best and worst of the rd novels ??

[NitroChrisUK]

i have only recently got round to buying last human and read that in a few hours .. off to get the rest today( if i can find them ) was just wondering what everyone thought was there personal favourate and least favourate of the books ..and from reading last human .. i assume it dosent fit in with the seies continuity ..?.. i feel so dumb :(

Topic

[JamesTC]

My favourite is ‘Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers’ with ‘Backwards’ in second and ‘Better Than Life’ in third, ‘Last Human’ is in last, not to say I don’t like ‘Last Human’, I love it. All four books are brilliant and live up to the series.

[Paul Muller]

I love IWCD, but I’m not too keen on Last Human. Backwards is awesome, as is BTL.

*Generic comment mode*

[Jonathan Capps]

> i assume it dosent fit in with the seies continuity ..?.. i feel so dumb :(

Both Backwards (by Rob Grant) and Last Human (by Doug Naylor) are classed as continuations from Better Than Life.

For me, Infinity and Better than Life are equal top, with Backwards next and Last Human last.

[NitroChrisUK]

only read last human so far and it seemed……a bit ott .. even for red dwarf still enjoyed it and shall read again just seemed very far remooved from the red dwarf im used to

[JamesTC]

Try ‘Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers’ next, it is closer to the TV show than any other, atleast the first few chapters. The last chapter though unlike Red Dwarf is bloody brilliant, I loved every bit of that book.

[Seb Patrick]

I treat IWCD and BTL as one book, pretty much – although if push came to shove BTL just edges it.

Neither solo book is as good as the first two, but Backwards is the better one for me. That said, I’ve grown to like Last Human more as time’s gone on. You just have to appreciate that it’s not like the others in any way.

More from me on all this, anyway : http://www.ganymede.tv/indepth/infinity-welcomes-better-than-backwards-last-humans

[p2p_productions]

Yeah, love IWCD. Last Human is a close second for me, personally. BTL, third. Tried reading Backwards, but I just couldn’t wrap me head ’round it.

[JamesTC]

I prefer listining to the audios really. Chris Barrie brings the first two books to life. Craig Charles has a much harder job with the slobbering GELF filled ‘Last Human’ but still does a fantastic job. Rob Grant does a weird Ace Rimmer.

[NitroChrisUK]

they should write some more books i guess it would only be doug who would want to do that.. im sure they would be popular ..and pesonally if the movie never ends up on the screen why not release it as a book.

[ChrisM]

I’m not sure I have a favourite.

If I had to pick a favourite from the single author sequels, I think Last Human might edge it. I liked how they expanded the universe with the various gelf species.

I’m not too sure of the ending of Backwards, (it was a brave way to go though) but I liked the fact it returned to the Backwards Earth and the agonoids were interesting baddies. (Why didn’t Rob Grant just stick with the word ‘simulants’ I wonder?) The rules of the Backwards earth also worked a lot better than the episode of that name.

Hmmm. This is the one book I don’t own, so I might try to grab it sometime.

[JamesTC]

Wasn’t the Red Dwarf Film part based on ‘Backwards’, I’m sure it was set to include simulants. For me ‘Backwards’ is a bit confusing, it keeps veering of onto other directions and dimensions! In the end it is rewarding to keep reading though.

[Pete Part Three]

>Wasn?t the Red Dwarf Film part based on ?Backwards?

Probably not, since Backwards was written by Rob Grant and the film was written by Doug Naylor.

Infinity is tops for me. The pre-accident stuff (specifically Rimmer taking his exams and Lister meeting Kochanski/ getting bored) is awesome. Better than Life is similarly great. I remember loving the Trixie La Bouche reveal (ooh er missus).

Backwards in at third (some overly sadistic stuff that I could do without).

At the bottom of the pile; Last Human. It doesn’t feel like Red Dwarf to me.

[JamesTC]

>Probably not, since Backwards was written by Rob Grant and the film was written by Doug Naylor.

Yes put the synopsis of the Film is very similar to the latter part of ‘Backwards’, rogue simulants attack the last known human ship, Red Dwarf.

[Andrew]

> Yes put the synopsis of the Film is very similar to the latter part of ?Backwards?, rogue simulants attack the last known human ship, Red Dwarf.

Well, it said ‘homo sapienoids’, not simulants (called ‘agonoids’ in Backwards) – assuming both are the same thing is something that’s come strictly from the fan side.

