tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30375173872259368252024-03-26T23:36:40.048-07:00It's All Geek To Me!Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.comBlogger150125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-65733661384672142162024-03-25T21:12:00.000-07:002024-03-25T21:12:46.714-07:00Review: Left of Karl Marx by Carole Boyce Davies<p>Sometimes I wonder what compels someone to write a book. This one seemed like it was written out of a genuine and deep admiration for Claudia Jones, and a desire to impart that joy with other academics. </p><p>For all the author’s high regard for Claudia Jones, the author does not seem to be writing for the next Claudia Jones (there is an interesting aside in the Introduction where the author justifies her use of non-academic (communist!) sources, such as Jones herself). The book is missing a sense of urgency (Jones certainly considered her writing to be of pressing importance) and of scale — it is nearly claustrophobically focused on Jones, failing to ground her writing in the thinking of her time or to much extent explore her influence on the writers and political movements that came after her. </p><p>I’m not convinced that the author really even understands Jones in her context. For example, in Jones’ famous 1950 International Women’s Day speech, Jones affirms solidarity with people facing all types of oppression, linking their struggles with the socialist movement. This, the author claims, is something “more radical than communism”, despite it aligning fully with Lenin’s 1902 work, <i>What Is to Be Done?, </i>a work Jones, as a self-identified Leninist, would have read but that the author seems unaware of. (Relatedly, the title of the book is an allusion to the location of Jones’ gravestone relative to that of Marx, and not a political statement the author argues effectively.) When we come to Jones’ well-documented beliefs with which the author particularly disagrees—Jones’ alignment with the CPUSA’s positions in the 1950s, for example—the author insists this smart, well-read, well-traveled woman has been naively deceived. </p><p>Yet for all the minute focus on Jones, it isn’t even an exhaustive one-stop-shop for understanding her experience as a Black socialist woman. Her exclusion from the CPGB due to racial prejudices is briefly mentioned and the reader is pointed towards a work where some other scholar has elaborated it. Academic convention prevents you from stepping on other people’s toes, I suppose. Someone with fewer constraints should write a book on this very deserving thinker.</p><p>As a stand-alone chapter to see if you will enjoy the book’s approach to Jones’s writing, I suggest Chapter 4 (“Deportation: The Other Politics of Diaspora”).</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-80358468631773471472024-03-24T13:15:00.000-07:002024-03-25T07:00:49.328-07:00Review: Stone Blind by Natalie Haynes<p>Marketing did Natalie Haynes’ delightful Medusa retelling dirty. From the reviews, it appears readers went in expecting Madeline Miller’s magnificent <i>Circe</i> except with snakes for hair. I get it: the subtitle “Medusa’s Story” hints towards an intensely intimate perspective of a woman grappling with being the sole mortal among her gorgon sisters or working through the trauma of her violation in Athene’s temple. It’s not that book. It’s a different book. It’s good at what it sets out to do, and, unsurprisingly, fails at accomplishing what it doesn’t aim to do.</p><p>So what does it set out to do? Well, here my empathy for the misled readers ends because it is laid out fully from the very first page:</p><p></p><blockquote>I see you. I see all those who men call monsters. <br /><br />And I see the men who call them that. Call themselves heroes, of course. <br /><br />I only see them for an instant. Then they’re gone. <br /><br />But it’s enough. Enough to know that the hero isn’t the one who’s kind or brave or loyal. Sometimes – not always, but sometimes – he is monstrous. <br /><br />And the monster? Who is she? She is what happens when someone cannot be saved. <br /><br />This particular monster is assaulted, abused and vilified. And yet, as the story is always told, she is the one you should fear. She is the monster. <br /><br />We’ll see about that.</blockquote>Stone Tears is a story about what makes someone a monster. It is about Medusa, yes, but it is also about the “men who call [her] that” and who “call themselves heroes”. It is about “all those who men call monsters.” The second page takes us soaring above the world we are about to explore, a literal birds-eye view of a world structured around patriarchal dominance: gods over mortals, kings over subjects, men over women. Each of these power relations, we will see, creates monsters. The next chapter zooms into one such relationship: Zeus, king of the gods, hunts down and rapes the minor goddess Metis and then swallows her whole. It’s an intense chapter, the monstrosity of it is vivid. <p></p><p>Readers waiting for “Medusa’s story” will have to wait until the 10% mark to hear through her eyes for the first time. Medusa is raised by her Gorgon sisters. It is a tiny isolated community: the three women live alone, lovingly tending a humble flock of sheep. The egalitarianism of it contrasts the scheming, power-hungry gods and monarchs of the surrounding chapters.</p><p>Medusa’s principle foil is, of course, Perseus, re-imagined as a Brock Turner or Brett Kavanaugh type: immensely privileged by birth, given help at every step of the way, whining as he fails upwards, and almost unbelievably cruel. Narratively, Perseus’s story is structured as a classic Hero's Journey—because of course it is in the classic retelling. Haynes deftly plays on our expectations with this trope, showing Perseus follow the expected steps of embarking on a quest and seeking wisdom and playing roguish tricks on a trio of three wise women, then taunting the reader for sympathizing with someone so carelessly cruel, so monstrous.</p><p></p><blockquote><p>So perhaps when you’ve finished congratulating Perseus for his quick tricks, you might spare a moment to think about how the Graiai lived after he was gone. </p><p>Blind and hungry.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>With Medusa’s deadly head retrieved, Perseus wanders through the world killing indiscriminately and remorselessly, leaving the narrative for the last time laughing after turning his bride’s extended family to stone, musing how he will let others clean up his mess. </p><p>But it is not just Perseus who is a monster. We see monstrous behavior in the gods’ egotistical violence: Zues’s rape and consumption of Metis, Poseidon’s rape of Medusa, his collective punishment of the Ethiopians for the vanity of their queen, Athene—powerless to take aim at her true target, Poseidon—cursing Medusa. We see other humans acting monstrously: a father who locked up his daughters out of fears of prophecies, a king forcing his brother’s life partner to marry him. Over and over, the true monster is patriarchy and its agents.</p><p>The horror of these figures of Greek mythology, varyingly beautiful or at least not portrayed as physically monstrous, is contrasted with the warm, caring sisterhood of the Gorgon sisters. Sthenno and Euryale’s loving reflections on the surprising delights and unsettling fears of motherhood are so human you forget they have tusks, wings and talons.</p><p>The hero/monster reversal is a very fun angle for a Greek mythology retelling. It’s satisfying terrain to explore here in the West as we reconsider Western myths from the colonization of the New World to which of the Allied forces was chiefly responsible for the defeat of the Nazis in World War II. Haynes is at times didactic in her calling out to readers the monstrosity of her characters—I don’t begrudge her for it, the monsters of history and popular books attract far too many fans. Haynes tells the story from a creative array of characters: Medusa, Perseus, Athene all get their say, but so too the individual snakes that make up Medusa’s hair, and Medusa’s decapitated head. Perspective influences your definition of a monster, after all. </p><p>Those looking for a more serpentine <i>Circe</i> should look elsewhere. Those with some tolerance for somewhat Marvel-y dialogue interested in a feminist retelling of a half dozen interwoven episodes from Greek mythology will enjoy <i>Stone Blind</i>.<br /><br /></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-85467994831972009462024-03-23T19:27:00.000-07:002024-03-23T19:27:57.698-07:00Review: When China Rules the World by Martin Jacques<p>The Western punditry can’t make much sense of China. It has elections, but they don’t look anything like the Presidential horse race the US hosts every four years. It has capitalists and markets, but these too don’t look like the western equivalents: there are state owned entities and communist party cells and capital flow restrictions everywhere. It has adopted industrialization, international trade and the internet, but these institutions of modernity did not bring with them the value system that the West recognizes as modernity. What gives? This book is a corrective to the prevailing level of discourse. </p><p>The strengths of Jacques’ book is its recognition that “modernity” (values, and the political structures that reflect them) can take multiple forms, and that a non-Western version of modernity becoming the (economically, demographically) dominant form is not necessarily a travesty. The first few chapters of the book stand out in particular: Jacques examines the history of China and Japan, with the latter providing a comparison point of an industrialized country that has tried to align itself more closely with “Western” conceptions of modernity despite lacking European roots. Jacques emphasizes the influence of Confucianism on popular understandings of the relationship between the State and the governed, and the continuity in philosophy between pre-1949 China through to the present day — another strength of the book. </p><p>However, Jacques ignores the impact of Marxism-Leninism in shaping not just Mao-era China but also present-day China. Marxist figures and quotes are frequent reference points in public speeches. But perhaps more indicative of the influence of Marxism-Leninism is programs like the <a href="https://thetricontinental.org/studies-1-socialist-construction/">extreme poverty eradication program</a>, in which communist party members act as guides to local political efforts:</p><blockquote><p>The targeted phase of poverty alleviation required building relationships and trust between the Party and the people in the countryside as well as strengthening Party organisation at the grassroots level. Party secretaries are assigned to oversee the task of poverty alleviation across five levels of government, from the province, city, county, and township, down to the village. Most notably, three million carefully selected cadres were dispatched to poor villages, forming 255,000 teams that reside there. Living in humble conditions for generally one to three years at a time, the teams worked alongside poor peasants, local officials, and volunteers until each household was lifted out of poverty.</p></blockquote><p>This is a method of poverty alleviation alien to neoliberalism, similarly strange to welfare states and not particularly Confucian, and yet remarkably effective: in 2021, China announced it had eliminated extreme poverty. Because Jacques’ picture of the guiding principles of 21st century China is essentially neo-Confucianism, I think his model for China’s growth and future decision-making as world power is incomplete.</p><p>In place of really understanding the philosophical traditions guiding the countries—both those of the West and those of China—Jacques turns to psychologizing the countries. Even economic factors, like level of development, fade to the background. The root of trade disagreements is found in hundreds of millions of people acting in unison out of shame or pride based on their sense of national identity. It’s not to say that these factors are not important; China’s resolution to gain independence following its “century of humiliation” and the role the Declaration of Independence plays in the US’s self perception as a fighter for freedom are undoubtedly relevant. But one can’t help but feel there’s several variables missing. </p><p>Finally, while Jacques tactic of using a sort of “neutral, outside observer” lens for understanding China and Japan is instructive, that he does not do the same for the United States limits his analysis. (I’m a scientist, I like controlled experiments.) What, for example, would a “neutral, outside observer” say about racism in 21st century USA?</p><p>Overall, although Jacques’ book is a corrective to a far worse sort of analysis, it leaves much to be desired. Written originally in 2009 (it is peppered with references to the ‘08 recession), it reads a bit dated, and China/West relations have changed a lot.