Take a photo of a barcode or cover
juliette_dunn's reviews
457 reviews
シメジシミュレーション 02 by つくみず
funny
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Foundation by Isaac Asimov
3.0
This book is so frequently mentioned among the greats of sci fi, so I had to read it. Unfortunately, I wasn't too captivated. I appreciate the epic scope, as the story spans hundreds of years of a civilization. But with neither interesting characters, prose, nor plot events, my enjoyment while reading it was lukewarm. So much of it was a flat character existing to come up with an economic or political scheme, carrying it out, and then skipping ahead once more.
The most rewarding aspect of the book to me was seeing a conception of the future so inevitably set in its time, with an understanding of fuel and technology that is laughable now but made sense back then.
The central concept of psychohistory was also interesting, as so much of history has been told with individual focused narratives. Foundation doesn't make an all-or-nothing case on free will vs fate, but rather positions free will as being true of individuals while the longer span of human history is simultaneously much less malleable. This view of history and society, and the outrage as people reacted to it made for the most compelling segments. The focus on ethical considerations for the future, knowing that society will regress many years past your lifetime but working for the best utilitarian outcome for many generations beyond, shows a forethought and scope real societies haven't offered, and it's interesting to see a group which does value this, working within the constraints and desires of their own time while always attempting to keep their more epic goal at the center.
So, a book with a good premise, but not all that entertaining to actually read, just a bunch of segments of dry political maneuvering.
The most rewarding aspect of the book to me was seeing a conception of the future so inevitably set in its time, with an understanding of fuel and technology that is laughable now but made sense back then.
The central concept of psychohistory was also interesting, as so much of history has been told with individual focused narratives. Foundation doesn't make an all-or-nothing case on free will vs fate, but rather positions free will as being true of individuals while the longer span of human history is simultaneously much less malleable. This view of history and society, and the outrage as people reacted to it made for the most compelling segments. The focus on ethical considerations for the future, knowing that society will regress many years past your lifetime but working for the best utilitarian outcome for many generations beyond, shows a forethought and scope real societies haven't offered, and it's interesting to see a group which does value this, working within the constraints and desires of their own time while always attempting to keep their more epic goal at the center.
So, a book with a good premise, but not all that entertaining to actually read, just a bunch of segments of dry political maneuvering.
Hope in the Dark: Untold Histories, Wild Possibilities by Rebecca Solnit
3.0
This book aims to give hope to a reader depressed about the state of the world, and serve as a critique of the ways leftists tend to underrecognize their accomplishments. I am mixed on how good it did its job.
Solnit makes correct observations about the tendency on the left to take nothing but a full socialist revolution as a success, and to downplay or even actively trash on forms of incremental progress. These forms of incremental progress often form the essential basis for something bigger, but the overly defeatist attitude leads to people doing away with them and thus never making progress at all.
This part of the book is very important and relevant. Activist burnout is a major problem, and it is often caused by people feeling so demoralized over the vastness of the issues they face, and the lack of what they feel is meaningful progress.
My issues with the book comes from the praise of methods of activism which I believe are actually a hindrance to progress. Solnit holds up activism for the sake of activism, regardless of efficacy. Her view that as long as people tried and felt happy with community, then the action was valuable. While I don't disagree that joy and community are essential to prevent burnout, this attitude that treats all activism as equal regardless of efficacy becomes absurd when you realize we're talking about people's lives.
All activism is not equal, and we can't blanket praise anything that involves positive emotions. So much of the problem in activism today is the lack of organization and the emphasis on feel-good moments of passion. Everyone marches together, but then where do they go from there?
Leadership should be questioned, yes, but spontaneous acts and lack of structure are not what's going to create the bulk of progress, and the author's unquestioning assertion that this is what we should be encouraging because it feels good is irresponsible.
A lot of her examples of successful activist movements also don't ring so hopeful now, which is a consequence of the book being published quite a bit ago. The author can't be blamed for not knowing what the results would be. Though it is frustrating to see her cite attempts to get people terrified of GMOs as successful activism, as anti-GMO is entirely anti-scientific and a waste of time when real issues of food injustice could be being fought. Her other examples tended to be small-scale gestures that didn't end up succeeding and in many cases the issues have gotten worse.
