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

Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 119 posts

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#61

Post by luyu_wu »

I'm happy most of the comment section is discussing Liu Cixin's works instead of this article, but having made the mistake of reading said article I have a bit of a rant.

This journalist seems so intent on making everything political (from the beginning to the end of the article) that it reads like they have no interest in anything he's actually written. The author of this article never describes a single genuine question about his works that it honestly makes me a bit sick. So many quotes are taken so wildly out of context that they contain a few words placed awkwardly in the author's wall of text and opinion instead of representing genuine conversation.

One of my favorite parts: "Liu’s posture slackened slightly as we ate. The drinks had warmed him, and the heat of Sichuanese peppercorns seemed to stir him from his usual reticence. I decided to inch the conversation toward politics, a topic he prefers to avoid." The author reads as genuinely manipulative, and it was clear Cixin already stated he wasn't interested in discussing politics in the authors previous attempts... Maybe have some decency and respect?

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#62

Post by breuleux »

ajross wrote: post #50
breuleux wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the "neat" sci-fi ideas are often complete nonsense, such as the whole concept of sophons, which leverage a neat fringe idea of theoretical physics while running afoul of boring, well-established physics.

Isn't that true for basically all speculative sci-fi? The point to the form is to pick an idea with "enough plausibility" and extend it to an interesting implication. Not all "sci-fi" can be (or should be) 2001 or The Martian; Foundation and Dune are kinda good books too.

To various extents, yes, but it is easier to suspend one's disbelief about certain things than others. The main issue with sophons is that they routinely have to interact with quantities of energy that should annihilate them: when they are unfolded, for instance, they have to bear the impact of light all over their planet-spanning surface. They are "god-tier" technology, but only because they flaunt basic conservation of energy. I find it harder to suspend my disbelief about that than e.g. faster than light travel.

Foundation and Dune's premises are much tamer, and neither story collapses entirely if they turn out to be false.

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#63

Post by TheGRS »

luyu_wu wrote: post #61

I'm happy most of the comment section is discussing Liu Cixin's works instead of this article, but having made the mistake of reading said article I have a bit of a rant. This journalist seems so intent on making everything political (from the beginning to the end of the article) that it reads like they have no interest in anything he's actually written. The author of this article never describes a single genuine que…

Yea I can see this in the article as well. And anyone who has read the books can probably see this wasn't the authors real interest. I can see where someone with their pulse on international politics might read into Trisolaris vs Earth being some sort of a proxy for China vs USA. But my take is that the author was just writing about sci-fi ideas from their personal perspective in China. Chinese history, politics, and culture plays into how the plot unfolds. But it didn't feel to me like they're trying to say much about the international politics of the situation. Instead the plot marches ahead into speculative fiction steeped in some current-day theories about the universe. There's certainly a lot of dabbling in human emotions and conditions vs aliens who don't share those same ideals. But like "how does the USA respond vs China" is like an afterthought of the book, can't remember if that even really came up.

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#64

Post by gs17 »

luyu_wu wrote: post #61

I'm happy most of the comment section is discussing Liu Cixin's works instead of this article, but having made the mistake of reading said article I have a bit of a rant. This journalist seems so intent on making everything political (from the beginning to the end of the article) that it reads like they have no interest in anything he's actually written. The author of this article never describes a single genuine que…

Weirdly, they seemed to understand that he wouldn't talk about politics out of self-preservation:

> When questioned about stories that seemed to allude to Stalinist conformism and paranoia, Lem said the same thing that Liu says about geopolitical interpretations of his trilogy—that he was not writing a veiled assessment of the present but merely making up stories.

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#65

Post by mvdtnz »

jtgverde wrote: post #59
mvdtnz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The splitting of the main character (who was a humble middle aged Chinese scientist) into 4 pointlessly racially diverse beautiful young people who somehow represent the apex of the scientific community (and a snack company for some reason). The total butchering of interesting concepts, for example the usage of the sun as an amplifier which, while based on some hand-wavey fictional science, was quite fleshed out in t…

It's interesting that your primary criticism is that the scientists are too diverse...truly a struggle for me to see why that's such an abhorrent error Personally I thought they did a good job at adapting a book that I thought would be nearly impossible to transform into a "pop" sci fi series.

That's not my primary criticism. I literally prefaced my primary criticism with "But most of all".

It's an "abhorrent error" because the themes of the books were deeply tied to the Chinese heritage and culture of the author and his characters.

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#66

Post by xster »

pokstad wrote: post #27
jnovek wrote: post #6

I just finished Deaths End this morning so I'm experiencing that ponderous glow that you get after reading something thought provoking. Without going into spoilers, Death's End makes everything so... huge. It really made me feel tiny in our universe. These are good books with some flaws. You should read them.

The fourth book blessed by the original author is also great. Don’t sleep on that.

which one is that?

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#67

Post by luyu_wu »

TheGRS wrote: post #63
luyu_wu wrote: post #61

I'm happy most of the comment section is discussing Liu Cixin's works instead of this article, but having made the mistake of reading said article I have a bit of a rant. This journalist seems so intent on making everything political (from the beginning to the end of the article) that it reads like they have no interest in anything he's actually written. The author of this article never describes a single genuine que…

Yea I can see this in the article as well. And anyone who has read the books can probably see this wasn't the authors real interest. I can see where someone with their pulse on international politics might read into Trisolaris vs Earth being some sort of a proxy for China vs USA. But my take is that the author was just writing about sci-fi ideas from their personal perspective in China. Chinese history, politics, and…

Yeah, I would agree. I think the author was trying to force a narrative too much (they were trying to compare Trisolarians coming to WHAT exactly?). To the counterpoint as well, I think much of 3-Body it was actual a motivational tale that humanity would set aside its differences and come together in times of crisis.

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#68

Post by ein0p »

card_zero wrote: post #52
ein0p wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see how it is more likely given that the US has spent several trillion dollars on wars against countries which posed no threat to it, the consent for which was entirely manufactured by mass media. I think it’s more likely that this is a psyop.

Uyghurs are Turkic, and Turkey makes only mildly disapproving comments on the situation because China is anti-american, and having solidarity with that is perhaps more important than having solidarity with Uyghurs. Meanwhile, China being douchebags to Uyghurs may indeed be exploited by America as an opportunity to say "look China are douchebags", sure, why not.

It’s just weird how the country which currently officially spends tens of billions of dollars on genociding Muslims in Palestine also has the balls to run such psyops of dubious veracity against anyone else.

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#69

Post by marcellus23 »

jnovek wrote: post #56
marcellus23 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, I get the feeling that the people who gush about all the awesome ideas in the 3BP books, are not people who read very much sci-fi. Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course. But those ideas have been explored previously, and much better (IMO), in other less popular books.

That's fair -- I read some here and there but I recognize that I'm not a hardcore sci-fi reader. You mentioned that there are other, lesser known books that explore the same ideas in a more compelling way. Can you give some examples so I can add them to my reading list?

For an exploration of the dark forest theory at least, I recommend The Killing Star. Fair warning though, it’s extremely bleak.

Re: Liu Cixin's War of the Worlds (2019)

#70

Post by pokstad »

xster wrote: post #66
pokstad wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fourth book blessed by the original author is also great. Don’t sleep on that.

which one is that?

“The Redemption of Time”

It ties together loose ends and goes into more detail about what happened to that brain.

Post reply on HN