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-9129338474981359262024-03-03T14:17:00.000-08:002024-03-03T14:17:32.384-08:00Review: Conspirituality by Julian Walker, Matthew Remski and Derek Beres<p>There's a banger of a long-form essay somewhere here. Unfortunately, in book form, the argument felt a bit padded.</p><p>This book took a closer look at a fascinating phenomenon that came to a head in 2020-2021 during the height of the COVID pandemic: the surprising affinity between far-right/fascist politics and the health and wellness industry. As the authors point out, this is not a novel phenomenon: the story of yoga's westernization is one of colonial anxiety about racial decline, while the history of eugenics has long married a health-conscious striving for purity with racism and reactionary politics:</p><p>So at the start of the modern yoga movement (...) we have a bizarre colonial collision. Europeans, afraid of racial decline as the borders of empire became porous through global trade and increased long-haul travel, concocted an exercise ideology to defend and restore the once-proud national body against corruption. Indian modernizers grabbed hold of this strongman aesthetic, mingled it with Scandinavian gymnastics, and then consecrated it with yoga exercises reconstructed from the medieval period. They faced east to salute the sun and sculpt a new national body, purged of foreign influences and colonial shame, a body that can carry a torch of ancient wisdom onto the modern global stage.</p><blockquote><p>By 2020, the health and wellness industry had evolved into a network of small businesses, magazines, multi-level marketing corporations, and social media influencers. Facing rising rents and the cut-throat competition of capitalism, those who were able to earn a living in this sphere often found themselves needing to combine many aspects of these industries. Yoga studios discovered class fees were insufficient for making rent and so sold yoga instructor classes (a sort of MLM scheme) and essential oils (often via MLMs) and became instagram influencers. The philosophy of the wellness industry aligns perfectly with capitalism: you alone are responsible for your own health; your choices (and purchases) and hard work can lead you to success.</p></blockquote><p>COVID was a perfect disaster to radicalize this group of people. On the one hand, (necessary and reasonable) restrictions against gathering in person prevented many of these businesses from operating. On the other hand, the individualistic approaches of the wellness industry were particularly ill-suited to combat health issues that required entire communities to act in unison to protect their most vulnerable. The wellness community was already primed to be skeptical of the medical community; vaccine skepticism was already high and herbal solutions and other such remedies were often preferred over clinically proved treatments. This group found a natural political ally with another group with similar distrust in collective solutions over individual rights, fury at government-mandated limits to in-person business operation, and skepticism over institutional health guidelines: the alt-right.</p><p>The authors explore how both extreme political parties and wellness industry proponents show overlap with cults. Members of these groups similarly dismiss evidence that does not fit within their worldview (using distrust of institutions, etc, to do so) and burn relationships with people that resist their beliefs. At least one of the authors was a survivor of a cult, and recognized many common patterns of the alt-right and wellness community rhetoric in their own experiences.</p><p>One of the strengths of this book was its empathy for all parties involved. The frantic communications from the government in the early days of the pandemic were confusing and contradictory, if understandable. The medical community has behaved in ways that corrode trust: events like the Tuskegee Syphilis trial are a stain upon our professsion, while at the individual level, busy doctors often dismiss patient concerns or fail to treat them like holistic human beings. Those who care for people that have become wept into proto-fascist politics have to find a line somewhere that allows them to maintain a relationship with those they love without being enablers themselves.</p><p>The authors don't quite have the answers for solving this problem, but because it is so multi-faceted it is a really hard nut to crack. Improve scientific literacy (and that includes not just pointing to peer reviewed articles as the arbiter of All Things True), integration of health within community networks in ways not mediated by money, regaining of trust between institutions and people. How do we get there in a way that doesn't further provoke the frustrations of people upset at government overreach?</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-50454195409143615912024-01-17T20:10:00.000-08:002024-01-17T20:15:01.442-08:00Review: Nietzsche, The Aristocratic Rebel by Domenico Losurdo<p>This is a 1000-page book about Nietzsche. This might seem like a lot of pages to read about one single philosopher (and it <i>is</i> a long book!), but it’s also an in-depth journey into late 19th-century philosophy, battles that shaped the ideology behind World War I and then later World War II as well as (from an opposite perspective) the 1917 October Revolution and then later the mid-20th century wave of national liberation movements. You come away from the book with not only a close familiarity with the evolution of Nietzsche’s thought over his ~20-year career, but also an understanding of origin myths and national identity, nihilism and the critique of religion, metacritique and an outsider’s critique of status quo ideology, judeophobia and antisemitism, eugenics and imperialism, masses and elites.</p><p>Losurdo argues that the consistent project in Nietzsche’s otherwise contradictory body of work is one of anti-communism and counter-revolution. Nietzsche held the creation of art and culture to be of the highest value, and something that could be achieved only by individuals afforded complete leisure and spared from mind-numbing toil. The maintenance of this class necessitated the enslavement of the rest of humanity, enforced by violence and eugenics and ideology. Socialism — in its declaration that all humans are equal — was a threat to this world order.</p><p>Nietzsche’s philosophy is repugnant, and Losurdo does not shy away from calling it so. But this book is not a 1000-page screed against a terrible philosopher. Throughout the book, it is clear how much Losurdo respects Nietzsche for his intellectual rigour and his ability to find new ways of interrogating the ideology of his world. The target of this tome is not so much Nietzsche but left Nietzscheans, or those who would wish to use him to socialist (or even liberal) ends. Losurdo renders this position ridiculous; he shreds attempts to interpret Nietzsche metaphorically or as a dreamy innocent distorted by a conniving sister. </p><p>A common pattern in this book is to establish the contemporary discourse on a particular topic — education, the military, the poverty of the masses — and show Nietzsche’s continuities with conservative and liberal thinkers of his time, and then examine the ways Nietzsche was able to radicalize these critiques, to transcend the limitations of Christian or liberal thought, and recognize the full implications of their consistent application. I am left with more respect (as well as more repulsion) for him than I expected, and have a better sense for what it means to do “good philosophy”.</p><p>---</p><p>For a more detailed, academic review of the contents and approac, I like this one by <a href="https://marxandphilosophy.org.uk/reviews/18867_nietzsche-the-aristocratic-rebel-intellectual-biography-and-critical-balance-sheet-by-domenico-losurdo-reviewed-by-matt-sharpe/">Matt Sharpe</a>.<br /></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-21156656045080242562024-01-07T12:00:00.000-08:002024-01-11T13:39:53.025-08:00Review: Washington Bullets by Vijay Prashad<p>This book is a whirlwind tour through 20th- and 21st-century Washington-led initiatives to bring to heel nations that would chart their own course (socialist or non-aligned movement), establishing what has been called the US century or US hegemony. It is a lengthy list of imperialist interventions, though its more comprehensive approach to naming interventions and its concise length entail a sacrifice in the depth of analysis compared to other books in this genre, such as Bevins' <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2022/01/Review-vincent-bevins-jakarta-method.html">The Jakarta Method</a></i> (focused on Indonesia, Chile and Brazil and the "military coup" recipe), Parenti's <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2023/02/review-to-kill-nation-by-michael-parenti.html">To Kill a Nation</a></i> (focused on the interplay of economic coercion, media narratives, and NATO military involvement in breaking up Yugoslavia), and Herman and Chomsky's <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2021/01/review-manufacturing-consent-herman-chomsky.html">Manufacturing Consent</a></i> (emphasizing the role of media in US interventions in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Nicaragua, Bulgaria).</p><p>In a way, the title is a bit of a misnomer: where Washington bullets powered the first forays (for example, the overthrow of Guatemala's popular anti-imperialist and economic-nationalist government in 1954, or the overthrow of the democratically-elected Indonesian communist party in 1965), political and economic considerations have pushed the US to adopt alternative strategies over the last 40ish years. Economic instruments, like IMF-enforced economic "restructuring", or legal approaches to deposing an unfavourable government (like the 2019 coup in Bolivia), are easier to sell to its citizens at home and save face during diplomatic negotiations abroad. There's a mirror here in how coercion went from violent and overt to economic and less visible over time in international relations as well as economic production. Once, masters used violence to coerce their slaves. Now, labour is coerced through economic means.</p><p>The most helpful part of the book was the list of commonalities Prashad calls the "manual for regime change". These steps were as follows: (1) lobby 'public' opinion, (2) appoint the right man on the ground, (3) make sure the Generals are ready, (4) make the economy scream, (5) diplomatic isolation, (6) organize mass protests, (7) green light, (8) a study of assassination, (9) deny. Structure like this makes it easier to interpret and remember historical events. Unfortunately, once presented, the structure wasn't rigourously used to present conflicts. I think it would be really effective to go through the list for a small handful of conflicts over and over, highlighting how different aspects of this "manual" change over time as modes of coercion become less straightforwardly violent and more complexly legalistic.</p><p>A last drawback of this book is that I doubt it will change minds: those who already believe the US is imperialist will be delighted to be walked through scores of examples of its imperialism; those who believe the US is indeed highly concerned with autocratic governments in general and not just those that oppose its interests are unlikely to be convinced otherwise. Prashad breezily dances around the globe, highlighting patterns in US-led regime change, but I can imagine a resistant reader decrying "no, it wasn't like that at all!" I think a more effective tactic is to present the opposing arguments in detail and investigate their claims, demonstrating their internal inconsistency. Examples of this approach include the three books listed above, as well as Losurdo's books on liberalism, Stalin and <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2023/05/conspectus-hegel-and-the-freedom-of-moderns-losurdo.html">Hegel</a>. For this reason, I think this book is harder to recommend for a general audience, and see it as most suitable for someone new to anti-imperialist perspectives who wants a broad overview.