Gay Forum

I've only ever read the first book, back in '07, when I lived in San Antonio. I might have to look into the series.

I remember my dad lending me his copies of the His Dark Materials books when I was a lot younger but I never seemed to manage to get into them.

Might need to have another crack at 'em one of these days.

I occasionally read something written for the YA market.

I actually have heard that adults make up a good percentage of the readership for many YA books.

Severelius wrote:I remember my dad lending me his copies of the His Dark Materials books when I was a lot younger but I never seemed to manage to get into them.

Might need to have another crack at 'em one of these days.

One of my dad's old school friends thought I'd like them and gave me her copies of His Dark Materials when I was around 14. They're some of my favourite books still!

Brenden wrote:I'm currently reading Lifespan: The Revolutionary Science of Why We Age — and Why We Don’t Have To by David Sinclair.

It's fascinating, very well-written, and gives me so much hope for the future.

It's sooooooo good! He's a really good writer.

Brenden wrote:

Severelius wrote:I remember my dad lending me his copies of the His Dark Materials books when I was a lot younger but I never seemed to manage to get into them.

Might need to have another crack at 'em one of these days.

One of my dad's old school friends thought I'd like them and gave me her copies of His Dark Materials when I was around 14. They're some of my favourite books still!

Everybody I've ever spoken to who's read them has absolutely sung their praises.

To be honest I don't know why I never really seemed to get into them at the time. I mean it was around the same time that I first read The Lord of the Rings so it's not like they were in any way too dense or deep for me.

I've just started reading Origin by Dan Brown. So far so good. I really like the way he writes.

Right now I'm reading this forum.

A few days ago I started reading the tome Empire of Things: How We Became a World of Consumers, from the Fifteenth Century to the Twenty-First.

Comparing my reading to Brenden's always makes me feel stupid...

I'm reading Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke.

All of by them. I’m reading all of them.

Cheat Codes Central, looking for cheat codes for Starship Troopers. That is, if the game runs at all, ofc.

Just reading the posts on here and catching up with what I've missed

Just finished Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism by David Harvey. He's much more inspired by the early, more humanistic Marx, and being the same myself, I thought it very good. Last chapters on capital's possibly fatal contradictions are essential reading if you want to understand how the current capitalist system might break down, and what the alternatives might be. He rejects the teleological theory suggesting that the end of capitalism is inevitable, and so there's an injunction for political struggle to shape the process towards a more democratic, more environmentally sustainable alternative. The "red greens" are the future, people.

Now onto Nervous States: How Feeling Took Over The World. Interesting first part outlining the development of the idea of "expertise", and how its utilitarian foundations relate to political and social alienation.

Magic J wrote:Just finished Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism by David Harvey. He's much more inspired by the early, more humanistic Marx, and being the same myself, I thought it very good. Last chapters on capital's possibly fatal contradictions are essential reading if you want to understand how the current capitalist system might break down, and what the alternatives might be. He rejects the teleological theory suggesting that the end of capitalism is inevitable, and so there's an injunction for political struggle to shape the process towards a more democratic, more environmentally sustainable alternative. The "red greens" are the future, people.

Now onto Nervous States: How Feeling Took Over The World. Interesting first part outlining the development of the idea of "expertise", and how its utilitarian foundations relate to political and social alienation.

I'm opposed on principle to most marxism, but, I would be interested in any recommendations of works that focus on synergising socialism with capitalism if you know of and can recommend any?

Also, be sure to come back with your thoughts on the second book, you mentioned, I'd like to give that a go too if it's worth the time.

PopTart wrote:I'm opposed on principle to most marxism, but, I would be interested in any recommendations of works that focus on synergising socialism with capitalism if you know of and can recommend any?

Harvey is very much a Marxist anti-capitalist, but I can think of maybe Eduard Bernstein, if you're looking for more social democratic or evolutionary socialist perspectives. He broke with orthodox Marxism to suggest that socialism could be achieved gradually, rather than through revolution, and he had a fair few criticisms of later, "scientific" Marxism. In essence, he thought that political struggle should be focused on directing the evolution of capitalism towards socialism through reform. Gets you thinking about the reform vs revolution debate within left wing political discourse.

