Sam

Well written. A rather unique and sprawling narrative stucture. Enjoyed the Canadian elements. Felt it tried to do too much, but thought the repeated motifs and playing with the idea of the ghost story was quite innovative.

This series of 2000s essays deals with the violence of Israel and Palestine conflict and the US's “war on terror.”
The overall focus is on the rhetorical and discursive strategies used by the state and war hawks to cut down dissent and critical discussion in the public sphere.
Generally, I agree with the arguments but found the PoMo language didn't add a ton. Some of those elements will be of interest to academics only.
Sad that the same processes identified here continue.

Arrival is one of my favorite movies. For some reason, I'd put off reading The Story of Your Life, the short story it's based on. I ended up reading Ted's Exhalation collection first. That's also amazing and introduced me to the titular story, which is one of the best secular statements of the meaning of life I've ever encountered. Please go read it if you have not.

This collection overall is quite good, but The Story of Your Life stands out to me. There is something magical and moving about the way that Ted combines the emotional content of a mother-child relationship with the scientific concepts from physics, language, time, and cognition. Overall, I've found Ted's work a bit light on the character development side of things, and at times it does veer into the academic-y, science-y, thought experiment side of sci-fi. Not that there is anything wrong with that; I quite enjoy it. But I think to really hit home for me, to stand out, sci-fi has to connect the scientific and technological concepts it incorporates to human, emotional stories.

And The Story of Your Life does that for me. It makes me think about the way I tell my own story and the way human life and self-understanding are shaped by our language. It tackles the age-old problem of free will without offering a real solution, but a path forward that verges on the spiritual or religious: how do we proceed with grace into a future we may not understand? And it tackles one of my favorite topics, a first-contact alien encounter story that takes the idea of being alien seriously. While astrobiology suggests there might be aspects of other intelligent life that we recognize, I appreciate when sci-fi storytellers don't introduce us to yet another human with an alien mask on. The heptapods are truly different from us, and I dare anyone to encounter them without feeling like they've changed at least a little bit.

Thanks, Ted.

The rest of the collection is good! Some interesting stories here. I love the ones that take the vengeful God and weird science of the Old Testament and try to imagine a world in which those things were real. Throughout the character work is pretty light, and the focus is on the concepts. But Ted does a good job of drawing the reader in with an emotional hook of some sort in most of the stories. Definitely worth a read!

I didn't enjoy this book. What's most frustrating is that I believe there's potential for a good story buried within it. While there were moments where the plot felt pointless and rushed, I appreciate that the author managed to link the characters and the world, making them somewhat engaging.

Spoiler-y review follows.

Allow me to discuss the positive aspects first. I found the world-building intriguing, with its complex cultures and maritime settings. The post-apocalyptic setting and the impact of the Hierarchs' War on the world and its various cultures were well depicted. The magic system was interesting, offering a twist on traditional mythology with witches and demons. The Seredi's alliance with the Under-Earth demons added depth to the narrative. While a bit confusing, the dual timeline structure allowed for an exploration of the Hierarchs' War consequences.However, there are many aspects I found problematic. The story's complexity left me bewildered, despite my experience with sci-fi and fantasy. The abundance of characters, cultures, and locations, combined with their insufficient development, made it hard to connect the dots. Though I listened to the audiobook, I suspect the issue lies more with the book than the format. I haven't had this issue with other audiobooks. I believe that effective storytelling ties world-building to character arcs, something that was lacking in "The Witch King."The characters didn't develop significantly, and I struggled to invest in them emotionally. Kai's overwhelming power and apparent infallibility made it hard for me to connect with him. While there were intriguing moments, such as his possession of the Expositor's body, it wasn't enough to establish a strong emotional bond. The dual timeline, while potentially interesting, fell short due to the lack of character development.I found the antagonist aspect perplexing. The Hierarchs lacked depth and motivation, making it challenging to care about their conflict with the protagonists. Similarly, secondary antagonists like Nepha/Arenstrath and the political conspiracy were underdeveloped and lacked impact.The driving forces of the plot were unclear and lacked emotional investment. The Hierarchs weren't convincingly established as a significant threat, and the objective to find Taryn and Dahinn felt underwhelming. The ending, with the "grand reveal" that Kai knew everything ahead of time, felt arbitrary and unfair. I do not like an ending that the reader could not have seen coming.

Overall, “The Witch King” left me wanting more character development and a clearer antagonist with explained motivation. While the world-building had potential, it didn't compensate for the book's other shortcomings.

I'm considering whether I should read “Murderbot” based on others' recommendations, although my uncertainty about Martha Wells' storytelling style gives me pause.

After bouncing off Iain Bank's Culture series, I figured I'd give another space opera a shot. Ultimately I found Revelation Space fine - it was interesting enough to keep reading, but I certainly didn't love it.

