Sentimental Education
by Gustave Flaubert

After reading about the 1848 revolutions a few months back this went on the list. I like to round out my understanding of events with source material; I think period literature counts as such.

Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes — Maw

Nice. Watch out for the windmills.

The Terminal Beach by J. G. Ballard.

A collection of some of his earlier short stories. Mostly great. Lots of surrealism, Freud, Jung, and genre-wise more slipstream than science fiction.

I’ll probably read a volume of his later short fiction next. Two stories I’m particularly interested in are “Why I Want to Fuck Ronald Reagan” and “The Assassination Of John Fitzgerald Kennedy Considered As A Downhill Motor Race”.

Schopenhauer’s Compass, Urs App. A new (2014) introduction to Schopenhauer, drawing on his written notebooks and the margin jottings on his copies of the Upaniṣads and with a lot of discussion of his views on the other German philosophers. Excellent, so far.

Conspiracy Against the Human Race - Thomas Ligotti
The Trouble With Being Born - Emil Cioran
Nihil Unbound - Ray Brassier — fdrake

Hell yes

I’m unsure what to read next, so I’ve been combing through sections of The Nag Hammadi Library again. If nothing else it’s good for falling asleep. The fiction kick I’ve been on for awhile isn’t always good for that.

I’m unsure what to read next, so I’ve been combing through sections of The Nag Hammadi Library again. If nothing else it’s good for falling asleep. The fiction kick I’ve been on for awhile isn’t always good for that. — Noble Dust

Seeing you posting here reminds me that we never got around to discussing "Ubik" by Phillip K. Dick. When we first talked about it, I read the book and wrote out my thoughts. Rather than waste all that intellectual effort, I'm going to post it now:

My book report - "Ubik"

I enjoyed reading the book. I haven’t read much Dick and I’m not a big fan. I can’t remember what book or books I read previously. I had some impressions but it’s been so long I wasn’t sure they were correct. Turns out they were.

“Ubik” is heavy on plot, as chaotic as it is, but weak on characterization. I didn’t really like any of the characters and didn’t much care what happened to them. That’s a real weakness for me, although the book was written before science fiction became literature. Going back and rereading books by Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein, et. al. I found the same was true of them. When I was a teenager it didn’t matter much to me. Science fiction was about ideas, and “Ubik” clearly is. That was the whole point.

The world of “Ubik” is bleak and joyless, which, again, is a weakness for me. As the book rolled on, it turned out the characters, and perhaps all of humanity, were also hopeless. The whole feel of the book is slick and metallic, a framework on which ideas are hung without any sense of direction, which is also part of its point I guess.

I read a lot of science fiction throughout the 1960s but started reading less when I went off to college, so I wasn’t paying attention to the things that were going on in science fiction in the 1970s and 80s. I’m guessing that a big part of the charm and value of the book came from the mind blowing plot and sense of unstable and unreliable reality. That kind of thing has become much more common since. I guess Dick was one of the first, a pioneer. I’ve read quite a few more recent books with similar plot devices that I liked more.

So where does philosophy come in? That’s not a rhetorical question. The book didn’t seem all that philosophical to me. It was - and I think was intended to be - surreal, absurd, disorienting. The peoples’ lives were non-linear and meaningless, although they seemed to be even before the shenanigans started. So, bleakness, hopelessness, meaningless, absurdity - I guess existentialism.

And what’s up with Ubik? The little paragraphs at the beginning of every chapter were amusing and absurd. I’m sure it symbolized something, but I’m not sure what.

Conclusion - my prejudice against PKD is validated.

Interesting to read your thoughts. I still plan on making a thread, so I'll wait to respond. I need to read it again to respond to some of your points anyway.

Ubik” is heavy on plot, as chaotic as it is, but weak on characterization. I didn’t really like any of the characters and didn’t much care what happened to them. That’s a real weakness for me — T Clark

Exactly this. I had committed to giving a review but I didn't finish the book and this was the reason along with what I perceived as a cliche form of discourse. I wanted to like the book as I like the idea and others I respect here liked it but I didn't. I am coming out of the closet now because I am not alone. Thanks.

I enjoyed reading the book. I haven’t read much Dick and I’m not a big fan. — T Clark

I haven't read that, but I've read pretty much all of Philip K. Dick's short stories. He's old school science fiction. The vibe was always like you're being invited to consider something completely bizarre, but based in science somehow. PKD is known for images that stick with you. For me it's an image of this guy sitting in his living room and when he looks up at the window, there's a giant eye staring back at him. I don't remember the rest of the story, I just remember that image.

If you've ever seen the Russian version of Solaris, it captures that old school vibe pretty well.

I haven't read that, but I've read pretty much all of Philip K. Dick's short stories. He's old school science fiction. — frank

His later novels are anything but old school Sci-Fi. I plan on starting a serious thread about UBIK. I need recruits.

There are good images, yes, despite his terse prose. I was going to go into more detail but want to save it for the mythical thread that shall one day appear.

