But here’s the thing … I usually prefer to read a book or story before I see its adaptation. I don’t hold fast to this rule, particularly if it’s something I probably wouldn’t have read anyhow, like, say, Girl on a train, but if I have an interest in it, reading-before-seeing is my preference. This didn’t happen – obviously – with Arrival, mainly because I hadn’t realised it was an adaptation. So, when I set off reading “Story of your life”, I had the movie freshly in my head. Not ideal and a little distracting at first, but in fact, as I kept reading, I realised that the movie was a “true” adaptation, and I relaxed into the story.
The set up is simple enough. A bunch of aliens – dubbed “heptapods” by the humans because of their octopus-like tentacles – have landed in various spots around the world, including nine locations in the US. They do not appear to be aggressive, but why are they here. The world’s governments naturally wish to discover their purpose, and so they send physicists and linguists to try to find out.
Now, here’s the challenge, as Arti also says in her post: how do we talk about this story without giving some critical things away, because this is one of those stories where much of the meaning is in the telling, even if you don’t know it at the beginning. Arti handles this challenge by talking more about the adaptation, which was indeed well done. I, however, will take a different tack and talk more generally about why I liked the story.
I said at the beginning that I’m not really into sci-fi. I’m not keen on quest films or invasion battle scenarios, but there are sci-fi stories I’ve enjoyed, and they tend to be ones which focus closely on human concerns and issues rather than on fantasy or adventure. I’m talking John Wyndham whom I enjoyed in my teens, and Kurt Vonnegut’s Cat cradle which I read in my twenties. “Story of your life” fits loosely into this sort of sci-fi (in my mind anyhow).
The story is narrated by linguist Dr. Louise Banks, but in two threads. One is the chronological (sequential) story of her work with the heptapods, told in a traditional first person voice, while the other, which jumps around in time, comprises her memories of her daughter who we learn early on dies in her 20s. It’s also told first person, but addresses “you” as if telling this daughter about her life. There are, as you’d expect, connections between the threads, so that the transitions reflect or expand on ideas developed in the other thread.
It’s an intelligent story that demands intelligence of its readers. Chiang uses words and concepts from physics and linguistics and expects us to keep up. The discussions of Fermat’s Principle, for example, and of causal and teleological ways of understanding the world, not to mention of various linguistic forms, demand concentration of the reader, concentration that I might not, in another situation, have been bothered with – but the writing is so clear, and the story so intriguing, that I stuck with it. Here, for example, is Louise’s description of heptapod writing (which was beautifully depicted in the film):
When a Heptapod B sentence grew fairly sizable, its visual impact was remarkable. If I wasn’t trying to decipher it, the writing looked like fanciful praying mantids drawn in a cursive style, all clinging to each other to form an Escheresque lattice, each slightly different in its stance. And the biggest sentences had an effect similar to that of psychedelic posters: sometimes eye-watering, sometimes hypnotic.
One of the things I particularly enjoyed was the exploration of the idea that the language we use correlates closely with how we think. (Not a new idea I know but the implications are interesting here.) So, as Louise starts to learn the aliens’ language, dubbed Heptapod B, she finds herself starting to think differently. Instead of thinking in the traditional human “sequential” (cause-and-effect or linear) mode of awareness, she starts to appreciate the heptapods’ “simultaneous” mode of awareness in which they “experienced all events at once, and perceived a purpose underlying them”.
I found myself in a meditative state, contemplating the way in which premises and conclusions were interchangeable. There was no direction inherent in the way propositions were connected, no “train of thought” moving along a particular route; all the components in an act of reasoning were equally powerful, all having identical precedence.
It’s the idea that you have to know the effects before you can know the causes, that all the components of an action or event, in other words, are simultaneously there. I did say mind-bending didn’t I?
Anyhow, I expect the non-linear/non-chronological second thread of her narrative is meant, in part anyhow, to reflect or illustrate this more holistic or teleological way of thinking.
Ultimately, “Story of your life” is a philosophical story that gets to the nub of how we understand time, of what we know, of what we can (or would change) if we could. And that’s about as close as I’m going to get to giving it away. I do recommend you read the story and see the film.
