Spoiler Free Summary: Antithesis by Mitch Goth is the second story in the Alien Days Anthology. Dr. Jonah Edwin has received a request. They want him to talk to some aliens. The aliens themselves have found a way to speak, but communication is still suffering. What is it that has these visitors so baffled?
Character: Edwin doesn’t really grab me. He’s thrown into a situation, and then he just kind of rolls with it. He doesn’t change. He doesn’t go. He doesn’t evoke change. This story is a plane-ride conversation followed by a interrogation room sort of conversation. Edwin doesn’t take any action. I don’t know anything about him, so I don’t care about him. I can’t even mentally picture him.
Exposition: This story reads like a musing designed to help mankind appreciate his mortality more. This might be satisfactory for a younger reader. The main conversation (see above) is essentially looking at mortality from the perspective of an immortal filter. Since, while I hope to live many more years, I’m fairly comfortable with my mortality, the 30-minute discussion on mortality didn’t do anything for me.
Worldbuilding: This story takes place on an earth setting, and it largely takes place on that plan and in the medical area/interrogation area. We don’t learn much about the creatures, and we only get a bit of insight to their biological needs (air).
Dialogue: While the story was driven by conversation, it’s not particularly lively conversation. There isn’t much snap to the dialogue, and the conversation just sort of expands on a pretty narrow summary. I mean, if I had the chance to talk to aliens, I’d probably have more than one subject of conversation. Even if the realization in this story was true, I’d still want to know more. But this story just sticks to that topic of conversation and calls it a day.
Description: I get more information on the plane in the beginning than I do on the aliens. I have more of a sense of that flight than I do the rest of the book, and the only value of the flight was to set up the “The More You Know” ah-ha moment at the end of the story. This story was 90% tell and 10% show, and that 10% didn’t do a thing to advance the plot.
Overall: This is a pretty “scathing” review from one point of view, so I want to clarify this a bit. This is less a story than it is a dialogue exercise with an existential scientific prompt. It asks a great question. It gives a satisfying realization. Those are true things. However, it’s not a story. There are no obstacles to overcome. In fact the only possible obstacle was handled before the story even started. There’s no conflict, so there is no resolution. The characters are only proxies for the perspectives of the motivating debate question. This might be the best philosophically driven dialogue exercise I’ve ever read, but it’s not a story.
Thanks for reading