Likewise, ‘mechanical guys attack last human’ is hardly a definitive description of the Backwards story, since only one actually gets near Lister and most of the book is mostly about other things…including the events the title refers to. The agonoid stuff is cutaway fun, but our heroes never join the population aboard Red Dwarf.

Regardless, the film was unlikely to ‘just’ it’s one-line description; ‘regular dude battles SF bad guys’ may be the plot of Star Wars, but it’s not ALL the plot of Star Wars, nor JUST the plot of Star Wars, since it’s also the plot of bazillion other movies.

[JamesTC]

Well ‘Backwards’ is more like three books in one, you have the ‘Backwards’ part of it, the alternative universe with Ace and the aganoids section. The backwards segmant was only a third of the book in the end, maybe a little more.
I always thought the Red Dwarf film was a mix of ‘Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers’ and the later part of ‘Backwards’ with the aganoids. Establish the setting and get Kryten on board then fight some simulants.

[Seb Patrick]

I always thought the Red Dwarf film was a mix of ?Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers? and the later part of ?Backwards? with the aganoids. Establish the setting and get Kryten on board then fight some simulants.

Ooh, where did you get your copy of the script? Can we get a scan?

[Andrew]

> The backwards segmant was only a third of the book in the end, maybe a little more.

About two-fifths I’d have said. But either way that’s more than the agonoids sections – which, for the most part, the main characters aren’t even in.

> I always thought the Red Dwarf film was a mix of ?Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers? and the later part of ?Backwards? with the aganoids

And you certainly seem unshakable in that conviction!

[JamesTC]

Well I heard that the Red Dwarf Movie was a new start like the books, it would need to establish characters and they would have to pick up Kryten. I was not very happy about the new start, I prefer continuing the story instead of starting another.

[Andrew]

I’m sorry for your disappointment.

But it’s still sod all like the Backwards novel.

[JamesTC]

Ok, I’m sorry. I have not seen a script, just a poster from years ago depicting Red Dwarf blowing up.
I wonder if the film script will ever get released as a book some day, I doubt a film will be made now, now the specials are coming I can lose all hope of the film.

[Pete Part Three]

Don’t you own this, Soundable Object?

[ChrisM]

> Yes put the synopsis of the Film is very similar to the latter part of ?Backwards?, rogue simulants attack the last known human ship, Red Dwarf.

Well, it said ?homo sapienoids?, not simulants (called ?agonoids? in Backwards) – assuming both are the same thing is something that?s come strictly from the fan side.

Yeah, I remember the film blurb describing the sapienoids as being “the next step in human evolution incorporating human and machine” (something like that anyway.) That could be interpreted different ways, but I took that to mean they were essentially humans with cybernetic implants and body parts. I.e. cyborgs in the traditional sense (like the borg or cybermen although according to the artwork they’re a lot more sexy looking) rather than robots with flesh bits, which seems to be what simulants and agonoids are. (I.e. like the T-800 terminator, but with… issues. ;) )

Don’t mind me I’m fascinated by this stuff.

If the film never takes off, it’d be great to see some of this material, be it script or further series.

[Mr Flibble]

Firstly, the first two books are by far and away the best. They work beautifully together as well. Backwards is third – I do love Backwards, but Rob Grant does go a little OTT on the torture business. Other than that though – I like it. Last Human is… OK. But it’s weird. And not really Red Dwarf, I don’t feel.

Secondly – wasn’t Backwards at least planned by Rob and Doug before the split?

Thirdly, Seb – your article is great. I agree with every point.

[Ian Symes]

Secondly – wasn?t Backwards at least planned by Rob and Doug before the split?

They were working on a book together called The Last Human (note the vital definite article) before the split, but it’s unknown as to how much of the book was written, and as to whether any elements other than the title went into their respective solo efforts.

[JamesTC]

http://www.ganymede-titan.info/docs/moviefaq.php#plot
“Oddly, this sounds rather like the Aganoids section of the Rob-Grant-only Red Dwarf novel Backwards.”
Hmm.

[Ian Symes]

And?

[Ben Paddon]

I’ve always viewed IWCD and BTL as one book, probably because I first read them in the omnibus edition. They’re definitely the best of the four books. I think Backwards just slightly edges out Last Human, but I can’t quite put my finger on why. I think it may be that sometimes the narrative in LH reads more like stage direction than… well, than narrative.

