciFi, two different rebel groups trying to overtake the world government.

[Thrift Store Book Miner · Rating 5 out of 5]

George Orwell meets Robert Ludlum meets Robert Anton Wilson in space! "Agent of Chaos", by Norman Spinrad, takes place in a future where the entire solar system has been colonized, but controlled by a dictatorial Hegemony. The common people, known as "Wards", live like cattle with their every move under surveillance. An "Unpermitted Act", witnessed by any of the omnipresent digital "Eyes" can result in being irradiated to death on the spot a "Beam". It is rumored that the Beams target Wards at random regardless of whether or not an Unpermitted Act was committed, just to keep the Wards in a state of fear and control.

Standing against the Hegemony are two main resistance groups. There is the League of Democracy, who hatch plans of assassination and sabotage, in hopes of one day over throwing the Hegemony and reinstating the now forgotten ideas of Democracy and Freedom throughout the solar system. Also, there is the much more mysterious Brotherhood of Assassins. They work in the shadows, working both for and against the League, with a mode of operation that baffles both the League and the Hegemony in it's randomness.

The Brotherhood of Assassins follow a philosophy of Social Entropy and worship Chaos. They believe that Chaos is the natural state of the universe, and any attempt to impose order is an affront to Chaos. Therefore, the Hegemony, which seeks to impose total control over everything within it's reach, is the ultimate blasphemy against the true nature of the universe. They believe that acting in a way that defies logic and reason is a way to restore the solar system back into it's nature state of Chaos.

"Agent of Chaos" is both fast paced and thought provoking. Spinrad works with superb efficiency in tying a wide range of threads together in less than 160 pages. No time is wasted throughout the whole book. There's action, pursuits, scheming and plotting, twists and turns, along with philosophical musings all crammed into a fairly short novel.

The discussions of the dynamic tension between Chaos and Order take the premise of this dystopian /sci-fi/spy thriller and bring it up to another level. The ideas are similar to those laid out by Robert Anton Wilson, aka " Malaclyspse The Younger" in "Principia Discordia" (Hail Eris !). The Brotherhood of Assassins serve as a representation of a Discordian type secret society put into action against a solar-system-wide totalitarian government. Their core philosophy is outlined in bite-sized chunks, with the beginning of each chapter starting with a quote from the fictional Chaos philosopher Gregor Markowitz, author of "The Theory of Social Entropy" and "Chaos and Culture". An example of one of Markowitz's Discordian-like quotes:

"Order, being anti-entropic, requires a fixed and limited context within which to exist. Chaos contains all such limited contexts within it as insignificant eddies temporarily resisting the basic universal tendency towards increased Social Entropy"


"Agent of Chaos" is a unique page turner with the potential to appeal to a wide range of audiences beyond those who would normally read sci-fi. It takes the reader on a ride while also provoking thought. It's like a rollercoaster where the operator gets on the intercom and talks to the riders about the nature of the universe while they go up, down, and around the track.

[Socrate · Rating 3 out of 5]

BORIS JOHNSON sări uşor de pe banda periferică a trotuarului mobil al nivelului zero şi păşi pe trotuarul fix. Faţada noului Minister al Tutelării, de un alb rece, se înălţa sfidătoare în faţa sa. Clădirea era separată de trotuarul pe care stătea, de o vastă întindere de gazon, ce o înconjura complet.

  O mulţime de oameni era deja adunată în faţa treptelor de la intrarea Ministerului, la baza cărora fusese instalată o mică tribună.

  Johnson estimă prezenţa a trei până la patru mii de Supuşi; bărbaţi şi femei cu priviri placide, aduşi de fata la acest eveniment de către Gardieni. Stăteau acolo şi aşteptau nemişcaţi, păstrând o tăcere de gheaţă. Ca la toate adunările dictate de Hegemonie, Supuşii formau o masă inertă de fiinţe, nicidecum o mulţime gălăgioasă. Johnson notă că oamenii erau înghesuiţi într-un areal semicircular, a cărui bază o forma treptele intrării, iar arcul de cerc, de Gardieni cu alură ameninţătoare, privind încruntaţi, ca nişte maimuţe bărbierite îmbrăcate în frac, în uniformele lor de paradă.Astfel, toţi cei prezenţi stăteau înghesuiţi formând o masă compactă, deşi spaţiul de gazon liber era mult mai.

  Pană aici. toate bune…

  Mergând nonşalant în contradicţie totală cu tensiunea ce îl stăpânea, afişând o mină dezinvoltă, Johnson trecu de inelul Gardienilor de la periferie. Trecu direct pe sub nasul unui Gardian cu înfăţişare de taur şi cu privire permanent suspicioasă şi duşmănoasa.

  Johnson îl gratulă cu un salut, pentru că era îmbrăcat în combinezonul gri al Ministerului întreţinerii, iar o asemenea cordialitate era mai mult sau mai puţin aşteptată.

  Faţa Gardianului se lăţi într-un surâs veninos şi Johnson îi întoarse zâmbetul, o grimasă fugară de egală sinceritate.