<br /></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-68121834103716282182023-12-28T13:44:00.000-08:002023-12-28T13:49:54.731-08:00Review: Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson<p>Our current society is particularly ill-suited to tackle climate change. Fixing climate change will require two things: (1) knowledge spanning disciplines as diverse as economics, agriculture and physics and (2) massive scale and multi-pronged collaboration between teams and countries. This presents a challenge for fictional stories of humanity solving the climate crisis: our current mode of storytelling is best suited for internal emotional journeys, following a handful of characters setting out to achieve one goal, with little prior background knowledge required. But we need fiction to handle this topic: fiction has long played a role in how humans <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2023/09/inventing-human-rights.html">understand value systems and social expectations, examine complex emotions</a>, and envision large-scale collective achievement. </p><p>In <i>Ministry for the Future</i>, Kim Stanley Robinson presents a unique way to overcome this writing challenge. Narrative chapters are interspersed with expositions on energy technology, gini coefficients, the Bretton Woods financial system, the carbon cycle and other pertinent topics. The narrative follows two main characters (Mary and Frank) most closely, but we see through the eyes of scores of other characters that are navigating the devastation of climate change (memorably, climate refugees who spend years in camps, a lone survivor of a village wiped out by a heat wave, and a kayaker who rescues Los Angelinos during a record flood) or trying to fix it (memorably, farmers in India and scientists in antarctica). In this way, the book succeeds at conveying information the author feels is necessary to prevent humanity’s pending extinction (addressing point 1 above) and presents a realistic and collective effort at harnessing all the tools available to society towards this end (addressing point 2).</p><p>Because of this unusual structure, I hesitate to call it a novel; Tolstoy rejected the label for <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2022/11/review-war-and-peace-by-tolstoy.html"><i>War and Peace</i></a>, which intersperses philosophy and history with narrative, if less disjointedly than Robinson’s work. I was a fan of this technique for <i>War and Peace</i>, and I found it to be compelling and enjoyable in Robinson’s less deft hands too. However, from discussions with others and from perusing book reviews for both literary efforts, I might be the only reader with this opinion. Climate change sci-fi authors are therefore recommended to further innovate on this approach to achieve broader appeal.</p><p>Robinson has clearly thought through possible paths towards maintaining a livable planet, and therefore I think his political and technological solution deserves some commentary: it sucks.</p><p>Briefly, his solution rests on blockchain financial instruments funded by modern monetary theory, although he engages with none of the critiques of MMT (and there are many). Through a convoluted system of privacy-focused social media networks (really!) and carbon coins, technological solutions arise magically due to competition. Sure, a weird techno-utopian neoliberal solution, I could have anticipated that much based on my reading of <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2023/08/review-red-mars-by-kim-stanley-robinson.html"><i>Red Mars</i></a>. But what surprised me was its full-throated defense of terrorism (and the lack of mainstream critique he has received for this!).</p><p>The story begins when Frank kidnaps Mary at gunpoint, and this event causes her to radically shift her view on her role as a high-ranking official in the branch of the UN charged with addressing climate change (the Ministry for the Future). It is quite clear that without this act of terrorism, the reforms she ultimately implements would never have come to pass. Several chapters center around the actions of the Children of Kali, a terrorist group who, by attacking cattle and airplanes, very effectively terrorize the planet into no longer eating carbon-intensive foods or flying in carbon-emitting planes. This terrorist organization is even secretly supported by the UN itself! These terrorists are portrayed with bottomless empathy, and are largely rewarded for their actions, which are presented as critical for humanity addressing climate change. It is hard to imagine what a more pro-terrorist science fiction work would look like, and that others don’t seem to view this political work in the same way leaves me feeling a little rattled.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-70331742263982465142023-12-28T11:47:00.000-08:002023-12-28T14:15:51.277-08:00Review: For Whom the Bell Tolls by Ernest HemingwayThis novel surprised me! The opening scene features the protagonist, Robert Jordan, laying out his plans to blow up a bridge to enable to Spanish Republicans to take a city over from the fascists, and I assumed this would be the inciting event to kick off the wave of action that the rest of the book would ride. Instead, the novel spans the two days leading up to the attack, every moment of the day catalogued in detail, from the typical thrilling events of an action movie (like scoping out enemy watch shifts) to the very mundane (sitting around campfires over dinner and talking). The slow unfolding of events gives space for an intensely realistic portrayal of life behind enemy lines (based on Hemingway's experiences in the Spanish Civil War, the book was a favourite among Cuban revolutionaries for its realism), and philosophical meditations on leadership.<br /><br />Of the aspects of leadership explored, my favourite was the argument for strategic decision-making guided by science and engineering over impulsive action guided by blood-lust and vengeance. Repeatedly, Robert Jordan reins in his allies, who, in their desire to kill some fascists, might jeopardize the bridge objective. Repeatedly, he is proven correct, ultimately tragically correct. This kind of theme feels rare in war stories, which often feature story arcs in which the best laid plans of mice and men give way to heroic actions driven by gut feelings. It seems rare outside of action movies too: evidence-based long-term planning does not scream "gripping plot" and even the stories we tell about real world events are usually re-framed to emphasize in-the-moment decision-making and big personalities over careful team coordination and discipline in sticking to long-term goals despite temptations.<br /><br />The philosophy was, however, a mixed bag: Robert Jordan's school of ethics was proudly eclectic. For him, philosophy is a matter of faith: you pick what you choose to believe and discard the rest. I would have preferred a protagonist who is as systematic in his philosophical thinking as he is in his assessment of how to place explosives or identification of men not up to the task of leading a rebel party.<br /><br />The portrayal of women was abysmal. Although matriarch Pilar was quite fun, I gritted my teeth through the scenes with Maria (of which there were many). Maria, we are repeatedly told, would have been ever so beautiful if it weren't for the fact that her hair was short. Despite the disfiguring length of her hair, she has every man in the camp slobbering over how sexy she is, although she falls in love at first sight with Robert Jordan. She quickly dives into bed with him because she is told that sex with this complete stranger will cure her of her trauma from being violently sexually assaulted. She is very young, and naive to the ways of the world, and wants nothing more than to sexually please Robert Jordan and wash his socks. They agree to marry, and mother figure Pilar gives her helpful advice like "don't eat potatoes so you can maintain your figure", and Robert Jordan agrees with her on the importance of not getting fat and not eating potatoes. <i>Insoportable</i>.<br /><br />The language of the story deserves commentary. I've seen elsewhere it has been criticized for its unnatural phrasing, but I loved it. The story is set in Spain but although it was originally written in English, it reads like an awkward translation from Spanish. The characters use "thou" and "you" for the informal and formal "tu" and "usted" as befitting their social relationships, and their speech is peppered with false-friend translations ("I could not support it" instead of "I couldn't stand it", taken from "<i>no puedo soportarlo</i>"). The main character, a Spanish teacher, muses at times on the fidelity of translation and the way etymology shifts across the european continent. Lots of fun easter eggs for fans of languages and people learning Spanish (i.e., me).Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-59210605391931814672023-12-05T20:52:00.000-08:002023-12-05T20:52:30.424-08:00Review: Beowulf, translation by Maria Dahvana Headley<p>The rhythm of the translation was almost distractingly delightful to read over audiobook. The alliteration and assonance and word play were often very fun. However, I found many of the very-modern translations a little jarring: "hashtag blessed", "dude" (although I like "bro" and "swole"--they bridge modernity and antiquity better), and "no shit". I appreciate the author's avoidance of anachronistic archaic words like "betwixt" but it was too much for me. This passage perhaps best encapsulates the highs and lows of the translation:</p><p></p><blockquote>They cornered it, clubbed it, tugged it onto the rocks,<br />stillbirthed it from its mere-mother, deemed it<br />damned, and made of it a miscarriage. They<br />examined its entrails, awed and aggrieved. <br /></blockquote><blockquote>Meanwhile, Beowulf gave zero shits.</blockquote><p></p><p>The translator set out to bring to life the women in the story, and I think she succeeded well at this. The most memorable passages were the battle with Grendel's mother and with the (female) dragon. Who, really, were the victims versus the monsters in the tale? These women wielded power in their own right, they had motivations of their own and justifications for their actions.<br /><br />Old stories prompt reflection of changes in storytelling and morality. The pacing of the poem feels off for modern senses: the first battles happen very quickly, and don't follow the typical incite/failure/reflection/success pattern expected of a hero's journey. The battles are unexpectedly brief relative to the lavish scenes of gift giving or funeral rites that follow them. This difference in emphasis is a good peek into how important kin bonds and rewarding loyal armsmen was to the social structure of the time. <i>The Odyssey</i> is similar in this way, but <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2021/12/translation-requires-interpretation-wilsons-the-odyssey.html">Emily Wilson's </a>modern, feminist translation is much better.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-4262729585954280172023-11-18T20:34:00.000-08:002023-11-21T19:28:04.900-08:00Review: Not Enough by Samuel Moyn<p style="text-align: left;"><img alt="" src="" /><br /> <br />Samuel Moyn’s <i>Not Enough</i> identifies a very interesting phenomenon: that discourse around human rights kicked off only as the USSR disintegrated and neoliberalism kicked off. Such an interesting coincidence deserves an explanation.<br /><br />Over the last few decades, human rights have fit quite comfortably within neoliberalism. But should they? Neoliberalism takes little issue with the first twenty-one articles of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): these have to do with political freedoms and property rights, and have close kin in the UDHR’s predecessors, the American Declaration of Independence (1776) and France’s Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789). </p><p>The next seven articles are harder to square within neoliberalism since they demand, among other social and economic rights, the right to shelter and food, to education, and even to paid holidays. These were sharply censured by one of neoliberalism’s leading thinkers, Hayek:</p><p></p><blockquote>The conception of a ‘universal right’ which assures to the peasant, to the Eskimo, and presumably to the Abominable Snowman, ‘periodic holidays with pay’ shows the absurdity of the whole thing. (<i>Law, Legislation and Liberty</i>, 1979)</blockquote><p></p><p>Moyn argues that human rights set merely a floor for basic needs, allowing limitless wealth accumulation for the few provided some allowances are made for bare subsistence living for the many. To address inequality — both between nations and within a nation — a new framework is needed. In this conception, indeed, human rights are exactly the fig leaf necessary for a return to the horrors of 19th century capitalism after the cannibalization of the welfare state. I agree with him that human rights organizations have largely prioritized political rights, and that the neoliberal era has made embarrassingly poor progress in the provision of shelter and food, education and paid holidays, globally. </p><p>I am less convinced that it is so much an inherent failing of the tool of human rights than simply the doing of those wielding it. Article 27 demands “Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.” Article 28 declares “Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.” Together, I think these rights demand that the technological progress of the Global North (high speed rail, internet, the most cutting edge cancer drugs, for example) be made available to all the people of the world regardless of their place of residence. The human rights movement under neoliberalism has not chosen to work towards these ends (and indeed this human right is also violated for many people residing in the wealthiest countries). </p><p>Moyn argues throughout his book for the need of a distributive concept of equality versus ideals that aim only for a subsistence existence. However, he never dares to venture a positive vision of what that could look like — a privilege of the ivory tower, and not one a burgeoning state attempting to bring equality to its people can afford. Presumably, his conception of the rights due to all people would have to encompass a “share” of all wealth? It is interesting, therefore, that Article 27 (quote above) indeed provisions to all humans a share of science and technology. Simply declaring a right to a share evidently hasn’t been enough. So what sort of government permits that?