[Jonathan Capps]

I find that the main reason I prefer Backwards to Last Human is Rob Grant appears to be far, far better at writing Rimmer.

[Mr Flibble]

They were working on a book together called The Last Human (note the vital definite article) before the split, but it?s unknown as to how much of the book was written, and as to whether any elements other than the title went into their respective solo efforts.

Ah, OK. I thought I had read some proof that Backwards was largely from that book they started.

[Andrew]

Nah. The story ideas they were working on together – which I don’t think made it to any kind of fully-built outline, much less the beginnings of the prose – don’t heavily feature in either solo novel.

[Mr Flibble]

One day, perhaps when he’s 80, Doug will write a book containing all these things like plots that never made it, however undeveloped, an audio CD containing commentaries of all the Dwarf episodes where Doug points out things he thinks are uninteresting, and a collection of other titbits.

It will be called “I didn’t know anybody would find it interesting” after the reason Doug gave for not doing commentaries in the first place. Everyone here on G&T, which at that point will only have 2 seasons worth of DwarfCast commentaries left to do, will be able to use the rest of their lives discussing these exciting morsels of information and thinking what could have been.

(And yes, I know there are myriad legal reasons why this will never happen)

[Seb Patrick]

>Thirdly, Seb – your article is great. I agree with every point.

Thirk.

[locusceruleus]

I love Infinity and BTL. Last Human, not particularly, and Backwards, not in the least.

[JohnnyW]

I recently re-read that last two books (the first two are definitely pure Red Dwarf).

http://thunderpeel2001.blogspot.com/2007/10/retro-review-red-dwarf-individual.html

In short: Backwards is smart and funny, whereas Last Human was despicably awful.

[ChrisM]

>Last Human was despicably awful.

It really wasn’t.

Comparably bad, possibly. (Although I liked it.)

[JohnnyW]

I remember laughing and enjoying it as I read it the first time (when it first came out), but I tried to read it again recently and well, here’s what I wrote about my experience:

I made it 50 pages into Last Human, and I literally can?t take it any more… It?s funny, don?t misunderstand me, there?s some brilliant lines, but it just feels wrong. Like a car engine in dire need of a mechanic, it somehow keeps on moving, but it really doesn?t sound right and you feel like you shouldn’t be driving it.

For starters, Naylor clearly has no issues with messing with the entire Red Dwarf canon. Rimmer’s inferiority complex about his more successful brothers all stem around the fact he didn’t get a memory implant when he was a boy?? Grant explored this neuroses and turned it into the core of his entire book and something emotionally satisfying we could all relate to, but Doug quickly explains it away in an unemotional and illogical sentence.

There?s also an astonishing amount of pseudo-science that, not only doesn?t hold up to even the tiniest bit of scrutiny, but also disregards everything we know about the Red Dwarf universe. Random scientific sounding bits and bobs that are tossed into the story and dialogue without explanation. All of a sudden even the Cat is an astrophysicist. Things like ?unused time lines? (how can a parallel universe be considered “unused”?) or the fact that Starbug has a ?Hubble telescope? installed (come on) are just horrible.

I guess Doug would argue that it?s all about entertaining readers, and most people aren’t going to know scientific theory and don’t care about technology (so long as it sounds ok), they just want a laugh.

While I can definitely say the Last Human tries very hard to tickle your rib bones (and succeeds very often, too), I have to ask; if you’re going to do the science-fiction without the science, why bother?

———–

True, I was a bit unnecessarily harsh with “despicably awful”, but it still wasn’t very good.

[ChrisM]

Fair enough. ;)

Rimmer?s inferiority complex about his more successful brothers all stem around the fact he didn?t get a memory implant when he was a boy??

It’s been a while since I’ve read it all through but wasn’t that just another example of Rimmer making excuses for the way his life has turned out rather than being the actual reason?

As for the Science stuff, yeah it’s likely mostly bogus but a lot of science fiction is based on making up stuff concerning the universe. Is it possible to warp space time like in Star Trek? Or enter a dimension called Hyperspace where everything is conveniently closer together so you can conveniently cover interstellar distances within a few days? Probably not, but they’re interesting storytelling devices.

[Pete Part Three]

>It?s been a while since I?ve read it all through but wasn?t that just another example of Rimmer making excuses for the way his life has turned out rather than being the actual reason?

No.

It was two books and 36 episodes of characterisation ruined in a paragraph.

