You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.03 AVERAGE
4.03 AVERAGE
So there might be some problematic parts of this book, but...
I really enjoyed it, found a lot of philosophy about raising children very interesting and it made me cry.
I really enjoyed it, found a lot of philosophy about raising children very interesting and it made me cry.
Este libro fue publicado en 1996, y me ha encantado, porque sin proponérselo y sin proponérmelo, me ha conducido a un ejercicio de memoria. No sé cómo sería el estilo de vida en Europa, Norteamérica o Asia para la segunda mitad de la década de los 90s o la víspera del nuevo milenio, pero para mí, en Colombia muchas cosas eran ciencia ficción. ¿un computador en la casa? Impensable ¿Windows 95? ¿Qué es eso? ¿D.O.S? ¡¡¡aburrido!!! Los artilugios tecnológicos no acompañaron estos años de mi vida y esta falta de dependencia me ayudó a desarrollar otros aspectos de mí, quizás a valorar cuestiones “simples”, como el esfuerzo, la paciencia, los amigos, la familia, el aprender de otra manera y aun hoy conservar los diccionarios.
Y creo que en esto radica una gran parte de mi fascinación por esta historia, comparar el presente y encontrarme con un autor visionario en una historia que fue contada 20 años antes y hoy no pierde vigencia.
Pero creo que el autor no quiere solo perderse en la parafernalia tecnológica, y la introducción de elementos filosóficos y socioculturales completa la obra, le da profundidad al escenario y los personajes y en conjunto terminamos no como invitados en este mundo futurista, sino que nos convertimos en ciudadanos de este.
No puedo hablar de la carga filosófica, porque soy ignorante de la materia; sin embargo, estoy un poco más familiarizada con lo sociocultural. Si nos ubicamos desde la tecnología, esta se vuelve el paradigma del progreso y estaríamos frente a una verdad de Perogrullo, pero si pensamos en el paradigma social ¿A dónde nos lleva esto? En la modernidad, al Estado – Nación que hoy sigue vigente, en el futuro, el autor destruye este paradigma, no para diseñar algo mejor que el Estado – Nación, sino para volver al sistema de organización en clanes ¿retroceso? Solo si se piensa en términos de “evolución” social o culturas “superiores o mejores” que otras. Al destruir el concepto de Estado – Nación, también hay que re evaluar el concepto de territorio y frontera, por lo que el componente de la noción de clan encaja con este nuevo (¿?) modelo de organización y aunque hay muchos clanes, con diferentes características, estos comparten un espacio y aparentemente lo hacen en paz, pero hay una guerra fría entre ellos, el poder de los clanes, su poder económico pero no político, se concentra en la tecnología, en la adquisición de la misma, lo que marca una diferencia en la calidad de vida. Así mismo, la tecnología viene acompañada de innovación y educación. La educación se vuelve uno de los ejes centrales de la historia, porque la educación va a moldear el carácter y a ampliar los horizontes en este mundo.
Estoy segura que hay muchísimo más que extraer de esta lectura, y por eso estoy segura que volveré a leer La era del diamante.
Y creo que en esto radica una gran parte de mi fascinación por esta historia, comparar el presente y encontrarme con un autor visionario en una historia que fue contada 20 años antes y hoy no pierde vigencia.
Pero creo que el autor no quiere solo perderse en la parafernalia tecnológica, y la introducción de elementos filosóficos y socioculturales completa la obra, le da profundidad al escenario y los personajes y en conjunto terminamos no como invitados en este mundo futurista, sino que nos convertimos en ciudadanos de este.
No puedo hablar de la carga filosófica, porque soy ignorante de la materia; sin embargo, estoy un poco más familiarizada con lo sociocultural. Si nos ubicamos desde la tecnología, esta se vuelve el paradigma del progreso y estaríamos frente a una verdad de Perogrullo, pero si pensamos en el paradigma social ¿A dónde nos lleva esto? En la modernidad, al Estado – Nación que hoy sigue vigente, en el futuro, el autor destruye este paradigma, no para diseñar algo mejor que el Estado – Nación, sino para volver al sistema de organización en clanes ¿retroceso? Solo si se piensa en términos de “evolución” social o culturas “superiores o mejores” que otras. Al destruir el concepto de Estado – Nación, también hay que re evaluar el concepto de territorio y frontera, por lo que el componente de la noción de clan encaja con este nuevo (¿?) modelo de organización y aunque hay muchos clanes, con diferentes características, estos comparten un espacio y aparentemente lo hacen en paz, pero hay una guerra fría entre ellos, el poder de los clanes, su poder económico pero no político, se concentra en la tecnología, en la adquisición de la misma, lo que marca una diferencia en la calidad de vida. Así mismo, la tecnología viene acompañada de innovación y educación. La educación se vuelve uno de los ejes centrales de la historia, porque la educación va a moldear el carácter y a ampliar los horizontes en este mundo.
