What have you read lately?

[apl68]

I finally got around to reading something by Jane Austen.  I know that Northanger Abbey isn't considered her masterpiece, but it's what wasn't checked out from the library at the time, so...

It's quite funny (even laugh-out-loud funny) in places, and the characters and settings are well drawn.  No question that Jane Austen knew her craft.  However, my ability to get into what is after all basically a romance involving very upper-crust people of two centuries ago is limited.  Heroine Catherine Moreland may marry well above her station, but her station was pretty high to start with.  Note that the romance comes with a solid dose of realism.  To marry well you've GOT to have money and negotiate a deal between the two families, no matter how much the lovers might like each other.

I wonder what Jane Austen's future in the literary canon will be?  Feminist literary critics long ago convinced themselves that she was a proto-feminist, and that it was therefore okay to enjoy her works as a break from more conventionally dreary literary fiction.  But she was a member of the upper classes in colonial-era Britain, and surely had family whose money came partly or entirely from some colonial business that would have involved the labor or traffic of slaves.  That she reportedly expressed abolitionist sympathies back in the day might not be enough to save her from being "cancelled."  Laura Ingalls Wilder and other long-recognized classic authors have already been unpersoned, and the pace of this sort of thing has greatly quickened recently.

Eh---lots of people choose not to teach Jane Austen for all sorts of reasons. If they decide that their reading lists contain too much upper-class privilege and want to replace some of it with other types of authors, that seems perfectly reasonable to me.

In general, there are so many reasons not to teach an author---ranging from 'he's morally reprehensible' to 'I don't really like him and there are so many others that I do like'---that fussing about making a decision because of 'cancel culture' seems a bit disingenuous to me. For one thing, it depends on the assumption that certain books have an indisputable right to belong to the canon--and I've already said what I think about that higher up. And anyway, if the concern about cancelling Austen were genuinely motivated by the belief that Austen always belongs on reading lists, then there would be equal outrage around instructors who remove her for other reasons (such as, 'I just don't like her all that much'.) But while we might disagree with such decisions, they don't make us clutch our pearls and bemoan today's Philistinism. So I believe that worries over 'canceling' Austen are really just using Austen as an excuse to complain about cancel culture more generally. And I myself think such complaints are misplaced.

To be clear, the future of Jane Austen's (or any other novelists') literary reputation doesn't make a great deal of difference to me one way or another.  But I am curious to see whether she becomes a contested figure in today's climate.  A year ago I would have thought that her place in the academic literary canon was as secure as anybody's.  Now...I'm not so sure.

[mamselle]

Many of Austen's characters were hardly upper-class...she explored a range of different layers of society in her day, the 'arrived' (whom she often spoofed as buffons), the aspirational--some of whom 'got on' and were rewarded for their efforts, others of whom did but--and a number of in-betweeners.

She doesn't go into the factories with Hardy, or visit London's low-rent tenements as Dickens later did, but her characters are not all playing tea party games; many, in seeking viable marriages, were fighting for their lives, as things were then.

M.

[Morden]

Sometimes I teach Austen; often I don't because she is one of two 19th century novelists (the other is Mary Shelley) that my students have probably already heard of, if not read. I usually don't teach Mary Shelley's novels for the same reason, but this year I picked her The Last Man because it's about a pandemic. So that's what I've been reading recently.

[apl68]

She doesn't go into the factories with Hardy, or visit London's low-rent tenements as Dickens later did, but her characters are not all playing tea party games; many, in seeking viable marriages, were fighting for their lives, as things were then.

M.

Which, from what I understand, is what keeps her from being regarded as just a forerunner of the romance novel genre, as some of her less in-the-know fans seem to imagine.  A woman in her society had to make the best marriage she could, or she was likely condemned to a lifetime of being a poor relation or worse.  There really is a lot at stake in her novels.  That was clear even in Northhanger Abbey.

[ergative]

She doesn't go into the factories with Hardy, or visit London's low-rent tenements as Dickens later did, but her characters are not all playing tea party games; many, in seeking viable marriages, were fighting for their lives, as things were then.