I think the worldbuilding is solid, the writing is good, and the plot was OK. I particularly enjoyed the way Reynolds handles transhumanism, implants, viruses, etc. The cybernetic ecosystem of the Nostalgia for Infinity was particularly cool. The whole Dawn War business was a serviceable take on the Fermi Paradox and ancient aliens trope, but in my view isn't that original compared to something like the mindblowing elements of Remembrance of Earth's Past..

Overall this felt a bit bloated and the characterization and character development were definitely subpar. I was especially frustrated trying to understand some of the characters' motivations. In particular, I was pretty confused about why the crew of the Nostalgia for Infinity would go so far to try to save their captain or why Kouri would work so hard to be reunited with a spouse she had grown so far apart from. That lack of motivation was the biggest barrier to me really enjoying this novel. The characters really didn't have much of an arc either; at times they all felt a bit like pawns that were convenient excuses for Reynolds to connect them to the larger plot and worldbuilding points. I suppose he did a good job setting them at odds and explaining why, but in terms of development or change, very little.

I'm on the fence about reading the next one.

Easily one of the most moving, rigorous, and insightful histories I've ever read.

This passage among many stood out. James quotes Toussaint's eloquent writing at length and says:

Pericles on Democracy, Paine on the Rights of Man, the Declaration of Independence, the Communist Manifesto, these are some of the political documents which, whatever the wisdom or weaknesses of their analysis, have moved men and will always move them, for the writers, some of them in spite of themselves, strike chords and in every age. But Pericles, Tom Paine, Jefferson, Marx and Engels, were men of a liberal education, formed in the traditions of ethics, philosophy and history. Toussaint was a slave, not six years out of slavery, bearing alone the unaccustomed burden of war and government, dictating his thoughts in the crude words of a broken dialect, written and rewritten by his secretaries until their devotion and his will had hammered them into adequate shape. Superficial people have read his career in terms of personal ambition. This letter is their answer. Personal ambition he had. But he accomplished what he did because, superbly gifted, he incarnated the determination of his people never, never to be slaves again.

Soldier and administrator above all, yet his declaration is a masterpiece of prose excelled by no other writer of the revolution. Leader of a backward and ignorant mass, he was yet in the forefront of the great historical movement of his time. The blacks were taking their part in the destruction of European feudalism begun by the French Revolution, and liberty and equality, the slogans of the revolution, meant far more to them than to any French man. That was why in the hour of danger Toussaint, uninstructed as he was, could find the language and accent of Diderot, Rousseau, and Raynal, of Mirabeau, Robespierre, and Danton. And in one respect he excelled them all. For even these masters of the spoken and written word, owing to the class complications of their society, too often had to pause, to hesitate, to qualify. Toussaint could defend the freedom of the blacks without reservation, and this gave to his declaration a strength and a single-mindedness the great documents of the time. The French bourgeoisie could not understand it. Rivers of blood were to flow before they understood that elevated as was his tone Toussaint had written neither bombast nor rhetoric but the simple and sober truth. (197-198).

Did not love this. The first half feels completely unnecessary, but it starts to get more interesting later on. The first few sections actually read a bit like old pulp sci fi to me: several pretty unconnected adventure romps with stale or uninteresting premises and a lack of character building.

The world is interesting enough that in curious about the rest of the series, but the world building is tell-y and the characterization is not great. I only really started to care about the characters very late in the book, and even then not a whole lot. Meh. Might read the next one... I've heard it's good. But I heard that about this one too!

I enjoyed reading this and found it particularly captivating for an academic text. My thoughts:

It is an impressive research project.
It offers an interesting experimental method for both conducting and presenting ethnographic research. It was well-written and engaging.
It makes some interesting general points about survival under ecological disaster driven by capitalism, with some great quotations from the first quarter of the book.
However, ultimately, I still have issues with the political possibilities of actor network theory and posthumanism. I have similar disappointments and reservations about the organizing capabilities of these ideas. I appreciate the goals of the project in fighting anthropocentrism, but I still think successful political projects organize humans along the lines of their material interests first and foremost. The use of thick description makes this book and other ANT projects eye-opening to new relationships, but it also leaves me hanging. What do we do with this new knowledge? How do we use it to improve the livelihoods of humans and nonhumans?
I also have not given up on the idea of systematizing knowledge in what Tsing calls “scalable” systems. Certainly there are limits there, but without these systems we would not have, eg, COVID-19 vaccines. I am disturbed by her seeming discounting of this way of conducting science. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that she hopes looking at “indeterminate” biological relationships will push science in productive new directions.

Some notable quotations:
“the uncontrolled lives of mushrooms are a gift - and a guide - when the controlled world we thought we had” (2).
This one really struck me, as myself and several friends have been learning to forage mushrooms as a pandemic activity (we are not alone).

“But what is survival? In popular American fantasies, survival is all about saving oneself by fighting off others. The “survival” featured in U.S. television shows or alien-planet stories is a synonym for conquest and expansion. I will not use the term that way. Please open yourself to another usage. This book argues that staying alive-for every species requires livable collaborations. Collaboration means working across difference, which leads to contamination. Without collaborations, we all die” (27-28).

