Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by chirson
Beggars in Spain by Nancy Kress
3.0
A fascinating book that's both gripping and off-putting (so many of its characters and themes are awfully ablist, and while part of that is explicitly critiqued, it is horrible to read about and through nonetheless, and to me, not sufficiently dealt with). It's very interesting for its analysis of how ethics of care may develop regardless of explicitly Randian society as a background. Still, I think the book has also aged badly in many ways: by not foreseeing animal rights, by assuming wealth and work go together and never truly interrogating the coherence of the objectivist ethics many characters spout (arguing with them as if they were good faith and incorrect rather than repugnant, fascist, evil on their face), by not looking outside USA, by having a random old-dude-marries-a-15-year-old (and no one bats an eye) throw away plot, by never fully grappling with the assumptions of its imaginary philosopher, who somehow is supposed to have been the start of a decent morality, but who really, sounds like Rand's cousin.
The reversal of beggars is done well, but the language of it isn't fully explored, either.
I disagree with all the reviewers who think the first bit, the novella, is better as stand alone: without the supers' intervention, this would have been much worse.
If I sound like my objections are ideological: maybe they are, but also it's not that I disagree with the book, it's that I think some of its points come off naive and not fully thought-through. Like: livers don't work, right? Except some seem to.
Much to think and argue about; I'd love to read a properly left-wing critique that is written by someone with an actual background in ethics, economics and the like.
The reversal of beggars is done well, but the language of it isn't fully explored, either.
I disagree with all the reviewers who think the first bit, the novella, is better as stand alone: without the supers' intervention, this would have been much worse.
If I sound like my objections are ideological: maybe they are, but also it's not that I disagree with the book, it's that I think some of its points come off naive and not fully thought-through. Like: livers don't work, right? Except some seem to.
Much to think and argue about; I'd love to read a properly left-wing critique that is written by someone with an actual background in ethics, economics and the like.