Posted by Dan Gunter on March 20, 1999 at 11:17:08:
In Reply to: Big Planet: impenetrable posted by Dean McMillan on March 19, 1999 at 22:47:41:
: Is it just me--a distinct probability--or has anyone else had trouble with this one? It galls me. (Not the book, but my own inability to get into the thing.) I've tried 3 times.
: I'd just like to know why I, who've a tendency to reread complusively nearly every Vance word to see the dark of print, should have difficulty here.
I'm surprised by your difficulties with "Big Planet." I first read the book when I was about 11 or 12 years old; it hooked me on Vance, and it also helped solidify my interest in reading. I've reread it a number of times since then, and I continue to enjoy it. I think it blends wonderful action scenes with delightful "sociological" scenes. In some ways "Big Planet" (like "Slaves of the Klau/Gold and Iron") is an early draft of the Tschai books, but it stands well on its own. You might try thinking of it against the backdrop of Edgar Rice Burroughs and his imitators; "Big Planet" is vastly better than any of those, even Burroughs at his best. (Of course, the comparison is unfair in many ways: although "Big Planet" is technically an "interplanetary adventure" book, it's vastly different in many ways from the Barsoom and Venus books.)
I urge you to give "Big Planet" another try, and this time just let yourself relax into it. I think you'll enjoy the effect!