Scan barcode
A review by larkspire
Forest of Memory by Mary Robinette Kowal
3.0
Forest of Memory is imperfect in many ways, but intriguing nonetheless.
The setting isn't especially remarkable at this point - except for the key detail where antiques become an even hotter commodity in a world where anything can be replicated, as long as they are verified "authentics" which, preferably, have a detailed provenance. I don't think I've seen anything like that in science fiction before; certainly not to this degree at least. This is linked to "Captures", sold-off perfect memories (including sense memories) of experiences. The idea of Captures isn't unique itself, but I haven't seen anyone else associate the desire for real experiences with the desire for authentic antiques that have histories and stories behind them, even though it seems obvious now I write it.
It's the little details like that that make the worldbuilding that much more satisfying (granted, I have an MIS specialising in archive management, so this has a more personal meaning and interest to me than it would to the average reader). Unfortunately, other details are lacking. If AIs have personhood, is Katya's virtual assistant a partner? Is it problematic that Katya treats her as a tool, or is she limited enough that she isn't sentient or a person? If capitalism is over, why is the gig economy flourishing (Katya is grateful that she only has to balance two, related income streams, instead of having to spend her time performing "microtasks") and why do corporations have legal personhood? Are *all* animals involuntarily streaming their experiences online or is it just the deer?
The story is interesting, but ultimately unsatisfying. Even Katya isn't really explored in any depth. But I don't think the story was really the point. For me this book's value was how it makes you think, about authenticity and reality; the questions it raises (unrelated to the ones I ask out of dissatisfaction with the worldbuilding). One of the most interesting, and most relevant to the average person today: If memory is fallible, can *any* narrator - who doesn't have a video they can prove has not been doctored - be considered reliable and trustworthy?
The setting isn't especially remarkable at this point - except for the key detail where antiques become an even hotter commodity in a world where anything can be replicated, as long as they are verified "authentics" which, preferably, have a detailed provenance. I don't think I've seen anything like that in science fiction before; certainly not to this degree at least. This is linked to "Captures", sold-off perfect memories (including sense memories) of experiences. The idea of Captures isn't unique itself, but I haven't seen anyone else associate the desire for real experiences with the desire for authentic antiques that have histories and stories behind them, even though it seems obvious now I write it.
It's the little details like that that make the worldbuilding that much more satisfying (granted, I have an MIS specialising in archive management, so this has a more personal meaning and interest to me than it would to the average reader). Unfortunately, other details are lacking. If AIs have personhood, is Katya's virtual assistant a partner? Is it problematic that Katya treats her as a tool, or is she limited enough that she isn't sentient or a person? If capitalism is over, why is the gig economy flourishing (Katya is grateful that she only has to balance two, related income streams, instead of having to spend her time performing "microtasks") and why do corporations have legal personhood? Are *all* animals involuntarily streaming their experiences online or is it just the deer?
The story is interesting, but ultimately unsatisfying. Even Katya isn't really explored in any depth. But I don't think the story was really the point. For me this book's value was how it makes you think, about authenticity and reality; the questions it raises (unrelated to the ones I ask out of dissatisfaction with the worldbuilding). One of the most interesting, and most relevant to the average person today: If memory is fallible, can *any* narrator - who doesn't have a video they can prove has not been doctored - be considered reliable and trustworthy?