Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
How in the gently caress did the Mass Effect: Andromeda tie in prequel books somehow pull in NK Jemisin and Catherynne Valente as authors? It's just such a weird mishmash of author quality and abandoned video game prequel novels that I still can't wrap my head around it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
Watching Logen go from being a semi-standard misunderstood barbarian to a monster was kind of cool. Or rather, seeing that he always was that monster despite his narration. Gandalf being Satan was kind of neat too.

Maybe it felt more subversive if you came from Drizzt or something. I don't remember the early 2000s fantasy that well, but from what I remember it was ASOIAF, Wheel of Time, and tons of genre pulp. ASOIAF wasn't "genre", nor was WoT, in some ways, so it could have been seen as a subversion of explicitly pulp fantasy, not fantasy as a whole.

If you had already found Gene Wolfe or generally better stuff I can see why it fell flat.

E: also if you were told it was "subversive" instead of just reading it when it came out.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Oct 11, 2022

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

sebmojo posted:

Yeah I enjoyed heroes, it's not wildly different from the others though it's just the best version of his thing that I've read.

It being relatively self-contained and themed around something like an American Civil War detailed battle plan are both points in its favor.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

PawParole posted:

anyone read any good books about parallel universes or generation ships recently?
Aurora has you covered for a generation ship novel.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

FPyat posted:

What's the word on Klara and the Sun?

I loved it. Never Let Me Go is probably better, and Remains of the Day definitely is, but something about it just really worked for me.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

freebooter posted:

Ministry of the Future was good, but still had some moments that were deeply Robinsonian in that they feel like the product of the imagination of a liberal arts professor who has no contact with the real world (which bothers me because I highly doubt Robinson is actually like that). I'm thinking specifically of the people who manage to convince rural Americans across places like Wyoming and Idaho to move to cities and let their lands return to nature for the good of the planet, and don't seem to receive any pushback, whereas in the real world (in America or anywhere) that's not happening and if you force the issue will lead to civil war. The moment in 2312 akin to that is when they convince a bunch of Russian immigrant farmers in Canada that air-dropping shitloads of genetically engineered predators back into their farmland is ultimately good because animals are our "brothers and sisters," which in real life would get you glassed. I just feel like sometimes he glosses over what would be required to actually change a majority of people's thinking to achieve that near-utopia (to be fair I have no clue how we'd achieve it either, and maybe it's impossible).

New York 2140 was fine, but it felt like what he actually wanted to do was write a novel set in the modern day about the aftermath of the 2008 crash, growing inequality and what it will take to amend that, but his publisher pressured him into setting it a century down the track instead so that it could be set in the flooded Venetian Manhattan from 2312. It feels very weirdly like a book of two halves, both of which are fine in isolation, but which don't fit together. (And if you're going to be the most *important* contemporary science fiction writer, which I believe he is, the book set in the 2020s or the 2030s imagining a tipping point in the global financial system is a way more interesting and more relevant book than one which just has the set dressing of a flooded New York.)
I didn't like New York 2140 very much because it had a cool setting and didn't do much with it, and the plot is basically "what if the 2008 financial crisis happened and we magically don't gently caress it up thanks to a few plucky heroes saying the right thing". Not only is it two halves of a book that could be fine, but one of them doesn't come close to earning the structural changes it ends up describing.

One of the reasons his Mars Trilogy was so good was that the slow societal changes actually felt earned and believable.

Also Aurora is amazing.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

anilEhilated posted:

. Magical USSR isn't exactly a common setting.

Others have named several but I'll throw in a plug for Catherynne Valente' Deathless

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

cptn_dr posted:

I have such conflicted opinions about Valente. I really liked Deathless, and Killswitch is one of my favourite short stories, but everything else she's written I've found absolutely insufferable. It's weird how those two things can be absolutely 100% my jam, and everything else I bounce off super hard.
She goes for a very different style in some of her other works which could be off putting, I think. But I at least like everything she has written except Comfort Me With Apples, so I'm biased.

It might just be that you like her more spartan descriptions compared to something like the orphans tales which gets to be very...I don't know, lush, or the kids books like The Girl Who...series.

