Also, the visualization of energy in The Matrix and what Lamia saw in the Datumplane are quite similar. I know there were some posts discussing whether Hyperion inspired The Matrix or vice versa, but hey, this thread is all about sharing your thoughts. Cheers!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX3qLIwHoUo

You: "So, it's a pilgrimage, right? And there's this guy who can manipulate time - "

Friend: "Wait, what? Like a time traveler?"

You: "Kind of… but also not."

Friend: "Okay, so there's a love story?"

You: "Well, also - wait, listen to the Shrike!"

#HyperionProblems 🙄 Help me, please.

So I wanted to start reading around a year ago and went to the book store. I saw the cover with the shrike looking over the sea of grass and thought it was cool. I read it all and didn’t care too much to get the second book. Looking back though after reading a bunch of books since, I’m realizing how good it was. I’ll probably re-read it and then the second one. But does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks!

As a film series, I think it would require at least 4-6 movies to properly tell the story.

As a Netflix-type of series you’re probably looking at 10-12 episodes.

But in this modern world of entertainment , with the movie industry not being the way it on e was, would anyone gamble on such a project?

It just fits for me. I saw the old movie a couple years ago and the character seems to fit for me. Witty and biting, but still caring in some ways.

After completing all 4 books in the series and several reviews, positive and negative, I’ve arrived to the opinion that some of larger issues I have with his work may not be directly his fault.

First, I must define the grievance to which I am referring. In both pairs of the overarching series the first novel (Hyperion, Endymion) is exceptional. Great world building, character development, and plot movement result in a captivating experience which excites the imagination of the reader. However, the second book of each pair (FoH,RoE) struggles to maintain that spark until their third acts. Specifically, I believe that FoH and RoE are inflated and therefore suffer from a degradation of the pace that worked so well in their counterparts.

The reason I say this may not be the fault of Dan Simmons is the possible lack of editing each of the second books received. Why would a publisher do this? Simple, to make more money. Often you may hear writers, directors, etc complain of companies removing sections of their work they deemed necessary to the plot. In this case, there is evidence of the opposite.

The most obvious example of plot inflation occurs in Part 2 of RoE (slight spoilers but not directly plot related). For several chapters, the characters work and interact on the planet Tien Shen. The issue… nothing happens. A few characters are conveniently introduced for call backs to the previous books, but until the primary force of the antagonist arrives late in Part 2, we are given dozens of pages of unnecessary names and useless nods to eastern culture that feel more racist than genuine. Most of part 2 could and should have been removed in editing so that the plot could build more steadily towards the climax. There are examples in FoH that also fall into this criteria but I did not include them due primarily to recency bias.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed Dan Simmons series, but I do believe that the four books could easily have been combined by pairs into longer more self contained novels with better pacing.

*apologies for any typos, wrote this on my phone

While reading Endymion and especially RoE, there were a lot of situations where I just hated Raul's behavior. I always thought he wasn't a good protagonist because he always seems to be passive. He's never the one taking action or making decisions. His only quality is that he's with Aenea. He lets her do everything, he never asks important questions, he doesn't understand things, he never insists on getting explanations from Aenea. Sometimes it made me so angry that I wanted to scream at the book to make him get his shit together.

And then there was this part of the story near the end, where Raul reflects on himself after he has written down the whole story. He comes to the conclusion that he was too passive, that he never asked important questions, that he didn't understand things, that he never insisted on getting explanations from Aenea.

Well, color me surprised, I definitely didn't see that coming. What a great and well thought out story!

I read the books and couple of years ago and thoroughly enjoyed them. When I first read Sol's story it left me feeling really down and depressed so much I had to put the book down and not read it for a while, the heartbreaking story of Rachel forgetting everything and the way she talks to Sol about how it affects her really upset me. I don't have kids myself but it was heart breaking to read of the slow loss and the connections she had to constantly remake.

Anyway, I decided I wanted to read them again but ended up listening to the audio books.

When I tell you that I, a 27 year old man, cried on my drive home from work tonight listening to Sol's story. I was driving home with tears streaming down my face, hoping to not stop in traffic next to someone fearing they'd see me sobbing.

Media doesn't really make me cry, but this story ruins me like nothing else.

Every time I open Endymion, it’s like I’ve signed up for a sci-fi scavenger hunt with zero instructions. It’s like Dan Simmons handed us a treasure map, but the treasure is a riddle wrapped in a philosophical debate. Anyone else want to throw their hands up and just ask where's the furniture? Let's laugh at our collective confusion, shall we?

I thought this part was very interesting. However I had some questions.

I understand the premise of the referred to thought experiment, but what was Simmons’ purpose with it in the plot?

Why would the Pax/Church choose such a punishment?

I understand A. Bettik was The Observer and his role in things, but when Simmons has Raul speak of The Observer in his last moments in the box, I felt as if it would have some larger philosophical parallel to the plot but when A. bettik is revealed as the observer later it didn’t seem to have any connection to the box.