  Ajutându-se de coate, în timp ce-şi croia drum spre tribuna de la baza treptelor, Johnson remarcă motivul înghesuirii atâtilor indivizi, într-un spaţiu atât de restrâns. O echipă TV îşi montase echipamentul pe strada de la nivelul 2, la aproape 20 de metri înălţime şi conectat printr-o rampă direct cu Ministerul. Astfel aveau posibilitatea să filmeze ceremonia inaugurală, direct peste capetele mulţimii, creând iluzia unui auditoriu vast şi compact, în preajma Ministerului.

[Julieta Steyr · Rating 2 out of 5]

Un totalitarismo como la Hegemonía se pone en peligro por dos organizaciones: la Liga Democr��tica y la Hermandad de Asesinos. Ha pasado tanto tiempo desde que la Hegemonía gobierna que incluso la Liga no tiene idea sobre lo que significa la democracia misma; la Hermandad, sin embargo, se rige bajo las leyes del caos natural, plasmadas en libros de un científico ficticio que habla sobre la entropía.
Boris Johnson, líder de la Liga, tiene tanta suerte en su vida que pareciera ser el protagonista (oh, wait...), siempre sale bien parado e incluso sus enemigos se fijan en él. Eso fue bastante tedioso. Después tenemos a alguien a quién Boris considera casi un amigo, Arkady Duntov, que realmente no sigue a la Liga porque crea en ella, sino porque es agente de la Hermandad. Soporífero.
Entonces está toda la Hegemonía en constante lucha de poder, un par de hombres que controlan a cientos de millones... en fin. Dos se disputan el poderío supremo y ya. Dos que tendrán atentados contra su vida con la acción de los dos bandos que se les oponen haciendo cosas opuestas. O sea, la Liga intenta asesinar, la Hegemonía lo salva.
¿Errores? El líder de la Liga, Boris, es un incompetente. De hecho, era más que evidente que alguien del reducido grupo con el que él se reúne, lo vende. Pero él parece no darse cuenta.
Segundo error: el enemigo confiesa. ¡Oh, por favor! Duntov contando que tienen al científico supuestamente muerto, Schneeweiss, de su lado es un estereotipo enorme, absurdo y tonto.
Finalmente, por algún lado leí que Norman Spinrad decía que no deberían escribir ciencia ficción quienes no sepan sobre ciencia. Bueno, señor Spinrad, ¿de dónde proviene el plástico que en este libro se utiliza tanto para materiales como para explosivos? El plástico es un derivado del petróleo. Imagine que, básicamente, tiene que sostener a todo el sistema solar con petróleo, puesto que no hay más vida que humanos allí según esta historia. Imposible. El petróleo es finito, ¿entonces por qué la pedantería esa? Más aún si se cuentan los OTROS errores de arriba.

[Kevin Phyland · Rating 3 out of 5]

In a future where a human Hegemony rules autocratically across the entire solar system, a three-cornered tussle for control is playing out. The Hegemony, ruled by an oligarchy under Vladimir Khustov has provided peace and stability at the cost of severe laws and death penalties; the Democratic League under Boris Johnson, is dedicated to a return to democracy but has only a vague idea of what it is and even less idea of how to achieve it; and The Brotherhood of Assassins is a secretive society dedicated to Chaos, in order to undermine confidence in the Hegemony. Under normal circumstances the Hegemony would be unassailable but a recent contact with an alien world around 61 Cygni has changed the Social Entropy and shifted it more favourably towards overthrow. When the Hegemony decides to thwart the nascent revolution it requires the Ultimate Chaotic Act to win. Norman Spinrad has taken a sociological treatise and used it as a template for a movement. The story flows but the premise is very handwavy. Worth a read.

[Gilles · Rating 3 out of 5]

L'hégémonie contrôle le système solaire de Mercure à Pluton. Mais elle a des ennemis dont la ligne démocratique qui veut plus de liberté, et...la confrérie des assassins qui vise à répandre le chaos et qui est par là même imprévisible.

Une dystopie inspirée de 1984 mais avec une approche un peu décevante et l'irruption du chaos ou de l'entropie qui est le contraire de l'ordre ou des gouvernements dans ce cas-ci.

Un roman intéressant sur un gouvernement totalitaire, la recherche du libre arbitre et ... l'imprévisible. La sortie est arrangée avec le gars des vues, mais le roman se lit bien.

J'ai aimé, mais j'espérais plus.

[Shane · Rating 3 out of 5]

I like to read a couple retro sci-fi books a year and usually with my wife so we can laugh at some of the stuff that hasn't aged well. This was pretty good, lots of action and tension, but also lots of philosophy/sociology. We just kept wondering what the hell was going to happen next.

On a side note the hero's name was "Boris Johnson" and he was fighting for freedom and democracy. I thought it was ironic but I'm guessing my friends on the other side of the pond might be more put off by it.

[Ben Shakey · Rating 4 out of 5]

A pretty funny political satire. I read this as a side note to Sean Howe's biography of High Times publisher Tom Forçade. The fact this madman based his world view on this novel, gave it extra level of ironic amusement.

[Ubik 2.0 · Rating 4 out of 5]

aggiornamento vecchio libro letto chissà quando

[Albert_Camus_lives · Rating 3 out of 5]

Acto caótico final 7u7

[Greg · Rating 1 out of 5]

Terribly dated, unengaging political sci-fi that lands with a dull (very dull) thud.

[Christina Packard · Rating 2 out of 5]

Sci-Fi.. just does not seem to be my thing.

[Andrew Gibson · Rating 3 out of 5]

odd.