E: vvv yeah I loved those. They feel very different from Deathless though so I could see how someone liked one and not the other.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 10:11 on Dec 23, 2022

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

RDM posted:

I bought this pretty much at random. It's grimdark YA Harry Potter written first person where the narrator is the angstiest magic teenager (there is a *prophecy*).

There's nothing really wrong with it, but I'm probably not going to keep reading the series. The writing was fine and I would have loved it 20 years ago.

I enjoyed the gimmick. It's basically set in a world where something like the Triwizard Cup or the absurd lethality of some parts of HP would make sense. In Harry Potter it's weird that a bunch of middle and high schoolers are wandering around a ton of incredibly lethal potions and dark wizards and creatures, and even weirder that a fun competition between schools throws children at dragons without warning or preparation to see what happens. And it's not like the kids are actually trained to a level where they could be expected to handle a dragon easily; everyone acknowledges that the tournament is dangerous as poo poo.

So scholomance just takes that and runs with it pretty far. It's definitely young adult fantasy, but its pretty funny in its own right and like I said, I liked the gimmick.

Also similarly enjoyed the bits where the protagonist keeps being annoyed by her affinity for mass death, domination, and destruction spells. It's funny.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

RDM posted:

Y'all are making me reconsider not reading the rest of the series.

It was just *so* teen angsty.
Honestly, if you didn't like the angst it doesn't really change in that regard, but I didn't find it particularly angst to begin with.

There is a lot of "this system is hosed where the wealthy get a comparatively easy route out of this pure hellhole", yes, and it does kind of beat you over the head with that, but that wasn't a particularly bad thing, imo.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

NinjaDebugger posted:

Just in case you didn't get the message in the first and second books, the third book has literal commuter wage slaves and magical dwellings built on the eternal suffering of a single child

I should be slightly more clear here about what I'm saying. The books are not angsty. The books are punk.

Yeah. I didn't read teenage angst into the books, but if you did, I dont think that will change in later books.

E: completed series spoilers: the Omelas enclaves aren't objectively better, either, just easier to make so they can set up more of them.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Dec 26, 2022

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Leng posted:

The funny thing is Scholomance wasn't intended to be YA. Novik is on record as saying that she thought the people who would enjoy it the most are those in their 30s (though I can't find that particular interview right now) but the first book got nominated for a YA awards and now everybody thinks it's YA.


Would it be fair to describe it as YA written for adults?

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Kalman posted:

Also, El’s not precisely “overpowered.” She’s really really good at murder magic and struggles with literally everything else.

Well until she somehow is powerful enough to do something as murderous and evil queen-like as creating the golden enclaves, even with help from a circle and chanting. There is some handwaving that she has the ability to channel huge amounts of power as well as an innate affinity for mass murder, but it felt a bit unearned compared to her general combat prowess, where it was clear where her talents lay. Even the bits where she gets incredibly good at defending herself seemed a bit too much to me, like when she shields herself and Orion from the entire Shanghai contigent. She starts out with a set of skills and affinities (and i thought her constantly trying to get basic cleaning spells and instead getting a summon for a giant acid vat or something was funny as hell) but by the end she is somehow able to do something very much not in line with her supposed affinity, and to be the only one able to do it in centuries.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
Everyone should read Piranesi. For that matter, just read everything Susanna Clarke writes.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

caspergers posted:

Fellas...first off I wanna apologize for the pretentiousness here. But I'm looking for fantasy that's more literary, at least to the extent that either leaves you with a sense of better understanding of the world or with a deeper conviction/love for life; in other words, fantasy that deals with the "human condition".

It doesn't have to be allegorical or anything, and it can still have all those pulpy tropes, but I need something isn't just a bunch of stock (or flawless) characters carrying out a plot. I'm talking characters who change, and not just adhering to their world's rules but ours as well. I also like books with strong imagery and motifs throughout.

Again, sorry if this is pretentious, but I'm so tired of reading books where all the stakes apply only the world the author imagined.
Off the top of my head;

Piranesi, Jonathon Strange and Mr Norrell, Buried Giant, Book of the New Sun, Earthsea Cycle, Deathless, and obviously, without question, the shining star of literary prowess, the Name of the Wind. Less so but imo still great is the Orphans Tales, so maybe check it out. There are some more that aren't coming to me this second though, I'll throw some more in.

