Review: Philip Terenson – Progenitor (Cold Blood Rising book 1)

Progenitor: Forget what you think you know. There is only one conspiracy. (Cold Blood Rising Book 1)Progenitor by Philip Terenson
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Progenitor would qualify primarily as science fiction, but reads equally well – if not better – as a thriller. It’s fast-paced, intrigue-ridden, save-the-world writing, pressing all the right buttons to get the reading turning forward one more chapter when he really ought to be getting some sleep. Damn it.

The saving of the world falls upon the shoulders of one man, Cameron. Unfortunate name, but let’s not criticise him for that. Cameron is a journalist who, covering a war in Africa, gets himself blown up and into a coma that lasts six years. When he awakens it is, amongst other things, to the discovery that he’s lived his life telepathically bonded to an intelligent lizard, a throwback from Earth’s history which, along with its brethren, managed to survive the asteroid strike that wiped out the dumber dinosaurs by escaping underground.

As premises go this is far-fetched in the extreme, and Terenson knows it. He handles it as such, undercutting it in the characters’ responses to the revelation, even mocking it through their reactions. Through their acknowledgement of it as a ridiculous premise, Terenson succeeds in making it believable enough for understandable concerns to be suspended in the reader, a dextrous move on the part of the author.

As if evolution-tinkering lizards riding around as passengers in people’s heads wasn’t enough, Cameron also finds himself up against a breakaway group of lizards his unwanted hitch-hiker opposes; a cabal of industrialists who have already taken over the world – and have been in control of it for some time – and the mysterious Lazarus with his companions Mike and Gabby, a well-beyond human trio who could solve Cameron’s problems at a stroke were it not for the fact they have a non-interference policy. In trying to solve the world’s problems, Cameron has as his companions Meg, an ecologically-inclined lawyer; and Yuri, an erstwhile member of Russia’s special services. Oh yes, and briefly at least, the Pope in a night shirt. Don’t ask.

Bar Lazarus as an effectively neutral observer – on Cameron’s side, but only able to offer logistical support – all the other forces are ranged against Cameron in his desire to save the world as much as they are ranged against one another, making for an interesting dynamic. Any cavalry that rides over the hill is pretty-much certain not to have the best interests of the human race at heart, and so Cameron finds himself a desirable pawn in opposition to nearly everyone he encounters, his only protection being his value given the telepathic link with his lizard. He is not a too-unlikely hero given his experiences in war zones as a journalist, but he’s way out of his depth throughout nonetheless.

Everything is nicely balanced for manoeuvres to come when, suddenly – blast it – the book ends, this being the first part of a trilogy, the second and third volumes yet to be published at the time of writing this review. Don’t you hate that? I hate that.

Overall belief is readily suspended, but there are a few challenges along the way. An occasional passage from Cameron’s lizard’s point of view feel like mistakes. We really ought not to be let into the head of something so alien, it becomes way too homely. Meanwhile Lazarus, Gabby, and Mike – for all their superhumanity – have a line in student humour and a tendency to bicker which doesn’t feel quite right. These aren’t serious distractions, but they do present the odd unnecessary challenge. Progenitor is also a work which may have benefited from a tad more scrupulous editing here and there, though that comes down to one or two repetitive errors rather than being a major flaw throughout.

That the most frustrating aspect of the work, though, is its leaving this reader high-and-dry for want of the sequel volumes is the most telling issue. Progenitor is a work worth reading well beyond its end.

America’s Extreme Right: a Marxist Conspiracy?

The new discussion I encountered today was whether the minimum wage should be abolished and, sure enough, out the Usual Suspects trotted with their analyses to prove how much better everything would be if only such a change were to be implemented.

What gets me about all this is the way these propositions are treated as if they’re blue-skies thinking, a venture into Terra Incognita, as if the world has always had minimum wage legislation and no one has ever considered what may happen were we to get rid of it. It’s always what would the world be like if, (better, apparently), instead of looking at history books to discover what was the world like when, (clearly worse).

Just as these (predominantly American, though the nonsense is catching on with the far economic right elsewhere) pundits appear unable to look back, so too they seem unable to look from side to side. All the terrible things that could happen if the USA were to tighten its gun laws are theorised as if discussing the possibility of life on Mars when, in reality, America stands alone when compared with other nations at a similar level of development for being so lax and has a dramatically higher murder rate. Likewise healthcare reforms. “Heyre be Dragyns”, apparently, up to and including one person who informed me the idea was socialist, socialism leads to tens of millions dying of starvation, ergo if Obama has his way then tens of millions will die of starvation. All I could say as a Brit was I never noticed, but perhaps I had other things on my mind at the time.

Discuss it for long enough, and up pops a new argument. ‘America is different’. Apparently, this difference works such that Americans have to keep shooting each other and sick people must live in a state of considerable financial anxiety from now until hell freezes over because America is special.

So much for ‘The American Way’. If that were ‘The British Way’, I’d find another nationality. (Indeed, with Cameron at the helm, I may end up doing just that).

We can assume, I suppose, that these people put forward their arguments in the hope of winning them. What makes these arguments so unspeakably dumb is their proponents would be better off losing them. Were they to convince people that banks should not be regulated, the welfare state should be dismantled, the minimum wage should be abolished and all the rest of it because that’s the only way capitalism can function, then the vast majority would suffer under that system and would be better off looking to overthrow it altogether. They will have ‘proved’ Marx right. As for gun laws and healthcare, all it proves – if they’re right – is America is indeed a special case. And it sucks.

Given – one assumes – that it would be better for them if they lost the argument, why can’t they just learn to shut the fuck up? Is it all some elaborate Marxist conspiracy?

Update: This post, originally written on September 28, 2014, pre-dated the Sanders campaign for the Presidential nominee of the Democratic party in which, (at first, anyway), he was selling himself as a ‘socialist’.

Point proven. Plaudits, please.