What do you think?
Rate this book
The Retroactivist
It's 2087. Mankind has eradicated war, poverty, and jobs. Robots now perform all work. Humans live free to strive for pure happiness and aesthetic perfection. Everyone except for Reid Rosales. Unhappy with joy, unfulfilled by satisfaction, in the throes of a creative slump, Reid longs for something -anything- to help him rise above the easy pleasures of humanity's perfected society. Reid thinks he's the only one, until he stumbles on Club 20c, a twentieth-century nostalgia club.
There he finds his calling in the long-lost virtues of a harder life... but at what cost?
There he finds his calling in the long-lost virtues of a harder life... but at what cost?
- GenresScience FictionSatire
274 pages, Paperback
Published February 23, 2017
About the author
Nate Ragolia
11 books16 followersNate Ragolia is the author One Person Can't Make a Difference (2022), The Retroactivist (2017) and There You Feel Free (2015, 2021). He was editor-in-chief of BONED: A Collection of Skeletal Writings from 2015-2020, and is currently co-founder and publisher at Spaceboy Books LLC. Way back when, he wrote and drew two webcomics, The Illiterate Badger, and The Right Corking Adventures of Cecil Larkbunting & Alastair Wakerobin. These days, he hosts the podcasts A Vague Idea and Roll For Blank, and co-hosts Debut Buddies. In his free time, he's writing the next book, contributing short stories to a variety of publications and collections, playing video games, and trying to smile his way through the apocalypse with his dogs and wife.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
June 14, 2017
A science fiction futurist book to make you think about an impending problem we haven’t faced yet, that’s what this is. An intellectual lunch at a conference that needs to happen. The author might have revealed too much in the synopsis but here’s the distillation:
The story describes the future we are currently working towards, where there’s no famine, all work is carried out by automation and people are free to pursue their leisure interests, which are usually to “drink and dance and screw because there’s nothing else to do” (Jarvis Cocker). One of these sheep citizens learns about an alternative, the ruthless meritocracy of the twentieth century. Although the risks are great, like coming out at the bottom of the social pile, there are occasional benefits that humanity in the future has all but forgotten: job satisfaction, self-worth, physical fitness, competitive challenge, feeling part of something greater than oneself; all the missing mental candies of happiness. To get them back into human lives, the protagonist chooses to become an activist revolutionary. Go retro!
This existential issue has stepped beyond the old nineteenth century ideologies that were set up in response to the industrial revolution, socialism and capitalism. It has become, truly, a question for science fiction because a world where we only have to do the jobs we want to do is within sight of the next generation of humankind. This sounds great but it takes a writer like this to explore the negative side of this third industrial philosophy.
There’s a big question underlying all of this: Can humans be truly happy if their sense of purpose has been removed? Secondary questions include: Will we continue to evolve if there is no competitive niche to select between probabilities of survival? (with artificial help, all flawed genes will survive and the standard of our species’ DNA can only regress). Should we strive to make our lives easier and easier, longer and longer, to suspend incentive to try (all being looked after anyway), until humans become the pets of their servant robots? Is it good to lose free will to make choices between right and wrong, to strive or be lazy, if by compliance with a system we only represent the matter being processed through it? Is it right to fear the efficiency-driven robots might conclude the human component is unnecessary luggage? Is everything we want the same as everything we need? If we find the human species has changed unrecognisably, could this change ever be reversed or would we have lost the skills to survive without the feeding tube?
“Beyond your social life you don’t have any fears. If you want to get Chinese, we go to China. If there’s a movie that doesn’t exist, we can make it together.”
I can think of one simile, that of antibiotic use. In developed countries, our immune system hasn’t had to fight hard for three generations because we use antibiotics. These are becoming gradually less effective as the various hazards which survive these medicines are selecting in favour of their most resistant strains. When antibiotics become useless, we will have artificially interfered in the system with the result that stronger (than otherwise background normal) strains can fight our weakened (than we would have had without decades of antibiotics) immune systems. In short, we make life easier for ourselves for fifty to one hundred years and then pay for it later, many times over, because we’re so limp without artificial support.
