Synapse is a difficult novel to review. Parts were excellent. Parts were not excellent. And parts were downright weird.
Let’s start with what I thought was excellent. Synapse is set in the future—2037. Humanoid robots are commonplace, as are the Purists, terrorists who seek to destroy the Artificials before Artificials destroy humanity (a valid concern for anyone who has seen a Terminator movie).
The main character, Kestrel, is a Methodist minister, and that gives lots of room to muse in the nature of humanity, whether a sentient robot has a soul or can believe in God or needs forgiveness for their sins.
There are some big questions around artificial life forms in this novel, and Synapse addresses them all in a natural way.
And that’s partly why I’m reviewing Synapse here. At the recent Omega Writers Conference, keynote speaker Steve Laube challenged us to make sure we weren’t only reading books (and blog posts) we agreed with. It’s also important to read about things we don’t agree with.
Why? It’s a way of renewing our mind (Romans 12:1-2).
Anyway, Synapse definitely got me thinking. Is salvation only for humans? I’d always thought so, but I don’t live in a world with sentient artificial life forms. If a computer were sentient, would it have a soul? Would it have eternal soul? These are the tough questions Steven James addresses in Synapse.
But that’s not the plot.
The basic plot is more mundane—there’s a bombing, our heroine is one of the first on the scene, and that naturally brings her to the attention of the investigating officers. Predictably, one is single (well, divorced) and interested in her (but has to get past his own issues first), and the other is a dirty cop. Yawn. Sorry, but that’s one plot line I’m kind of over. However, I did enjoy the occasional touch of humour:
So the underlying novel is the search for the truth about the bombing, and will the good cop find out the truth before the bad cop destroys all the evidence and implicates Kestrel. I’m not sure if it was intentional, but I found the bad cop a little cliché, and the writing in those scenes somewhat bland.
Then there’s the writing.
Honestly, some of the writing was bland, but there were also passages of brilliance, and passages that could be either. Or both.
Take the introduction. One of the first “rules” of writing is about managing point of view. In short, write in first person or third person, but be careful about writing in both. And don’t write in second person.
Synapse breaks these rules. It starts in second person as Kestrel gives birth and realises her baby is not okay. Honestly, I almost stopped reading there—using “you” (meaning me, the reader) would have been weird in any context, but in the context of a mother losing her baby? Beyond weird.
The novel then switched into first person past tense. But Jordan (Kestrel’s Artificial aka sentient humanoid robot) was also a viewpoint character, and Jordan’s scenes were written in first person present tense. This was somewhat jarring next to the rest of the novel, and definitely not a technique I’d recommend to new writers.
Overall, Synapse is a futuristic whodunit that uses enough common tropes to make it familiar despite the futuristic setting. While I didn’t wholeheartedly enjoy Synapse, it was a fascinating concept that asked some serious questions about the nature of God, humanity, and salvation.
Recommended for science fiction fans.
Thanks to Thomas Nelson and NetGalley for providing a free ebook for review.
Hi Iola, Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the book. It does sound like an intriguing concept, and the plot line wouldn’t bother me – probably because I read a lot less thriller/suspense/police procedural books than you do. But the point of view issues – surely second person POV couldn’t be an intentional choice? I just checked out the sample and you’re right… It’s not a book I’d pick up and read on because of the POV. I guess there are some writing rules that are best not to be broken.
The concept was excellent, which is what kept me reading – that, and the fact Steven James is a well-known writing teacher, so I wondered what his writing was like. I’ve glanced at other reviews which suggest this isn’t the typical Steven James novel.
Having said that, it’s a book I’ll remember because of the concept and the big-picture questions, and a book I’ll recommend to writers so they can see some unusual techniques at work. I suggest James got away with second person because he’s Steven James, and that a less well-known writer would be asked to revise that opening into first or third person.
Hi Iola, interesting thoughts. Only yesterday I was talking with cp’s about including short flashbacks in the opening chapters. In the book example that was mentioned (contemporary fiction) we were divided on whether or not the flashbacks worked. I’m often not a fan of first person POV, especially if I dislike the POV character. Second person POV feels intrusive, as if the author is accusing me personally of doing something, but readers who love first person POV could really like it. That said, I’ll happily read a blog post and certain types of non-fiction that are written in second person POV.