"Too Like the Lightning" Finished Reading *Spoilers*

[Jemppu]

My gripe with the gendered language was the one-sidedness of it: the narration seemed to only sexualize / assign gender to femininity (as determined by the narrator).

(view spoiler)[Any mentions of 'feminine traits' - looks, gestures, clothing - automatically get noted in sexualized tones and frequently used to indicate departure from the status quo of 'genderlessness'. The feminine form is fetishized: breasts and vagina mentioned in context of 'forbidden' parts, acts and lewdness.

Meanwhile, there are hardly any mention of 'masculine' features of physique, and the rare occasion when a careful mention of such is made - broad shoulders or chest - no specific remark on gender is made, nothing forbidden or stirring implied. He can be casually described as having the physique 'solid as Atlas' and there'll be no mention of lustful eyes on him, no admiration of his body parts, or a remark from the narrator on how his gender is just so obvious it must be recorded thusly.

Out of a group of 'sexlessly dressed' "gentlemen" only those who have breasts and female crotch bones to hide under their clothing are called out. Because, can you believe it, dear reader, some of these gentlemen are female!? (Just trying to dress 'genderless'?) The other half? Presumably they're the real deal: 'non-gendered' gentlemen - men. Whose hiding of penises under their clothing warrants no special focus.

Which would suggest, that it's not gender neutrality per se, which is the status quo of this narration, but maleness. Everyone who doesn't display feminine traits gets called by the gender neutral "they", and if they show any hint of femininity, as determined by the narrator for us, then it's "she". "He" and "they" meanwhile seem rather interchangeable - treated just as nonchalantly, and can be switched around.

It seemed like Mycroft's one sexual encounter too was very careful with mentioning any gender specific parts by name; because it involves nothing female, and should thus read rather 'gender neutral'?

Eureka seems an example of a female who gets 'spared' from being sexualized/gendered and is called "they", because "there is nothing female about a creature to whom the body is no more than the mind’s imperfect interface, and the sex organ one more convenient place to cluster sensors".

Meanwhile, to a mere notion of a male getting called out for their gender we're supposed to react to adversely? Indicated by Mycroft's remark regarding Andou Mitsubishi: "Do not chide me, reader, for using the gendered ‘husband’...". This right after a whole paragraph is dedicated to gendering/sexualizing their wife, imagining her breasts and the wetness under her kimono - all of which Mycroft explains with ease and justifies to themself.

And on a side: from the get go, there seemed something off about the narrator's notion, that pronouns he/she would cause sexual thoughts in the reader's mind, apparently applicable only in that combination, when interactions between no other pairing of gendered pronouns elicit this remark. (hide spoiler)]

All of which I was unsure of until this line from "dear reader" to Mycroft: "Wretch, thou art as mad about women as thy Jean-Jacques." Which I took to be a proof that this is all indeed on purpose; just as much part of our narrator's twistedness as anything else, not author oversight as I first feared.

[Jemppu]

Anthony wrote: "Just finished Chapter the Thirtieth..."

*hah* I want a side story on the PR departments of these leaders (or is it enough to just turn on the news?)

[Anthony]

I just finished and I can say that I really really loved it. And I can totally imagine many people not loving it even a little bit.

[Jemppu]

Wonderful! I'm teetering between 4 and 5 stars. Might have to go high for how utterly engaging and innovative it is.

[Dawn F]

@Jemppu, that’s the genius of the writing. Mycroft presents himself as telling truth but in fact everything he says is all over the place, he contradicts himself many times, a lot of what he tells us is phrased as “they say that...”, thus completely avoiding actually committing to what he tells us. You absolutely should not take what he says as face value, least of all his ridiculous observations on gender. He’s a completely unreliable narrator, from his own feelings and motives, to his observations about others, which are completely subjective. Everything he says says everything about himself and very little about the people or events he describes. I would have an issue with it if this was the author’s view, but it’s very cleverly deeply ironic and I find myself laughing whenever Mycroft waxes on about his “clever insights”. He’s quite terrible and wonderfully consistently written. I’m quite in awe XD

[Anthony]

That’s my exact reading of Mycroft as well, Dawn. And I agree that it’s a singular achievement on Palmer’s part to pull him off so convincingly.

[Jemppu]

Dawn wrote: "...You absolutely should not take what he says as face value, least of all his ridiculous observations on gender..."

*hah* no fear of that! If there even was a way to make sense of all of their reasoning. I was only looking for that 'confirmation' on this particular quirk in text - since I seem to have tuned out for a while during the first read.

Anthony wrote: "...it’s a singular achievement on Palmer’s part to pull him off so convincingly."

That it is!