The protagonist’s answer is meritocratic capitalism, but that has imperfections too: “Nobody agrees with your ideas, Reid. That’s why they changed. That’s why sixty years ago, people changed them. Your ideas were killing everyone, slowly.”
Hawking and Musk cautioned that we have reached a crossroads in artificial intelligence development where we can choose between allowing or preventing a potential threat to our assumed position as the dominant decision-making species. Please note the difference – they were not suggesting the machines would harm us physically but they were suggesting we would be passing the baton over and following behind them, trusting in the generosity and compassion of metal. Do we want that to happen? If we continue on our current trajectory and choose that version of the future, to make our lives more comfortable, after a few generations will we still be entirely human? We might need Shakespeare, or his sister, to bring that point to the world’s attention. The experience, the struggle and perhaps even the sadness is part of the human experience, so without it don’t we just become useless lumps, bored and reliant on an external source of handouts for survival?
I love the idea that an artificial intelligence can be brought down by presenting it with an abstract statement it can't process, such as: “A man is a giraffe under an iron sun.” Well done.
“Every question he has possessed about himself wilts and dies on the vine, dropping to the ground and fertilizing his growth.”
There’s a sharp sting in the tail end pages of this story, which will make you sit upright too. The empire strikes back - and not in the fashion you’re expecting.
Principles of Literary Criticism would claim that “effective critical work requires a closer aesthetic interpretation of the literary text as an object”. By that rule, this book frames an important social question and that question needs to be asked more often or we will be walking ahead without seeing where our foot is landing. Therefore, this isn’t just a competent science fiction adventure, it has implications and worth. We are moving toward this without a debate on whether a cosseted future is in our best interests. It might be or it might not but The Retroactivist is a prompt to think and choose before we become reliant for survival on something external to our species.
I recommend that the author send copies of this book to the major national science fiction archives, as when this philosophical question for humanity becomes a hot topic, its early portrayal in this fictional story should be acknowledged and considered in the literature.
The story describes the future we are currently working towards, where there’s no famine, all work is carried out by automation and people are free to pursue their leisure interests, which are usually to “drink and dance and screw because there’s nothing else to do” (Jarvis Cocker). One of these sheep citizens learns about an alternative, the ruthless meritocracy of the twentieth century. Although the risks are great, like coming out at the bottom of the social pile, there are occasional benefits that humanity in the future has all but forgotten: job satisfaction, self-worth, physical fitness, competitive challenge, feeling part of something greater than oneself; all the missing mental candies of happiness. To get them back into human lives, the protagonist chooses to become an activist revolutionary. Go retro!
This existential issue has stepped beyond the old nineteenth century ideologies that were set up in response to the industrial revolution, socialism and capitalism. It has become, truly, a question for science fiction because a world where we only have to do the jobs we want to do is within sight of the next generation of humankind. This sounds great but it takes a writer like this to explore the negative side of this third industrial philosophy.
There’s a big question underlying all of this: Can humans be truly happy if their sense of purpose has been removed? Secondary questions include: Will we continue to evolve if there is no competitive niche to select between probabilities of survival? (with artificial help, all flawed genes will survive and the standard of our species’ DNA can only regress). Should we strive to make our lives easier and easier, longer and longer, to suspend incentive to try (all being looked after anyway), until humans become the pets of their servant robots? Is it good to lose free will to make choices between right and wrong, to strive or be lazy, if by compliance with a system we only represent the matter being processed through it? Is it right to fear the efficiency-driven robots might conclude the human component is unnecessary luggage? Is everything we want the same as everything we need? If we find the human species has changed unrecognisably, could this change ever be reversed or would we have lost the skills to survive without the feeding tube?
“Beyond your social life you don’t have any fears. If you want to get Chinese, we go to China. If there’s a movie that doesn’t exist, we can make it together.”