<br /></p><p>One of the neoliberal critiques of human rights is whether it is possible to satisfy them within a worldview founded on individual responsibility. Here’s Hayek again:</p><p></p><blockquote>It is evident that all these ‘rights’ are based on the interpretation of society as a deliberately made organization by which everybody is employed. They could not be made universal within a system of rules of just conduct based on the conception of individual responsibility, and so require that the whole of society be converted into a single organization, that is, made totalitarian in the fullest sense of the word.</blockquote><p></p><p>Moyn, likewise, is terrified of the “totalitarian” systems that chose an alternative to the welfare state in their efforts to eliminate inequality (i.e., socialism). It is not clear what system he calls for, nor how this system would avoid such “totalitarian” tendencies.</p><p>Moyn’s argument largely traces the intellectual history of the concepts of distributive equality versus subsistence allowances — particularly from an American perspective. He does not investigate the source of wealth inequality (although he nods briefly towards the devastation wrought by colonialism), nor does he ground his analysis in what sorts of interventions effectively reduced inequality (though there is a brief foray in how investment in education both satisfies a human right and reduces inequality). This is a blind spot: it is very difficult to tackle a problem without knowing what causes it and what has fixed it in the past. </p><p>His treatment of intra-nation versus inter-nation inequality is simplistic. Political projects are largely judged by their intent to lift the very neediest in the globe out of poverty. In this way, the USSR’s accomplishments in dramatically raising literacy and life expectancy within its borders are dismissed because they aimed for “socialism in one country” (rather than addressing global inequality). (Nor is there curiosity regarding why the Soviets pivoted from their original goal of socialism across the world to just socialism in one country.) Similarly, heightened intra-nation inequality during the marketization of China is lambasted, although the wealth gap between China and the wealthier countries narrowed during this time for both its poorest and its better off citizens. Is it possible to reduce intra-nation inequality without, at least for some period, heightening inter-nation inequality? Because Moyn examines neither the source of inequality nor practical examples of addressing it (beyond the former colonial empires’ welfare states), he cannot answer this question.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-40491962518781124532023-10-07T17:18:00.005-07:002023-10-07T17:18:54.695-07:00Review: They Were Her Property by Stephanie Jones-Rogers<p>Women have always been smart, able to make decisions for ourselves, creative and enterprising, and both interested in and capable of shaping the world around us to our own benefit — to the same extent as our male counterparts. Some social configurations limited the sorts of actions available to us, and we may not have received the same education and resources as our brothers did, but we were never simply passive members of society. Many of these decisions and actions we took, the ways we shaped the world, are not obvious from a more superficial reading of historical sources. This is true for the important roles women played in science and art and politics, and also for the less savory parts of human history, like the ownership and exploitation of enslaved people.</p><p>In this work, Jones-Rogers exhaustively documents white women’s autonomy and shrewdness in their roles as slave owners in the United States. She draws from sources as diverse as advertisements, women’s magazine advice columns, sales records and lawsuits to show over and over again how involved white women were in the institution of slavery. They made decisions to purchase or sell their human property, determined how to discipline them, how to get the most value out of their property, and other aspects of ownership. Jones-Rogers shows how important slave ownership was to the culture of this class: enslaved people were often parts of dowries, wills, coming-of-age-gifts and other markers of life. She discusses several instances of “power couple” slave owners, with husband and wife taking wildly different tactics to the care and discipline of their slaves. </p><p>All this at a time when a woman’s property was considered to be her husband’s! In practice, women had say over their own property, and their property rights were enforced in court orders. Women would often sue their husbands for mismanagement of their (human) property, or sign premarital agreements governing the ownership and management of their (human) property. Other historical sources often overlook the role women played in slave ownership, and Jones-Rogers documents a number of factors that led to this under-count. For example, female slave owners were more likely to own female slaves, and female slaves were not recruited for Civil War efforts as male slaves were. When these slave-owners lined up for compensation for slaves taken from them during the war, women slave owners were therefore underrepresented. Women slave owners also used slave traders to a relatively greater extent than slave markets, compared to their male counterparts. They also often used (male) go-betweens to execute their wishes. Buyers and sellers may also be listed only with a first initial, complicating assessment of the individual’s gender. A superficial examination of limited sources might conclude that this practice was mostly a male affair.</p><p>The most interesting and unique chapter of the book was the chapter on wet nursing. This practice involves biology and culture, and exploits inequalities and prejudices about race and gender and class. It was a life-giving practice for many people, disgusting in its particular form of oppression, yet rarely features in history books. In my opinion, it works well as a stand-alone chapter, highlighting many of the other themes Roberts pulls at throughout her work.</p><p>The rest of the book is very detailed, and though it really brings to life the period and all its ugliness, it’s not a casual read but a scholarly work. I recommend it for those with an interest in the topic, but for the reader casually interested in race and gender in American history, I suggest Angela Davis' <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2020/10/review-race-women-class-by-angela-y.html">Race, Women, Class</a></i>.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-56452896596915704362023-10-01T18:48:00.002-07:002023-10-01T18:48:30.088-07:00Review: Lenin Rediscovered by Lars Lih<p>Lih takes as his target western marxists that wish to exonerate Marx from his association with Lenin. This so-called “textbook interpretation” of Lenin’s 1901 <i>What Is to Be Done?</i>, favoured by academics and Trotskyist, takes a couple passages out of context and uses these passages to argue Lenin was dismissive of the intelligence and abilities of workers and that this pamphlet is a founding document of a party of a new type, one distinct from the socialism that sprung from Marx’s milieu and one that is more authoritarian. Although this interpretation requires dismissing thousands of pages of Lenin’s other writings, including passages from within the same text, it nevertheless predominated at the time of Lih’s writing of this book (2005).</p><p>Lih’s approach is to demonstrate the continuity between German Social Democracy and Russian Social Democracy in the last half of the 19th century, elevating particularly the role Karl Kaustky played in shaping social democracy. Lih supports his argument by quoting extensively from Kautsky and contemporaries to explain the “merger theory”, a concept that would have been very familiar to socialists across Europe during this era. Briefly, the scientific analysis of capitalism and proposals for a better socioeconomic order become apparent to socialists, who study the system carefully. However, they are few in numbers and cannot effect change on their own. Workers also become aware also of the flaws of the capitalist system through their experience as labourers, but without the ability to study the system in its entirety (due to the oppression of capitalism clawing away as many hours of their life as it can) are capable only of militant fights for economic and labour rights, but not for universal political change — i.e., they are limited to trade unionist politics. The merger theory describes the meeting of these two parties that need each other: the socialists with the workers, each mutually instructing each other on what is to be done. Far from dismissing the intelligence and abilities of the workers, the merger theory (and Lenin’s dogged defense of it in What Is to be Done?) hinges on the workers being rational, curious, coordinated, powerful. After reading Lih’s background, I realized how foundational this concept was to writing of the late 19th and early 20th century — much like how a modern television show wouldn’t bother explaining how the internet works, the existence of the merger theory is assumed knowledge rather than explained.</p><p>In bringing Lenin closer to Kautsky (I remain unconvinced that Lenin is uniquely passionate about Kautsky, rather than taking him as just one of many valuable instructors), Lih tries to distance Lenin from the Russian revolutionary tradition: Chernyshevsky, Herzen, Pisarev. This is a factual error: Lenin refers to these authors extensively in his writing — indeed also in this very book — and (according to his wife, Krupskaya, Chernyshevsky and Lenin) elevated them as inspiration to the level of Marx and Engels. It is also an error for those wishing to understand the course of history: 1917 was an anti-imperialist revolution, which necessitates a strong, shared vision of national identity.</p><p>Though I gnashed my teeth through large swathes of this book, I also found it to be very useful. Reading <i>What Is To Be Done?</i> without the intellectual history and historical context Lih provides would likely have been a far less productive experience. This book is too eurocentric and too overly long to recommend broadly. I wish there was a modern accompaniment to <i>What Is To Be Done?</i> that spent a little less time on Kautsky and a little more time looking forward to the ripples of this book and the debates featured within it. Still, for the reader eager to learn about movement building and hoping to turn to theoretical works from 120 years ago to do so, it’s an excellent read.