Science Fiction & Fantasy Award Winning Book Group discussion

This month's pick is Hominids: Volume One of The Neanderthal Parallax by Robert J. Sawyer. It won the 2003 Hugo Award. Other finalists that year include Kiln People, Bones of the Earth, The Scar and The Years of Rice and Salt.


I wasn't familiar with this one until I picked it up recently in a used bookstore. Hoping it's good.


As always watch out for spoilers.

I just started yesterday and I'm getting through it much quicker than I thought I would - it's very readable and so far I like all the characters.

I thought this was a very sweet little book.

I enjoyed it alot, and it was a quick and easy read.

In the end, it wasn't very ground-breaking for me. I feel like most of the concepts were touched on briefly, or were things I'd heard before. I suspect I would've loved it as teenage and would definitely recommend it to one.

About halfway through and this feels like a beach read or maybe something you'd pick up in an airport giftshop. Like you said a quick and easy read. I've only picked it up twice and I've read at least 250 pages.

Really enjoyed the 'Top 10 reasons we know he must be a real Neanderthal' list.

Jon wrote: "Really enjoyed the 'Top 10 reasons we know he must be a real Neanderthal' list."

Haha, yes, the little news snippets were some of the funniest parts

Finished it. I enjoyed it but it felt a bit dated for a book that isn't really that old. The end caught me by surprise. I thought that there were still one or two chapters to go. I understand why they stopped it there but it felt abrupt.

I probably won't continue the series just because my TBR pile is large enough already but this is one that back in the day I would have probably continued on until the end.

Yes, I don't think I'll continue the series either - I feel like we're damning it with faint praise and I don't want to do that because I think it was good - it was just a kind of good that feels familiar to me. I'm getting jaded!

I really enjoyed this one. I never would have picked it up based on the title or cover. I liked the concept, and it did explore some of the same themes as first contact books, but to me it was done in a different way. It challenged my preconceptions. I liked that it was both easier to read and more interesting (to me) than say, A Woman of the Iron People. Of course, I am older, and yet haven't read as many sci fi award winners as you guys.

I am reading the second book now, and am enjoying it as well.

Let us know if the next book is any good - I hope it is!

After a long dry spell of not writing book reviews, I have finally felt the inspiration to write reviews again, starting with my review of this book.
As I was looking through other people's reviews it seemed to me that a lot of people had very strong opinions about the rape scene. What did you think?

It seemed to me that the author had obviously included it to work in his themes contrasting violent and abusive humans to peaceful and loving neanderthals, so it didn't seem gratuitous to me.

It also seemed to me that the depiction of the rape and it's aftermath was as tactful as could be - as if the author had earnestly studied the psychological literature on typical reactions to rape and carefully written it to be as realistic and empathetic as possible - but so many readers seemed to think he'd done a bad job I wondered if I had read it wrong?

Gratuitous isn't the right word but it didn't fit for me. I can see why it was included from a thematic point of view but tonally it felt wrong. It is basically the only violence depicted in the novel other than a punch. It felt out of place. It could have been something that happened in Mary's past and it still could have worked. If the author wanted a violent scene he could have gone to a scene of Homo Sapiens slaughtering Neanderthals. So I guess I have two problems with it. I felt that explicit violence didn't fit with the rest of the book. And if the violence had to be there, did it have to be a rape scene? But it didn't seem gratuitous and it didn't ruin the book for me. It was just a choice that I wouldn't have made.

Not to change the subject, but Ponter was horrified when he was told that Homo Sapiens killed the Neanderthals on this world. But I don't think he ever said what happened to the Gliksins in his world?

Jon wrote: "It could have been something that happened in Mary's past and it still could have worked."
Yes, that's a very good point, it would've worked just as well if it was back-story.

Jon wrote: "I don't think he ever said what happened to the Gliksins in his world?"
I think the nearderthals assumed that the Gliksins had died from being so weak and stupid.
It's been a while since I've read up on neanderthals, but I think that the book is somewhat anti-sapiens to only put forward the theory that homo sapiens killed the neanderthals. I think climate change is still a viable theory (i.e. they were much better adapted to the cold and didn't do so well when the ice and tundra retreated).

I didn't think the rape was completely out of place, even as violence. It seemed to be a commentary on the differences between the two worlds.

I have just finished the second book, Humans. The rape aftermath is a large part of the story. It brings in the religious aspect of how humans interact versus the big brother is watching of the neanderthal world. I found it interesting.

That's interesting - good to know it carries on being integral to the story - I think it really makes a difference.