Estoy segura que hay muchísimo más que extraer de esta lectura, y por eso estoy segura que volveré a leer La era del diamante.
Finally finished it! Again it's going to be a long time before I read another Stephenson's novel. And I compulsively bought Anathem when I got back to this one because it's what I do.
More to the point: like many people rightly say, Stephenson is this "I have a great idea but don't really know what to make with it!" kind of guy. The novel is based on this super cool vision for the nanotechnology-based future where there aren't states, at least not in the way we understand, and everyone's basic needs are fulfilled, and yet the world is more divided still – more tribal, more stratified. Which, I suppose, is inevitable. The novel itself starts off very engaging, but then turns meandering and uncertain of itself, some threads feel unfinished, and there are too many of them, some characters redundant, and the ending feels... weird. The climax seemed to happen out of nowhere – it happened out of somewhere, but the buildup just wasn't there. Still an interesting, very rewarding at times read, but difficult to recommend off the cuff.
More to the point: like many people rightly say, Stephenson is this "I have a great idea but don't really know what to make with it!" kind of guy. The novel is based on this super cool vision for the nanotechnology-based future where there aren't states, at least not in the way we understand, and everyone's basic needs are fulfilled, and yet the world is more divided still – more tribal, more stratified. Which, I suppose, is inevitable. The novel itself starts off very engaging, but then turns meandering and uncertain of itself, some threads feel unfinished, and there are too many of them, some characters redundant, and the ending feels... weird. The climax seemed to happen out of nowhere – it happened out of somewhere, but the buildup just wasn't there. Still an interesting, very rewarding at times read, but difficult to recommend off the cuff.
Very good book - I struggled with whether to mark it three or four stars. Ultimately, though - the ending wasn't quite satisfying for me, which makes me think I won't ever want to re-read it. It was really wildly imaginative, though, and there was good tension in the middle that kept me reading. And some beautiful passages about life and the nature of intelligence. Well done, if not perfect.
[this is for the ESF book club and is not a real review]
Oof.
I loved this book when I read it around ten years ago; I remembered it as a fun story about subversiveness and overcoming adversity. I am dismayed to realize that my reading comprehension ten years ago was trash.
This is a book about the superiority of certain cultures in the developed world; the hopeless inferiority of cultures in the developing world; the need for the wealthy to re-assert their roles as global stewards; and the merits of belonging to an ethnically pure traditional community. This book blows.
In 1995, this was all presumably meant as harmless fun. Neal likes playing around with heterodox ideas to give his stories some edge. But since then, the world crashed out of the End of History. Reamde showed that reactionary thinking is not just a hat that Neal puts on sometimes but is closer to the core of his ideology.
In 2020, it's not cute to entertain the notion that maybe executing poor people and drug addicts by firing squad is actually the secret ingredient to building a thriving community and raising well-adjusted children.
Neal entertains other schools of thought in other books; I'm not saying he's a rotten egg or that his whole corpus has to get memory-holed or anything. But this is One Of The Bad Ones.
Edit:
You know what, I want to walk this back a little bit. I actually liked the first 2/3rds of this book a lot. I read through that last third really fast because my library copy was due and it made me feel like I was going insane. Having calmed down, it's not all that bad, it's just... not what I needed in Pandemic Summer.
Oof.
I loved this book when I read it around ten years ago; I remembered it as a fun story about subversiveness and overcoming adversity. I am dismayed to realize that my reading comprehension ten years ago was trash.
This is a book about the superiority of certain cultures in the developed world; the hopeless inferiority of cultures in the developing world; the need for the wealthy to re-assert their roles as global stewards; and the merits of belonging to an ethnically pure traditional community. This book blows.
