Set in the 1950s and 60s, the story follows Beth Harmon, who grows up in an orphanage, addicted to the tranquilisers they give her. Her best friend is Jolene, a worldly older black girl never to be adopted. When the janitor teaches Beth to play chess, it becomes clear she is a prodigy and later on, her adopted mother, who is an alcoholic, takes her to chess tournaments where the prize money funds their expenses. Beth aims to be the best, but she finds herself increasingly cut off from everyone and dependent on substances.

Beth is an intriguing character, single-minded and resourceful, not inclined to interact with people unless she has something useful to say. She has no interests other than chess, pills and drink, but she does like to eat boiled eggs. We could interpret her as autistic but I don’t know if the author intended her to be. As well as a commentary on isolation and genius, the book has feminist leanings as Beth navigates the prejudice she faces as woman in a man’s world of grandmaster chess. She is a contrast to Jolene, who from an unpromising beginning, progresses to higher education and a career, staying away from tranquilisers. When the two women meet after years of separation, it’s clear that Jolene has the brighter future. What Beth is to do after becoming a champion at her young age, is a question left unanswered.

First published in 1983.

The story is that Newton journeys to Earth, where he then starts amassing wealth for a mysterious project. People are very curious about him, particularly his housekeeper (Betty Jo in the book, Mary Lou in the film), a chemist called Bryce and, disastrously, the FBI. He starts to act more human, he becomes an alcoholic and realises he can’t ever return to his home planet (named Anthea in the book, unspecified in the film).

The most glaring difference between the book and film is, to put it bluntly, sex. There’s none in the book. There’s a lot in the film. I suspect that adding these scenes might be a trait of the director Nicolas Roeg, going by how his previous film Don’t Look Now (based on Daphne du Maurier’s short story) turned out. I’ve discovered he also directed the Roald Dahl adaptation The Witches, which has no such scenes, but then it’s a children’s film.

There were a few things I found somewhat lame in the film but I won’t mention them because they’d be spoilers. I think that the story and dialogue could have benefited from staying closer to the book. I didn’t mind the changes to the characters so much.

Recommended for David Bowie fans, anyone who’s read the book and those who don’t mind seeing a lot of nudity.

Low-resolution film poster sourced from Wikipedia.

The answer is Mockingbird by Walter Tevis, author of The Man Who Fell to Earth and The Queen’s Gambit.

This is a very unusual science fiction novel, set mainly in New York, about 400 years in the future. There are no more children being born, while the few adults left have nothing but drugs, TV and a broken society. Robots control every aspect of life but even they are worn down and suicidal. The novel focuses on three protagonists. Spofforth is a black humanoid robot, highly intelligent, depressed and the last of his kind. Bentley is a shy young man and a fan of silent movies, who’s taught himself the illegal skill of reading. Mary Lou is a homeless free spirit who rejects drugs and sees the truth of everything. Bentley and Mary Lou fall in love, but Spofforth is going to throw a spanner in the works.

There are many themes in this novel which are commonly found in science fiction, dystopias in particular. The book is also a statement on the value of reading and of making your own decisions. I see a lot of parallels with today’s society, especially in lockdown times. The people in Mockingbird are conditioned to respect each other’s privacy so much that social distancing is the norm. They are stoned all of the time, discouraged from asking questions, glued to their screens. Even the robots are inclined to roll a joint and ignore everyone else.

I didn’t enjoy the second half of the book so much, as I felt that the story became bogged down in ideas rather than action. There was also more of a focus on Bentley, who I didn’t find as interesting as Spofforth and Mary Lou. I certainly found it thought-provoking, but unlike The Man Who Fell to Earth, I wouldn’t want to re-read.

First published in 1980. This edition published in 2015 by Gollancz in the SF Masterworks series.

The Man Who Fell to Earth is mainly set in Kentucky in the future (the 1980s), to which a humanoid alien from the planet Anthea has travelled. Going by the name of Thomas Jerome Newton, he amasses a huge fortune by patenting new technology. He was sent to Earth with a purpose but as time goes by, he goes native. Not only is he struggling to work out what to do, the government are beginning to suspect him. The story is narrated in the third person, focusing on Newton, his housekeeper Betty Jo and a chemist, Bryce. They are all interesting characters. Undoubtedly the writing is a little dated, but it’s easy to read.

Although there is some science, even if some of it’s fabricated, the main themes of the book are alcoholism and isolation. I don’t usually like to infer too much about an author’s personal life from their fiction, but the frequent references to alcohol and the main characters’ reliance on it are surely evident of Tevis’ problems. We can even see him as Newton, the fragile alien in the grip of an existential crisis, sick of pop culture and suspicious of authority. There is also a Cold War atmosphere (as in much science fiction of the era) with Newton warning that atomic weapons almost wiped out his species and that the same fate is in store for the Earth.

Famously the book was adapted into a film starring David Bowie, which I discuss in this post.

First published in 1963. My edition is by SF Masterworks (Gollancz), 2016, with an introduction by Ken MacLeod.