Scan barcode
kdahlo's review
5.0
Delightful. Much lighter than Anathem but in that same narrow category of Plato fan-fic - I wonder how many books fit in that category?
This book nicely divides its time between sort of fluffy fun questions about building paradise, and more serious questions about the biases and problems that we bring along with us. I'll confess that I just loved it, I've dabbled enough in classics that the references were quite thrilling and I had several 'oh damn!' moments of recognition/foreshadowing that delighted me. It was also great to read something packed full of these ideas that also dealt frankly with sexism and sexuality through women's perspectives. I really like Stephenson but I feel like it can be sort of an exhausting suspension of disbelief to wade through the ideas of an author who just doesn't really think about sexism. I feel like whenever you transport yourself in time as someone who is not a cis male, you inevitably have to think about how people are going to treat you, and it's natural and relieving to have the author just take it on directly rather than glossing over it, or awkwardly spiking it in for narrative purposes.
That said, despite this book having two female POV characters, I sort of felt like they had very similar vantage points on certain things. I thought that the characters were realistically drawn, but not terribly distinct. This is especially remarkable because I think the book describes a great many women with different actions and viewpoints, but the women we are closest to are a little samey, especially on topics around ethics and sexuality. I'm giving that a pass for now because I did like these characters and I really enjoyed spending time with them, I guess it's just something I'll be on the lookout for when I read more of Jo Walton's books. I'm excited for the next one!
This book nicely divides its time between sort of fluffy fun questions about building paradise, and more serious questions about the biases and problems that we bring along with us. I'll confess that I just loved it, I've dabbled enough in classics that the references were quite thrilling and I had several 'oh damn!' moments of recognition/foreshadowing that delighted me. It was also great to read something packed full of these ideas that also dealt frankly with sexism and sexuality through women's perspectives. I really like Stephenson but I feel like it can be sort of an exhausting suspension of disbelief to wade through the ideas of an author who just doesn't really think about sexism. I feel like whenever you transport yourself in time as someone who is not a cis male, you inevitably have to think about how people are going to treat you, and it's natural and relieving to have the author just take it on directly rather than glossing over it, or awkwardly spiking it in for narrative purposes.
That said, despite this book having two female POV characters, I sort of felt like they had very similar vantage points on certain things. I thought that the characters were realistically drawn, but not terribly distinct. This is especially remarkable because I think the book describes a great many women with different actions and viewpoints, but the women we are closest to are a little samey, especially on topics around ethics and sexuality. I'm giving that a pass for now because I did like these characters and I really enjoyed spending time with them, I guess it's just something I'll be on the lookout for when I read more of Jo Walton's books. I'm excited for the next one!
gus_reads's review against another edition
5.0
Realmente es un 4.5, pero es que se ha convertido en uno de mis libros favoritos aunque no sea el mejor libro del mundo. Tengo que reflexionar la reseña pero me ha fascinado la originalidad de Jo Walton, y su estilo sencillo que alterna con diálogos filosóficos. Cómo es capaz, por otro lado, de definir con dos frases un carácter tan creíble, distintivo y coherente para cada uno de los personajes.
pkiwi's review
4.0
A book that broaches timeless and contemporary themes (of justice, trust, and of consent, female emancipation and personhood (of non-human entities) to name a few) by having characters from various ages and backgrounds live and debate them within an experimental setting of Plato's Republic. It's a novel that is most interesting for the topics it makes you consider and less so for its characters and story. It shines at the quirky anachronistic moments, such as Socrates engaging in dialogue with mute gardening robots, but is a bit sloggish in parts of overlong dialogues. Well worth a read though and I'm looking forward to the following two books.
aftaerglows's review
4.0
jo walton went nuts in this one. the idea is absolutely insane: people from all over time who have prayed to athena are brought in one place to try and create the just city following plato's republic. we follow apollo and one of the children that's growing up in the just city. it's a lot about philosophy, as you would expect; it's more of a thought experiment, you can tell jo walton had fun with it, trying to imagine what would happen. it's not character nor plot driven, it's thought driven lol, and there are a lot of dialogues but it worked well for me and i'm interested to see where the author's going with this as it's the first in a trilogy. it has a lot of potential for sure.
gilroi's review
informative
mysterious
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
caoimhie's review
1.0
This book was a major disappointment. While I think it can be interesting knowing more than the characters ,if done well, in this case when met with the question of whether or not the just city would work, anyone with sense I think knew the answer was 'no', and the writer didn't have the skill to pull off making this feel like a tragic inevitability.