“It is unselfconscious privilege that allows us to fantasize - counterfactually - that we each survive alone” (29).

“Transformation through collaboration, ugly and otherwise, is the human condition” (31).

“The thrill of private ownership is the fruit of an underground common.”

A good overview of the social issues of tech companies and their owners. However, as someone already a bit familiar with a lot of these issues, I didn't feel like I learned a whole lot. I also felt that this kind of critique falls a bit flat if the most you really say is, “Monopolies are bad,” and don't get more into the structural forces in modern capitalism that reward firms for pursuing monopoly, as well as the political challenges to regulation under American (neo) liberalism. There's a rich literature on this topic from Marxist scholars and others, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_Capital.

I thought the critiques of tech CEOs felt a bit petty. They certainly deserve to be brought down a peg given the widespread praise they often get, but I'm not convinced dunking on them really accomplishes that much in a critique of the industry. Entrepreneurial, conniving, psychopathic and self-aggrandizing business owners exist in all industries, even if their wealth is not as extreme as the tech barons.

I also wanted more detail on the idea from the last chapter of “internet socialism,” which had some interesting points, but felt thin and wishful from my perspective.

I'd recommend this to folks looking to get a high-level overview of what's wrong with tech companies today, but to anyone relatively familiar with the issue already, I'd suggest a pass.

I welcome recommendations in the comments for texts that are more weighty on either the critique or the alternatives.

I feel pretty conflicted about this one. There are positives for sure. I think it shows how absolutely awful toxic masculinity is for both men and women (but much, much worse for women, duh) and how dumb honor culture is. And it definitely captures the awkwardness and weirdness of growing up and being in close friendships. It brought the time and place alive in an evocative way. I felt like I learned about the challenges of growing up as a woman, and I tried to be empethetic in my reading for that reason.

But I found it pretty boring, even when obviously dramatic and intense stuff was happening! I just never became attached to the characters... It felt to me less like a novel and more like a diary or listening to someone tell you a story. A lot of it felt like a series of unconnected events, much like life itself. I understand from my friends who have read the whole series that this book sets the stage for the rest of the books, exploring how this upbringing effects the characters later in life.

But given my feelings about this one, I'm not sure if I'll continue with the series. I certainly won't do so immediately.

As usual, Graeber delivers some super interesting ideas, facts, and figures. But he tends to argue via a kind of odd counterfactual: because the way economies worked in the past is different today, today is bad and wrong. Which, I mean, he's not incorrect. But I don't think he really ever has much of a positive argument. Or a direct one, really. As many reviewers have pointed out, his goal here is to undermine capitalism and how debt functions today, but he's not super explicit about that. And the points he raises don't really directly address that issue.

Consider that his arguments often show diversity and richness in human social life where capitalism restricts it. Understandings of debt, money, honor, etc. But if there was diversity in the past, is this not just more diversity? It is perhaps more widespread, but at times so were other ideas. So I don't think that line of argumentation is really effective. It's much more effective to take a Marxist approach and show how labor exploitation and capital force our economy into making people miserable while a small elite grows ultra-rich, and the environment is destroyed. There are explanations for why things function this way beyond greed. They are structural ones, not cultural.

From this book I took a few things:
- a good takedown of the Myth of Barter
- an understanding of why Western Christians feel icky about money and debt
- an understanding that both debt and debt crises and massive debt relief are historically all very common. But today we don't really have the last part, not for your average person anyway, just corporations and banks.

A lot of this rehashes arguments started in Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value for a popular audience.

I want SOME SIGNPOSTS! Please. The lack of those frustrated me.

Geologic in scope. Love the emphasis on how colonization of Mars would create a new society and also be inextricably linked to Earth's. Loved the fact that science was not presented as being outside from ideology. Did not love the hard sci-fi elements. Way too much geology and technology description for my taste. Still curious what happens in the later books, but not enough to keep reading the series right now.

Most of the individual essays are great, but I didn't think they worked together as a collection very well. Like some other reviewers, I found the style a bit frustrating in places. If you are protective of your time, you can read Chapter 4 (Slavery, Race, and Ideology in the United States of America) and skip the rest. That essay is really good.

I picked this up after seeing it inspired the flavorful Mothership module Gradient Descent (https://www.mothershiprpg.com/gradient-descent). I'll review the whole series here.

I enjoyed this series. My interest waned as I read it all, but I'd still recommend it for cyberpunk fans. I find the world and characters fascinating. The many panels of figures navigating a colossal (infinite?) decrepit industrial landscape are amazing. As others have pointed out, I think this series is more style than substance. There are some tantalizing hints about what is happening here: resurrection, AI apocalypse, cyberspace and meatspace, self-replicating machines, silicon life, etc. But there's not much plot to grab onto, and I sometimes had trouble following what was happening. The pacing of navigating a new landscape, finding a weird creature, and shooting it, got tiring after repeating over and over again.