17 thoughts on “Ted Chiang, Story of your life (or, Arrival) (Review)”
Like you, I’m not keen on sci-fi. And I admit too that before watching Arrival, I had not even heard of the name Ted Chiang. And since watching, I’ve read several of his stories and they can all be found online. All insightful and human, very meaningful. Arrival definitely belongs to a different realm of sci-fi, as you clearly point out here. You’ve done a good job reviewing the story, and given us some teasers (like trailers). I’m sure you could feel the frustration of not letting out the twist at the end, which is the key to the ingenuity of the whole story / film concept. Agree with you that it’s a philosophical story about how we understand time, language, and the choices we make as humans. As well, the will to communicate for peaceful co-existence, to live and let live, empathy… all so critical for us now as citizens of the world.
Thanks Arti – yes, I should also have mentioned that peaceful co-existence theme too. I’d happily read more of his stories.
May I share two other ones I’ve read after Story of Your Life. One is a very short: The Great Silence, the other is excellent: The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling. You will love them.
Thanks Arti. I’ll try to get to them if I can. Are they as long? Story of your life was a rather long short story. I say someone describe it as a novella which is rather pushing it, but it is longer than most short stories I’ve read. (Not that I’m complaining.)
Well you’ve won me! I have no objection to reading reviews first and will look out for both the movie and the story. (Coexistence or not, I find it hard to believe that the first reaction of any government these days would not be to send out the military. In fact I find it hard to believe that the military would wait to be ‘asked’.)
Oh, Bill, you cynic you – go see the movie! Seriously though I think, for a change, Chiang was trying to present a more positive world view than the usual sci-fi – and what’s wrong with that?! (Let me know if you do see/read it).
Well, sci-fi is not my thing either,. though I’ve read a couple lately and quite enjoyed them. But the book does sound interesting, and I’ll keep an eye out for it at the library. (They’re bound to have it if it’s been made into a film).
Ah, yes, Lisa, we’re pretty alike in our reading tastes when it comes to genres aren’t we?
BTW, It’s not a book, but a story that you can access online (I’ve provided the link). I think it was also included in a collection of his stories called Stories [not Story] of your life.
We are indeed!
I plan on seeing the movie and reading the story. Not sure when, but I will. And can I just say i was thrilled you read and enjoyed sci-fi? 😀
Oh oh, Stefanie, I did didn’t I! Does that let me off the hook for a while?
For now 😉
There is some sci fi I do like. Stories like the ones featured on the Twilight Zone, Ray Bradbury and John Wyndham. My sister was talking to me about this film as she had just seen it. Your review is a good one. Might have to chase these two (film and book) up.
Dear WG: Such a beautifully wrought review of a film which left me wanting it to go on and on – around and around! This reinterpretation of the way in which one becomes something of another person when trying to understand – indeed speaking/thinking – in another language – all new reference points/iconic cultural indicators – at a shift from one’s own – is pointed to in this film (well, was for me) – and your review puts it all into sharp relief – just back eight days from my other land – a slip back into the other perspectives and ways of expressing and moving oneself there. I’m speaking of western Japan – discovering this time that my ability to read has if anything improved…the making of meaning from what 27, 28 years ago were mere squiggles – as in the amazing movie representation – cloudbursts of symbolism – gradually patterns and meaning emerging… One of the best SciFi films I’ve ever seen – though disappointing (or was it realistic) the military complication factor? In this age of trump!
Thanks Jim, the military factor was enhanced in the film. It’s there in the story but the filmmakers expand it and add some political messages that weren’t really in the story.
Well, SF is my thing (or at least sometimes is) and this is classic SF and rather nicely reviewed. Unfortunately I’ve been spoilered on this one elsewhere. Is it still worth catching the film on this do you think even knowing the story?
I think it probably is Max. Having seen the film I knew the story when I came to read it and still found the read good. But the interesting question is: would the spoiler affect enjoyment more of the film than of the story?