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

I agree, I think (and know, actually: http://www.mybookishways.com/2016/05/...) she was very purposeful with a lot of this.

The questions I think Travis and I have are a bit informed by re-reads, and the skew, which isn't entirely even with anything we learn about Mycroft. It's another thing where the assumptions made and the way a question is posed can't help but inject a bit of authorial intent into a character, even if, when asked, she would have a much more informed or socially acceptable answer to these questions.

But I am fully invested in the idea that at least gender and religion are something Mycroft is struggling with independent of Ada's perceptions on the subject.

[Chris]

I would be curious to see the favorite passages (in spoiler tags) of those who consider TLtL to be an above-average or better novel. I listened to the audiobook in 2017, so my general impressions have persisted much longer than my memory for specifics, and I don't have a text to search.

[Anthony]

@Chris I would cite the entirety of Chapters the Ninth and the Twentieth, which are wonderful examples for me of the coalescing of stylistic and thematic and philosophical and plot-rich threads.

[Travis]

Allison wrote: "But I am fully invested in the idea that at least gender and religion are something Mycroft is struggling with independent of Ada's perceptions on the subject."

Totally agree. My hesitations this second reading were more about the world Palmer has built and its history (e.g. my question above about why a post-U.S. world still holds on to Jefferson's American exceptionalism) than about Mycroft.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Travis wrote: "Allison wrote: "But I am fully invested in the idea that at least gender and religion are something Mycroft is struggling with independent of Ada's perceptions on the subject."

Totally agree. My h..."

Right. That's what I mean by the assumptions and what questions we pose. There are a few things that align too closely to things I'd anticipate of an American alive now to make it seem natural they'd belong to someone 300 years from now who is not American.

[Anthony]

Where is Jeffersonian American exceptionalism explicitly cited? I don’t remember seeing it myself, but that certainly doesn’t mean it wasn’t there.

[Travis]

Anthony wrote: "Where is Jeffersonian American exceptionalism explicitly cited? I don’t remember seeing it myself, but that certainly doesn’t mean it wasn’t there."

During the Renunciation Day festivities.

[Anthony]

Ah yes, I vaguely remember.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

This time around I'm able to better appreciate some of the pacing/construction elements of the book.

Ch 26

In my update, before Dawn told on herself and me, I mentioned that I really appreciated the progression (view spoiler)[of meeting Saladin--wild, savage, loving Saladin--in the muck and violence of plotting a murder in an alleyway, followed by meeting Papa who is so reasonable and so sure of what is right (and so fascinated by what is wrong) to end up at Madame's.

What a marvelous comparison of the three. We have someone we know is a murderer, who literally has eaten part of Mycroft, but for whom Mycroft would die before selling out, even to JEDD, and to whom Mycroft entrusts Bridger. Then we have the opposite, a symbol of law and order who cannot be trusted even by his employers because he is so prim, and then a brothel with people Mycroft fears so much he'd rather be brained and left for punishment than let them get more access to people he's revealed himself to.

So much savagery, all avoiding Papa. One in darkness and filth and love worth dying for, one with glitter and glamour and a fate worse than death. (hide spoiler)]

[Anthony]

So well stated, Allison!

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Okay, now that I'm done again, time for my really hard hitting questions:

1. What hive/law would you follow and why?
2. Which character did you have a crush on?
3. Which car system would you use?
4. If you could travel 1000 miles (1600 km)/hour at will, where would you make your home?

[Amanda]

Okay, just finished this, and wow!

I really love the complexity of the world, it makes me want to poke around in the corners and see what I'm missing, not because anything was left out but because there really is so much depth. This really nails the idea of social science fiction beautifully.

The flow of the narrative was a little tricky. The chapters are long and for the most part very distinct, which probably made it harder than normal for me to read through. On the other hand I can't really see it working any other way.

The end, meanwhile, had me sitting here going "What? What?!?" in the best possible way, and I kind of want to read it again right away to see what else I pick up on.

Finally, I especially adored chapter 15 and (view spoiler)[the discussion of stories, especially this: "We all imagine happy endings to such books, pick out the page, the paragraph, in which we would step in and pluck the innocents to safety. Only one among us actually can. All it would take is some store manikins, the costumes, and a miracle." (hide spoiler)]

[Sarah]

Amanda you should definitely go read Seven Surrenders while it’s still fresh. It answers a lot of questions regarding the ending.

[Ariana]

One problem I tend to have with some science fiction, especially if it's set in the "far" future (i.e. more that 100 ish years in the future?), is that the setting and culture seem too familiar to believably be coming from 400 years (or whatever) in the future. Clearly things change, and it feels like a failure of imagination to fill in parts of the world not immediately pertinent to the plot (e.g. culture of all sorts, gender norms, religious norms, language norms, modes of address, etc.) with things that feel too similar to our current culture, norms, etc.