If you've ever seen the Russian version of Solaris, it captures that old school vibe pretty well. — frank

Yes, Tarkovsky's take on Lem's novel. I enjoyed the film a lot and need to re-watch it. With Tarkovsky I'm a bigger fan of Stalker and Mirror, but this is a reading thread. I absolutely loved Lem's Solaris novel, so seeing the film second was a let down because it's so different. But that's Tarkovsky. I saw Stalker first and then read the Strugatsky Brother's Roadside Picnic. It seems whichever you experience first is your preference, at least with me.

Another great Lem novel is Memoirs Found in a Bathtub. "Kafkaesque"...

His later novels are anything but old school Sci-Fi. — Noble Dust

Really? That's weird that they'd diverge significantly from his short stories. How would you characterize them?

Well, now that I say that, I should clarify since I might have misspoken. I think and write too quickly at times. His later novels are not Hard Sci-Fi involving mutant aliens races and complex future technologies. Some of these things make appearances in earlier works, but they are essentially non-existent in later works. By "old school" are you referring to the truly old school like Wells? I might have misinterpreted. The Sci-Fi qualities of some laters works are nearly subsumed by an obsession with philosophy, mysticism and religious symbols.

By "old school" are you referring to the truly old school like Wells? — Noble Dust

I was thinking more about the 1960s I guess? Like Jack Vance, Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, etc

Maybe his short stories were just a way to make money. Now that you mention the mysticism, I remember something about someone showing up to PKD's door with Christian fish necklace and it caused some epiphany in Dick? Was he struggling with mental health issues?

Another great Lem novel is Memoirs Found in a Bathtub. — Noble Dust

I love many of Lem's short stories. I think I enjoyed The Cyberiad the most, of what I've read.

I was thinking more about the 1960s I guess? Like Jack Vance, Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, etc — frank

Ah, those I would consider Hard Sci-Fi. PKD began trying to write normal, everyday non-Sci-Fi novels and was not successful, so he pivoted to harder Sci-Fi and found some success. It was a job, yes. He gradually became more successful, and then pivoted away into more philosophical novels.

someone showing up to PKD's door with Christian fish necklace and it caused some epiphany in Dick? Was he struggling with mental health issues? — frank

Yes to both. There's a fascinating mythology surrounding him, his work, and his life. It's part of why I want to start the UBIK thread. The philosophical merit of the thread would go beyond the novel itself.

Both from The Atrocity Exhibition. Weird stuff.

But don't miss Vermilion Sands for the other side of Ballard.

I'm not super well read on him. I've read a few I didn't care for, like Eden. I do like the recurring theme in some of his work of alien life being incomprehensible to us and resistant to our anthropomorphization, something the Strugatsky Brothers also explored.

The philosophical merit of the thread would go beyond the novel itself. — Noble Dust

Interesting. :up:

I wouldn't try to convince you guys that Ubik is a great novel. I'm not sure he wrote a great novel, really. But all the work I've read is of a piece, and it makes a tapestry I find very appealing.

That said, I like Ubik a lot. I could say some things about why, but it might be hard to disentangle what I like about Ubik from what I like about the work taken altogether.

Just wait for the forthcoming thread, then!

Alright. It's been years since I read it though, and often can't convince myself to reread things just for class.

But you know I'm always up for talking about Saint Phil.

It's been years since I read it though, and often can't convince myself to reread things just for class. — Srap Tasmaner

Haha, that's fair enough. There's no requirements, I just personally feel responsible for re-reading it in order to make a quality OP.

One element I found interesting in PDK back when I first read him as a teenager up to now as a pretty senior person is the theme of how one distinguishes fake narratives from real ones.

Also an excellent discussion point. I’m feeling motivated to get this thread going.

Interesting to read your thoughts. I still plan on making a thread, so I'll wait to respond. I need to read it again to respond to some of your points anyway. — Noble Dust

I just figured you'd given up on or forgotten it and I didn't want my effort to go to waste.

a cliche form of discourse — Baden

I think this is true of a lot of science fiction from the 40s, 50s, and 60s. "The Foundation" and it's two successors had a big impact on me, but rereading the first recently enlightened me to how ham-handed the writing is.

If you've ever seen the Russian version of Solaris, it captures that old school vibe pretty well. — frank

I saw the English version, which was ok. I've been thinking I should read it.

[Edit] Just put the electronic version on hold from my library.

I wouldn't try to convince you guys that Ubik is a great novel. — Srap Tasmaner

Perhaps we should wait till Noble Dust gets off his ass and starts a separate thread. Then you can, if not try to convince me, at least help me understand why you like it.

I think this is true of a lot of science fiction from the 40s, 50s, and 60s. "The Foundation" and it's two successors had a big impact on me, but rereading the first recently enlightened me to how ham-handed the writing is. — T Clark

Theodore Sturgeon is often credited with pushing sf in a more literary direction from the early 50s onward. Later, there's Bester. And LeGuin. And later still there's Delany. We have some "real writers".

But I love 50s science fiction. It's the triumph of substance over style. There's a purity about those stories, the centrality of the idea, and the demand of the audience that the idea itself be the most interesting thing in a story, not the author's style.