![\"The](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/sei263485521.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The New Scientist Book Club has been reading Circular Motion by Alex Foster<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The New Scientist Book Club made a jump backwards through time for our latest read, Alex Foster\u2019s Circular Motion<\/a>, moving from the millennia-ahead future of Adam Roberts\u2019s Lake of Darkness to a world that doesn\u2019t feel so very far from our own. There is one major difference, though: Foster\u2019s world is orbited by massive aircraft. This \u201cWestward Circuit\u201d enables those rich enough to travel the globe in a matter of hours \u2013 but it is also speeding up Earth\u2019s rotation, leading, as the book progresses, to shorter and shorter days \u2013 eventually, to just 2 hours in duration.<\/p>\n As I\u2019ve already said, I was blown away by this book. It ticked all the boxes I want ticked in my science fiction: an impending apocalypse of horrific proportions? Yes. A blinkered world trying to pretend it isn\u2019t happening? Yes. A cast of interesting and intriguing characters who we really care about? Yes. In terms of sci-fi, it has been my favourite (new) read of the year so far. I found it enjoyably, spine-crawlingly horrible to see the effects of the accelerating Earth play out, whether that was the huge and physical (storms; changing gravity), or the more individual (how awful would it be to have a day of just 2 hours?).<\/p>\n Not all of you agreed with my two-thumbs-up take, however. (And isn\u2019t that the joy of a book club, to be able to pick over fiction with your fellow readers?) I love a good dystopia, but for Niall Leighton, the dreadful reality of life on Foster\u2019s Earth went too far. \u201cI liked it, and I\u2019m pleased I read it, but it was too dystopian, and I don\u2019t think I\u2019ll be putting it on anyone\u2019s birthday present list,\u201d he writes on our Facebook<\/a> group. \u201cI want to say it was solid literary science fiction, but I also struggled to suspend disbelief, and I thought it seemed contrived in places. I did think it managed a good balance between being character- and ideas-driven, but it was too dystopian for my taste.\u201d<\/p>\n Niall wasn\u2019t the only reader who struggle to get into the story \u2013 Jennifer Marano writes that \u201cI usually have no trouble suspending disbelief, but I just couldn\u2019t do it with Circular Motion.\u201d And the dystopia was also a little too heavy for Gosia Furmanik. \u201cI\u2019m not sure dystopia has any meaning anymore nowadays, as all we have to do is read the news and look outside to know that we\u2019re already there,\u201d she writes. \u201cClimate collapse, growing inequality and exploitation, people being blamed for their mental health issues instead of them being recognised as a systemic problem etc etc. Circular Motion had it all and it was a hard read for me because of that. Hit too close to home.\u201d<\/p>\n I\u2019m glad Gosia brought up climate change, because Foster told me in our video interview<\/a> that the book was very much intended to have parallels with our current situation \u2013 the characters in the story create a huge, sky-covering \u201cShell\u201d as a technological fix to the problems they\u2019ve caused with the Westward Circuit \u2013 rather than just stopping flying the aircraft. Many of you saw those links between Foster\u2019s characters facing disaster, and just getting on with things in the meantime, and our own lives. \u201cThe theme of hubris (pods and circuits and the attempts to build a shield to correct the problems with gravity and day length) was strong and obviously a lesson for today,\u201d says Phil Gurski, while Steve Swan adds: \u201cI think humans are remarkably adept at knowing the bigger picture but to keep that knowledge in the background and trying to get on with their lives. How many [in-passing] conversations have we all had where we try to set the world to rights, but then [say] \u2018well there is nothing we can do about it\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n For Niall, \u201cit worked as well as any and better than most as a metaphor for climate change, complete with (spoiler) some ill-advised technological non-solutions, although I did struggle to suspend disbelief in the physics of it (would objects flying through the air in this way actually do anything to the planet\u2019s rotation, even imperceptibly?).\u201d<\/p>\n One thing I was confused about was the dating system Foster uses, which is written like this: \u201cA.H. 976,314:17\u201d. A number of you felt similarly; Eliza Rose took the same approach as me: \u201cI didn\u2019t figure it out but then I actually never tried. As I was reading it didn\u2019t seem as though I would need it to figure out the plot etc. so\u2026\u201d. Phil adds: \u201cI would have liked an explanation about the new AH system to measure time and why it was brought in.\u201d Thank goodness, then, for Paul Jonas, who explained it to us all: \u201cIt\u2019s in hundreds of thousands of hours and the same time throughout the world,\u201d he writes. \u201c970,000 being 11 years. But it\u2019s going to get unwieldy unless it resets.\u201d<\/p>\n There were a few comments about wanting more science in this science fiction from New Scientist Book Club members. \u201cIt felt to me that the science fiction was secondary, more of a backdrop to the stories of the characters, whether this is a good thing or not is up to individual tastes, I think,\u201d adds Gosia. \u201cWhat I did miss was some more speculation on how the Earth spinning faster and faster would affect the biosphere other than humans. This would have tremendous effects on plants and animals and I think writing about that would have made the book feel more real and less far fetched.\u201d Gosia would also have liked to see Foster explore \u201cstories of some less privileged people and how their lives were affected by the apocalypse (just as climate change is disproportionately affecting the global south)\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cI wanted more about the world speeding up issue and the travel system. So it\u2019s not science fiction enough for me,\u201d writes Paul.<\/p>\n I\u2019m hoping our next read will satisfy those cravings: it\u2019s one of the most acclaimed sci-fi novels of all time: Ursula K. Le Guin\u2019s award-winning anarchist utopia title The Dispossessed, from all the way back in 1974. We haven\u2019t done a classic for a while, and Le Guin has been suggested by a few of you as the next author to tackle, so, here goes! Book club members can enjoy, very excitingly, an essay<\/a> by the late Le Guin\u2019s son, Theo Downes-Le Guin, in which he considers the novel as both a son and a reader (it\u2019s fantastic), as well as a short extract<\/a> from the opening of The Dispossessed. Do join the discussion about this stone-cold classic on our Facebook group, and let us know what you think.<\/p>\n Topics:<\/p>\n\n