I am NOT having that problem with this book.

[Gabi]

I'm still going slowly through this one (not even half done). It feels like going on forever. I would love to see what everybody sees so special in it, but so far I unfortunately can't.

[Mareike]

I've read up to chapter 5 so far and I'm really, really intrigued, but also still a bit disoriented. there's so many things about this world and Mycroft's past that haven't been explained yet and I look forward to learning about them.

In Ch. 4 (view spoiler)[I was a bit surprised by Danaë's effect on Mycroft. If this society is genderneutral, why would he react like that to her? I'm not sure I quite believe his explanation of that situation, but then, he might not be entirely truthful in it.

I'm also intrigued by her name (okay, all the names in the book) and the possible connection to the Greek Danaë and Perseus (Martin = Perseus?). (hide spoiler)]

[Amanda]

Not sure if you're there yet, but it's mentioned that (not really a spoiler, just world-building info) (view spoiler)[religious/biblical based names are no longer common, so given that I can see people drawing from mythology and literature as we see here. (hide spoiler)]

[Mareike]

Aaah! I hadn't reached that part yet, but that's a good point. Though (view spoiler)[the stickler in me can't help but point out that Martin is definitely a name based in a religious story. I mean, it definitely existed independently of the Catholic saint, but I think that's one reason it's endured so far. (hide spoiler)]

[Amanda]

Mareike wrote: "Aaah! I hadn't reached that part yet, but that's a good point. Though [spoilers removed]"

(view spoiler)[That will be addressed. (hide spoiler)]

[Mareike]

Excellent! Thanks!

[Mareike]

A few thoughts I typed up on the plane today.

Ch. 5
(view spoiler)[Is it just me or was there something very gender about the conversation between Mycroft and Carlyle that closes out this chapter? Especially the very end of it, when Carlyle asks Mycroft if they would have been a sensayer. (hide spoiler)]

Ch. 8
(view spoiler)[I've been reading a lot about Machiavelli and Rousseau these past three weeks (especially the citizen-soldier ideal) and I've taught the American Declaration of Independence enough timesto recognize it instantly. So coming across aspect of the ideas of the former and a slightly changed version of the latter was a delightful coincidence.
Having the founding myth of this society performed for people is an interesting idea. (And a nice parallel to the original Declaration of Independence being read aloud to peoplei n town squares, etc.).

For more than a generation we have not just been your travel agents but your banks, your lawyers, your hospitals, your schools. Now let us be your nations.

Hmmmm...
I must confess, the thought of corporations finding nations makes me a bit uneasy. Even though I really like the concept of people being able to choose which nationality they want and citizenship not being linked to a certain geographical region. (hide spoiler)]

[Amanda]

Mareike wrote: "A few thoughts I typed up on the plane today.

Ch. 5
[spoilers removed]

Ch. 8
I've been reading a lot about Machiavelli and Rousseau these past three weeks (especially the citizen-soldier ideal) ..."

Re: Ch. 8, I read that section a little differently. (view spoiler)[I didn't get the impression that their referring to individual corporations, but rather larger professional groups, sort of a guild-like organization. (hide spoiler)]

[Mareike]

Ah! Yes, that might be possible. (view spoiler)[Mycroft compares them to our contemporary companies, but clains they're different, IIRC. (hide spoiler)]

I just finished Ch. 9 (view spoiler)[and the discussion between Bridger and Carlyle was really well done. I found the change from 'Carlyle" to "Man" to "Priest" in the dialogue sections especially interesting and really well done. (hide spoiler)]

I really enjoyed reading your discussions on race and gender in the novel. I noticed the point you, Travis, made about race, too, and was a little...hmm...puzzled? To put it nicely. But I think I agree with Anthony when he says (view spoiler)[that Mycroft's descriptions and value judgments are influenced by the Enlightenment's Eurocentrism. (hide spoiler)]

I think I need to read some more to fully make up my mind on Mycroft's use of gendered language.

But I will say that (Ch. 7) (view spoiler)[Dominic Seneschal's introduction was fascinating. And in a way it made me think of Suranne Jones's amazing performance as Anne Lister in Gentleman Jack. (hide spoiler)]

P.S.: I noticed a typo in my comment about ch. 5. It should read "gentle" not "gender". *facepalm*

[Mareike]

Some thoughts abd reactions from last night.

Ch. 14
(view spoiler)[I really like how the book keeps peeling back thellayers in this society and the different Hives. It keeps me on my toes. And the interview made me painfully aware how rusty my Latin is.
And the thought of Martin always being connected to J.E.D.D. MASON is pretty unsettling.