What are your thoughts on this?

Not too sure what to think after reading both books, I’m relatively slow in terms of understanding larger concepts lol so bare with me but there was a lot of topics and things that simply don’t make sense to me and was wondering if someone could help explain. (no spoilers for Endymion) (If a question I have is answered in the other 2 Endymion books please just inform me of that)

1. moneta is described as being Rachel from the future and simultaneously kassads lover? I’m not too sure of what to think of this and also what is the purpose of her showing up in kassads stimsims ? What’s the link?

2. the core has an UI which we don’t meet and also the humans have a UI which again, we don’t meet, and aparently the shrike is an instrument sent back in time by the core. (Why)

So is brawnes baby is the empathy version of the UI but neither Human or Core ? Who is the true UI?

3. why did severn have to die on old earth? Was it to fulfill the timeline of the original Keats?

4. if the core can predict everything and knew the outcome of the war with themselves and the humans, why fight the war in the first place if they know they would be confined to the dark places in the web

• I have a lot more questions that I can’t think of off the top of my head but if there’s anyone willing to give me a rundown of the endings and meanings of all 7 of the pilgrims or can recommend any videos that explain this than it would be much appreciated

I love Hyperion and the following two books, but when it gets to Rise of Endymion, I lost the plot. Too many plot tropes and lazy plot devices. And the whole Raul - child Aenea thing gets really creepy af. But my biggest problem was, and I might be missing something here, how the hell did Raul defeat Nemes? She had so many powers and came close to defeating the Shrike, but can't use those powers to defeat a puny young man.

Jk there’s SOME interesting parts before here lol

Hey pilgrims, let me preface with I've really been enjoying my time with the first Hyperion novel. It's my first read of 2025 and if I can bring myself to finish it, I'll for sure be picking up Fall of Hyperion and maybe the Endymion sequels. But I'm facing a difficult obstacle with Chapter 5: The Detective's Tale - The Long Goodbye that's sorta keeping me from wanting to continue.

See, I actually knew about >!the John Keats clone !<ahead of reading Hyperion and the whole weirdness that ensues from that. I've been dreading actually reaching that point in the story. I'm not too sure why I find the prospect of reading it so off-putting but I think I've narrowed it down to >!Dan Simmons pulling on a real historical figure that he speculates would definitely love his fictional characters, also the unfortunate fact that the reason Brawne Lamia - the sole woman of the pilgrims (discounting Rachel because she's a baby) - is important is because of her womb and the prospect of childbirth.!< Just feels like a chapter I know I'm going to dislike ahead of time and, while I know it's important to the story as a whole, really wishing I could skip it and resume the storyline in the present.

Not really looking for suggestions or solutions, I know I'm gonna have to stick with it even if my assumptions about disliking it are proven right, because I'm enjoying everything else thus far. Just wondering if these elements struck out to anyone else as particularly bothersome.

This is the first book I've read (completed just now) and I saw so many references to southern part of India and it hyped me up.

• Madhya
• Nanda devi
• Parvati
• Banaras
• Goonda

These are all the things I've heard since childhood in my mother tongue. Does Dan Simmons have any history with India? Particularly anything related to south India that you know of??

When Father Duré first arrives at God’s Grove, Sek Hardeen claims that the prophecies state that anyone left on God’s Grove will be destroyed.

The robed and cowled figure at the table was wrapped in darkness. “In eighteen minutes, standard, the world of Heaven’s Gate will fall to the Ousters. Our prophecies say that it will be destroyed. Certainly its farcaster will, and its fatline transmitters, and to all intents and purposes, that world will have ceased to exist. Precisely one standard hour later, the skies of God’s Grove will be alight from the fusion fires of Ouster warships. Our prophecies say that all of the Brotherhood who remain—and anyone else, although all Hegemony citizens have long since been evacuated by farcaster—will perish.”

When the story comes back to these two characters, Sek Hardeen is confident that God’s Grove will not be destroyed.

It was the Templar’s turn to stand and pace, first to the railing, then back to the table. “They will not attack God’s Grove. That is what I have kept you here to see. Then you must report to the Hegemony.”

Did I miss something? What changed from one moment to the next? The Templar was claiming that he acted out of belief of the prophecies, but then kept Duré on God’s Grove so that people would know why God’s Grove wasn’t attacked. Am I just reading it wrong? Please help.

Has it ever occurred to you that Aenea is a palindrome? Coincidence? I think not. Dan Simmons is a genius.

I’ve read the whole series twice, but I can’t put my finger on any specific retcon. Does anyone have anything specific they could point to?

Love these books and feel like ai art is the most ironic/perfect way to visualize the shrike

I want to read all of them eventually, but is the first one able to be read as a solo/standalone like Dune?

Edit/update: thank you for the feedback everyone!