I can think of one simile, that of antibiotic use. In developed countries, our immune system hasn’t had to fight hard for three generations because we use antibiotics. These are becoming gradually less effective as the various hazards which survive these medicines are selecting in favour of their most resistant strains. When antibiotics become useless, we will have artificially interfered in the system with the result that stronger (than otherwise background normal) strains can fight our weakened (than we would have had without decades of antibiotics) immune systems. In short, we make life easier for ourselves for fifty to one hundred years and then pay for it later, many times over, because we’re so limp without artificial support.
The protagonist’s answer is meritocratic capitalism, but that has imperfections too: “Nobody agrees with your ideas, Reid. That’s why they changed. That’s why sixty years ago, people changed them. Your ideas were killing everyone, slowly.”
Hawking and Musk cautioned that we have reached a crossroads in artificial intelligence development where we can choose between allowing or preventing a potential threat to our assumed position as the dominant decision-making species. Please note the difference – they were not suggesting the machines would harm us physically but they were suggesting we would be passing the baton over and following behind them, trusting in the generosity and compassion of metal. Do we want that to happen? If we continue on our current trajectory and choose that version of the future, to make our lives more comfortable, after a few generations will we still be entirely human? We might need Shakespeare, or his sister, to bring that point to the world’s attention. The experience, the struggle and perhaps even the sadness is part of the human experience, so without it don’t we just become useless lumps, bored and reliant on an external source of handouts for survival?
I love the idea that an artificial intelligence can be brought down by presenting it with an abstract statement it can't process, such as: “A man is a giraffe under an iron sun.” Well done.
“Every question he has possessed about himself wilts and dies on the vine, dropping to the ground and fertilizing his growth.”
There’s a sharp sting in the tail end pages of this story, which will make you sit upright too. The empire strikes back - and not in the fashion you’re expecting.
Principles of Literary Criticism would claim that “effective critical work requires a closer aesthetic interpretation of the literary text as an object”. By that rule, this book frames an important social question and that question needs to be asked more often or we will be walking ahead without seeing where our foot is landing. Therefore, this isn’t just a competent science fiction adventure, it has implications and worth. We are moving toward this without a debate on whether a cosseted future is in our best interests. It might be or it might not but The Retroactivist is a prompt to think and choose before we become reliant for survival on something external to our species.
I recommend that the author send copies of this book to the major national science fiction archives, as when this philosophical question for humanity becomes a hot topic, its early portrayal in this fictional story should be acknowledged and considered in the literature.
October 1, 2023
This was such a cool book! I loved the humour and how it didn’t stuff its message down my throat but still hit some really good points.
July 18, 2017
Do our lives have meaning without struggle? Is facing the absolute freedom to do what you want potentially more dreadful than facing limits? In a utopia, what is the meaning of resistance?
In The Retroactivist, protagonist Reid Rosales confronts these and many other questions in this page-turning speculative novel of ideas that reminded me of Looking Backward meets Steppenwolf. Ragolia rightly avoids easy answers in this engaging exploration of social justice, historical nostalgia, and frustrated agency, and ends his tale with a shocking conclusion that has to be read to be believed.
In The Retroactivist, protagonist Reid Rosales confronts these and many other questions in this page-turning speculative novel of ideas that reminded me of Looking Backward meets Steppenwolf. Ragolia rightly avoids easy answers in this engaging exploration of social justice, historical nostalgia, and frustrated agency, and ends his tale with a shocking conclusion that has to be read to be believed.
May 20, 2017
Satirical science fiction set in a future utopia.
In the future, robots do all the work and humans can devote themselves to having fun. Despairing of ever being more than a second-rate cartoonist, Reid embarks on a search for personal meaning in life. When he finds a club where people enjoy role-playing life under twentieth century capitalism, he decides a life of hard work and hardship is more fulfilling, and sets out to overthrow the established order.
The story is a little slow to start, but the writing was good enough to keep me reading, well edited with few errors. The satire is sharp and I found Reid’s struggle to find meaning in a life of leisure thought-provoking.
Expect a fair bit of sex.
In the future, robots do all the work and humans can devote themselves to having fun. Despairing of ever being more than a second-rate cartoonist, Reid embarks on a search for personal meaning in life. When he finds a club where people enjoy role-playing life under twentieth century capitalism, he decides a life of hard work and hardship is more fulfilling, and sets out to overthrow the established order.
