My first experience reading King. After an interesting beginning culminating in the slaughter of a dreamlike desert town (where I could see elements of King’s horror writing that make him such a well known author) there really wasn’t too much to capture my attention. The majority of the middle was a fairly dull adventure story dotted with small glimpses of the protagonist’s backstory. There were definitely some good elements that help to build the slightly surreal, post-apocalyptic world King is trying to create, but they didn’t really do much to hold my interest. However the climax of the story and the inevitable encounter between the gunslinger and the man in black was fantastic. Suddenly we’re thrown into a metaphysical monologue with an extended dream sequence that reads like a mescaline trip and starts to show us the route King might be taking the rest of the series. Overall I think 3* is a fair rating. I’m not in a rush to read any more King books after this one but I’d quite like to come back to the Dark Tower series at some point in the future.
|A wonderfully written little book. Marquez is obviously a master story teller but he also the the unique ability to make a story resonate with the reader long after the book is finished. Chronicle of a Death Foretold is certainly not epic on the scale of One Hundred Years of Solitude but it captures the same essence and evokes similar emotions within the reader. (There’s even a reference to Colonel Aureliano Buendia!)
I love the way Marquez wraps up his tales within the last few pages; the final depiction of the murder of Santiago Nasar is at the same time brutal and weirdly beautiful. Since this was such a quick read I’d definitely like to come back to it at some point in the future. A solid 4*.
The Incal is possibly one of the most difficult books I’ve had to rate in recent times. The problem with rating comics is that I don’t know how to distinguish between the overall reading experience, the script, and the art itself. Jodorowsky and Moebius’ work really sums up this dilemma. On the one hand we have a comic script that is funny and clever in parts but often overly sporadic to the point of sometimes being incomprehensible (this shouldn’t really be a surprise to anyone remotely familiar with Jodorowsky) and on the other we have a collection of technicolour sci-fi imagery that’s as inventive as it is beautiful, but is often coloured very confusingly (characters will literally change shape and colour depending on the tone of the page). I’ve found this problem again and again with rating supposedly influential comics (Alan Moore’s Swamp Thing comes to mind) but I think I’ve settled on 4* because the book undoubtedly has some elements of visionary genius tucked away in there amongst the madness. Overall The Incal took me on a journey. It creates a bizarre futuristic sci-fi world that comes across like the monograph of someone at the end of a two day acid trip – but maybe that isn’t a bad thing. Regardless of my thoughts it’s still a must read for Sci-fi fans in any medium.
I’ve been meaning to read Pynchon for a long time now and I really didn’t know what to expect. There’s no doubt TCL49 is a very interesting book. Much more strange, and even somewhat silly, than I was expecting. The book definitely has an air of 60s psychedelia to it (which is not at all surprising considering when it was written) and there were a few moments where the absurdity of it all legitimately made me laugh out loud.
Pynchon’s writing is a constant flux of densely packed images broken up by moments of witty surrealism. I understand how it can come across obtuse at times, but I’m surprised to see so many other reviewers have found it so difficult. To me it was not a particularly easy read but it hardly had that air of impenetrability that some of the other early post-modernists are known for.
Overall I’d argue that there are undoubtedly moments of genius in here but it seems like TCL49 only really gives the reader a taste of what Pynchon is capable of. To me, a style like Pynchon’s doesn’t seem suited to a short 150 page story, and that’s coming from a huge fan of short form literature. I can see why some people love it and why some people hate it but reading this made me really excited to dive into V. at some point in the future. Only then could I really decide if I’m a Pynchon fan or not.
4.5* Absolutely beautiful. The work of a true master. Have never read anything quite like it. I’m not going to give it 5* purely on the basis that I read it so sporadically and many of the poems in the middle I didn’t give my full attention to. However, for me, the beginning and the end were absolutely stunning.
I feel like these
I could read again
and again (and again
and still find
meaning (the truth
that I had always
Cummings’ experimental (yet thoughtful) style really makes you take a step back and analyse the poem as a poem. The length of the lines, the punctuation, the depth of the stanzas, they all have a clear purpose and they all change how the words themselves are experienced — more so than anything I’ve ever read before.
