OnlineBookClub.org

In the story we learn about two different groups; the Naturals and the Syndos. The syndos are portrayed as the antagonists in the book because they are trying to destroy the naturals.

Are the Syndos really the antagonists or are the Naturals since they are the ones who created them in order to perfect humanity? After reading the book, who do you think is to blame for all the conflict?

What's the saying? There's two sides to every story? Is any one person ever really to blame fully? Or is it almost always a combination of the two?

I don't believe you can fully blame either group as a sole antagonist. Both groups absolutely wronged the other, to the point you have to ask: was either justified in their actions?

It would have been nice to have seen a bit more of the book focused on this aspect. It is really to hard to tell, with the information given.

I was very interested in this theme of the book and I thought the author should have concentrated more on it. He should have given more information as to what happened. I think the Natural humans should have been more careful when they made the Syndos because it sounded like they made a mistake in programming their morality. The mission to go back in time was to fix such mistake. I wish he develops this theme of artificial intelligence more in the next books because it is a contemporary subject that is really worrisome.

I would have liked it if the author took more time with this particular aspect. As it stands, I don't know enough to have a real opinion. The book would have been stronger if there were more focus on the Naturals and the Syndos, in my opinion.

There was so little said about both groups to come up with an informed opinion. The story tried so hard to reach all audiences to the point that it became ineffective.

The author didn't really give enough detail on either group for me to form an opinion. It's hard to say who is to blame for all of the conflict.

I agree with most of you - there just wasn't enough information. It would have been really good to learn more about the history between the naturals and syndos.

Que Lopez wrote:The author didn't really give enough detail on either group for me to form an opinion. It's hard to say who is to blame for all of the conflict.

Yes. More info in the sequel and then we can form an opinion.

I think the Naturals are more to blame for the conflict because they created the Syndos. Without the Syndos, there wouldn't have been any problem to resolve. Also, it is their fault for creating the Syndos with the flaw. The conflict would disappear if the original creator would have realised this mistake in the Syndos genes and fixed it.

Amie Gene wrote:I think the Naturals are more to blame for the conflict because they created the Syndos. Without the Syndos, there wouldn't have been any problem to resolve. Also, it is their fault for creating the Syndos with the flaw. The conflict would disappear if the original creator would have realised this mistake in the Syndos genes and fixed it.

Good point of view. The root problem lies here.

I think the grandfather of Jennifer who started and created this mission is to blame.

kandscreeley wrote:What's the saying? There's two sides to every story? Is any one person ever really to blame fully? Or is it almost always a combination of the two?

Two hands are required to clap. You are right. It's two sides always.

I don't think that in this book we can blame one persone or one group. It is hard. Leaving aside the lack of information, it is all about how human beings are created. Deep down no one is only good or only evil. It is within us the readers to accept all characters as they are and to see the good that is in the bad and the bad that is in the good. So for me, it does not exist a full antagonist.