PopTart wrote:Also, be sure to come back with your thoughts on the second book, you mentioned, I'd like to give that a go too if it's worth the time.

Will do. I'm about half way through at the moment, I'll report back once I'm done.

Just started reading Brief Answers to the Big Questions by Stephen Hawking on the plane yesterday.

Started reading "American Kingpin: Catching the Billion-Dollar Baron of the Dark Web" the other day, and so far so good its keeping my interest well.

PopTart wrote:Also, be sure to come back with your thoughts on the second book [Nervous States - William Davies], you mentioned, I'd like to give that a go too if it's worth the time.

I totally forgot about this. Honestly, it's not so fresh in my mind, but I think I can remember some bits which stood out for me. There's a good bit where he talks about pain (in a US context specifically), using the idea of the "body politic" in a quite literal sense, and relating it to populism. Pain is a philosophically interesting phenomenon, so I remember liking the musings here. He claims that pain (physical, emotional, it's very meshed) is badly contextualised in our societies, and lacking any narrative around pain other than that it should be eradicated, the experience, if chronic, damages an individual's sense of self-control. So we turn to both horrifically addictive medical narcotics, and to figures which seem to articulate our pain, to recognise and narrativise it, which gives us a greater sense of control over it. Gives it meaning. In the political arena, pain is a powerful fuel to populist leaders who, classically, and generally unlike more mainstream political leaders, appeal to feelings of pain. In what seems to me to be in a similar vein to Fromm's Escape from Freedom, he proposes that it is authoritarian leaders who generally benefit from this.

I'd say it's a good analysis in so far as it forgoes the usual claptrap of High Liberalism in which populist movements are derided as merely "irrational", or the even worse nonsense peddled by some of the right-inclined commentariat, the "facts don't care about you're feelings" crowd. That's not going to increase our understanding of the issue (indeed, it likely decreases understanding), or advance a satisfactory synthesis of data-driven, "objective" policy and more humanistic approaches that deal with things like self-esteem and community. "When an entire political or economic system appears rotten, a flagrant liar can give voice to an underlying truth", as he says.

There's also an interesting bit where he talks about information warfare, and in particular the "Gerasimov Doctrine" (a style of warfare articulated by Russia's General Valery Gerasimov, which could be summarised: create an information environment in which the boundary between civilian politics and war are blurred, by boosting extreme actors who specifically call for explicitly violent solutions above all), and how this is being deployed.

OT: Finished Going Dark: The Secret Social Lives of Extremists, by Julia Ebner. Journalistic style, it's broken down into chapters with each chapter focussing on her interactions (often online, but not always) with extremists of various sorts (Jihadists, white supremacists, etc). Particularly interesting chapter on Generation Identitaire (a sort of European alt-right movement) and their use of hyper-modern messaging and aesthetics to revoke the beery, backward-looking and ignorant image we all tend to have of far-right: Instagram selfies, for instance. They insist that all public-facing members be young, pretty and fashonable, in a similar way to the Unite the Right march organisers in the US ("if you're out of shape or deformed, stay home", was the message, or something similarly revealing ).

Short bit at the conclusion spitballing ideas on how to combat online extremism. Rejects the "ban it all" solution as too simplistic, and likely, in the case of the alt-right movements, to feed into a narrative of censorship and defence of free speech.

I'd liked to have seen the conclusion fleshed out a bit, but that would probably be another book in itself. Introduced me to the very weird anti-feminist "Trad Wives" movement, so that was new. I rate it: Fine.

Now onto Chasing Eris, which appears to be a series of interviews with people influenced by Discordianism: a satirical religion founded in the 60s, very silly with a deadly serious point. Dunno what it is, but it's serious (and deadly). Think I'll enjoy it. Also some Bookchin I've been meaning to read for a while.

Whew, long post, soz.