Mike Flynn offers a fun look…

at one of his own novels: the sadly neglected The Wreck of the River of Stars. It’s a beautiful, heart-breaking piece of work that you should really read.

Flynn also, of course, utters heretical blasphemous blasphemy of heresy concerning climate fideism, which is also fun.

"St. S is right, you know. The most serious testimony of Trump being a sex ..."

The Base of the Party of ..."
"What an obnoxious, childish article. The author resorts to name calling, projection, and virtue signaling ..."

Christianist Roy Moore Conspiracy Theorists
"The razor cuts away from the person in power who can’t actually deny the claims, ..."

The Base of the Party of ..."
"Wrongo, Bucko. The testimony has not been established as “credible”. You’re accepting rumor as fact ..."

The Base of the Party of ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Noah Doyle

    I can’t recommend Flynn’s books enough. Wreck is a good start, as is Eifelheim. My favorite is probably the Spiral Arm series, but you have to read them in order.

    A tidbit in Wreck intrigued me: one of the crew is identified as a ‘Trilobite’, a derogatory term for the settings Trilibarians (I’m probably misspelling that), a group that had rationalized Old Testament, New Testament and Koran, in a ‘Father, Son and Spirit’ reflection of the Trinity.

  • Sean P. Dailey

    What Noah said. Michael Flynn’s books are some of the best fiction out there today. The Spiral Arm series is grand adventure in the best traditon of space opera. Eifelheim is sublime meditation on Christian charity and sanctifying grace. And The Wreck of the River of Stars, besides having the Best. Title. Ever., is a majestic, dark, heartbreaking Greek tragedy of a novel. If you aren’t reading Michael Flynn then your literary diet is severely impoverished.

  • S. Murphy

    Should be required for all military officers – staff coordination gone horribly wrong…

  • Clare Krishan

    a little off topic, but re: hermeneutic of science fiction, would I be being ‘uncharitable’ if I noted my discomfort at this recent contribution of a Patheos colleague of yours
    Is this a sin of omission? The author stakes out no rhetorical stance for or against a presumed ‘beatitude’ to be experienced by his reader-viewers sharing in the encounter with these eikon-images (other than mirth, but at whose expense)?