This article says “Book Review:” but then doesn’t provide the title of a book. I’m confused. :)
It's in the title: "There is no Antimemetics Division" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/54870256-there-is-no-ant...
[deleted]
Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
61–70 of 243 posts
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#62It was a great book, but this review of it have its own value.
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#63I dislike the ending, at least of v2. In it, the author basically gives a fleshed out (christian, neoplatonist) metaphysics to the world he's created which basically amounts to: heaven exists, humans win against the devil, etc. And the ending itself is a self-conscious version of an ascension narrative. It's a very 90deg turn ending to a book otherwise more interested in a world in which heaven is never accessible.
It's the strongest possible memetic weapon humans would have - I think it's entirely consistent with the meta-nature of the book, especially the self-conscious part.
If the take is religion is itself the weapon and the depiction given is mere evidence of that, OK, that's at least avoids the ending being totally awful. HOWEVER
The book spends much of its time saying the transcendent cannot even be represented, to people, to us the read -- then just represents it, and in a tawdry christian way.
I think the violation of that norm, as well as the ending being played straight -- with literally a long paragraph explaining with ideaspace is... that's a fourth-wall break into christianity imv
Which makes the whole book read as, "the issue with humans is our physical bodies in a fallen world which are limited. just die, go to heaven, then you can know/represent/understand everything. Yay! Death!"
OK. Just kinda naff.
It reads as a religious person who accidentally wrote a good sci-fi book then hurridly, at the end, reminds us all that its really a parable with a Noble Message that in Death all things are trascended.
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#64This review is just a plot synopsis. There are no quotes from the book to give me a sense of the quality of the writing. The review feels targeted at somebody who is already bought into the premise, not somebody from the outside who wants to know if "There Is No Antimemetics Division" is a good book or not. In that sense, it totally fails as a book review.
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#65Written by AI.
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#66This review is just a plot synopsis. There are no quotes from the book to give me a sense of the quality of the writing. The review feels targeted at somebody who is already bought into the premise, not somebody from the outside who wants to know if "There Is No Antimemetics Division" is a good book or not. In that sense, it totally fails as a book review.
I have never read a review and got a true notion of whether the prose is good or not. Is that really why you read reviews? I thought this was a great review because it very concisely described what is an unorthodox book. If you want to see if the prose is any good, read the book. It is a good book by the way.
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's in the title: "There is no Antimemetics Division" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/54870256-there-is-no-ant...
Why would you disagree with the parent post and then fail to provide the title of the book in your own response? Just give the name of the book, please.
[deleted]
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the strongest possible memetic weapon humans would have - I think it's entirely consistent with the meta-nature of the book, especially the self-conscious part.
If the take is religion is itself the weapon and the depiction given is mere evidence of that, OK, that's at least avoids the ending being totally awful. HOWEVER The book spends much of its time saying the transcendent cannot even be represented, to people, to us the read -- then just represents it, and in a tawdry christian way. I think the violation of that norm, as well as the ending being played straight -- with…
I read the book and at no time did I think "Christianity". It seems like motivated reasoning on your part. At no time did the book ever preach, or was even moralistic.
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#69It's surely not a great book and if you are someone who reads a book every few months i wouldn't recommend it. It's very weird and different and fun, though. I suggest it for people who read a lot of sci-fi and are looking for something that doesn't feel the same as 10 other books they've already read.
[deleted]
Re: Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division
#70This article says “Book Review:” but then doesn’t provide the title of a book. I’m confused. :)
What article?