M.

Which, from what I understand, is what keeps her from being regarded as just a forerunner of the romance novel genre, as some of her less in-the-know fans seem to imagine.  A woman in her society had to make the best marriage she could, or she was likely condemned to a lifetime of being a poor relation or worse.  There really is a lot at stake in her novels.  That was clear even in Northhanger Abbey.

I'm thinking now about Miss Bates in Emma, who is so poor that she relies on baskets of food from Emma, and how Emma's eventual arrival at maturity depends on her realizing that she needs to be kind to Miss Bates, rather than mocking her.

Of course, Emma is also really invested in maintaining social class boundaries, so it's probably not a great example of progressive values more broadly.

[nebo113]

I've been listening to The Oregon Trail by Rinker Buck, and am fascinated, less by his trek, than by his segues into the history of mules, geography, and the delightful Olive Oil.

[hmaria1609]

I've been listening to The Oregon Trail by Rinker Buck, and am fascinated, less by his trek, than by his segues into the history of mules, geography, and the delightful Olive Oil.

I read a library copy of this book when it came out and enjoyed it!

[ab_grp]

We finished Echopraxia (Watts) a few days ago and were unsure how we felt about it.  It definitely didn't draw us in as much as Blindsight had, but we tend to wonder whether we just did not pick up on or understand everything very well.  Lots to think about, but I agree with one review on Goodreads that it seemed Watts went farther outside his knowledge base and expertise with this one, and it just didn't seem as coherent or that his ideas landed that well.  I know there was some discussion of this book on the other site but haven't yet been able to access it via the wayback machine.  There was a brief mention over here.  My recollection was that others felt similarly about the two books?

After finishing that one, we excitedly got to the Chaos Vector (O'Keefe), the sequel to Velocity Weapon, which we read last year.  So far, it's been holding its own.  There are so many interesting story arcs in this series, and it's interesting to see how they relate to each other.   There are a couple pretty solid lead female characters, which is refreshing in science fiction.  The back of the book describes this as the second in a space opera trilogy, and the story involves a sentient AI space ship, a lot of political intrigue and treachery, and some compelling action.  It's a little hard to summarize a follow up book without giving away any spoilers about what happens in the first book! One of the aspects I really liked about the first book was how the sentience of the ship was described and the interactions with it.  It raised a lot of philosophical questions for me, and I believe this book will continue on with those.

[hmaria1609]

The Oxford Guide to Heraldry by Thomas Woodcock and John M. Robinson (2001 reissue)
Took this book since it was being weeded from our branch collection.

[apl68]

The Oxford Guide to Heraldry by Thomas Woodcock and John M. Robinson (2001 reissue)
Took this book since it was being weeded from our branch collection.

That's a librarian for you!  Awhile back I temporarily salvaged a multi-volume Oxford set on British writers from Bede through the Victorian era that we had weeded from Reference and read through parts of it.  It was funny to see Anthony Trollope being dismissed as a minor novelist.  Evidently his reputation has grown since the early 1900s.

[ergative]

I just finished Katie Mack's The End of Everything (Astrophysically Speaking), about different theories of how the universe will end. It's a popular science textbook, so I imagine that astrophysicists on the fora may find nothing new--or indeed might find themselves nitpicking the various analogies--but I thought it was mindblowing. It's friendlily written for the lay reader, and Mack has a lot of personality that flavors her prose without turning it into that kind of tiresome 'let me tell you my life story' memoir/science genre that I find so tiresome.

My only question is this: in one chapter we learn about the cosmic horizon, and how elements in the universe beyond it are moving away from us too fast (because of universe expansion) for their light ever to reach us. So if that's the case, then how can vaccuum decay destroy the universe as we learn in a later chapter, if the bubble of true vaccuum, when it appears, will expand "only" at the speed of light? Would all the things beyond the bubble's cosmic horizon be safe because the bubble can't expand fast enough to catch them?

