![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
newnumber6Finished: Blindsight, by Peter Watts
Started: Slow River, by Nicola Griffith (Nebula Winner)
Thoughts on Blindsight behind the cut. Mostly non-spoilery, but there may be a few bits in there, mostly for the general concept.
Overall, I quite enjoyed the book. The premise (a ship attempting first contact, crewed by a linguist with induced MPD, a biologist who sees through machines, a 'pacifist warrior', a vampire, and all told through the perspective of a man who had half of his brain cut out and who had to reinvent empathy from scratch by analyzing other people - that's all back of the book stuff, not any big spoilers since they're introduced with early on) was irresistable, and although I don't think it quite lived up to the expectations it built in my head, it still did a good job of entertaining. I mean, come on, how do you not love a story that straight-facedly puts a vampire in the main cast, and attempts to deal with it scientifically. I wish they explored it a little more, in fact.
The book explores a lot of different things involving different ways of thinking and seeing the world, and various ways in which our mind can fool us. It also dabbles its toe in a whole host of other objects, the singularity, and the idea of most humans becoming unemployed (comfortably) due to advance of technology.
The central conceit to the story (which I won't reveal) is an interesting one, well explored even if I'm not sure I agree with the premises. But then the author says it's more a thought experiment than specifically an argument. And it lead to a kind of bleak tone which I enjoy in books sometimes.
My major complaint is that it felt a little light in some ways. With so many characters messed up in their own little ways, I didn't feel like I got to know any of them like I'd hoped to when I started. The plot itself, likewise, felt like it breezed by a bit too quickly, and certain elements of the Earthbound life (told in flashbacks) didn't get as much detail as I'd like. Neither of it particularly hurts the story, but I personally would have appreciated, say, another hundred or so pages to just really dig in to some concepts and characters more.
One nice element I appreciate is the appendix, which briefly gives some scientific justification (with footnotes) for a lot of the stuff dealt with. I'm a big geek so I like reading about that, and the fact that it's handily available it means I'll probably be using it as a quick reference (or reference to furthur reference) if I want the information again, especially if I want to steal one of the elements for something of my own. ;)
The book's also one of very few I read that I can actually just post a link directly to it, since the author made it available online. This was in fact the only way I heard of it. It was BoingBoinged and I was bored so I read the first chapter and it hooked me enough to want to buy the book to read the rest (since I don't care for reading online long term). So, anyway, if at all interested, here's a link to the complete text of Blindsight by Peter Watts
Blindsight of course was up for a Hugo this year, but lost out to Rainbows End by Vernor Vinge, which I've also read. Of course, it would be crass to turn it into a game of "which should have won". So, let's be crass!
Actually, they're pretty close, in terms of my personal enjoyment - some cool elements, a little disappointing and unsatisfying in some ways. I do still think I'd have preferred Blindsight to win, though. It had a more cohesive story that wrapped everything up, whereas Rainbows End had some plot elements not resolved, presumably because there's a sequel brewing. Also, Blindsight had a cooler central premise to it... both had a lot of wild ideas, but Blindsight made theirs come alive a little more. Rainbows End does edge out in terms of depth, both in story on character (which is why I would have liked a few hundred more pages), but I think Blindsight was, somewhat, the better book. And of course, Watts is Torontonian and hasn't won before, so I would have preferred that, too.
Well, I suppose there's always the Nebulas.
Of course, I haven't read any of the other nominees (but Glasshouse is on my short list to read)
Just started Slow River, but haven't got far enough into it to form any preliminary opinion.
Started: Slow River, by Nicola Griffith (Nebula Winner)
Thoughts on Blindsight behind the cut. Mostly non-spoilery, but there may be a few bits in there, mostly for the general concept.
Overall, I quite enjoyed the book. The premise (a ship attempting first contact, crewed by a linguist with induced MPD, a biologist who sees through machines, a 'pacifist warrior', a vampire, and all told through the perspective of a man who had half of his brain cut out and who had to reinvent empathy from scratch by analyzing other people - that's all back of the book stuff, not any big spoilers since they're introduced with early on) was irresistable, and although I don't think it quite lived up to the expectations it built in my head, it still did a good job of entertaining. I mean, come on, how do you not love a story that straight-facedly puts a vampire in the main cast, and attempts to deal with it scientifically. I wish they explored it a little more, in fact.
The book explores a lot of different things involving different ways of thinking and seeing the world, and various ways in which our mind can fool us. It also dabbles its toe in a whole host of other objects, the singularity, and the idea of most humans becoming unemployed (comfortably) due to advance of technology.
The central conceit to the story (which I won't reveal) is an interesting one, well explored even if I'm not sure I agree with the premises. But then the author says it's more a thought experiment than specifically an argument. And it lead to a kind of bleak tone which I enjoy in books sometimes.
My major complaint is that it felt a little light in some ways. With so many characters messed up in their own little ways, I didn't feel like I got to know any of them like I'd hoped to when I started. The plot itself, likewise, felt like it breezed by a bit too quickly, and certain elements of the Earthbound life (told in flashbacks) didn't get as much detail as I'd like. Neither of it particularly hurts the story, but I personally would have appreciated, say, another hundred or so pages to just really dig in to some concepts and characters more.
One nice element I appreciate is the appendix, which briefly gives some scientific justification (with footnotes) for a lot of the stuff dealt with. I'm a big geek so I like reading about that, and the fact that it's handily available it means I'll probably be using it as a quick reference (or reference to furthur reference) if I want the information again, especially if I want to steal one of the elements for something of my own. ;)
The book's also one of very few I read that I can actually just post a link directly to it, since the author made it available online. This was in fact the only way I heard of it. It was BoingBoinged and I was bored so I read the first chapter and it hooked me enough to want to buy the book to read the rest (since I don't care for reading online long term). So, anyway, if at all interested, here's a link to the complete text of Blindsight by Peter Watts
Blindsight of course was up for a Hugo this year, but lost out to Rainbows End by Vernor Vinge, which I've also read. Of course, it would be crass to turn it into a game of "which should have won". So, let's be crass!
Actually, they're pretty close, in terms of my personal enjoyment - some cool elements, a little disappointing and unsatisfying in some ways. I do still think I'd have preferred Blindsight to win, though. It had a more cohesive story that wrapped everything up, whereas Rainbows End had some plot elements not resolved, presumably because there's a sequel brewing. Also, Blindsight had a cooler central premise to it... both had a lot of wild ideas, but Blindsight made theirs come alive a little more. Rainbows End does edge out in terms of depth, both in story on character (which is why I would have liked a few hundred more pages), but I think Blindsight was, somewhat, the better book. And of course, Watts is Torontonian and hasn't won before, so I would have preferred that, too.
Well, I suppose there's always the Nebulas.
Of course, I haven't read any of the other nominees (but Glasshouse is on my short list to read)
Just started Slow River, but haven't got far enough into it to form any preliminary opinion.