The story is a little slow to start, but the writing was good enough to keep me reading, well edited with few errors. The satire is sharp and I found Reid’s struggle to find meaning in a life of leisure thought-provoking.
Expect a fair bit of sex.
March 4, 2017
Loved it!
April 14, 2020
Very thoughtful and imaginative!
February 25, 2025
Essential dystopian reading for our time.
March 16, 2017
It was so refreshing to find a novel like this. I'm also a writer and have thought a lot about how humanity will deal with increasing automation and leisure time in the future. The author does a good job exploring one man's search for meaning in a world where you don't have to work. The plot moves along well and there are lots of clever ideas presented. The dialogue is a little speechy in spots but nonetheless this is an enjoyable, thought provoking effort.
June 25, 2018
If you enjoyed Orwell's 1984, Huxley's Brave New World, or even Pixar's Wall-e there is something for you in Nate Ragolia's The Retroactivist. Throw in a bit of nuanced Stepford Wives and a splash Bellamy's Looking Backward and you have a sense of the novel: a speculative fiction piece focused on what truly qualifies a society as utopian and a person as happy.
(More below cover art)
Set in the year 2087, the government has solved hunger, illness, social strife and all major components of societal duress. Citizens travel the world via tube cars and enjoy cocktails made inconvenient replicators. Sexual gratification is omnipresent and all activities are scheduled and paid for by the flick of a wifi wristband. The primary goal of citizens - enjoy life.
Society is 'perfected', yet perfection leaves main character Reid Rosales unfulfilled.
Akin to Alice tumbling down the rabbit hole, Reid finds an underground sect of fellow Citizens with a shared longing for the past. Reid decides to eschew the safety of perfection for the excitement of uncertainty. He leaves his sultry girlfriend, a cush apartment and a life of leisure in the United Sociocracy of the Americas and immerses himself in the philosophy, economy and society of the 20th century. His newly acquired cohorts band together and take it upon themselves to be 'retroactivists'.
Revolution ensues.
Ragolia has a knack for presenting the fantastic as believable, unfolding a unique perspective on what it means to be genuinely fulfilled, not just comfortable. I have a sense if Margaret Atwood and Ayn Rand sat down for an afternoon of Chardonnay, they would have lots to say about this novel. Ragolia also gives the reader a treat by nestling into the novel subtle references to the 20th Century that if you are on your toes you will read with a smirk. The Retroactivist reads quickly have a steady pace and is a tribute to what Indie Authors have to offer. Kudos to Nate Ragolia. Buy it!
(More below cover art)
Set in the year 2087, the government has solved hunger, illness, social strife and all major components of societal duress. Citizens travel the world via tube cars and enjoy cocktails made inconvenient replicators. Sexual gratification is omnipresent and all activities are scheduled and paid for by the flick of a wifi wristband. The primary goal of citizens - enjoy life.
Society is 'perfected', yet perfection leaves main character Reid Rosales unfulfilled.
Akin to Alice tumbling down the rabbit hole, Reid finds an underground sect of fellow Citizens with a shared longing for the past. Reid decides to eschew the safety of perfection for the excitement of uncertainty. He leaves his sultry girlfriend, a cush apartment and a life of leisure in the United Sociocracy of the Americas and immerses himself in the philosophy, economy and society of the 20th century. His newly acquired cohorts band together and take it upon themselves to be 'retroactivists'.
Revolution ensues.
Ragolia has a knack for presenting the fantastic as believable, unfolding a unique perspective on what it means to be genuinely fulfilled, not just comfortable. I have a sense if Margaret Atwood and Ayn Rand sat down for an afternoon of Chardonnay, they would have lots to say about this novel. Ragolia also gives the reader a treat by nestling into the novel subtle references to the 20th Century that if you are on your toes you will read with a smirk. The Retroactivist reads quickly have a steady pace and is a tribute to what Indie Authors have to offer. Kudos to Nate Ragolia. Buy it!
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews