![](https://image.librarything.com/pics/fugue21/magnifier-left.png)
![Lest Darkness Fall par L. Sprague de Camp](https://pics.cdn.librarything.com/picsizes/11/0c/110cd47ec8355d6593479785051433041414141_v5.jpg)
Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.
Chargement... Lest Darkness Fall (original 1941; édition 1974)par L. Sprague de Camp
Information sur l'oeuvreDe Peur que les ténèbres par L. Sprague de Camp (1941)
![]()
Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre. ![]() ![]() In 1938 an ancient historian/archaeologist is visiting Rome when he's struck by lightning and somehow sent back to 535 AD. He has absolutely no qualms about changing the future because he decides to 'invent' the printing press and a bunch of other should-be-anachronistic devices. He also decides to make sure that the Dark Ages don't happen. I dunno. I feel like I should have adored this story, and I really super didn't. I mean, who hasn't daydreamed about going back in time and trying to decide how you would live in a past society (as a woman, though, these daydreams tend to end in a disturbingly nightmarish way for me). And yeah, it would be totally fun to act the non-modern day Prometheus (minus the monster, hopefully), but something about this version of the daydream seems off to me. Just because you know the printing press exists doesn't mean you could make one yourself (or am I just helplessly ignorant of such things? Does everyone know how to create something like that from essentially nothing?), and the main character has no problem doing just that and also creating so many other things without the benefit of Ikea-like instructions. (I mean, a telescope? Come on. I get the general concept, but actually *making* one?!) And he gets arrested a time or two, but has no real problem wriggling out of trouble, it seems. How was he not condemned for witchcraft?! (A TELESCOPE, FFS. AND CANONS.) It was also not...interesting? That period of Roman history has never been my favorite, but it's certainly not dull. But it seemed so here. Anyway, a big miss for me, sorry to say. I recall reading this as an adolescent and loving it. Left a deep impression. I picked it up again as an adult looking for3ard to revisiting an old, great book, and was disappointed. That's OK, though. It was great when it mattered, and I've always loved the idea of time travel largely as a result of this book, which captures aspects of it - on a very surface level - that were entertaining in their fashion.. The protagonist gets transported in time back to 6th century ad of rome. Because it's about to fall into the Middle ages, also known as the dark ages, the author named it "lest darkness falls". The protagonist, once he realizes he is stuck in 536 ad Rome, sets out to change the course of events. Little by little he is drawn into the political scene, and gets involved in wars. The rest of the book is one war after another. This is where the author lost my interest. Also, I would have ended this differently, if this were my book. Easy to say right? However, I would have liked to see treated how, perhaps the protagonist got struck by another lightning bolt (which is what happened when he was transported back in time), so that now he travels back to his own time, and sees the changes in current events that have occurred because he changed all this stuff back in the 6th Century ad. For example: he introduced Brandy, the double entry accounting system, the printing press, just to name a few. Since they were invented so far back ahead of time than they should have been, what happens now in the protagonist's current time? aucune critique | ajouter une critique
Appartient à la série éditorialeDistinctionsListes notables
This book addresses a dilemma concerning freedom and moral obligation (obligation, right and wrong). If determinism is true, then no one has control over one's actions. If indeterminism is true, then no one has control over their actions. But it is morally obligatory, right or wrong for one to perform some action only if one has control over it. Hence, no one ever performs an action that is morally obligatory, right or wrong. The author defends the view that this dilemma can be evaded but not in a way traditional compatibilists about freedom and moral responsibility will find congenial. For moral obligation is indeed incompatible with determinism but not with indeterminism. He concludes with an argument to the effect that, if determinism is true and no action is morally obligatory, right or wrong, then our world would be considerably morally impoverished as several sorts of moral appraisal would be unjustified. Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque |
Discussion en coursAucunCouvertures populaires
![]() GenresClassification décimale de Melvil (CDD)813Literature English (North America) American fictionClassification de la Bibliothèque du CongrèsÉvaluationMoyenne:![]()
Est-ce vous ?Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing. |