[Parasaurolophus]

Gotta catch up on my June and July reporting:

Simon Scarrow – Traitors of Rome: Always a fun romp, and plenty of fighting to see me through it all. I do prefer it when they're based on real history and real battles, though.

Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle, and Steven Barnes – Beowulf's Children: The misogyny is really strong in this one, and usually centres on sexuality, so I mostly blame Pournelle (although I'm sure Niven bears his share of the responsibility, too). I have no idea about Barnes. It was enjoyable despite that, mostly because the new ecology is exceptionally well-rendered. I was excited to read about the mainland and its flora and fauna, and in that respect it didn't disappoint. I also especially appreciated the subtle deformations of the names of Earth plants and animals to convey the properties of the new ones. There's an awful lot of casual cruelty to animals portrayed, however, and I don't think the authors recognize it for what it is.

Sue Burke – Semiosis: I loved every bit of this one. The imagining of the new world and its creatures was very well executed, as was the central conceit about sapient plants. It was also a very interesting and fresh take on the colonists' side, especially the initial descent into pretty bleak territory, and I wondered the whole way through how the plot could get resolved without diverging too far from the characters' commitment to pacifism. Very cool. My only reservation is that too many of the plant names relied on unchanged earth names, which left me a little confused—especially since the colonists start out with some earth crops. I'd have preferred it if Burke had adopted something akin to the naming conventions in The Legacy of Heorot and its sequels, to mark the difference.

Tom Godwin – Space Prison: I enjoyed it because it's pretty much what I asked for—space colony with deadly critters, although the ecology was a little sparse. It's a very flawed work, however, quite apart from its foundations in misogyny. What it is, basically, is just the sketch of what has the potential to be a really great story, with only the barest bones filled in. A meticulous writer could do an impressive job with the basic plot, especially if they forgot about including the '70s-style fulfillment of revenge thing at the end. Oh, and Godwin apparently has no idea about how bows and crossbows work, the difference between them, or their relative advantages and disadvantages.

Steven Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner – Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores: I read the expanded edition. It was an entertaining pop read, but I'm afraid that I'm pretty skeptical of the conclusions drawn about most of the topics covered, especially—but not exclusively—in the extra essays at the end of the expanded edition. It was fun to think about the weird places where you can find supporting data, but it gave off a very strong impression of the arrogant Economists-Know-All-The-Things-And-Solve-All-The-Problems-Because-Better-At-Applied-Maths-Than-Other-Social-Scientists attitude that I find to be a real turn-off (probably not least because it's the mirror of philosophy's attitude to just about everyone else). As a series of disconnected vignettes, it didn't do much to capture my lasting interest, however. I confess that I often found myself thinking I'd rather be reading Stephen J. Gould.

Douglas Adams – The Restaurant at the End of the Universe: A fitting follow-up to the the first.

Douglas Adams – Life, the Universe, and Everything: Still fun, but the non-sequiturishness of the plot and its occasional efforts at something more substantial is starting to wear a little thin. The whole campaign for real time thing with Slartibartfast and the Bistromath seems especially out of left field, not least because they just disappear again by the end.

Douglas Adams – So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish: This one held together somewhat better than the last, although it's somewhat further removed from the charm of the original. Actually, it felt much less zany and more tame—I think less happens in it?

We finished Echopraxia (Watts) a few days ago and were unsure how we felt about it.  It definitely didn't draw us in as much as Blindsight had, but we tend to wonder whether we just did not pick up on or understand everything very well.  Lots to think about, but I agree with one review on Goodreads that it seemed Watts went farther outside his knowledge base and expertise with this one, and it just didn't seem as coherent or that his ideas landed that well.  I know there was some discussion of this book on the other site but haven't yet been able to access it via the wayback machine.  There was a brief mention over here.  My recollection was that others felt similarly about the two books?

I think that was in relation to me--I reread them a couple times over on the old foum. I did save my reports on my reading from the old forum, so I can probably reconstruct those posts. I can't remember where I stashed them now, but I'll have a look.