In 1995, this was all presumably meant as harmless fun. Neal likes playing around with heterodox ideas to give his stories some edge. But since then, the world crashed out of the End of History. Reamde showed that reactionary thinking is not just a hat that Neal puts on sometimes but is closer to the core of his ideology.
In 2020, it's not cute to entertain the notion that maybe executing poor people and drug addicts by firing squad is actually the secret ingredient to building a thriving community and raising well-adjusted children.
Neal entertains other schools of thought in other books; I'm not saying he's a rotten egg or that his whole corpus has to get memory-holed or anything. But this is One Of The Bad Ones.
Spoiler
And I know he loves swords but it is really stupid that a regular MC, a cheap appliance that every poor person has in their homes, can be quickly programmed to make a sword that cuts through anything, but it only becomes relevant in the climax.Spoiler
Oh and Nell's a white savior. She's better than the whole Mouse Army because, uh, her copy of the Primer came with a voice actor? What in the fuckEdit:
You know what, I want to walk this back a little bit. I actually liked the first 2/3rds of this book a lot. I read through that last third really fast because my library copy was due and it made me feel like I was going insane. Having calmed down, it's not all that bad, it's just... not what I needed in Pandemic Summer.
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
A bit weird at times but thought provoking and excellent world building.
This is an almost-cyberpunk nanotechnological scifi futuristic adventure. Stephenson creates an interesting future where necessities are provided out of thin air and the world is divided into exclusive clans. A powerful leader decides the world needs independent thought, and he has a powerful piece of technology designed to teach his granddaughter how to be an individual. Others get access to this technology, and then it is a race to rebuild a stagnant world.
The first half of this book is excellent. It all starts going downhill once a weird sex-orgy-clan is introduced and what seemed a minor character suddenly becomes a prominent player. While the necessity for this is later explained, it's almost half a book later, after pages and pages of "what the heck is going on?" Not that I need everything explained to me, but I would like to know there is at least a reason plot, style and character changes abruptly. Overall I enjoyed this book and its creative look at a nan0-future, but what would have been a five-star review got complicated by a perplexing chunk of novel.
The first half of this book is excellent. It all starts going downhill once a weird sex-orgy-clan is introduced and what seemed a minor character suddenly becomes a prominent player. While the necessity for this is later explained, it's almost half a book later, after pages and pages of "what the heck is going on?" Not that I need everything explained to me, but I would like to know there is at least a reason plot, style and character changes abruptly. Overall I enjoyed this book and its creative look at a nan0-future, but what would have been a five-star review got complicated by a perplexing chunk of novel.
Very much in line with [b:Snow Crash|830|Snow Crash|Neal Stephenson|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1157396730s/830.jpg|493634], but Victorian. Same basic idea, there is a world-changing device that could fall into the wrong hands, the lives of varied characters intertwine, indirectly, innocently, as they drive the plot of the situation.
As with that book, there is a solid central premise wrapped around a wonderful fantasy (small-f) world. In fact, the world is probably richer since it's not merely a pastiche of an unfortunately stagnant and homogenic cyberpunk culture. Stephenson shows that he can create worlds along with the best of them.
The only reason I love this book less is because I read it second. I'm sure this would have blown me away had it been my first exposure to Stephenson's peak.
It's a tragedy, really, because the point of this book is far subtler and far more important. It's a pinnacle of social projection; Snow Crash's novum was flashier but does have more obvious holes that naturally arise from its scifi premise. This novel uses science fiction to wield a point that is far more organic.
As with that book, there is a solid central premise wrapped around a wonderful fantasy (small-f) world. In fact, the world is probably richer since it's not merely a pastiche of an unfortunately stagnant and homogenic cyberpunk culture. Stephenson shows that he can create worlds along with the best of them.
The only reason I love this book less is because I read it second. I'm sure this would have blown me away had it been my first exposure to Stephenson's peak.
It's a tragedy, really, because the point of this book is far subtler and far more important. It's a pinnacle of social projection; Snow Crash's novum was flashier but does have more obvious holes that naturally arise from its scifi premise. This novel uses science fiction to wield a point that is far more organic.
if you enjoy well-written, researched, and intricate intellectual fantasy, read this!
DNF way too technical for me. Took the speed out of the story. Made it to page 66