Again, I don't want to discount Solnit's belief in the power of small-scale gestures and community. Sometimes these things make a difference in ways we never could have predicted. But to use them as reasons to hope and encourage this sort of activism as enough when we are seeing the consistent failures of the left to make meaningful progress or organization even when passionate about an issue, doesn't actually give a reason to hope for these issues.
But I do agree with her message around acknowledging and celebrating incremental change, and understanding activism will be an eternal struggle, not something that is ever going to be won by some single grand revolution that we all must wait for.
Solnit makes correct observations about the tendency on the left to take nothing but a full socialist revolution as a success, and to downplay or even actively trash on forms of incremental progress. These forms of incremental progress often form the essential basis for something bigger, but the overly defeatist attitude leads to people doing away with them and thus never making progress at all.
This part of the book is very important and relevant. Activist burnout is a major problem, and it is often caused by people feeling so demoralized over the vastness of the issues they face, and the lack of what they feel is meaningful progress.
My issues with the book comes from the praise of methods of activism which I believe are actually a hindrance to progress. Solnit holds up activism for the sake of activism, regardless of efficacy. Her view that as long as people tried and felt happy with community, then the action was valuable. While I don't disagree that joy and community are essential to prevent burnout, this attitude that treats all activism as equal regardless of efficacy becomes absurd when you realize we're talking about people's lives.
All activism is not equal, and we can't blanket praise anything that involves positive emotions. So much of the problem in activism today is the lack of organization and the emphasis on feel-good moments of passion. Everyone marches together, but then where do they go from there?
Leadership should be questioned, yes, but spontaneous acts and lack of structure are not what's going to create the bulk of progress, and the author's unquestioning assertion that this is what we should be encouraging because it feels good is irresponsible.
A lot of her examples of successful activist movements also don't ring so hopeful now, which is a consequence of the book being published quite a bit ago. The author can't be blamed for not knowing what the results would be. Though it is frustrating to see her cite attempts to get people terrified of GMOs as successful activism, as anti-GMO is entirely anti-scientific and a waste of time when real issues of food injustice could be being fought. Her other examples tended to be small-scale gestures that didn't end up succeeding and in many cases the issues have gotten worse.
Again, I don't want to discount Solnit's belief in the power of small-scale gestures and community. Sometimes these things make a difference in ways we never could have predicted. But to use them as reasons to hope and encourage this sort of activism as enough when we are seeing the consistent failures of the left to make meaningful progress or organization even when passionate about an issue, doesn't actually give a reason to hope for these issues.
But I do agree with her message around acknowledging and celebrating incremental change, and understanding activism will be an eternal struggle, not something that is ever going to be won by some single grand revolution that we all must wait for.
Exhalation by Ted Chiang
5.0
Now this was incredible, and I aim to read Chiang's other short stories as soon as possible. Not one of these stories was bad. Some of them seemed to resemble Black Mirror or Twilight Zone-esque scenarios, but the ultimate messages sent were a twist upon that sort of story in a great way. For example, one of the stories deals with a new technology capable of recording every memory with perfect, objective accuracy. This concept was used in Black Mirror, to, predictably, highlight why this would be terrible and relationship ruining.
Chiang brings up this issue but also questions our assumptions about technology that alters the mind as inherently bad, and takes a nuanced approach which showcases the ways in which it could be a new stage of human evolution, not good or evil, just something entirely different.
He creates similar nuance in most of these, not taking a strongly pro or anti tech stance, but a view which explores both of these potentials. It's refreshing after story after story which slams us over the head with the evils of technology.
The longest story, The Lifecycle of Software Objects, was a novella and was unafraid to venture into the strange and controversial. What starts as a straightforward story about the commodification of sentient digital pets takes a philosophical dive into the nature of free will, autonomy, and sexuality. The story approaches wildly contentious areas and many would find it appalling, but it is no doubt interesting and bold in its thoughts. It also makes for some wonderful satire, as the digital creatures aim to register as legal corporations, given that this would ensure them far more rights to life and personhood than would be granted to even the most beloved of non-human creatures, the dog.
The stories I didn't talk about were all wonderful as well, this was a wonderful collection of science fiction which uses the genre to explore the emotional and cultural impact rather than any hard technology. Chiang is brilliant as a writer.
Chiang brings up this issue but also questions our assumptions about technology that alters the mind as inherently bad, and takes a nuanced approach which showcases the ways in which it could be a new stage of human evolution, not good or evil, just something entirely different.