[ergative]

Gotta catch up on my June and July reporting:

Sue Burke – Semiosis: I loved every bit of this one. The imagining of the new world and its creatures was very well executed, as was the central conceit about sapient plants. It was also a very interesting and fresh take on the colonists' side, especially the initial descent into pretty bleak territory, and I wondered the whole way through how the plot could get resolved without diverging too far from the characters' commitment to pacifism. Very cool. My only reservation is that too many of the plant names relied on unchanged earth names, which left me a little confused—especially since the colonists start out with some earth crops. I'd have preferred it if Burke had adopted something akin to the naming conventions in The Legacy of Heorot and its sequels, to mark the difference.

I'm so glad you liked it! There's a sequel, Interference, that I also enjoyed. What's particularly fun about Interference is that it's not at all clear whether to read the sapient plants as sinister or not.

Tom Godwin – Space Prison: I enjoyed it because it's pretty much what I asked for—space colony with deadly critters, although the ecology was a little sparse. It's a very flawed work, however, quite apart from its foundations in misogyny. What it is, basically, is just the sketch of what has the potential to be a really great story, with only the barest bones filled in. A meticulous writer could do an impressive job with the basic plot, especially if they forgot about including the '70s-style fulfillment of revenge thing at the end. Oh, and Godwin apparently has no idea about how bows and crossbows work, the difference between them, or their relative advantages and disadvantages.

I read this not too long ago, and I agree. I did rather enjoy the attempts to domesticate the unicorns, who remain half-wild assholes throughout. What I thought this book did really well was capture the scale of time and the number of generations and the issues of population shrinkage and resource sparcity that would control the endeavor of these unwilling colonists to escape. I was also struck by the convenience of the ending revenge: how convenient that the hundreds of years that have passed have not changed the design of the Gern blasters or the operation of their spaceships!

[Parasaurolophus]

I'm so glad you liked it! There's a sequel, Interference, that I also enjoyed. What's particularly fun about Interference is that it's not at all clear whether to read the sapient plants as sinister or not.

Yes! I read it, and loved it, too. But that goes into the August report. =)

I read this not too long ago, and I agree. I did rather enjoy the attempts to domesticate the unicorns, who remain half-wild assholes throughout. What I thought this book did really well was capture the scale of time and the number of generations and the issues of population shrinkage and resource sparcity that would control the endeavor of these unwilling colonists to escape. I was also struck by the convenience of the ending revenge: how convenient that the hundreds of years that have passed have not changed the design of the Gern blasters or the operation of their spaceships!

Yeah, the arc of generations was cool (a feature which it shares in common with the Burke novels!), along with the fact that Godwin didn't shy away from killing characters off. I really liked the premise. I'd like to see someone tackling it again in a longer format!


More space colonies with critters, please!

[ab_grp]

We finished Echopraxia (Watts) a few days ago and were unsure how we felt about it.  It definitely didn't draw us in as much as Blindsight had, but we tend to wonder whether we just did not pick up on or understand everything very well.  Lots to think about, but I agree with one review on Goodreads that it seemed Watts went farther outside his knowledge base and expertise with this one, and it just didn't seem as coherent or that his ideas landed that well.  I know there was some discussion of this book on the other site but haven't yet been able to access it via the wayback machine.  There was a brief mention over here.  My recollection was that others felt similarly about the two books?

I think that was in relation to me--I reread them a couple times over on the old foum. I did save my reports on my reading from the old forum, so I can probably reconstruct those posts. I can't remember where I stashed them now, but I'll have a look.

Yes, I believe you are the one who introduced us to Watts's books, and I would be interested to re-read your thoughts if you get a chance to find and post them at some point.  Thanks, too, for your thoughts on the Douglas Adams books.  We had read the first one a year or two ago, and I was just thinking the other day that maybe we should move on to the others.  Maybe the second would be worthwhile to put in the near-term queue, but it doesn't sound as though the rest of them are quite as good.