Glad you like the site, Gregor. In case anyone’s interested, I’ve added my reviews of The Business and Dead Air to the archives.

And Iain Banks has been losing it since Complicity

One thing that struck me about Banks before that was that like a lot of baby boomer men, he seems to have a fascination with female protagonists, and is completely hopeless at writing them. As with William Boyd, he seems to delight in creating selfish, spoilt (and always young) women, who would just be regarded as d-kheads if they were male. When he writes from a male viewpoint, the guys are mainly fine, but when he writes from a female viewpoint, the men are all pervy and obnoxious (or both).

A lot of my closest friends are girls, and it seems that to people of my age group gender conflict has largely been resolved. We have not turned into androgyns, but have a lot in common. For this reason, despite the sci fi themes, I think that Iain Banks always reads as being slightly anachronistic.

Anyway, Great Site Mr Poole!!

The obligatory character who is a long way from the rest of the Culture and humanity through his own choosing and therefore must die

I’m glad you mentioned that guy! The way he and his ship were introduced so deftly and funnily (he was a bit of a twat, but not dislikeable), and then zapped to smithereens, all within the space of a few pages, was a really brilliant set-piece of writing. And, to my taste I’m afraid, so much more economical and vivid than what happens on Sursamen.

I’d forgotten that I’d also reviewed Dead Air. I really hated it. Seems I’ve been a bit of a stalker-critic of Banks’s over the years. But only because I’m convinced that he can write excellent books, so am always freshly disappointed when he doesn’t, quite.

But in ‘Matter’ even the story arcs that aren’t have character development as compensation. Ferbin, Oramen, and Choubris all grow as people, which is something. There’s something of a proper story in the references to ‘King Lear’ and ‘Hamlet’ and the travel narratives. I think there are themes which aren’t developed: why is tyr Loesp disloyal? Why does the Culture’s meddling miss the bigger picture? Why is the artefact buried in the first place? On the other hand, it’s much funnier, especially the dialogue, than I remember Banks as being. There seems to be less sadism. The obligatory character who is a long way from the rest of the Culture and humanity through his own choosing and therefore must die (we could call him the ‘Max Gogarty’ character after the Guardian’s ill-fated gap year blogger) is dispensed with quickly and almost relevantly to the meta-plot (although what happens to the Oct ships after they get to where they’re going?).

“The novel itself has a kind of liveware problem: the ship Minds are more sympathetic characters than most of the medieval-fantasy humans.” I don’t agree. I think that’s usually the case - and may be the case here with the drone Turminder Xuss (have to check the spelling there), who may have appeared before. But I found the regent, the prince regent, the younger brother, the assassins, the doctor, the court adviser (the one person who sees what’s going on), and of course, the fool figure very engaging. Yes the ship is interesting, but mostly in the human need for physical contact in Mr Quicke and in the disingenuousness of the Special Circumstances.

Banks does an interesting twist with the story telling. It’s told from at least three different points of view, each with their own perspectives. It’s up there with Use of Weapons as one of my favourite culture novels.