Jlawrence’s Comments (group member since Mar 08, 2010)

Jlawrence’s comments from the The Sword and Laser group.

aldenoneil wrote: "Tamahome wrote: "I would think you would spell your favorite actress's first name correctly. :P"

Favorite actress? Did someone mention Zoey Deschanel?"

Once the machines inserted Zoey Deschanel into the Matrix, no one wanted to leave, and Zion's rebellion crumbled.

I'm excited by the cast, but I kinda wish the Wachowski's were producing instead of directing. They've executive produced some decent stuff semi-recently (The Animatrix, V for Vendetta), but the last thing they directed that I liked came out in 1999. ;)

This book is also on my to-read list for this year. I guess I better hurry!

I saw William Gibson read and do a Q&A session at The Booksmith in San Francisco last Thursday. He was very interesting and amusing and said something that's been touched on by many discussions here: he claimed that science fiction is, by necessity, always really about the day in which it is written, instead of about the future.

He argued a science-fiction writer is always doing extrapolations into the future through the lens of contemporary society's perceptions and current knowledge -- which will inevitably mark the work as being part of its time. As an example, he talked about his own Neuromancer (1984) containing a vision of "Reaganomics turned up to 11", which for Gibson meant a disappeared middle-class, leaving only the superrich and an teaming underclass. He said that was not any conscious intent when he began writing Neuromancer, but was just a natural consequence of him extrapolating from his present day.

He conceded some science fiction writers do the hard work of rigorous world-building, trying to be as rational and scientifically sound as possible in their visions of the future -- and he did not put himself in that rigorous category because he "plays too fast and loose" with his world-building. But he argued that reality is so strange and complex, getting an accurate grasp on the present is deeply difficult enough that completely accurate extrapolations into the future are impossible.

He imagined himself himself going to his publishers in the '80s with a list of 15 (accurate) points about the future which he would want to include in his next novel. He startes with our dependence on fossil fuels causing global climate change, and extreme weather patterns that result. "Nice, that could be interesting," the publishers say. But when he reads points 2 & 3, about AIDS and the 9/11 attacks and aftermath, they start to look at him strangely. "Seriously, planes being flown into the WTC? You want to do the climate change....*and* these two other things in same book?" By the time he's read all 15 points, they've called security to escort him out of the building.

I agree with him up to a certain point. Even though there's some very cool (or frightening) examples of imagined futures in sf lining up with what actually came to pass, I don't think the best way to view science fiction as a scientific-societal fortune teller. I remember arguments here that Blindsight wasn't really science fiction by people who found its imagined future too unbelievable. But for me, it was an interesting (if flawed) rational exploration of some big questions about the nature and value of consciousness, which certainly qualified it as science fiction even if every aspect of its imagined future turns out to be incorrect.

I think what Gibson de-emphasized is the "what-if" exploratory aspect of science fiction, because he's become more and more fascinated with "what is actually currently happening?" vs. "what would things be like if...". I think the exploratory "what-if?" is the core of science fiction (and why some sf authors have pushed for the term "speculative fiction" vs. "science fiction").

What do you think?

aldenoneil wrote: "I'd also like to add to the list any books that include any sexual encounters at all, because I do most of my recommending to my parents."

So you'll be recommending the current pick Rule 34 then? ;)

kvon wrote: "Dictionary of the Khazars which was written in braided hypertext entries, before hypertexting. Not really a plot, but hidden suggestions of various stories from different points of vbut hidden suggestions of various stories from different points of view and different times. (The male vs female version, however, was just a useless gimmick to me.) "

Yes, I love that book, but it's definitely an acquired taste -- a surreal fantasy / revised history parceled out in dictionary entries that you can cross-refrence in the order of your choosing (agreed, hypertext-y) -- so I don't recommend it until I know someone's tastes. And agreed, the dumb gimmick of the male/female versions is also a barrier. I still love it, though (*hides from its dream assassins*).

Adreienne wrote: "I have not yet found someone I can recommend Shadow and Claw to without strong, strong reservations and lots of buts."

When I re-read it when it was a S&L pick I was less dazzled by it then the first time I read it, picking it apart more, liking some of it more, some of it less -- so I did gain some caveats I would make before recommending it now, whereas before I would trumpet it heedlessly. And yes, it not being on Kindle doesn't help.

Jenny wrote: "Jlawrence wrote: "Just started A Canticle for Leibowitz (the first on my 'read these books in 2012' challenge list)"
Have you ever read it before? I never have, and have always meant..."

I started it when I was in high school, I think, and liked it a lot but got thrown off by a certain plot development early on (I won't spoil) and put it down. But I've always meant to go back and read it through, and finally am doing so!

Just started A Canticle for Leibowitz (the first on my 'read these books in 2012' challenge list), and making my way through The Making of The Empire Strikes Back.

Yes, that does fit. You've answered my questions and filled in the plot hole I apparently dug myself. :)

Veronica, how dare you disqualify the 'human height restriction' from io9's 2012 sf predictions list! ;)

I think that that part of the Peter-Gabriel-era Genesis (...ah, when Phil Collins was just the drummer...) song 'Get 'Em Out By Friday' *does* qualify as being science-fiction-y. It goes:

"This is a announcement from Genetic Control: 'It is my sad duty to inform you of a four-foot restriction on humanoid height.'"

The lyric sheet notes "18/9/2012 T.V. Flash on all Dial-A-Program Services" above that line (the album came out in '72). (And, c'mon, 'humanoid' - where does that get used outside of laser-y stuff, huh? huh??) ;)

Also, on the same album is 'Watcher of the Skies', inspired by the S&L read Childhood's End.

Yes, I listened to that album far too many times in jr. high.