Less fantasy, but add the Name of the Rose in there. Would also second the Years of Rice and Salt.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

caspergers posted:

I'll give it another shot, and to be honest I gave up on it because of one tiny thing, which was something like

If there's anything I can't stand, it's adverbs. But worse than that, adverbs in your dialogue tags.

But admittedly this is very shallow of me. I have way too many compositional qualms that I don't even enjoy reading anymore lmao

Do not give it another shot, it is very bad. I was being facetious.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
You can read the book as an indictment of fascism and the society presented but it wasn't written as one.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

StrixNebulosa posted:

What’s the best historical fantasy that isn’t by GGK?

Strange and Norrell, easily.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Fate Accomplice posted:

After reading “The Wandering Earth” and being thoroughly entertained by both movies and massively disappointed by sci-fi’s Ascension, I want to read books taking place on colony/generational ships.

Where do I start?

Kim Stanley Robinson's Aurora

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

pradmer posted:

The Ladies of Grace Adieu by Susanna Clarke - $4.99
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002UM5BUU/

I love this book. Well worth a read.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
It stays like that through Gideon, but it also stopped bothering me really, really quickly for whatever reason. The tittymag comment had ne pause for a second but I kept reading and was really glad I did.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

grassy gnoll posted:

I haven't gotten to Swordheart itself, but Ursula Vernon, the human behind the Kingfisher pen name, is one of the few humans I would trust to write seemingly-saccharine junk and still have it come out well-written and meaningful. She's real good.

Oh poo poo, is that what she has been doing since Digger? I need to check that out.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

fez_machine posted:

Isn't that The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? I haven't read it but I think that's the plot.

Not really. The moon is already a libertarian society culturally, just one that starts off with being a colony. The AI is what allows them to successfully revolt and continue on their way being libertarian. The story is about the revolution, not the aftermath or the society.

That is, the AI doesn't enforce the NAP, the society does (incoherently). I think the AI does also handwave away the resource scarcity though.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Mar 11, 2023

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Everyone posted:

Which is (presumably unintentionally) hilarious. Haven't actually read it, but I'm guessing the general vibe is "We are the People of the Moon! We are an island unto ourselves who need nothing and no one (except a semi-omnipotent artificial intelligence who provides the food/water/oxygen/etc. that allows us to claim all of this super-duper self-sufficiency)!"

Kinda. Resource extraction is important to the start of the revolution, but the AI doesnt create them, just prevents someone from unfairly controlling eg the oxygen. The Loonie society isn't particularly critically examined other than explanations of how parts of it are and that it is good.

One thing the AI does well for the story is make it clear that just because a societal organization is marginalized and exploited doesn't mean it is inferior. It also solves the libertarian problem of how a weak/diffuse state can defend itself against a larger, centralized state bent on exploiting it, so that part is pretty handwavy.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

CaptainCrunch posted:

I mean yes? I never claimed to be a being of pure logic and reason. I'll die no matter what I do, I can't change that. But I can avoid stepping into any transporters and dying then. Discussions like this always make me feel as if I'm being peer pressured into sci-fi transporter suicide.
Does it still not matter if the transporter in question is designed (by Philosophical Sadists, Inc.) so that the destination copy of you doesn't "activate" until you physically put a pistol to your head and pull the trigger? Same outcome, just messier. You die, exact perfect copy flies off in the Enterprise.
Sorry, I'm just baffled by the cavalier attitude of "I'm super chuffed to die so some other guy can be in Paris for lunch."

My theoretical comfort on the neuron replacer is predicated at it happening in concert with, and at the same rate as my brain meat's own replacement speed. I figure it's happening at that rate for a reason. I also wouldn't want it for the purpose of "transferring" myself anywhere either physically or digitally, for reasons stated above. Instantiating a copy of me, after I've kicked it for whatever reason, is A-OK with me, because it wouldn't be me.
Having my robot duplicate stomp me to jelly in some sort of Highlander "there can only be one" fiasco is also an unacceptable scenario.
Now, I know there is some degree of consciousness during sleep, but let's take incredibly deep anesthesia for a second. We place you in as deep of an anesthetic coma as we can, do a heart transplant or whatever, and then move you somewhere else. You wake up.