I also find it interesting that the chapters are groups in days. I wonder if we'll end up getting sehen if them... (hide spoiler)]

Ch. 15
(view spoiler)[Ha! Referencing Les Misérables just after Mycroft and the Major talked about Dominic Seneschal is a delightful bit of intertextuality. And the parallele this and the mention of Odysseus as "beloved of the Gods" brings up some interesting parallels. Especially Bridger - Odysseus, but also Mycroft - Odysseus Mycroft - Jean Valjean, and of course Dominic Seneschal - Javert. (hide spoiler)]

Ch. 17
(view spoiler)[This

You may not have thought about it, reader, but ‘free’ is not a word one hears much anymore, not in its pure denotation. Almost everyone is so free these days, just as everyone is so healthy, happy, sentient, and alive, that one only mentions the quality if it is threatened: unhealthy, unfree.

is an interesting link back to the earlier discussion about Epicureans.
And I'm pretty sure it's not true for "everyone". Starting with Mycroft himself. (hide spoiler)]

Ch. 19
(view spoiler)[

Certainly you too, reader, like Carlyle, had formed a portrait of Thisbe who existed only in that bedroom, drinking tea and waiting for the active cast to come to her. But let me ask you this: would you have labeled her a stay-at-home so easily had I not been reminding you with every phrase that she is a woman?

Ha! Well played. (hide spoiler)]

Ch. 20
(view spoiler)[This chapter was....a lot.

Reading one of the conversations Mycroft has with the "reader" early on had me wondering if he's talking to himself? Is this some sort of split personality situation?

The later revelations......wow. I had thought Mycroft had committed one murder... (hide spoiler)]

Ch. 21
(view spoiler)[This bit about the selection of the new emperor

Young Ken Mardi, the prodigy who had fancied himself as sturdy as a samurai, I broke in an hour with such a method, but Cornel MASON endured three weeks at his predecessor’s order, and emerged as strong as he is now.

had me briefly wonder if Mycroft's crimes were part of that selection last night but this morning I think that's maybe too far a reach.... (hide spoiler)]

On top of the narrative and Mycroft, I also really, really enjoy Palmer's prose.

[Mareike]

To Allison's question about which Hive we'd like to be in:

After ch. 23 (view spoiler)[Reading this chapter, I thought the Cousins might be a good fit for me. But then I got to the bit about this Hive having struct kaws against sex work (or at least Red Light districts) and that clashes pretty badly with some of my political beliefs. So maybe I'd be Hiveless....

In general, I found it interesting to see some of my thoughts about so many people in the leadership positions being related somehow refkected back at me in Carlyle and Julia's talk. Thoufh "Mitsubishi brood" is a lot harsher than I'd have put it.
And I was genuinely taken aback by Carlyle having ulterior motives. (hide spoiler)]

Ch. 24
(view spoiler)[Saladin, huh? Interesting name. (hide spoiler)]

[Sarah]

Does anyone have any updates on the release date for Perhaps the Stars? I see Goodreads has pushed it back to 2021 (please don't let this be true!), but Amazon is still reflecting February 2020 (which I seriously doubt at this point). Another site mentioned June 2020...

I really want to get back to Terra Ignota but I was hoping to do it closer to release for book 4.

[Anna]

Sarah, this is the latest news I've seen about it.

[Sarah]

Anna wrote: "Sarah, this is the latest news I've seen about it."

Ahh yes I remember now. I must have blocked it out in a refusal to accept the truth. Thanks Anna!

[Bonnie]

A week after finishing TLTL:
1. "Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: "
A feeling that this could be a book by Vladimir Nabokov and Neal Stephenson writing a joint project. The discovery of Saladin from Mycroft's past, connected with appalling crimes -- crimes which he wants to explain to us--really reminds me of Claire Quilty lurking on the edges of Humbert Humbert's story. So if Lolita was rewritten as science fiction, not any old SF but the spectacular mind-expanding meteoric kind. Snow Crash when it was cutting-edge. Or Charles Stross in his debut years?

2. Very confusing for me. So many characters, that even with notes and two online character lists I just cannot make sense of everyone in the story. Some of them I look up again and again. It is close to a two-star ("It was OK") rating for me because of the rudderless anxiety and not being able to latch onto storyline.

3. The ideas of this future are fascinating. The Bashes vs. nuclear families; fast transit bringing about Hives instead of nation-states; gender concept/reference changes; individual but no public religion allowed; "Vocateur" instead of "Calling."

[Oleksandr]

Bonnie wrote: "3. The ideas of this future are fascinating. ."

I second this. I enjoyed the book on many levels with only minus - then it was the only one volume while I needed a conclusion. I plan to re-read it seen and try the following volume