He creates similar nuance in most of these, not taking a strongly pro or anti tech stance, but a view which explores both of these potentials. It's refreshing after story after story which slams us over the head with the evils of technology.
The longest story, The Lifecycle of Software Objects, was a novella and was unafraid to venture into the strange and controversial. What starts as a straightforward story about the commodification of sentient digital pets takes a philosophical dive into the nature of free will, autonomy, and sexuality. The story approaches wildly contentious areas and many would find it appalling, but it is no doubt interesting and bold in its thoughts. It also makes for some wonderful satire, as the digital creatures aim to register as legal corporations, given that this would ensure them far more rights to life and personhood than would be granted to even the most beloved of non-human creatures, the dog.
The stories I didn't talk about were all wonderful as well, this was a wonderful collection of science fiction which uses the genre to explore the emotional and cultural impact rather than any hard technology. Chiang is brilliant as a writer.
Carmilla and Laura by S.D. Simper
4.5
This is labeled as a retelling, but unlike a lot of retellings that switch the setting, Carmilla follows the exact same setting and characters as the original, only with an explicitly reciprocated romance.
I love the clear respect the author had to the original text, with many of its scenes and phrasings reused for this story. But it never becomes redundant, rather a great addition to the original that gives Carmilla and Laura the development they deserve.
The story does not shy away from or try to lighten Carmilla's darkness, she is still a sinister vampire who lures girls to their deaths. Carmilla is not a mere misunderstood victim, but against the social oppression of the time, her dark and bloody life has an appeal in its freedom, and you can see why Laura is tempted by it.
It's a difficult task to retell such a classic, but Simper did it more than well.
I love the clear respect the author had to the original text, with many of its scenes and phrasings reused for this story. But it never becomes redundant, rather a great addition to the original that gives Carmilla and Laura the development they deserve.
The story does not shy away from or try to lighten Carmilla's darkness, she is still a sinister vampire who lures girls to their deaths. Carmilla is not a mere misunderstood victim, but against the social oppression of the time, her dark and bloody life has an appeal in its freedom, and you can see why Laura is tempted by it.
It's a difficult task to retell such a classic, but Simper did it more than well.
Carmilla by J. Sheridan Le Fanu
dark
4.25
The vampire story before Dracula, and the origin of the lesbian vampire trope. The vampire Carmilla comes to stay with a young woman named Laura and her father, feeding on Laura at night while quickly developing a romantic obsession.
I was surprised how textually explicit the romance was, given this was published in 1872. As I understand it, the author was able to get away with this given it is connected to Carmilla's supernatural hunger, rather than an ordinary romance. Still, the direct scenes of them kissing and the poetic declarations of love were surprising, and welcome.
This is a very short book, and that was to its detriment. I greatly delighted in everything up until the end, of the gradual worsening of the supernatural as Laura continues to deny what's going on. But then it is all sent to a rushed conclusion in which new characters take over the narrative and leave the central focus abandoned. Despite Laura being the first person narrator, we get hardly any of her thoughts after the reveal that Carmilla is a vampire, save for a few sentences at the very end.
Does she feel angry at the betrayal? Was it hard for her to admit it was true? Or did she in some way know all along, and was partly okay with it? Was she relieved when Carmilla died? Sad? We don't know. We can only guess, because her introspection is near entirely done away with.
That said, it's still a good book, and quite a fast read. I am glad I read it.
I was surprised how textually explicit the romance was, given this was published in 1872. As I understand it, the author was able to get away with this given it is connected to Carmilla's supernatural hunger, rather than an ordinary romance. Still, the direct scenes of them kissing and the poetic declarations of love were surprising, and welcome.
This is a very short book, and that was to its detriment. I greatly delighted in everything up until the end, of the gradual worsening of the supernatural as Laura continues to deny what's going on. But then it is all sent to a rushed conclusion in which new characters take over the narrative and leave the central focus abandoned. Despite Laura being the first person narrator, we get hardly any of her thoughts after the reveal that Carmilla is a vampire, save for a few sentences at the very end.
Does she feel angry at the betrayal? Was it hard for her to admit it was true? Or did she in some way know all along, and was partly okay with it? Was she relieved when Carmilla died? Sad? We don't know. We can only guess, because her introspection is near entirely done away with.
That said, it's still a good book, and quite a fast read. I am glad I read it.