From the perspective of the "you" that would hypothetically be teleported, these conditions are identical, barring the heart transplant (which also isn't necessary for the hypothetical). From the perspective of you, now, they also seem the same to me. Your current consciousness will end on induction of the anesthesia. I'm really not seeing how they are different at all without there being some core essence that isn't just an emergent property of neurons and hormones. I don't know, maybe there is more to consciousness than that.

Like...would you be somehow ok with this process taking place over days, with parts of you physically existing in both locations until enough of your new brain wakes up? You would have some degree of physical continuity there.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

CaptainCrunch posted:

I've been through that, twice. And yes, I have struggled with the question of if I'm still the same "me" after each one. The fact that my brain is still "on"--there were wires glued to my head to prove it!--is what let me sleep at night afterward.

Depending on how deep they were trying to put you, the wires weren't monitoring you being "on", but actually that you were deep enough.

I've definitely seen EEGs so suppressed they were identical to a dead person's. I'm not saying that an EEG is the only (or even a good) measure of consciousness, but it is a measure of brain electrical activity, and thats as near to "off" as I can think of. Their brain tissue was preserved (as the isoelectric EEG was medication induced) and they were able to recover without issue. So, yeah. Don't know what that means for you, or what your monitoring was or what your sedation goal was.

E:

Stuporstar posted:

And in the case of brain upload, it’s not even close. No-one talks about how much the PNS and other non-neural parts of the body also affect someone’s feelings and personality. Futurist bros only think about the brain and how liberating it would be to shed their “meat” but what that might do to the mind could be totally horrific
Yeah, for the purposes of this discussion I was assuming all of that is copied as well, but that's a fun thought too. I can't imagine someone reacting in horror to the idea of nuking their gut biome with antibiotics because they wouldn't be themselves anymore.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Mar 14, 2023

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

CaptainCrunch posted:

What? As in zero/zip/nada? That's a bit terrifying. It wasn't a 100% jump cut for me. They did the "count down from 10" each time. My memories stop at six-ish and then there's a discontinuity, a gap. The waking up doesn't butt up against that "six" perfectly, I'm aware that something happened in between, but not what. If it was a perfect cut, I'd be more worried about me-ness. The weird gap makes it feel like I was still there, even if the brain was off for all intents and purposes.

Sure. To clarify, that is with monitoring equipment measuring electric brain activity. The monitors are not perfect and it is possible that there is activity that is not detected with our current systems (both in research and in clinical practice). For instance, you can clearly see increased amplitude if leads are placed over an area where someone had part of their skull removed and a skin flap placed over it. The skull attenuated the signal, and sensitivity can only be increased so much before it picks up so much noise as to be worthless. So, not perfect. Also, this is only measuring brain electrical activity and so may not be in any way indicative of some kind of "consciousness". Also, in medically induced isoelectric EEGs in the context I was looking at, we were not trying to elicit responses, so there may be a response we did not see.

We're getting way out of my depth, but I'm pretty sure anesthesiologists cool and sedate patients to a level that produces electrocerebral silence to protect your brain cells during types of cardiac bypass surgery.

Do I think a patient in medically induced state like that has a brain identical to a dead person's? No, not at all, because the former process is reversible. Death is not.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Everyone posted:

Honestly this seems like a different topic than teleportation. This is "What if death was no longer a thing?" What if Tain Hu's drowned, rotted bones could be regrown into a body who's brain's normal electrical functions was restored?

It relates because the "star trek teleporter" nominally relies on disassembling someone and reassembling them elsewhere.

And...yeah, death requires the continuation of death, because death is a process. You can easily enter transient periods that are congruous with death, but the key difference is the continuation of that. Is death the cessation of heartbeat? Sure, you couldd define it that way, but we don't really act like everyone who had an asystolic cardiac arrest, even for extended time periods, as dying. Brain death definitions vary (because it is a legal definition) from place to place, but as far as I know they all require determination of an irreversible state.

So yeah, I line up fully on "if we disintegrate someone and then reassemble them, they never died".

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 11:22 on Mar 15, 2023

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Groke posted:

There is, of course, A Game of Thrones. Although that puts the big surprises at the end of book 1.

I read that loving thing when it was new and before it had much word-of-mouth. Looked like just another big old fantasy epic with all of the expected plot elements, everything getting set up nicely to follow certain patterns we had come to expect, and then the rug gets yanked out from underneath in the last chapters, at least twice.