Kate wrote: "I don't remember where it said that global violent crime was low, I think I remember Liz saying that there were an average of 9 murders in Edinburgh a year, which is about what it is now
(source: ..."

Ah, you're right. I could have sworn there was some part of it that mentioned the low of murder world-wide as a rationale for connecting the far-flung crimes, but I can't find it, and the murder rate in Edinburgh that Liz mentions is about what it is now. Maybe I made the low-global-murder-rate thing up because I couldn't understand why such disparate seeming-accidents would get connected otherwise (at least, before the number of incidents mushroomed).

Yeah, your explanation of the Rule 34 squad's purpose makes sense.

Early in the novel, when Liz makes a connection with the first death and another 'accidental' death (with some shared characteristics) that occurs in an entirely different country, I thought that was a highly unlikely connection to make. But shortly thereafter it's revealed that the global rate of violent crimes in the near-future of Rule 34 is very, very low. So low that incidents like these could come under immediate scrutiny and seem suspiciously related.

Now, it doesn't seem crime and vice in general has decreased in the world of Rule 34, even if it's maneuvered into some new territories, and I couldn't really detect a reason why violent crime would have decreased *that* radically. This also made me wonder about the Rule 34 unit itself. Unless I misunderstand it, it's not a thought-crime unit, but is instead scouring internet memes and behaviors for incipient actual crime/violence. But if psychotic behavior/violence is so rare, would such a unit be a practical investment of law enforcement, even as a department backwater? Is the idea that the Rule 34 unit acts like Minority Report's "Precrime" division, but with network/meme analysis instead of precogs, and that's why violent crime is low? But if that were the case, wouldn't it be a highly regarded unit instead of a department backwater?

For those of you who've read
Halting State, the earlier book set in the same world, does that book explain this part of the world?

Finished today as well. I liked what the ending revealed, but it still wasn't quite enough, and agree that it was unsatisfying with regards to the overall characters and story. Still, I'm glad I read it - not a favorite, but an interesting take on a near-future, kinda-cyberpunk-y noir/murder mystery.

terpkristin wrote: "AndrewP wrote: 'Okay, so was there any point to the 2nd person narrative, or was it just a gimmick?'

It made some sense for the Toymaker parts. Maybe not as much for the other parts. (view spoiler)[It could be a representation of the AI scamming everybody, kind of telling the story from the AI perspective...but that's a bit of a stretch.(view spoiler)[" (hide spoiler)] (hide spoiler)]"

Yeah, I wondered about that, too. (view spoiler)[It would have been cool if the second-person narration was revealed to be part of the AI's 'personality projection' and the social engineering that it did with the people (the characters of the novel) it had targeted through its web of connections -- that it was viewing each of them as 'you'. But I think there's just a hint of that, and the second-person was mainly an exercise on Stross's part.) (hide spoiler)] I did get used to the second-person much quicker than I thought I would.

aldenoneil wrote: "Jlawrence wrote: "Snagged! Thanks for the heads-up!"

It was all for you, Josh."

If that's so, you just conducted a marketing campaign with a 100% success rate! :)

Snagged! Thanks for the heads-up!

At first the second-person narrative struck me as gimmicky and pointless (like being in an interactive fiction game or choose-your-own-adventure without being able to make any choices), but as earlier as the first character pov switch for chapter 2 I found myself getting used to it.

The accents are still throwing me off, however. I am kind of wishing I had got the audio book now, but I already paid for the kindle version, so I'm committed to e-inking it.

All of my pre-GR reads are just ratings, but whenever I re-read something or finish something new I try to write at least a short review (but sometimes laziness makes me just rate them).

Alex wrote: "Jlawrence wrote: "The Best of the Best: 20 Years of the Year's Best Science Fiction is a *phenomenal* collection of short stories."

This is sitting on my shelf, just waiting to be read!"

There's a bunch of authors I want to read more of thanks to it. Favorites from it included Greg Bear's 'Blood Music', Nancy Kress's 'Trinity', Gibson's 'The Winter Market', John Kessel's 'The Pure Product', Greg Egan's 'Wang's Carpets', Brian Stableford's 'Mortimer Gray's History of Death', Tony Daniel's 'A Dry, Quiet War', Ted Chiang's 'Story of Your Life' and Geoff Ryman's 'Have Not Have'.

The Best of the Best: 20 Years of the Year's Best Science Fiction is a *phenomenal* collection of short stories.

Bree wrote: "Paul 'Pezski' wrote: "Bree wrote: "Read Hyperion first! :D "

Hyperion is good, but Name of the Rose and Cloud Atlas are two of my favourite books...."

Well, this is how nerdy my approach to Hyperion is going to be: I want to re-read some bits of the Canterbury Tales before I read it (it's been a long time since that college course ;) ).

Kris wrote: "also no one writes the end of days like Pournelle and Niven."

Yeah, my first thought for this was Lucifer's Hammer by Niven & Pournelle - I started it as a teen after reading and loving The Mote in God's Eye and liked it, but never finished it for some reason (maybe I didn't want the world to end!). Basically a hard sci-fi version of the 'a meteor is going to collide with Earth!!' scenario.

Another book I started when a teen and never finished - King's The Stand. What I read of it certainly *seemed* headed towards end of the world-ness.

Mars hates our world, of course, so you could read the Wells classic
The War of the Worlds for the prototype of alien invasion stories.

J.G. Ballard loves to destroy the world - he's done several variations - global flood in The Drowned World, strange crystals enveloping everything in their path in The Crystal World, and global drought in, er, The Drought.

Frank Herbert wrote The White Plague about a bio-engineered threat to humanity (meaning to read it) -- but that brings up the question if you want to include threats-just-to-humanity or if the threat has to be to the entire world. Multiple choice apocalypses!