/lit/ - Literature

>>19579971
>muh priest and heeb stories
I can smell you tradcath larpers a mile away, go jerk off to your kike on a stick someplace else!

>>19579971

The second one is much worse and doesn't resolve the story, either

>>19579971
Lmao. The soldier was one of the best characters??? His whole plot line is hilarious.

>>19580351
Shit sex scenes and really badly written action, was like some bad anime. Same with the detective.

>>19580115
lmao at you

>>19579971
f-f-f-filtered

>>19580383
What’s there to enjoy if you don’t get filtered?

>>19580200
>doesn't resolve the story
literally it does

>>19580383
Wrong, there is no being filtered by this vile tripe. 1 grade level reading. Niggershit.

>>19580478
kek

>>19579971
Stick to comic books kid

>>19579971
Not even a little bit, I really enjoyed it. I was bored by the opening before the stories got going, but other then the soldiers story I really enjoyed all of them. The second one was also really enjoyable too. There's a crazy panthiest theology, an interesting spiritual journey for the jew, a complex set of interstellar interests and wars, heroism, and a pretty satisfying resolution.

>>19580115
go read your game of thrones, you atheist dogfucker

>>19579971
/lit/'s understanding of scifi and fantasy only extends as far as artless pulp, Asimov, Lem, and Wolfe. They believe that this is all there is.

>>19580977
>pretending Simmons is more artful than Wolfe
Kek.

>>19580965
Lmao christcuckeroony reveals himself. Based Hyperion filtering yet another crossbrain.

>>19580977
>Lem
>artless pulp
the only pulpy Lem is the sci-fi stories he specifically wrote for children

>>19581160
>>19581172
Allow me to clarify:
/lit/'s understanding of scifi and fantasy only extends as far as artless pulp (including artless pulp with higher aspirations, such as Simmons), [in addition to surface level classics mostly restricted to] Asimov, Lem, and Wolfe.

>>19580383
> “Someone landed on my back and I completed the roll across the bed and floor, bringing him up against the wall. He was good. He took the blow on his shoulder and went for a nerve pinch beneath my ear. He had a second of trouble because of the extra layers of muscle there and I got an elbow deep into his stomach and rolled away. The man choking Johnny dropped him and delivered a text-book-perfect kick to my ribs. I took half the impact, feeling at least one rib go, and spun inside, attempting no elegance as I used my left hand to crush his left testicle. The man screamed and was out of it”

> “Fuck you.’ He sprayed some bloody spittle in my face.
‘Maybe later,’ I said”

> “I felt him die then. I also felt the surge as his hand found the neural shunt, the white-light warmth of the surge to the Schrön loop as everything Johnny Keats ever was or would be exploded into me; almost, almost it was like his orgasm inside me two nights earlier, the surge and throb and sudden warmth and stillness after, with the echo of sensation there.”

Is this what I’m getting filtered by? This is YA.

>>19580383
Wow.

There is a lot of mystery in this book that just push you to read the second book. The author could only twice widen the deadless tribe story and it would be a good book. But he wanted to surpass "Dune" I suppose.

>>19580383
Very cool.

>>19581769
>>19581758
So what's your objection here? That the detective part has a long action sequence, or the way it's written?

>>19581758
>>19581769
Lamia's story is supposed to be written like a hard-boiled detective noir in case you were 2dumb2notice

>>19579971
There is a lot of great Sci-fi, but none of it is shilled on /lit/.

>>19581789
>>19581817
I noticed the style choice but the prose is poorly written.

Yeah, I mean, Hyperion is obviously pulp, but I enjoyed it. All these over-the-top ideas and piles of tropes provided nice entertainment. I laughed frequently about how ridiculous it was. Sometimes I was cringing.
I believe cases like this, where a SciFi book does not take itself very seriously, but still delivers an honest and entertaining story, are rather rare.

>>19582394
It’s pulpy but I thought it still was badly written for the most part. Some parts made me laugh and were good but for most of it I was cringing.

>>19579971
>Half the characters were boring and shallow (the detective, the soldier, even the consul). The priest and the scholar story were good.
That's the general consensus, but people loved the priest and the scholar enough to praise the book.

Also don't read Endymion. It really sucks.

>>19580977
It's not our or Lem's fault that nobody is even half as good as he is.

>>19582421
Idk, Endymion is pretty bad but it has a few scenes that are fantastic and almost make it worth it. I think I will remember the scene where the android and aenea revive Endymion from almost freezing to death forever, it was beautiful

>>19582311
>>19582394
The prose is not always good, but I think that on analysis the themes and ideas of Hyperion are remarkably well executed, relevant, and thoughtful.

Hyperion is essentially about three things all unified by the manipulating of the natural order of space and time (and this even exists at a meta-level through the intertextuality combining 19th century romantic texts and modern sci-fi.

These three ideas are:
1. The relationship between creator and created, begetter and begotten. More generally even, it is about how one’s actions have consequences that extend far beyond what we can understand. This exists throughout the poet, scholar, and consul’s tale, and to a lesser extent in the Soldier’s tale. The AI conflict is the most obvious example of this, but every character finds themselves embroiled in a cosmic struggle while only knowing what is in front of them and pursuing their own personal desires, unknowing or uncaring of the final results.