The concept of taking figures from different time periods and with different worldvies and trapping them in a city where they have to philosophise non-stop could be really something spectacular, but instead the only friction and exploration of how these different people would interact is the occasional reminder that Cicero is a misogynist.
The writing itself was at times painful to get through, and the multiple pov chapter's felt pointless because each voice sounded the same, which is something given one of the pov's is a literal god.
The pacing of the story felt messy and uneven, and at one point, 200 pages in, we get a chapter where the god apollo explains some incredibly basic platonic concepts to himself, despite knowing them already and I had to put the book down.
The only compelling characters were Kebes and Sokrates, but Kebes in particular is treated as little more than a nuisance by most of the characters.
I'm not going to get into the treatment of sexual assault and eugenics in the book but needless to say its bad.
(also treating Plato like a feminist (?) without there being any serious discussion of his views on gender and also the statement that Constantinople was only good for preserving the classical world are some of the worst takes I've seen ever)
The concept of taking figures from different time periods and with different worldvies and trapping them in a city where they have to philosophise non-stop could be really something spectacular, but instead the only friction and exploration of how these different people would interact is the occasional reminder that Cicero is a misogynist.
The writing itself was at times painful to get through, and the multiple pov chapter's felt pointless because each voice sounded the same, which is something given one of the pov's is a literal god.
The pacing of the story felt messy and uneven, and at one point, 200 pages in, we get a chapter where the god apollo explains some incredibly basic platonic concepts to himself, despite knowing them already and I had to put the book down.
The only compelling characters were Kebes and Sokrates, but Kebes in particular is treated as little more than a nuisance by most of the characters.
I'm not going to get into the treatment of sexual assault and eugenics in the book but needless to say its bad.
(also treating Plato like a feminist (?) without there being any serious discussion of his views on gender and also the statement that Constantinople was only good for preserving the classical world are some of the worst takes I've seen ever)
yuck1209's review
challenging
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
I’ve read Walton’s Lent before so this feels somewhat similar thematically and even has earlier iterations of the same historical figures she’s played with (e.g., Ficino, Mirandola, Pico). While it definitely made me think, I’m still not entirely sure what I was supposed to get out of it.
Obviously for the reader there are clear and early signs that the Just City experiment is less than perfect from the get-go (e.g., the selection of the masters, the rationalization of buying child slaves). This only reinforced by events throughout the novel, such asKebes’ unflagging resistance to the masters and refusal to ignore that he was brought to the City against his will; Maia’s rape at the hands of Ikaros despite clear and repeatedly refusal; the “children’s” furtive defiance against rules around marriage and sex; and of course the reveal that the workers are, in fact, sentient beings capable of volition and reason .
It’s also very obvious that the City is subject to the prejudices and very harmful beliefs of its older masters, particularly as it relates to gender and slavery. The interesting sticking point with the masters is the reverence with which they treat famous philosophers and thinkers, despite their insistence on forgetting their original lives and times (or was that just for the children? There are a lot of double standards between masters and children). All of this goes to show what a precarious setup the Just City truly is, particularly as the children age and become much more capable of questioning the way things are.
In that sense, Sokrates’ examination of trust cut to the heart of the premise. So much of society functions only because we have trust in the citizens around us, the rules we choose to follow, the authorities that enforce said rules, and so on. When Sokrates finally gets the opportunity to debate Athene on the topic, it ends almost abruptlywith her spitefully transforming him into a gadfly . Well-reasoned.
Obviously for the reader there are clear and early signs that the Just City experiment is less than perfect from the get-go (e.g., the selection of the masters, the rationalization of buying child slaves). This only reinforced by events throughout the novel, such as
It’s also very obvious that the City is subject to the prejudices and very harmful beliefs of its older masters, particularly as it relates to gender and slavery. The interesting sticking point with the masters is the reverence with which they treat famous philosophers and thinkers, despite their insistence on forgetting their original lives and times (or was that just for the children? There are a lot of double standards between masters and children). All of this goes to show what a precarious setup the Just City truly is, particularly as the children age and become much more capable of questioning the way things are.
In that sense, Sokrates’ examination of trust cut to the heart of the premise. So much of society functions only because we have trust in the citizens around us, the rules we choose to follow, the authorities that enforce said rules, and so on. When Sokrates finally gets the opportunity to debate Athene on the topic, it ends almost abruptly
lsparrow's review
4.0
The concept of this book combines fantasy, sci fi, philosophy with greek mythology and politics. Greek mythology is not always my favorite but I found myself pulled into the story. The questions about freedom, power, identity and government are ones that we continue to grapple with. I found the ending the weakest part of the book for me. But perhaps it being part of a series explains it.
taylormsinclair's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0