Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Interview with Ted Chiang

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 60 posts

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#41

Post by macintux »

betageek wrote: post #34
elorant wrote: post #6

I’ve just finished reading “The story of your life” the other day and I can’t say I’m impressed. Based on the comments I’ve read about the movie I expected it to be mind boggling. The author claims that knowing the future affects free will but he doesn’t bother explaining how could anyone know the future or why would there be only one – quantum mechanics for example states that there could be countless futures/univer…

I think in this case the film works better than the story. It's not one of my favourites of Chiang's but the impact & consequences of Louise learning the heptapod language is far greater on film than it is in prose.

Having read the short story after seeing the film, I agree. The story is enjoyable, but the film is powerful.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#42

Post by sandworm101 »

macintux wrote: post #39
sandworm101 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Avoid spoilers if you can. That's another red flag for me. The great scifi remains watchable over and over. Knowing the plot, not being surprised, should not take much away from a properly good movie. When people tell me not to read spoilers they are suggesting to me that the film is considerably less watchable without the surprises. True be told, pretty much every "giant ships" scifi follows the predictable path.…

I'd gladly rewatch it, but is it really so hard to imagine that a surprising plot is worth being unspoiled? You're trying awfully hard to dislike a movie you haven't seen.

>> You're trying awfully hard to dislike a movie you haven't seen.

I am. I do try hard. I've been burnt by too many movies. If am only going to see one in a given month (at the theatre) I don't want to waste that opportunity. I don't think I am alone in heavily criticizing how a movie is promoted as part of the decision. One of the reasons I went to DrStrange was that the movie had not been so heavily promoted. It's a standard superhero movie, but the lack of exaggerated claims gave me confidence.

The last time I allowed someone else to take me to a "critically acclaimed" movie I ended up cringing through Twelve Years a Slave. Or Contact, which I only sat through because I was with people. If Arrival is anything like Contact I want to know that in advance.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#43

Post by pritianka »

bbctol wrote: post #7

I'm so glad that this movie is getting Ted Chiang more exposure. He's one of the most interesting and creative science fiction authors out there, despite and unbelievably small output (he has literally published fifteen stories over almost 30 years, and picked up four Hugos, four Nebulas, and a ton of other prestigious awards.) Maybe this will finally motivate him to quit his day job and write more, or at least get m…

100% agree. I loved his short stories (including the one this book depicts). This was my first foray into sci-fi (if you can call it that, strictly) and it was awesome.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#44

Post by sandworm101 »

chroma wrote: post #15
sandworm101 wrote: post #3

The greater the marketing hype before a film arrives in my town, the greater the inevitable disappointment. Perhaps Arrival is great, but imho the truly great ones don't invest in such a hype machine. The "100% at rotten tomatoes" line in the commercials give me pause. I checked. It's at 95, not 100. I can see why. Scores do change, but it's just more evidence of heavy marketing. The best scifi, the really good stuff…

> The best scifi, the really good stuff, doesn't hit a home run with reviewers immediately. Wait, so your expectations for the movie would be higher if the Rotten Tomatoes score was lower ?

>> Wait, so your expectations for the movie would be higher if the Rotten Tomatoes score was lower?

Yes. A good movie should be hated by certain reviewers. There are a great many reviewers with radically different tastes than mine. The chances of us all agreeing about a movie are slim. So when I see "100%" I am suspicious.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#45

Post by macintux »

sandworm101 wrote: post #42
macintux wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd gladly rewatch it, but is it really so hard to imagine that a surprising plot is worth being unspoiled? You're trying awfully hard to dislike a movie you haven't seen.

>> You're trying awfully hard to dislike a movie you haven't seen. I am. I do try hard. I've been burnt by too many movies. If am only going to see one in a given month (at the theatre) I don't want to waste that opportunity. I don't think I am alone in heavily criticizing how a movie is promoted as part of the decision. One of the reasons I went to DrStrange was that the movie had not been so heavily promoted. It's…

I'm pretty well disconnected from mass media, but was Arrival really more hyped than Dr. Strange? I hadn't even heard of Arrival until it, well, arrived.