2. Another major theme is globalization/universality vs. particularity. The hegemony is a fairly homogenous and culturally exploitative entity that kills of species that could even potentially pose a threat, it incorporates worlds into itself peacefully, but commerce with it inevitably destroys the unique cultures of the world’s that inhabit it. It obviously is a parallel to modern liberal Democratic culture. The AI and the pax in later groups represent this as well. Hyperion suggests it’s better for people to preserve their cultures and unique identities, even if it means the loss of material gain.

3. Finally, there is the idea of salvation. Throughout the series, I believe that different ideas on salvation or the future of mankind are presented. Most of these ideas are false, bastard, corrupted versions of salvation. The technocore are an artificial end point, one devoid of love and understanding. The cruciform is a sick and twisted corruption of the resurrection of the body. The hegemony meanwhile represents stagnation and a lack of belief in any kind of future or salvation. The true salvation is through the omega point, the natural progression of the universe. The false gods so to speak all get their power, create homogeneity, etc. from disrupting space and time to suit their ends via time travel, farcasters, etc.

I think it’s one of the few books where the ideas are so good and interesting that the corniness and prose is made up for

>>19581733
This is what /lit/ spends hundreds of bump limited threads defending, it should tell you everything you need to know about this board and the faggots who inhabit it.

>>19581195
>wolfe
>artless pulp
Pringled.

>>19579971
Sci fi is for autistic manchildren. Don't pay much heed to them.

>>19582299
Shame /sffg/ is useless and dead.

>>19582299
like? Only consistent rec i get here is book of the new sun.

>>19582691
The third idea of salvation is the best explored, in my opinion the other two are explored in too simple of a way to be impressive and make up for the corny prose and wanky literary/musical references. Maybe if it was a 200 page book it would be forgivable but at almost 500 and being one of four books it’s not.

>>19582933
>reading comprehension
Though the anon you replied to is still a retard, BOTNS is genuinely harder to read than many classics.

>>19583062
Delany, Zelazny, Ballard, Silverberg, Sturgeon, Stapledon, Wells, Disch, Sheckley, Simak, Malzberg, M John Harrison, John Crowley, Bester

>>19583471
Nice recommendations. Makes me wonder what’s the point of /sffg/.

>>19582691
Thank you for the effortpost, anon. I agree with what you said and there's a whole lot more that can be analyzed in terms of how "evil" is presented in the books and what the shrike represents other than what's stated in the books.
The fact that noone responded to you yet they continue sperging out about the book says plenty about our fellow litizens.

>>19583523
It's for retards to jerk off Bakker and talk about soulless chink shit

>>19581733
For real, this shit reads like gaids (gay aids, not the straight kind)

>>19582933
>>19583397
>Gene wolfe
Of course you think a lake is deep when you have never swam in the ocean

>>19583740
I said nothing of the sort, I merely said that Gene Wolfe is a more difficult read than many classic works of fiction. You're baiting if you say otherwise.

>>19583752
>Gene Wolfe is a more difficult read than many classic works of fiction.

>>19583740
Literally what the fuck are you talking about you fucking pseud retard.

>>19583754
Many classic works of literature are quite simply written, BOTNS is not. You seem to be unable to seperate any kind of discriminatory comment that is not inherently negative from praise. I'd advise you spend less time on /lit/ and more time reading.

Why is most sci-fi like Hyperion and so rarely like Ubik or Solaris?

I feel like the latter is what sci-fi should be about but the overwhelming mass that is mainstream American sci-fi "literary" "culture" made it DOA.

>>19583752
I agree with you. Classical works can have maybe some outdated language but a lot of them are pretty simple plot wise. Wolfe is definitely not. And that's not a negative or positive either way.

Not to mention that Wolfe also uses a ton of outdated/older language on purpose.

>>19583593
>Bakker
Who even is he? Somebody posted his opening paragraph in another thread, and it's just awful that I refuse to believe people actually like him.

>>19584086
Read Prince of Nothing recently and it's actually pretty good. Rest of the series is very dissimilar in tone to the opening lines.

He's not the greatest author I've ever read, but he's a sight better than many modern fantasy writers. I don't know if that's saying much.

>>19582942
>QUIT LIKING THINGS I DON'T LIKE

>>19584360
Said like an autistic manchild, and reddit to boot.

>>19586283
It's not like I watch Marvel or Star Wars and clap when I see there's a new plastic toy coming to market.

I am a grown man with a career, wife, kids, and objectives who also reads some Asimov or Wolfe from time to time.

Liking things is not cringe; it's how you express that appreciation that invites contempt. Onions drinking fanboys have taken all the other forms of media, so I read. I'll be damned if I let anybody take that from me too.

>>19586710
*Onions drinking fanboys

Fucking autocorrect.

>I am a grown man with a career, wife, kids, and objectives
yikes

>>19586889
I hope when you leave behind your teenage mindset you can enjoy things again, I really do.

Only weak willed men allow themselves to be policed by someone else's dictation of who they are.

I defy your stereotype and all you can say is "yikes" because admitting you erred is surely beneath you. Form some opinions yourself, hate sci-fi, read exclusively pig Latin esoteric philosophy. I don't give a shit. It's one thing to meme on an internet board and another to become a meme on an internet board. Live your life.

>>19587330
Yikes (by the way, I like scifi, don't read meme philosophers except out of occasional curiousity, and form my own opinions (unlike those who blindly cling to Gene Wolfe) I am my own man and judge myself as myself, not as a list of my belongings or achievements)