The Terror: Book Review

I just finished The Terror, a historical fiction novel, and horror novel, by Dan Simmons. I have not read anything else by this author, I was simply turned onto it by a horror novel suggestion video (I think). This book is based on the horrific Sir John Franklin expedition into the arctic circle, looking for the north-west passage. This historic event is an embarrassment, a failure, and a mystery, which has invited much speculation; as far as we know, the Erebus and the Terror (the names of the two ships) disappeared and all the crew died. At the very least, none were ever seen again.

Simmons combines this dour historical event with fictional elements, like supernaturalism, to add another terrifying account to the rampant speculations made about the event. In Simmons' story, he depicts a mysterious beast that is stalking the crews of these ill-fated ships as they are iced in and unable to break out and return home. This story is rife with copious details about ship-life in those times, and also the creeping dread that they are all about to die, and from looking at the reviews you can see that these factors polarize people, even if most seem to have enjoyed it; some people think it's boring with the historical fiction levels of detail, while others hated the supernaturalism.

Overall (No Spoilers)

Overall, my opinion of the book seems to be still developing. I did not hate it, nor did I absolutely love it. I was never disappointed, but I did get the sense that more could be made of the story that was there. Upon writing the first draft of this review, let's just say that my evaluation is that it is only okay.

For the things that I liked:

The amount of detail that went into the day-to-day life of the characters—the sea-going life, and the fate of being iced in—was fascinating to me. This is one of the factors that most haters of the book seemed to focus on, but I thought the details added a level of realism that makes the plausibility of the story only greater. While my ability to recite the facts is obviously lacking, I do get the sense that I understand what it is like to be out there. I also just want to note that there are some books I have read where it seemed they were just throwing in a scattering of details as time went by, and while it is not obvious what the issue is in the moment, I still got the sense that there was something lacking. And it's these details. This is what makes a story feel real.

I also liked the idea of the monster stalking the crew. I want to make a distinction between the idea and the execution, however. Here, I want to talk about the idea. From the very beginning, Simmons portrays the monster in the way any supernatural force ought to be treated. First, you are merely hinted about the monster. Then more details are presented, both in respect to its appearance and its behavior, and this slowly happens throughout the course of the novel. I was intrigued from the very beginning, and this addition to the realism mentioned previously only made the story better.

I liked the characters. They weren't the greatest characters I have read, and perhaps I won't necessarily remember them, but that was mainly because they were realistic. They seemed like real people that could have existed. No one does extraordinary things, nor do they embody intensely likeable character traits. They are just people in all their banal glory, and I found that I liked that. Now, I will have to admit that there are downstream implications of this that I did not like, which leads to the next point, and the first dislike.

For the things I did not like:

I thought that the story was kind of anti-climactic. This is an incredibly long novel, likely over 250,000 words long, so if I am to truly enjoy a book like this, then I would like to see some justification for the length, not only in terms of what is filling out all those pages, but also in terms of what all of this is building to. I did not have a problem with the sequence of the events depicted (and the in media res start of the novel helps this), but when the events of the story don't really build to something utterly gut wrenching, then I just can't get excited about this book. I am going to return to this point in the spoiler section, because there are so many things to touch upon.

I mentioned that this point is downstream of the banality of these realistic characters, and this is because the characters are not capable of great cinematic feats. They are just people. There is no Jack Bauer or James Bond. We just have scared, starving men squabbling. I am fine with this, but I think Simmons could have made it more epic while maintaining the realism of the story's characters.

I did not like the explanation for the monster, nor did I like the execution of those revelations. As before, I cannot go into details until the spoiler section, but I was kind of disappointed with the revelations. And the fact that the book reveals these things through chapter long exposition sequences does not help. I was left wanting.

Overall, I thought the story was only okay. I don't regret reading it, but I don't have many powerful feelings about the story. I will give it a 5/10.

Strides (Spoilers)

I don't have much to add to the things that I liked for the spoiler section. I will mention, however, that I did like the depressing defeat by the elements that the crew suffered in the end. Goodsir's death, Hickey and company's death, the presumed death of De Voux, and the desertion of the wounded at rescue camp were all exceptionally well done. This is one aspect of the story's end that I liked.

I also liked the uncertainty brought into the story at the end, with the Terror (ship) being found far from its original place, with no obvious explanation as to how that happened. This ties into the fact that the ship in real life has yet to be found, even as the Erebus has.

Finally, I did like the ending with Crozier living on as an Esquimaux. This is a fun twist that deviates from expectations.

Stumbles (Spoilers)

I mentioned that the story was anti-climactic. And this is for multiple reasons that basically amount to Simmons setting up the pieces for shit to hit the fan, and him not taking the opportunity to actually fling that shit.

There is the monster. The monster has been stalking the crew and the terrorizing them for the whole novel, and by the novel's end it is following them as they desperately rush for land and perhaps salvation. You would then be surprised to learn that the monster literally played no part in the climax of this novel. And that baffles me. I don't think you are detracting from internal human conflict by having the monster show up one last time to seriously wreck their camp; all you have to do is have their internal conflict impede their ability to deal with the monster. But Simmons doesn't do that. The monster just kind of disappears, I guess, only to pick off a few remaining people after they were already on their way out (like Hickey). The failure to use the monster to its full potential makes me question why it was put in the book in the first place. What was the point?

Aside from the underutilization of the monster, we have the underutilization of the potential conflict between the white sailors and the Esquimaux people. As before, I am baffled that Simmons had Hickey fuck over the crew by killing John Irving, leading the sailors to kill all those Esquimaux, only to never follow through on the obvious problems that would arise. This is in two ways. One, the obvious one, is that the Esquimaux never actually hit back against the sailors. They are not seen again until the very end, where it is mentioned in passing that they don't really hold that much animosity over the event. Which is completely underwhelming. The second way is in how this contributes to internal discord. Baffling as it is, Crozier almost immediately suspects Hickey, and has every reason to just off the guy, but just never does. Perhaps this is just the crushing limitations of human existence, but even then, the execution was lacking given that it never really went into why Crozier could not take action.

This leads to the final point, which is that the internal conflicts of the crew never really hit a satisfying conclusion. We are teased of a mutiny brewing, and once Hickey kills John Irving, you think things are about to get hot, and even hotter as Crozier picks apart his story and seems to know what Hickey has done. But that is not the case. Instead, Crozier gets rid of Hickey and his lackies by letting them go about their own plans, only to be outwitted by them in some painfully obvious manner. Much of this is the uncinematic realism of people who aren't Jack Bauer, but I don't think cinematic competence on Crozier's part was necessary for this. Simmons could have had Crozier pin Hickey for his killing of Irving, only to have Hickey's lackies rise up to save him, leading to some sort of unexpected and messy conflict. What actually happened was just dumb.

And then there is the revelation about the monster at the end. It turns out that the Esquimaux myths about squabbles between deities are true, and this monster is a product of their fighting. I thought that Simmons could have done more with this. The explanation just seemed slapped on at the last moment to help bring the story to a close. I remember thinking, at one point, that the sailors could just be delirious, and sharing some collective delusion; this would have been much more satisfying. Especially if it highlighted the insanity of the people involved and crushing consequences of their actions.

This kind of leads into another problem with the revelations. I just don't see any thematic importance for the reveal. What does this revelation do to our understanding of the story, its characters, and to the message of the story? It doesn't do anything that really stands out to me. Maybe the idea that people are just inconsequential bystanders in some grand conflict can be drawn from this, but I don't know if that was Simmons' intent or how well that message was communicated.

Conclusion

Overall, I thought the story was only okay. I will give it a 5/10.