<br /></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-10773389187469762942023-10-01T14:27:00.001-07:002023-10-01T14:27:17.407-07:00Review: Into the Riverlands by Nghi Vo<p>All of Nghi Vo’s works center around the same theme: the relationship between reality and the stories we tell, and how this relationship is modified by who tells the story. In <i>The Empress of Salt and Fortune</i>, we re-learn the story of a famous empress through the eyes of her maid servant, and in this way learn about the untold sacrifice of the commoner that makes this noble woman’s heroic tale possible. In <i>When The Tiger Came Down The Mountain</i>, we learn humans and tigerfolk have told the same folklore tale from different angles, such that a tale of torture and escape becomes one of love and betrayal. This theme continues also in Vo’s novels outside of this series of novellas: in <i>The Chosen and the Beautiful</i>, we rediscover <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2022/01/review-the-chosen-and-the-beautiful-reads-differently-after-the-great-gatsby.html">The Great Gatsby</a></i> through the eyes of Daisy Buchanan’s best friend, and Daisy becomes a more understandable yet tragic character; in <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2023/03/review-siren-queen-by-nghi-vo.html">Siren Queen</a></i>, the racism and queerphobia of Hollywood impacts what stories get told, and these stories in turn shape how people from these groups see themselves. </p><p><i>Into The Riverlands</i> continues this theme, raising questions like: when should old stories be abandoned and replaced with something new? What makes for a satisfying end to a story? Why are all women in stories either ugly or beautiful? How do figures of history influence how stories are told about them? Can you keep your story to yourself, refuse to have it be told? But I don’t feel like these questions had satisfying answers and I think the reason is the story structure. </p><p>The previous novellas in the <i>Singing Hills Cycle</i> series featured cleric Chi journeying to discover stories to take back home to their monastery, encountering a group or an individual on the way and hearing out their story. This frame story would interrupt the folktale story often, giving commentary, context, and discussing how the folk story conflicted with other versions of the tale. In <i>Into The Riverlands</i>, there is no one inner story, but several brief folktales, just a few pages each. Instead, the “frame story” was the main story. Part of my difficulty with this novella was expecting the formula to continue through this volume — enjoying the cozy setting and pretty prose, I kept waiting for the “main story” and it wasn’t until the 80% mark before I realized, oh, this is it! </p><p>Another challenge here is that now Chi is the main character; suitably, for someone dedicated to telling stories, the questions raised are largely to do with how to turn real events into a story. The cohesion to all these questions about story-telling is granted by Chi's sudden change in relationship with the stories told to them. Chi is thrust into the position of not scribe but witness to <i>Water Margin</i>-like adventures of bandits and fighters. It will be up to them to turn the events into a story — but we don’t see them grapple or reckon with what this means to them in the context of their vocation. The novella reads like perhaps it is setting Chi up for a more active role in storytelling, leaving the conclusion of the character arc open for a subsequent installment in the series. Which I will absolutely read, despite my disappointment in this book.<br /></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-32842084592744124922023-09-27T21:13:00.005-07:002023-09-27T21:35:09.647-07:00Review: This is How You Lose the Time War by Amal El-Mohtar and Max Gladstone<p>I’m partial to an epistolary tale — if Jane Austen’s <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2020/11/review-lady-susan-by-jane-austen.html">Lady Susan</a> is not in my top 3 Jane Austens it is because the competition is very good. Letters provide a window into the soul of the character, but always shaped by how that character wishes to show themselves to the addressee of their letter. It's a fun device.</p><p>The letters in this novel are wonderfully written. The characters’ observations about what it feels like to be in love feel both particular to the characters (as any love is particular to the two people it binds) as well as recognizable (“I have built a you within me, or you have. I wonder what of me there is in you.”). If the characters appear to tip too suddenly from respected adversary to romantic love, I think it is because love is perhaps like that — you hold yourself back, uncertain until all of a sudden it can’t be denied.</p><p>While the romance arc itself is straightforward, the world it is set in is convoluted and for all its flashy weirdness doesn’t contribute much to the relationship developed between the two characters. Our lovebirds, Red and Blue, are time-traveling non-human (or bioengineered beyond typical human biological impulses) secret agents on two opposite sides of a conflict that is waged across all the timelines of the universe towards no clear end. What principles and values do Red and Blue fight for? What are the final objectives of the war? How did the conflict start? Unclear — except for the two sides being irreconcilable and alien to each other. Towards the end of the novella, Red nearly begins to grapple with what it means to love someone not from her own people but from the opposite side of the war, but because the political differences between the two sides are so unexplored, it feels a little empty. (Blue’s team is more organic, while hers is… bionic?) One rather wonders why the authors picked this setting to tell this love story.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-12839923921716986972023-09-23T15:38:00.001-07:002023-09-23T15:38:35.977-07:00Review: Maladies of Empire by Jim Downs<p><i>Maladies of Empire</i> tells the usually-untold story of how epidemiological and medical advances were made directly as a result of the institutional aspects of colonialism. The “told” story usually includes Onesimus, an enslaved man who told his master, an 18th century New England priest by the name of Cotton Mather, about the practice of inoculation against smallpox using exposure to a small quantity of the virus to prevent a more severe, systemic infection. Mather tested this process on some 250 enslaved people and eventually his own son, convincing the aggressively skeptical medical establishment of the validity of this Black “folk” wisdom. Good discussion of this episode in history is usually limited to the ethicality of experimentation on enslaved people (see <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2022/08/review-medical-apartheid-by-harriet.html">Medical Apartheid</a></i>). But there’s sort of a comforting aspect to this narrative too: Onesimus was a relatively well-treated slave, and that his master listened to him and learned from his cultural traditions plays into the story the Anglo empire likes to tell that cultural mixing was beneficial for itself and all the civilizations it conquered.</p><p>Where <i>Maladies of Empire</i> goes beyond this is to document how the very processes through which the British Empire colonized much of the world also enabled the medical field to understand the spread of diseases. The story starts with slave ships:market forces drove slavers to keep costs down as much as possible without hurting the sale price of their human wares. This captive population was carefully documented and experimented upon, and from here, the medical establishment learned about the minimum fruit or vegetable intake required to stave off scurvy.</p><p>The mechanisms of the spread of infectious disease, however, necessitated the aggregation of records from across the world. Who was living where? Where did these ship passengers come from? Where did they go? After how many days did symptoms start? The meticulous records through which the British Empire tracked their ships and military and subjects allowed medical doctors to track the spread of yellow fever and cholera. For the first time, scientists were analyzing data that others had collected, possibly from the other side of the globe. </p><p>The birth of epidemiology is therefore also, in a sense, the birth of data science, and the dark sides of data science were present from the start. The individual names and stories of the people who contributed the data — often racialized or institutionalized or poor — are lost to the sands of time, while the knowledge gleaned from their data goes on to benefit the wealthy and white. Downs’ story-telling is up for a challenge: how do you bear witness to these lost narratives and humanize the individual subjects whose suffering taught us how to cure or prevent disease, without getting mired in details? I don’t think the result is fully successful — there were some episodes where I felt the main themes became a little lost in the weeds of names and locations. But the work is excellent for understanding how intimately linked the development of science was with imperialism.</p><p>We see similar beats today: the bureaucracy of institutionalized people supports medical advances. For example, the link between the Epstein-Barr virus and Multiple Sclerosis was shown quite definitively only because of the mandatory monitoring and testing of American military recruits (themselves an imperializing force).</p><p>Downs contrasts the racism of the British Empire in the 19th century with that of the United States. In general, the British were certainly white supremacist, but more accepting of belief systems that allowed for similarities between races. For example, see Florence Nightingale and some of her peers’ views of racial differences in disease susceptibility:</p><blockquote><p>Although Florence Nightingale believed in racial difference, regarding the English as the finest race on the planet, she did not use race as an explanation for the spread of cholera or other infectious diseases. Even after germ theory became widely accepted, she insisted that unsanitary environments led to disease. She did not believe that the source of disease transmission could be found in innate characteristics of the patient (...). Similarly, while Gavin Milroy and other doctors working in the Caribbean certainly harboured racist beliefs, they too searched for the cause of disease in the natural and built environment. Milroy condemned Black people’s living conditions and blamed their high rate of illness on their failure to maintain clean homes, but he did not focus on racial difference as the cause of disease spread.</p></blockquote><p>Because their economic system depended on enslavement (and later, subjugation and segregation) of the Black race, American doctors approached medicine quite differently, and sought to reify the impact of race in health. The answer to “why is disease more prevalent in slaves?” could not be that they were oppressed, and forced into terrible living conditions, since that was a threat to the social order:</p><blockquote><p>Many doctors in other parts of the world were turning to the physical world and the built environment to understand how disease spread; they observed symptoms in a patient and then turned outward to housing, sewers, drainage, and crowded conditions to understand why patients were sick. USSC surgeons did the opposite. They turned inward to the patient, trying to find the answer to the illness within or on their body. While they considered the natural or built environment, they emphasized racial identity as the cause. </p></blockquote><p>This approach had a long-lasting impact on the medical establishment: while slavery ended with the Civil War, “the USSC resurrected slave-holding ideologies to amplify racial difference and to contribute to medical knowledge.” These were not the first scientists to seek to justify their pre-existing beliefs with “evidence” and refuse to consider alternative explanations, and they were certainly not the last.</p><p>A challenge with books of this sort is where they stop. The British Empire is no more, but the world is still scarred by imperialism. Science has developed into a far more robust practice, but is still often racist, and the fruits of its research are unequally distributed. The author set out to tackle this topic for a reason, and I would imagine it is because he saw similarities between this part of history and our world today. If so, I agree, and I have highlighted some of these themes above. But Downs never goes so far as to explicitly draw out the link, to comment on practices of the twentieth century and beyond. I suppose it is the careful conservative nature of most academics, who don’t dare step outside their field of expertise — but that just leaves me, with my considerably smaller extent of expertise, to apply what I’ve learned on my own.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-43521993630657260032023-09-11T21:13:00.002-07:002023-09-11T21:36:24.164-07:00Review: Inventing Human Rights by Lynn Hunt<p>I think of invention as a long, arduous process of trial and error, where, if you know where to look, it’s easy to see the bolts connecting previous pieces of technology and the design choices made due to historical conditions or material limitations. This book does not operate under the same definition of invention, and its handling of the invention of human rights is much the worse for it.</p><p>The picture that Hunt paints of human rights is one where humanity somewhat suddenly (over the 1750s-1790s) realized human rights were a crucial concept, and then somewhat bumpily implemented them, compelled by this contagious consciousness. Briefly, the narrative goes something like this: over the 17th century, the rise of the novel (particularly in France and England) led people to empathize across class and gender boundaries and recognize others to also be humans with their own inner worlds. Society then needed to change to reflect this new understanding of the individuality and equality of humans. Once these rights were declared (particularly in France and the USA), and one group got the individuality and equality they asked for, it was extended from on high to other groups:</p><blockquote><p>The logic of the process determined that as soon as a highly conceivable group came up for discussion (propertied males, Protestants), those in the same kind of category but located lower on the conceivability scale (propertyless males, Jews) would inevitably appear on the agenda. (p150) </p></blockquote><p>It’s a very western-centric view of the “invention” of human rights. I think Hunt is correct to trace (at least some of) the emotional impetus for European bourgeois propertied male demands for individual rights and equality through the novel, but we should then see mirroring phenomena for other classes (or, to use her language, groups or categories of people). It seems unlikely to me that the slaves in Saint Domingue were inspired to demand their freedom because they were reading Samuel Richardson’s 1740 novel <i>Pamela</i> or were enthused about the positive example of the Parisian’s right to freedom of religion. That the decree emancipating the slaves quotes the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen is not sufficient to convince me it was a demand cascading from the French Declaration rather than a more spontaneous understanding that slavery really sucks, the negation of which was justified to the world with the hypocritical words used by its French oppressors. </p><p>I think the root of my disagreement with Hunt about what human rights are is evident from this passage:</p><blockquote><p>Human rights require three interlocking qualities: rights must be <i>natural </i>(inherent in human beings); <i>equal</i> (the same for everyone); and <i>universal</i> (applicable everywhere). For rights to be human rights, all humans everywhere in the world must possess them equally and only because of their status as human beings. It turned out to be easier to accept the natural quality of rights than their equality of universality. (p20)</p></blockquote><p>While the <i>equality</i> and <i>universality</i> of human rights form the backbone of the remainder of Hunt's narrative, the issue of the <i>naturalness</i> of human rights is discussed only once, when summarizing the critique by Jeremy Bentham, the father of utilitarianism: </p><blockquote><p>Bentham objected to the idea that natural law was innate in the person and discoverable by reason. He therefore basically rejected the entire natural law tradition and with it natural rights. (p125)</p></blockquote><p>This critique is not engaged with — his dismissal of human rights seems to be enough to stamp him as someone to ignore — and I’m left puzzled as to why it is so obvious that human rights are <i>natural</i>. After all, (paraphrasing Bentham) there is no gene that encodes the right to freedom of religion. If human rights are natural, then why is the book called <i>Inventing Human Rights</i>, rather than <i>Discovering Human Rights</i>? </p><p>The title of the book is, ironically, an excellent way to frame this part of human history: human rights are indeed constructed. They are the product of the society that formulates them and enforces them, and they bear the marks of this process. This is a more useful lens: instead of a static, fully identified set of rules that society embarrassingly fails at applying sufficiently universally and equally, rights are the product of the battles and the concerns of the era.</p><p>Why was the era of capitalism the one that gave rise to demands for individual freedoms (the right to political representation, the right to freedom of religion), granted equally to all from birth? Those suddenly in power were no longer only men of noble birth. Their wealth came from the markets, and not from the pleasure of the King. Unlike the king, this new middle class had no need for the legitimation granted by the church, and so its authority too was weakened. Why were economic rights (the right to food and shelter, the right to work and to rest) added to the UN Declaration of Human Rights by the first ever Worker’s State? Those in power were concerned not only with political freedoms, which better enable the accumulation and enjoyment of wealth, but also with the economic freedoms, which enable the enjoyment of a fulfilling life without such wealth.</p><p>Because Hunt’s breezy overview of rights (excluding appendices, it is just 214 pages) emphasizes the slow stumbling process of recognizing the universality and equality of rights (rights in the abstract), the content of these rights and the specific relationships between these rights and the concerns and challenges of the people that demanded them is lost. It makes the invention of rights seem finished — in 1948 we declared there were 30 of them, and now we have only to implement them properly for a change. Why aren’t we adding to them to reflect our new understanding of what every member of society deserves, say, the right to a planet with an inhabitable environment? </p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-65820268119616477802023-08-28T16:38:00.000-07:002023-08-28T16:38:28.568-07:00Review: The Seven Moons of Maali Almeida by Shehan Karunatilaka<p>This was a unique, creative and weird book. A gay Sri Lankan photographer and fixer with a sex and gambling addiction dies, and tries to deal with the bureaucracy of the afterlife. He has no memory of his death, and has seven days (as a ghost!) to get his lover and his straight best friend who is in love with him to publish photos that could save his country from political corruption and repression before his soul needs to either move on or be swallowed by Mahakali. The prose is dense and colourful, the narrative is told in the unusual second-person omniscient voice. </p><p>It’s an incredible number of ideas to tackle in about 400 pages, and it feels a little overwhelming at times. For someone without any knowledge of Sri Lankan history — particularly the 1983 anti-Tamil progrom and its fallout — the different political parties felt difficult to keep track of. Despite feeling painfully unaware of a few gaps in my knowledge, the backdrop of class and race relations in Sri Lanka, with the gravitational force of the US Empire felt from afar, felt fun and fresh. Disappointingly, the political clashes just boiled down to “all sides are bad” and “violence begets more violence, but non-violence doesn’t work either.” It’s rather bleak, and the reader is left with little optimism for a better world, nor much insight into what can be done. More interesting is the philosophical questions of the role of the afterlife; the author makes a compelling case that focusing too much on life after death dampens one’s desire to make change in the here and now. In the end, ironically, it is not political strife that takes Maali’s life, but a personal conflict based on simple, brutish, prejudice.</p><p>Overall, the book packs in a plethora of questions and themes (Is mercy-killing permissible? Do animals have souls? How does internalized homophobia impact one’s ability to love? How do NGOs contribute to neocolonialism? Too many to list.), explores them from a novel angel, and often (but not always) arrives at rather flat or obvious conclusions. The various climaxes of love, personal growth, political clashes, and philosophical understanding land disjointedly; the book seemed to end three or four times before its actual last passage. Still, I appreciated its vibrancy and its ability to be both serious and playful.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-34470856995976771532023-08-05T22:14:00.000-07:002023-08-05T22:14:09.337-07:00Review: A Man Called Ove by Fredrik Backman<p>This book does a couple things well, but has a lot of infuriating ticks and bad philosophies. Let's start with the things I hated, and end on a pleasant note. And let’s do internet-friendly numbered lists, because why not: 4 Things I Hated and 3 Things I Loved about A Man Called Ove:<br /></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>The book is grossly fatphobic. The overweight character Jimmy cannot complete an action without Ove remarking on how his “blubber” moves or how his weight causes his Saab to sway. It can’t be chalked up to the worldview of the narrator, Ove (unless Ove hallucinates): the character is constantly asking for something to eat.</li><li>The book strictly observes gender roles. The amount of emotional labour the women of this book contribute is unreal. While the book explores positive masculinity versus toxic masculinity, it is the women — neighbour Parveneh and wife Sonja — who patiently coax Ove out of his rut, help him find purpose in life, and rescue him from suicide. Over the book, Ove comes to accept that men who don’t know what to do with joists are still valid people, but he still doesn’t take on basic “social glue” tasks like remembering people’s names.</li><li>The book distrusts institutions, who never do anything good. The narrative gives good reason for Ove to be skeptical of some social workers, who suggested he might want to divorce his wife and/or put her in a home after she is left paraplegic. But his crusade against “men in white shirts” is always righteous, or at worst, tedious but principled. Although the overall message of the book is the importance of community, the bounds of community are limited to one’s neighbourhood. There’s not a single instance of the positive benefits of state coordination of tasks — although presumably this is how the train system on which Ove fell in love with his wife came into being. The ideal world appears to be one where there is no government intervention save for the administration of driver’s licenses (the one sole positively portrayed government function), and groups of people manage their needs via homeowner associations (even if HOAs are plagued by petty squabbles over snow blowers and heating systems).</li><li>The humour is unfunny. This arises naturally from the three points above: the fat jokes, the jokes about women having too many coats, the jokes about how you can’t do anything these days without men in white shirts telling you no, they’re tiresome and unending. There’s a lot of angry violence played for humour — which is odd in a book that seeks to understand toxic aspects of masculinity.</li></ol><p>The book is a long 337 pages, and I think if all the above (plus a few scenes played just for jokes) was cut out, it could have been a really tight 150-page novela. It writes some things skillfully:</p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>Ove’s backstory is revealed fantastically. We hear about his tasks for the day, which include installing a hook in the ceiling. Throughout the day, he thinks about what he should tell his wife. He does things like check the radiators to make sure his wife hasn’t sneakily increased the temperature. Perhaps a quarter through the book, not until after we get to know Ove and his relationship with his wife, do we learn that his wife has been dead for six months, and he is installing a hook to hang himself. Similarly, asides and observations, like tire marks on the living room floor, presage the discovery that his wife used a wheelchair. These mysteries kept me wanting to read more.</li><li>Ove is an odd sort, but so is everyone else. Ove has many flaws. A worse comedy could leave it at that, have its characters act as straight men to Ove’s grumpy particularity while Ove softens up. However, we learn that Ove isn’t so strange at all: his quirks are shared by others. Parveneh in particular matches him in force of will, but other neighbours mirror him in how they hide their pain, or their joy in new machines (cars for him, an iPad for Parveneh’s daughter), or their fastidious expertise in tools (cables for Jimmy, and less electric tools for Ove). Nobody is a normie.<br /></li><li>The portrayal of love and loss is excellent. Ove is curmudgeonly, but not unloveable. His wife is wonderful — it was a pleasure to discover such a vibrant woman through Ove’s adoring eyes. Through this seemingly odd pair, we see how wonderful it is to be understood, appreciated, loved by someone else. We learn how seamlessly the two people fit together, and it’s heartbreaking to then see Ove try to struggle through on his own after her death. These passages are sincere and very emotional.</li></ol>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-21980370899776771552023-08-04T20:35:00.002-07:002023-08-04T20:35:29.456-07:00Review: Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson<p>There is not an overwhelming amount of science fiction writers tackling the climate crises and other challenges of social organization from a leftist perspective. Kim Stanley Robinson, or KSR, is probably the most decorated of this crew, and the <i>Mars</i> trilogy is the most well-known of his work. For these reasons alone, I thought it would be interesting to check out this series. </p><p>Fiction provides a good way to explore topics like social organization at a level of distance or abstraction, can provoke discussion and debate, and at its very best it can inspire a desire for change. Its ability to explore these topics and spark discussion rely on how well it portrays the interconnectedness of issues, the relationships between peoples and the problems they face. This doesn’t exclude fantastical elements: R.F. Kuang’s <i>Babel </i>wonderfully explores the internal contradictions of imperialism and capitalism in a world powered by magic. But within the world the author builds, the issues and their solutions have to seem realistic, each challenge and its solutions arising naturally from the world, and they need to feel relevant to our example. For the work to inspire, it has to show an appealing path forward for us: good characters who resonate with us, and who are tied into the challenges in the world and the solutions.</p><p><i>Red Mars</i>, the first installment of the trilogy, does not achieve these tasks. Its characters do not demonstrate a way we can change society, and its analysis of sociopolitical relationships is superficial.</p><p>The premise of the book is the formation of a new society on Mars: in an international collaboration, 100 scientists are sent to Mars to begin colonizing efforts, followed by waves of additional immigrants. The narrative follows a handful of these “First Hundred” scientists, while off-scene, Earth increasingly struggles with inequality, overpopulation, and powerful international corporations. This choice of setting sets KSR up for a challenge in making the issue he’s discussing relevant to our world. For the next century at least, our social projects must build on the foundations of existing societies — how would this change the characters’ solutions? The novel does not explore this. Additionally, there’s something off-putting about a story about the colonization of a new frontier without people — this is also how the first settlers in the Americas viewed their task and we haven’t really reckoned with this past yet. (There is a brief discussion about the danger of terraforming Mars without first ensuring it had no original traces of life, but the scientist in favour of a “red” Mars is quickly over-ridden and her concerns are made to look silly.) </p><p>In their nine-month voyage to Mars, the scientists discuss declaring independence from Earth and forming a new society. A scientist named Arkady sparks this debate with some of my favourite lines of the book:</p><blockquote><p>“To be twenty-first-century scientists on Mars, in fact, but at the same time living within nineteenth-century social systems, based on seventeenth-century ideologies. It’s absurd, it’s crazy, it's — it’s —” he seized his head in his hands, tugged at his hair, roared “It’s unscientific!”</p></blockquote><p>The conflicts between them rapidly dissipate when they arrive and diffuse across the planet. I liked this analysis: this reflects the dissipation of social tensions in Europe as the “surplus population” spread to the (“unpopulated”) colonies. The pacing gets a bit weird after this. There are endless passages about dust and ice as the scientists terraform Mars, pumping as much heat into the environment as possible (also off-putting to read about, given present challenges). In the background, Arkady agitates among the new immigrants while the transnational companies tighten their grip on earth. These off-scene maneuverings come to a head in what ends up being a failed revolution.</p><p>This is where the novel fails in its tasks as political fiction. First, our main characters have surprisingly little to do with the "main" events of the book. They drive around Mars in their Jeeps and ponder the implications of their pharmaceutically-induced immortality, bemoaning that there are really too many immigrants coming to Mars. Some are a little sympathetic to Arkady’s movement, but their support seems lukewarm, disinterested. Second, the political actions and reaction don’t feel relevant to our world, and are thrown into the plot with little connection to each other. In one of the few scenes in which we witness a point-of-view character impacting events, Frank convinces the President of the United States of America to stand up to the multinationals because it would be embarrassing for him not to. And Washington is swayed! What was the rebel’s plan, how did they develop it, and why did it fail? These questions aren’t really answered.</p><p>From my brief summary of the story here, it might sound like a complete failure of a novel — but I actually don’t think so. It does actually have a cohesive emotional arc. The underlying issue with <i>Red Mars</i> is that the backbone of the story has very little to do with its premise. At its heart, <i>Red Mars</i> is about the dynamics of a group of a hundred people required to work together out of necessity and proximity — like colleagues or homeowner association members, but in Space. The structure of the story reflects this: the book opens with a critical scene where one of the First Hundred arranges and executes the assassination of another of the First Hundred, the climax of a power struggle built over decades. Next, we flash backwards, learning how the First Hundred came to get to know each other, how they formed their first friendships, romances and allegiances. Next, we see how cracks form, developing into the feud that leads to the assassination. Much of the (slow, dust- and ice-filled) middle of the book is driven by the tension of some of the First Hundred looking for a faction that has gone no-contact, and how they deal with the feelings of regret and rejection. The climax of the novel is not the revolution, but of the First Hundred uniting again, surviving together in the chaos caused by Arkady’s rebellion.</p><p>When I thought the novel would be about forming a new society on Mars, I wondered at the choice of point-of-view characters. Why do we not see the perspective of someone on Earth, perhaps someone in the Global South, particularly at the mercy of the transnationals, and able to access neither Mars nor the pharmaceutically-induced immortality? Why do we not see through the eyes of a new immigrant to Mars, struggling with the lack of infrastructure and the oppressive laws of the transnationals, eager to join Arkady's movement? Why are our only point-of-view characters these older, white, privileged First Hundred scientists that care more about science and each other than forming a new society on Mars? Because it’s not a story about forming a new society on Mars, it’s a novel about the friendships and competitiveness of adult professional societies.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-80807348338762829032023-07-29T20:08:00.003-07:002023-07-29T20:15:24.258-07:00Review: The Tombs of Atuan by Ursula Le Guin<p><span class="Formatted">This was such a strangely paced little story. It
felt very much like an Act 1, and I believe Tenar's story continues in
other books in this series, so maybe that's the right way to approach
it. The beginning meanders quite a bit, pleasantly enough but without
much hint of where the story will go. It's not until about the halfway
mark that the inciting event happens: a man (a wizard!) has entered (and
shines light, even!) her dark labyrinth reserved only for her, the
high priestess. The chemistry between the two, though not romantic, is
very fun. She is taunting, sarcastic, smart, but sheltered. He is
genuine, equally smart, and worldly. She is disarmed by his good-faith answers to her questions. With his help,
she is able to leave the faith she had already begun to question. The story
ends very open-ended: she has no family, no skills, no knowledge of the
world beyond the tombs. What will she do? And that's why it feels like
an Act 1 for me: it isn't enough to simply leave a faith, you have to
replace it with something else. A new philosophy or worldview, a new community, a new purpose. Tenar still has quite a journey ahead of
her.<br /><br />Aesthetically this book reminded me a little of Susanna Clarke's <i>Piranesi</i>:
a lonely person at home in a labyrinth. That one was gripping in a way
this one wasn't quite, and I think it was the mystery of the place and
Piranesi's past. Tenar's world is instead incredibly boring and mundane
and that is in a sense the point of Le Guin's novela: why should lives
be sacrificed (literally, or via devotion) for these dark, nameless Gods
that provide no comfort or happiness or peace to their devotees? Life
is instead what humans make of it.</span></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-37926946411968402052023-06-29T21:54:00.001-07:002023-06-29T21:54:05.742-07:00Review: The City and the City by China Mieville<p>The setting of this otherwise fairly cliched police procedural is a pair of cities that share a geographical location but refuse to acknowledge that fact. Citizens of the two cities walk the same streets and breathe the air, but carefully ignore the people and buildings of the “other” city, learning from birth the architectural, ethnic and fashion traits that distinguish the two cities. Why are the two cities like this? The cleavage of the cities predates written history, and is never discovered. What keeps the two cities apart? A shadow court with absolute power might sick a SWAT team on you if you gaze for too long at the wrong building.</p><p>Given that the cop drama starts a little ho-hum (no-nonsense alcoholic cop, young woman shows up dead, the whodunnit turns into a matter of jurisdiction) while the setting is so unique, the book seems positioned to make a political critique. After all, we can live in the same location as others but experience the location wildly differently. Race, wealth, gender all shape how comfortable we are in a particular setting, what actions or locations are open to us, and what actions or locations are threatening. Glimpses of a political critique appear here and there throughout the novel: one city is embargoed by the United States and aligned with Mao and the Black Panthers and economically thriving, the other is on friendly terms with the US while its infrastructure decays. But beyond these symptoms of political differences between the two cities, there is no mention of actual political difference, discussion of how these differences arose, or how these differences impact the citizens. Indeed, the people of each city seem remarkably culturally similar: each city has its own language but the differences end there. The two cities hold no animosity towards each other; their relationship is more like two awkward strangers that would rather not have to sit next to each other on a bus. There’s nothing like what typically, historically, separates feuding states: religion, differing opinions on the role of private property in society, genocidal intent. This absence is made all the more stark by the explicit mention of “border cities” like Berlin and Jerusalem.</p><p>So the fact that there appears to be <i>nothing</i> preventing the unification of the two cities (even for the sheer convenience of being able to go to the coffee-shop next door without having to first cross the border 5 miles away) but an ethos that “it has always been this way” plus the fear of the shadowy mob accountable to no one appears to be the point of the book. It winds up feeling a little empty, like a night spent passing around a joint musing “isn’t it crazy that there’s unspoken social rules that you just, don’t, like, question, man?” The detective plot echoes this conclusion: for a moment, it seems like perhaps there is a third city unbeknownst to the other two, a new world to explore. But no, a faceless American corporation was just stealing things and murdering people for profit, like they do in countless far less unique locations around the world. “Isn’t it crazy how like, evil, corporations are, man?”</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-16873803540449552502023-06-17T16:19:00.000-07:002023-06-17T16:19:14.106-07:00Review: The Lathe of Heaven by Ursula K. Le Guin<p><i>The Lathe of Heaven </i>is Le Guin's critique of George Orwell's <i>1984.</i> It's clear that she wants us to draw direct lines of comparison between the two science fiction works: Le Guin names her main character "George Orr", and the history of her world includes an attempted police state occurring in 1984.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span></p><blockquote>They rewrote the Constitution in 1984, the way you remember, but things were so bad by then that it was a lot worse, it didn't even pretend to be a democracy any more, it was a short of police state, but it didn't work, it fell apart right away.</blockquote><p>We don't hear more details about how Orwellian-style authoritarian rule fell apart in a tangle of its own contradictions. Perhaps Le Guin (an anarchist) found this part of Orwell's famous dystopia too incredible to make it worth re-examining. Instead, Le Guin challenges the "brainwashing" aspect. Is it possible to control someone's thoughts towards your own political ends?</p><p>Her answer is a resolute "NO". </p><p>Our protagonist George Orr is placed on Voluntary Therapeutic Treatment (an Orwellian sort of name) for abusing drugs, which he takes to suppress dreams. We learn that Orr is able to rewrite history through his dreams — he had previously inadvertently done so to erase the fall-out of nuclear war and disappear an inconvenient aunt — and he is horrified at the prospect of meddling in the world without the permission of its other inhabitants.</p><p>His therapist, Dr Haber, sees in Orr's powers an opportunity to change the world for the better. Haber develops a system of hypnosis and brain stimulation to direct Orr's dreams, with mixed success. Haber attempts to have Orr address world peace; Orr's dreams create an alien threat that unites mankind against a new foes. Haber attempts to have Orr solve racism; Orr's dreams create a dull world filled with gray-skinned people. Orr's subconscious can be influenced, but it cannot be controlled with the precision of Orwell's Big Brother's tools: people mediate the messages they receive.<br /></p><p>Orr objects to the way Dr Haber uses him, but "voluntary" therapy keeps him trapped under Haber's thumb. His efforts for legal intervention are thwarted <span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">— like our world, Le Guin's dystopia is also rife with gaslighting and <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2022/08/review-medical-apartheid-by-harriet.html">medical abuses</a>. Orr learns that the aliens he invented have deeper knowledge of dream states, and one alien directs him to The Beatles' "<i>With a Little Help from My Friends</i>". The world can't be changed by single individuals, Orr learns, but instead we have to be one with the world and with each other, connected and surrendering to its flows like wave-flung jellyfish.<br /></span></p><p>The critique of the impossibility of mind control or of solving sociopolitical problems through science is clear and pointed. Le Guin's solution for change is murkier — how exactly holistic, social dreaming works is rather unclear, and the Beatles reference was a little cheesy. In this regard, <i>The Lathe Of Heaven</i> is similar to <a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2022/06/utopias-and-ursula-le-guin-dispossessed.html"><i>The Dispossessed</i></a>, which she published three years later. After a few hundred pages of probing the difficulties of anarchism, unable to find a real solution, the rebels of <i>The Dispossessed</i> who are trying to found a better anarchist society throw their hands up and say "It was our purpose all along (...) to shake up things, to stir up, to break some habits, to make people ask questions." </p><p>Unlike the antagonists of <i>1984</i>, Le Guin's Haber is not portrayed as evil or seeking power for the sake of power. Although Haber does use Orr's abilities to improve his social standing and influence (acquiring for himself various promotions, for example), Haber believes he is acting for the greater good, and this drives his decisions and rhetoric. It leads to a more interesting discussion of philosophy, of utilitarianism versus self-determination. In this, too, <i>The Lathe of Heaven</i> is<i> </i>consistent with Le Guin's other worlds: her characters are real people, with well-thought out and articulated philosophies, which lead in a rational way to their political beliefs. Her worlds are detailed, her prose is beautiful, and she's always a joy to read.<br /></p><p></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-46925128755805236292023-06-11T18:53:00.001-07:002023-06-11T18:59:35.293-07:00Review: The Art of Cruelty by Maggie Nelson<p>I kinda struggled with this book for the first couple chapters, but to be honest, that one is on me. I went in expecting something on the art of cruelty — should it ever be wielded, and if so, how? That is, I was expecting something along the lines of Yves Winter’s <i><a href="https://www.itsallgeekto.me/2022/11/machiavelli-and-the-orders-of-violence.html">Macchiavelli and the Orders of Violence</a></i>. In that text, Winter looks at the historical context in which Macchiavelli was writing, and from this perspective, proffers a model for how to understand violence (and cruelty, which he defines in Machiavelli's terms as lethal violence that upsets the social expectation of dignity and bodily integrity). Although the title is <i>The Art of Cruelty</i>, the subject matter is cruelty in art — something very different, and once I shifted my frame of reference, I felt better able to swim through Nelson’s waters.</p><p>In <i>The Art of Cruelty</i>, Nelson reflects on various meditations on cruelty in art and media (or reactions of people who accuse specific works of art of excess cruelty). She strolls through theatre (e.g., Antonin Artaud), visual arts (e.g., the other Francis Bacon), performance art (e.g., Yoko Ono), pop culture movies (e.g., Quentin Tarantino), poetry (e.g., Sylvia Plath) and mainstream news (e.g., Bill O’Reilly). Initially I found myself probing for why these examples of these genres were selected and not some others. Learning that Nelson taught an undergraduate seminar with the same title as this book made a lot of pieces fall into place: it should be approached as a tour through the hot topics of 2001-2011 (when this book was published and when she taught her seminars) and of academic discussions around contemporary art. This also explains why my expectations that Nelson would cast judgement on this or that object of art as “warranted” or “good” use of cruelty were constantly disappointed: Nelson presents many examples but seems very careful not to conclude too much about them. </p><p></p><blockquote>“[The Neutral] allows for a practice of gentle aversion: the right to reject the offered choices, to demur, to turn away, to turn one’s attention to rarer and better things. Preserving the space for such responses has been one of this book’s primary aims. Of equal importance has been making a space for paying close attention, for recognizing and articulating ambivalence, uncertainty, repulsion and pleasure. I have intended no special claim for art of literature – that is, no grand theory of their value. But I have meant to express throughout a deep appreciation of them as my teachers.” </blockquote><p></p><p>I could see this approach working well in a context where the examples are encountered and debated collectively. But I wasn’t reading this book in a group or seminar, so I had to have a debate with myself. Perhaps in a university classroom, Nelson provides a little more guidance to structure the debate. I found very little structure present in this book, which is grouped mostly according to topic (theatre, pornography, beauty, etc). Without a better guide, I turned to the aforementioned Winter for help. His triadic model of violence, consisting of object, subject and audience, is helpful for examining cruelty in art. Who does the artist put in the role of object and subject, and do they include an audience within the frame, or is the audience only the viewer? Winter also discusses the political role that hate (collective, unites people in action) and fear (isolating, inhibits action) play — this too would be a useful lens: does a cruel work of art cause us to hate or fear something? </p><p>I think if Nelson had used these frames for examining cruelty, the examples she picked would have been a little more varied, and the discussion a little more interesting. For example, she discusses at some length the reaction to the horrors committed by the US military in Abu Ghraib, made public in 2004, but highlights only American reactions. As she points out, this “model of shaming-us-into-action-by-unmasking-the-truth-of-our-actions cannot hold a candle to our capacity to assimilate horrific images, and to justify or shrug off horrific behaviour.” But in Abu Ghraib, the perpetrators of the cruelty <i>are</i> the Americans — the same group she presents as the audience. In the triad model (object, subject, audience), we are missing two parties: how did those in the territories invaded by the US react to these images? How did those in uninvolved countries react? Did it elicit fear? Or hatred? (Or, perhaps it registered as only one more action to add to the pile.) Either way, I think these parts of the triad would have been unlikely to shrug off or justify such horrific behaviour.</p><p>Despite its lack of theoretical framework and its US-centric focus, Nelson does pull together philosophical comments on cruelty from a variety of sources (Nietszche, Adorno, Plato, Derrida, etc) and it was fun to see these very different approaches collaged together. It was also an interesting time capsule: many issues it presents (for example, Stephen Colbert's "truthiness", and reality TV) were fiery topics of debate just as I was entering adulthood and I haven't really examined them since.<br /></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-70154810167889573522023-06-07T16:37:00.001-07:002023-06-09T21:02:12.919-07:00Review: The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand<p>There are no children in <i>The Fountainhead</i>, and this is because if this gap was visible all of Rand's argument comes tumbling down.<br /><br />Rand's core argument is that man is naturally predisposed to selfishness, to wish only to fulfill his own wants, that any form of self-sacrifice or altruism is parasitic. Man's goal is to create skyscrapers and art.<br /><br />I disagree, of course. Evolution found an optimum where our ability to think complexly came at the expensive of a very dependent childhood, and as a result humans evolved to be social creatures. Man is instead inherently predisposed to bond with others, to wish to see them to do well, to help them, to form loyalties and allegiances. We create skyscrapers and art not for the sake of these lifeless objects themselves, but because we want admiration, belonging, to communicate with others, to mark our place in the history of our people.<br /><br />For this reason, I find Chernychevsky's take on rational egoism (the same philosophy Rand espouses) to be much more compelling. It feels <i>good</i> to help others, to accomplish something, to be admired, and so, selfishly, we act altruistically.</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">You see, my dear sir, O perspicacious reader, what schemers these noble people are, and how egoism plays in their souls? (...) They take their greatest satisfaction in having people whom they respect regard them as noble; to achieve this end, my dear sir, they work hard and devise all sorts of schemes no less diligently than you do in pursuit of your goals. Only your goals are different, and so the schemes you devise are not the same. You devise schemes that are worthless and harmful to others; they devise schemes that are honest and useful to others.</p><p>Rand's writing is tedious, the book is overly long, the rape is treated with startling dismissiveness, but I give her some credit for putting forth an argument rather than hiding her views in criticism of the status quo without putting forth a proposition for something she believes to be better.</p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3037517387225936825.post-74925040938281425752023-06-07T16:27:00.001-07:002023-06-07T16:27:08.104-07:00Review: Ludicrous by Edward Niedermeyer<p><span class="Formatted">Tesla and Elon Musk have been newsfeed staples
for a decade. I’d kept up with the general story arc and formed an
opinion on how revolutionary/earth-saving their technology is (that is
to say, not very). This work of investigative journalism does a great
job filling in the gaps in my knowledge, and highlighting themes
characteristic of Musk’s public relations style and Tesla’s
decision-making. The book is well organized; each chapter is based
around a topic (defect reporting, the announcement of the model X and
the ensuing production woes, autonomous vehicle technology). This
structure allows the common beats to shine through: Musk’s willingness
to bend truths and skirt regulations, the emphasis of flash and style
and status symbols over practical or environmental considerations, the
disregard for hard-earned industry wisdom in favour of a silicon valley
software engineering mentality. <br /><br />The author is sharp in his
criticism of Elon Musk, but does grant him some accomplishments. I was
swayed by the author’s argument that car consumers did not really want
(at least in the early to mid 2010s) electric vehicles like the Nissan
Leaf but wanted a status symbol with the cutting-edge,
naysayers-be-damned branding that Musk built for Tesla. Did Tesla help
move the needle on increased demand for low-carbon emission vehicles,
and spur its competitors to develop alternatives? This is an impossible
counterfactual to answer. But I do think it’s clear that Tesla’s
electric vehicles had a small, financially inefficient impact on
reducing global emissions. It’s fascinating that this was written in
2019; Tesla’s valuation has increased by an order of magnitude since
then without much more to show for it.<br /><br />I also learned a lot more
about car manufacturing than I expected: how manufacturing and design
stay in close step and how company cultures are shaped around this, how
post-market reporting of defects are reported and investigated, how
business models and car designs are shaped around this high-capital
investment and low-profit margin business.</span></p>Its All Geek To Mehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17018053738268037966noreply@blogger.com0