Yeah same. I read it just before Storm of Swords came out and it had no real cultural awareness yet. It's just so clear that Ned is going to the Wall and will have a reconciliation with Jon there and together they will save the world and also somehow be vindicated in the south too.

Oops.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Wheres the lie tho

I don't think there is a lie so much as it's a lovely article without a point that meanders way too much and also makes the author look bad. Seriously, you almost cried because a kid salted their yakisoba? And you did cry because you had to watch a movie you didn't like? Wow. Nobody has ever claimed Sanderson writes good prose. He does pump out a ton if genre fiction though.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

buffalo all day posted:

The author is a fan though, who’s read like 17 Sanderson novels! And he interviewed a bunch of fans about what appealed to them about the work, which he tells you about!

Depends on how old he was when he read them. I know I read an ungodly amount of Terry Goodkind before I realized how loving terrible it was because I honestly just didn't stop to think about it and it was the age where I had to read absolutely anything voraciously.

E: vvv yeah. So, so many Drizz't's too.

Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Mar 24, 2023

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

MockingQuantum posted:

On the subject of Susanna Clarke, how is The Ladies of Grace Adieu?
Very good. Certainly her 3rd best work, but the short stories vary in tone quite a bit (in a good way) and are fun, varied, and interesting. The titular ladies fit in incredibly well to Jonathon Strange, and one of the other stories is a bit like one of the footnote stories writ large. I really love Clarke, so thought they were great short stories. Would recommend, but if you want more Clarke I'd read Piranesi first if you haven't.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

zoux posted:

After much reflection I have decided not to read the Saunders oeuvre. But thank you all for your explanations.

I read Perdido Street Station like, 15 years ago, I don't remember a lot besides grime, ant-head girlfriends and cactus men. I'd like to read The Scar, but Amazon has it as "2 of 3" in the Bas Lag series, is it a direct sequel to PDS or just in the same universe, and separately, do you think I'd enjoy it more if I went back and re-read PDS?

There is essentially no connection between the two. Events from PSS are briefly referenced in the Scar, but not in a way that feels like you missed something. I think they can be read independently and do not think re-reading PSS is particularly necessary beforehand.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
Yeah but I love wandering poo poo just focusing on the weirdness. Give me a travelog that just goes around a weird place and tell me about it. gently caress plot or characters.

Ok not all the time, but PSS is a perfect example of catering to that. The Scar is genuinely a better book in almost every way, PSS just scratched a specific itch.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
So, CJ Cherryh. Ages ago I read 40k in Gehenna, which I vaguely remember, and Downbelow Station , which I don't at all beyond the title and that I liked it. Where should I start with her in general?

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

StrixNebulosa posted:

Pride of Chanur!

What do you like best about her stuff? Do you like fantasy or sci-fi or both?

I like both pretty evenly. What I thought was most memorable of 40k in Gehenna was how the alien species felt like something alien and not "randomly inscrutable" or "humans with one personality trait monolithically exaggerated and maybe with bits stuck on their face".

E ^^^ yeah that's perfect. Thanks!

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

BurningBeard posted:

So what sci-fi or fantasy books have exceptionally good/interesting treatments of religious faith?

I think the Coldfire trilogy by CS Friedman does it interestingly at least, but it's also fantasy with some tendencies to purple prose. I'd call it maybe good genre fantasy, maybe.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011
Ny2142 features the pseudo-Utopian ending "what if we didn't gently caress up a repeat of a global financial crisis" without really laying the groundwork for it, imo. I found it one of the weaker of his novels.

Also polar bear blimp was just weird.

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

mllaneza posted:

The Lady Astronaut is very good, and the series keeps getting better, that third one is an absolute banger. At $1.99 to get into the series, there's no excuse not to.
The third one is the one on the Moon with the different main character, right? Lady Astronauts 1 and 2 were great though.

Also, by the same author but the Spare Man is a ton of fun. It's basically a mystery in the vein of the Thin Man movies.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011

Haystack posted:

The physics behind why FTL enables paradoxes is a pretty fundamental outcome of relativity. It took me a long time to wrap my head around the idea. It was a random reddit reply that laid it out clearly enough for me to understand:

A good post.

In other news, I just read Library at Mt Char thanks to this thread and hot drat it was good and weird.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply