Book 3: Use of Weapons

[Maggie, space cruisin' for a bruisin']

Its August, and time for our next entry in the Culture Read!
This is probably my favorite Culture entry so far....I cant wait to see what you all think about the ending!

[York]

great story. I really miss Iain M. Banks, and Iain Banks.

[Mike]

This was my favorite one so far. The scene with the girl on the beach and her pet flightless seabirds threw me into a depression. The ending caught me off guard even though I suspected something similar. The development of the culture and their policies of interference in other planets was well done. The writing was compelling and I never got bored with it or thrown off by the time-reversed threads of the storyline.

[E.J.]

The ending was good. Worked well. (for Maggie)

But, Culture's actions in this book at times mirrors wars in support of policy in our own time. A little disappointing to me. In one conflict, when the main character has just won the war he was told to win, he is informed that because an agreement has been concluded, he must stand back and let the other side win. Talk about a cynical policy decision.

In Players of Games, Culture's motives seemed far more pure. Quite frankly, it is hard to support wars of policy. People are much more drawn to wars over ideals and rights.

The trouble is, wars for ideals don't turn out so well in our time either. Look at WW I, the war to end all wars. How idealistic can it get? The reality that war was not ended turned the American public into cynical isolationists who saw war now as simply something to benefit arms manufacturers etc. (monied interests)

The reality is war is horrific under any circumstances and for any reason, even good ones.

After particularly bloody wars such as the thirty years wars or more recently combined WWI and WW II, many nations and their people recoil from war and turn to limited wars in support of policy, which are not ever very popular.

But, what happens to the people who fight in these "Little" wars? The main character in this novel for instance. How is he affected? Seemed to me he kept trying to reconnect to something more innocent. He leaves and tries writing poetry for instance.

One final comment: I love Lain's descriptions. Normally, I skim descriptions. So boring. But, many of his are way different. One in particular stood out for me. He was describing a nearly abandoned city covered with snow to be akin to a linen shroud over a corpse. Eek!

[Maggie, space cruisin' for a bruisin']

It seems to me each book in the series describes The Culture from a different standpoint.....
Showing how they use their 'weapon', manipulating over and over...both eerie and hard to define

[Micah]

Excession is my favorite in the series so far, followed by Player of Games and then this one.

The structure of the book is difficult in Use of Weapons and I found it often times confusing. Only seeing comments about it by others did I recognize the pattern of the books different segments. I don't know why I didn't pick up on that but it hindered my enjoyment some.

Also, (excerpted from my GR review of it) "More annoyingly, there are several places in the narrative where the POV jumps suddenly from one character to another in mid-paragraph. That seemed very grating. And finally, there is a point in the middle-to-late book where the flashbacks seem to cease being strictly necessary, imparting very little plot-forward motion."

But it's saved ultimately by the killer ending, the action, and the characters. I think it's an admirable work, but felt just a bit rough in places.

[Micah]

June wrote: "The ending was good. Worked well. (for Maggie)

But, Culture's actions in this book at times mirrors wars in support of policy in our own time. A little disappointing to me. In one conflict, when t..."

Well...hmm...I think the whole point in this book, and in several other books by Banks is that cultural (no pun intended) idealism is never perfectly reflected in the world of politics and foreign policy; that The Culture cannot exist as the perfect democracy it appears to be without some very underhanded and cynical manipulation going on somewhere.

And that somewhere is Special Circumstances. It's their job to be the stealthy dagger up the backside of the Culture's would-be enemies and/or rivals. They are Banks's way of acknowledging that there is no such thing as an innocent Utopia. The Culture is not so much a democracy, as an oligarchy ruled by benevolent tyrants (the machine minds) and protected by a ruthless, sneaky, cynical black-ops secret society: Special Circumstances.

His books are kind of like the Dune series, where each one explores the Culture from a different viewpoint. Banks himself I'm sure wasn't saying "this is the way it should be" but rather "this is the way it probably would be."

June wrote: "The trouble is, wars for ideals don't turn out so well in our time either. Look at WW I, the war to end all wars. How idealistic can it get?"

Yeah. Well, that's not really the way it was. That was the propaganda slogan. In reality it was totally a war of policy. It came about because of a series of political pacts and treaties. When two of the small parties involved started fighting, their sworn political allies were drawn in. A house of cards...knock down the smallest one of them and they all come crashing down.

Ideals only came into it when they needed fodder for the front line.

[Packi]

The reason WWI happened was because everyone wanted it. For years there had been saber-rattling and militarization. Everyone wanted to see what these new war-toys could do. Then a small incident in Sarajevo was enough to burst the barrel.

We know now, that this kind of war-mongering almost led to a nuclear war during the Reagan era (Able Archer).

[E.J.]

I think President Wilson is interesting as a real world example of idealism and war within the context of Banks' Culture. He was very idealistic and was willing to send military forces to enforce those ideals. He sent quite a few expeditions into the southern hemisphere. For instance he sent the Marines to Mexico to teach the Mexicans to elect good men and to demonstrate good government during a short occupation. The US did not need to enter WW I. Wilson wanted a place at the peace conference so he could push for his 14 points. He bought that place with American lives. Then, he was not as ruthless as Culture and was argued out of all his points except the League of Nations. I had a teacher who said Wilson just couldn't bring himself to be ruthless enough to withhold food. I doubt Culture would have failed to do what was necessary to get the other leaders to agree to idealistic goals. (Think about how different the world would be had self-determination of nations been enacted as part of the peace treaty? Ho Chi Minh submitted an application for his country's independence based on that and had it rejected. The Middle East was carved up with imperialistic notions in mind putting bitter enemies together in states). I realize that the European reasons were totally different--treaties, train schedules, real drive for war, British fears concerning German growing naval power, ...

[E.J.]

I was really wondering what other people thought about the ending and what that meant about the main character. (view spoiler)[ Like all of a sudden, he is not what he seemed to be. And, even he seemed to be unaware of who he was. (hide spoiler)]

[Maggie, space cruisin' for a bruisin']

Also, what it says about Culture, and the fact that he is a major player for them....a Weapon they use.

[E.J.]

As in Player of Games, Banks seems interested in the effects on the person doing Culture's bidding. And, at the end, the effects of war in general.

[Kevin]

Micah wrote: "Excession is my favorite in the series so far, followed by Player of Games and then this one.

The structure of the book is difficult in Use of Weapons and I found it often times confusing. Only se..."

The structure of the novel was definitely troubling for me as well, as I lost track of what I thought was the main part of the novel, but the closing chapters all brought it together and as you say "Killer Ending". At one point I thought maybe I won't bother finishing this, as I thought I had no idea what was going on. But even at that point I enjoyed the writing well enough to continue. Now I think that I'll just have to hang in there on books I find difficult because in part maybe that is what makes them ultimately so satisfying in the end, of course that only goes for a book you're glad you've read when it's finished.

[E.J.]

Kevin wrote: "Micah wrote: "Excession is my favorite in the series so far, followed by Player of Games and then this one.

The structure of the book is difficult in Use of Weapons and I found it often times conf..."

Thank you for your comment on the value of continuing. I am near the beginning of the next one, and I am definitely spinning my wheels. Where is this one going? This is my third one of his and the first that I have found to be difficult. But, your words have inspired to pick it back up.

[mark, personal space invader]

I finished this over the weekend. very, very impressed. amazing book!

I really loved the challenging structure once I "realized" what was happening. and that's in quotes because I only realized it after checking the wikipedia page for the book due to some confusion on another issue. I wonder if I would have been able to eventually figure it out on my own. probably not until the last couple flashback chapters because I was about halfway through the book before checking wikipedia. that said, my not realizing those flashbacks were in reverse chronological order didn't necessarily confuse me, they just made me think they were random snippets of this guy's life. there were enough flashbacks within those flashbacks to make me think that.

I have to say that for the first half of the book I felt a lot of my less appealing, more bloodthirsty sides of myself were really getting off on the idea of punishing reactionary war-mongering assholes. and by punishing, I mean killing after toying with. Iain Banks really knows how to feed into that side of some progressives - that desire for "progressive revenge" is something that bubbles up in many of his books. but in the end, as always, Banks is way too sophisticated and complex of an author to make this or any of his novels a stroke fantasy for progressives who want to put their peacefulness to one side and actually get back at people who would fuck over other people for their right wing or corporate agendas.

I'm going to have to agree with Micah in recognizing that Banks does have a problem with shifting POVs. it was annoying and confusing and felt sloppy at times, unnecessarily. I wonder if he just has an antipathy to the phrase "____ said,"

Much like the prior two novels, Banks creates such a strong narrative that is all about deflating and even attacking complacent perspectives, so much that I feel like I've actually grown as a human after reading them. but the experience, when over, is one that is so deflating and causes me to get weirdly melancholy, that I find that I'm just not eager to jump right back into his world view. he's brilliant, no doubt. and I agree with him. but as much fun as I often had - his books are genuinely fun! at times - when I closed the book, my main feeling is often a combination of relief and a need to get some air/read something lighter.

I'm going to try to get past the need for a lengthy break and dive into Inversions sooner rather than later, but still, I can't imagine that happening for a few weeks. I need a breather.

[E.J.]

I agree this one was dark. So far, this is the darkest one I've read. I still cringe at the "chair."

You get at something I think is important. How progressives can get medieval in support of peace. Uh-huh. How one needs to go beyond and gain true tolerance. Which is tough to do. But, without that, progressives set themselves up as a separate side and become as intolerant as what they're opposing. Can you seek change without becoming something different from what you were?

And, I think Banks is asking this as well. But, I agree he enjoys the pure pleasure of smiting evil. Well, I do too.

[mark, personal space invader]

How one needs to go beyond and gain true tolerance.

so true and yet so hard to do.