Anyway, speaking as someone who saw it for $5, I'd pay thrice that to see it again (and probably will). I found it much more compelling than Dr. Strange, which I might watch again someday on Netflix.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#46

Post by gohrt »

sandworm101 wrote: post #3

The greater the marketing hype before a film arrives in my town, the greater the inevitable disappointment. Perhaps Arrival is great, but imho the truly great ones don't invest in such a hype machine. The "100% at rotten tomatoes" line in the commercials give me pause. I checked. It's at 95, not 100. I can see why. Scores do change, but it's just more evidence of heavy marketing. The best scifi, the really good stuff…

Surely there's a difference between "hyped by many reviewers and related journalism" and "hyped by McDonald's and 7-11 tie-ins"

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#47

Post by jotjotzzz8 »

rpearl wrote: post #40
jotjotzzz8 wrote: post #8

I didn't know him until now. I will definitely check out his short stories. I also love Ken Lu, his book "The Paper Menagerie and Other Stories" is one of the best collection of short stories I have read.

Ken Liu actually wrote a response to one of Ted Chiang's stories. http://kenliu.name/stories/single-bit-error/ is a response/exploration of the same world and ideas as Chiang's "Hell is the Absence of God", in Stories of Your Life and Others. I recommend reading the Chiang story first.

Wow, thank you.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#48

Post by macintux »

macintux wrote: post #45
sandworm101 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> You're trying awfully hard to dislike a movie you haven't seen. I am. I do try hard. I've been burnt by too many movies. If am only going to see one in a given month (at the theatre) I don't want to waste that opportunity. I don't think I am alone in heavily criticizing how a movie is promoted as part of the decision. One of the reasons I went to DrStrange was that the movie had not been so heavily promoted. It's…

I'm pretty well disconnected from mass media, but was Arrival really more hyped than Dr. Strange? I hadn't even heard of Arrival until it, well, arrived. Anyway, speaking as someone who saw it for $5, I'd pay thrice that to see it again (and probably will). I found it much more compelling than Dr. Strange, which I might watch again someday on Netflix.

More that I think about it, makes sense there'd be more of an advertising push for a movie that's rather difficult to describe, even difficult to understand, vs "hey another Marvel Universe film of course you're going to go see it".

Definitely doesn't seem fair to complain that Arrival needed to be promoted to make money. Look at what happened to "Iron Giant": fantastic film, completely underwhelming box office because WB had no idea how to market it.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#49

Post by superbatfish »

philh wrote: post #25

The interviewer here rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he had his own ideas about the things Chiang explores, and used much of the interview as a way to try to get Chiang to talk about those ideas, rather than talking about Chiang's own exploration of them. Did anyone else get this sense?

I felt the same way, but ultimately decided it's a good attribute for an interviewer to have, even though it didn't work out this time.

A good interviewer should understand his interviewee's work, have ideas about it, and then use those ideas to probe for deeper insights than surface details like "who influences you as a writer?". But deep probes are a little risky -- you might not find anything in that direction.

In this case, more than one of the interviewer's probes was a little off-base, but -- to his credit -- he didn't pursue those questions too far after Chiang's responses came back somewhat tempered. Kudos for trying, and kudos for letting it go.

Finally, kudos to Chiang himself for being clear about how he views his work. When faced with an enthusiastic -- but incorrect -- interpretation of one's writing, some authors would just "go with the flow", hesitant to dampen their readers' enthusiasm (misguided as it might be). But Chiang gently shot down a few of the interviewer's ideas, ultimately strengthening the original meaning of his own work.

Re: Interview with Ted Chiang

#50

Post by superbatfish »

cousin_it wrote: post #12

Ted Chiang is cool. But I think "Story of your life" isn't his best work. If you're going to read one story by Chiang, a good one is "Liking what you see": http://www.ibooksonline.com/88/Text/liking.html

That's interesting, because Chiang himself doesn't view "Liking What You See" to be his best work. In fact, he turned down a Hugo nomination for it, "on the grounds that the story was rushed due to editorial pressure and did not turn out as he had really wanted".[1]

Personally, I think Story of Your Life is a master work. I found the strange writing structure annoying at first, and then right at the end of the story you get an "ah-ha" moment that changes everything. What I thought was awkward writing turned out to be a masterful illustration about a theory of consciousness. I was floored by Chiang's ambition to even write such a story.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Chiang

Post reply on HN