Scan barcode
A review by grrr8_catsby
The War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells
2.0
There is a stigma that all pieces of classic literature are works of art.
The War Of The Worlds, is not.
To its credit, it does a lot of things well. For a book of 1898, it makes a lot of bold assumptions about the state (and the future) of science as a whole. The writing is descriptive and expansive, especially in detailing the fallout of total warfare left in the Martian army's wake. Depictions of warfare, in terms of chemical warfare and laser technology predate their use in actual history. And perhaps most importantly, microbiology and immunity are of dire importance, more than 30 years before the invention of antibiotics.
At its core, The War Of The Worlds is an allegory of British Imperialism. In the words of Wells himself, "And before we judge them too harshly, we must remember what ruthless and utter destruction our own species has wrought, not only upon animals, such as the vanished bison and the dodo, but upon its inferior races. The Tasmanians, in spite of their human likeness, were entirely swept out of existence in a war of extermination waged by European immigrants, in the space of fifty years. Are we such apostles of mercy as to complain if the Martians warred in the same spirit?"
My biggest complain with The War Of The Worlds is that it's just.....boring. Beautiful segments of descriptive text and visualization are broken by distracted writing, moments of action are interrupted by philosophical idealization. The author himself struggles at times with the very definition of "Martian", sometimes referring to the terrifying, enormous machines and sometimes referring to the smaller individual. I found myself rereading multiple passages because I was legitimately confused as to what was being referenced.
The War Of The Worlds should absolutely be read and enjoyed as one of the most referenced pieces of Science Fiction of all time. However, the impact of The War Of The Worlds should not be interpreted as the quality of the novel overall.
The War Of The Worlds, is not.
To its credit, it does a lot of things well. For a book of 1898, it makes a lot of bold assumptions about the state (and the future) of science as a whole. The writing is descriptive and expansive, especially in detailing the fallout of total warfare left in the Martian army's wake. Depictions of warfare, in terms of chemical warfare and laser technology predate their use in actual history. And perhaps most importantly, microbiology and immunity are of dire importance, more than 30 years before the invention of antibiotics.
At its core, The War Of The Worlds is an allegory of British Imperialism. In the words of Wells himself, "And before we judge them too harshly, we must remember what ruthless and utter destruction our own species has wrought, not only upon animals, such as the vanished bison and the dodo, but upon its inferior races. The Tasmanians, in spite of their human likeness, were entirely swept out of existence in a war of extermination waged by European immigrants, in the space of fifty years. Are we such apostles of mercy as to complain if the Martians warred in the same spirit?"
My biggest complain with The War Of The Worlds is that it's just.....boring. Beautiful segments of descriptive text and visualization are broken by distracted writing, moments of action are interrupted by philosophical idealization. The author himself struggles at times with the very definition of "Martian", sometimes referring to the terrifying, enormous machines and sometimes referring to the smaller individual. I found myself rereading multiple passages because I was legitimately confused as to what was being referenced.
The War Of The Worlds should absolutely be read and enjoyed as one of the most referenced pieces of Science Fiction of all time. However, the impact of The War Of The Worlds should not be interpreted as the quality of the novel overall.