Book review: There Is No Antimemetics Division

Post by satvikpendem » Mon, Apr 06, 2026, 6:34 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #88

doug_durham wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> If you want to see if the prose is any good, read the book. I don't read complete plot summaries of books that I ever plan to read. That's why I look for "reviews." The only reason it's hard to write a review is because you can't give away the plot, but you have to give a sense of the appeal and the quality of the book. Otherwise, it's just a summary. I can't know what books are available on the market through intr…

Post by lukifer » Mon, Apr 06, 2026, 6:41 PM UTC

zelias wrote: post #75

andrewla wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What book? There is no book discussed in this article

Post by skeaker » Mon, Apr 06, 2026, 6:46 PM UTC

biophysboy wrote: post #81

mjburgess wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm referring to the ending of the published version, which is quite different than v1, which ends abburptly, in particular the sections before and after: > “She steps back from him. She flexes what could be wings.” > “In ideatic space everything is possible and everything is real and every metaphor is apt. She sees a galaxy of shining points: people, all the people who have ever existed, packed almost densely enough…

Is this book just riffing about embedding space? I thought about reading it eventually, but the quoted passage is kind of annoying/tedious

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 06, 2026, 6:55 PM UTC

mjburgess wrote: post #56

I 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.

Post by yellottyellott » Mon, Apr 06, 2026, 7:04 PM UTC

cwillu wrote: post #28

yellottyellott wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the first half was good and that the second half felt clunky > The second half was garbage, but the first half was so good so you had the same reaction?

> To the point where i don’t recommend it to anyone > but the first half was so good and original I'd recommend it just for that Attension span so short you couldn't even make it to the second half of the sentence before dismissing it