Reading these so randomly over the space of a couple of months (in PDF form on a laptop [the formatting didn’t work on kindle]) was somewhat of a disservice. I’ll next pick up a book of Cummings poetry when I’m in a situation where I can purchase a hard copy and keep it with me at all times. I have no doubt I will get even more from it than I did from this edition.
Cyberspace. A consensual hallucination experienced daily by billions of legitimate operators, in every nation, by children being taught mathematical concepts… A graphic representation of data abstracted from banks of every computer in the human system. Unthinkable complexity. Lines of light ranged in the nonspace of the mind, clusters and constellations of data. Like city lights, receding…
How can I describe Neuromancer? Probably by writing something with far too much unnecessary alliteration. A rip-roaring roller-coaster ride resembling a prophetic vision of our recent reality maybe? That’s something that I could imagine being on a blurb of a sci-fi book in the 80s…
Anyway, I got about halfway through this book almost 2 years ago before drunkenly leaving it at a friends house in somewhere in the sprawl of suburban London. Fast forward to the present and I’m living in a different kind of sprawl amongst the neon lights of East Asia. It seems quite appropriate that I finished the book here.
Neuromancer is really somewhere between a work of utter genius and the speculative ramblings of an inexperienced sci-fi writer. It’s extremely difficult to follow (even the second time round) and many of the characters and settings are unexplained or underdeveloped. However, in a sort of backwards way this is arguably one of the book’s biggest strengths. You are thrown head first into a world of technological acronyms and digital codes that are not explained to you by any omniscient narrator – you the reader have to try and work out what’s going on while it’s all happening, and this is no easy task. There is no break in the action for any kind of sustained explanation and this leaves you with a real sense of what life in a dark digital dystopia must feel like. In other words, Gibson’s scatty, action packed, fast paced writing is the perfect aesthetic style for the world he’s trying to envision, and it’s a world that has, as many readers are well aware, become eerily close to our own.
The fact that this book was released in 1984 is absolutely staggering in my opinion and it’s honestly a pretty big surprise that it hasn’t dated badly at all. Gibson actually joked that one of the only things that kids these days would found completely off about Neuromancer’s predictions is that no one is carrying around smartphones.
All in all as I’ve recently been digging down the rabbit hole of accelerationism and retracing my routes in the philosophy of technology Neuromancer was the perfect thing to read. Not quite worth 5 stars but easily deserving of 4. I’m going to give another book of Gibson’s a read to hopefully see if his ideas are as prescient as they were in this book when he has had more time to develop as an author.
A couple of my favourite quotes:
‘His vision crawled with ghost hieroglyphs, translucent lines of symbols arranging themselves against the neutral backdrop of the bunker wall. He looked at the backs of his hands, saw faint neon molecules crawling beneath the skin, ordered by the unknowable code. He raised his right hand and moved it experimentally. It left a faint, fading trail of strobed afterimages. The hair stood up along his arms and at the back of his neck. He crouched there with his teeth bared and felt for the music. The pulse faded, returned, faded…’
‘It was a vast thing, beyond knowing, a sea of information coded in spiral and pheromone, infinite intricacy that only the body, in its strong blind way could ever read…’
‘But weren’t the zaibatsus more like that, or the Yakuza, hives with cybernetic memories, vast single organisms, their DNA encoded in silicon?’
Very interesting book but damn it took me a long time to get through for something so (relatively) short. It was partly due to the bleak nature of the book, but partly because Ballard has a very particular kind of writing style. It just doesn’t draw me in instantaneously. Even though his speculative concepts are intriguing and the stories are often compelling enough on their own, I just don’t particularly enjoy reading his books as I’m reading them. However, as soon as I finish I become seemingly more interested to delve deeper into his oeuvre.
On a side note: The modern politico-philosophical trend of accelerationism has a lot of interesting things to say about Ballard’s writing which I find to be of interest. As Ballard had predicted, sf had become the only medium capable of addressing the disorienting reality of the present:
‘Everything is becoming science fiction. From the margins of an almost invisible literature has sprung the intact reality of the twentieth century. What the writers of modern science fiction invent today, you and I will do tomorrow—or, more exactly, in about ten years’ time, though the gap is narrowing. Science fiction is the most important fiction that has been written for the last 100 years…’
I’ll certainly be coming back to explore more of his work at some point before the year is through.