[ChrisM]

>It was two books and 36 episodes of characterisation ruined in a paragraph.

Only if you allow it to.

[Pete Part Three]

Note that I said it was the characterisation that was ruined, not the books or the episodes. And I don’t allow it to, because I think it was such a gigantic mis-step that I don’t consider it canonical part of Rimmer.

A large part of Rimmer’s character is that he’s a failure who blames his hang-ups on his parents. The sudden (and unnecessary) revelation that this is entirely justified and not a irrational excuse, is completely unwelcome. What does it add to the character? Fuck all. What does it take from the character? A lot.

[Phil]

Can I just pop in to say I don’t really like the novels? I’ve only read the first two (I THINK the other two were unavailable in the US…that may have changed…) but the material seems to fall into two categories:

a) great stuff that was invented/detailed just for the books
and
b) extended sequences that are much more fun to watch on TV than to read about

If there were a lot more of a and a lot less of b, I’d have enjoyed them more. Clearly I’m in the minority. And on top of that, I’m used to my opinions not being the correct ones. But there you go.

[Seb Patrick]

>If there were a lot more of a and a lot less of b, I?d have enjoyed them more.

Erm, pretty much the entirety of the second book is made up of “a”, you big fool.

[hummingbird]

>Can I just pop in to say I don?t really like the novels? I?ve only read the first two …. but the material seems to fall into two categories …….

I’m the same. I’ve only read the first two, and I think they’re OK, but unremarkable.
I’d much rather watch the shows.

[Mr Flibble]

Is it possible to warp space time like in Star Trek? Or enter a dimension called Hyperspace where everything is conveniently closer together so you can conveniently cover interstellar distances within a few days? Probably not, but they?re interesting storytelling devices.

I still much prefer the Futurama idea of just ignoring all that and making things up when they fit the story and to hell with the continuity.

[Phil]

>you big fool.

!!!

Actually, you’re probably right. It’s been a while since I’ve read them, so I could be remembering incorrectly. Also the black/white hole stuff was new for all you guys because you read the book before the material was reworked into an episode. Since I read it long after seeing the episode–and since I was accustomed to so much being borrowed from the show for the novels–it didn’t click with me that this was “new” material at the time.

Still, that’s sort of the taste left in my mouth by the books. I always thought I’d enjoy the second two books more because, from what I understand, they’re mad up of much more non-TV material. But I couldn’t get them at the time (I may not have even had the internet then, mind you). Maybe I’ll try to grab some copies in the near future and see if I enjoy them more.

[ChrisM]

A large part of Rimmer?s character is that he?s a failure who blames his hang-ups on his parents. The sudden (and unnecessary) revelation that this is entirely justified and not a irrational excuse, is completely unwelcome.

The thing is though, although the implant certainly gives a person a major advantage, it is just another tool. A tool many successful officers did without and got to with graft.

Sure, Rimmer could still work his butt off and not succeed. On that other hand he just might. He might never be as high ranking as his privileged brothers but he could still end up an officer. Unfortunately, although it’s the thing he most wants in the world, he really doesn’t have any interest in the subject matter he is studying, hence all the rotas and bar-charts, etc. Working hard at not working. And what does he do? He blames his parents. He feels sorry for himself. And the lack of an implant is just another excuse to add to all the others.

The interesting thing is, when it really counts, when he is (spoiler territory) faced with someone who is the archetype of what he would like to be, who even saw him as the hero, he actually does better himself in the end. He doesn’t become an officer but in the end that’s not what’s important.

[locusceruleus]

>And I don?t allow it to, because I think it was such a gigantic mis-step that I don?t consider it canonical part of Rimmer.

I wouldn’t consider the novels canon at all.

>Erm, pretty much the entirety of the second book is made up of ?a?, you big fool.

I remember thinking all the Bedford Falls and Juanita stuff was pretty great.

[Jonathan Capps]

> I wouldn?t consider the novels canon at all.

They are canon, just their own separate canon. Which forks off into two other canons.

But, yeah, there’s never been ANY doubt that the novels continuity is entirely separate to the show’s.

[NitroChrisUK]

with 10 years gap between only the good and back to earth theres lots of room to wrte a book or 2 to chronicle the events inbetween ..or should any new novels continue in there own continuity ?

[Ian Symes]

Phil! You. All four novels. Re-evaluation. Article series. G&T. NOW!

[Author]

Replies