boxer_dogs_dance

joined 10 months ago
[–] boxer_dogs_dance@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

How are you with other classic stories? Do you like Three Musketeers? Treasure Island? Count of Monte Cristo? The Once and Future King? War of the worlds?

Movies and then television influenced the pace of novels.

But I love Lord of the rings. It is a subtle sophisticated book. And if your characters are going to hike across the world, there should be scenes of walking.

[–] boxer_dogs_dance@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Buying books and reading books are separate hobbies.

Re wasting money, you should budget for some fun expenditures if you can afford it.

[–] boxer_dogs_dance@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

TLDR, two secret agents, working for opposing sides, are time traveling and attempting to shape history to their specific, contrasting purposes. I liked it, but I plan to read it again because I missed a lot that I would understand better after having read the story. The perspective is based on these two individuals and they themselves don't know much about the broader context.

This author expects you to pick up from context clues within the letters, where you are in history, and what the agent is trying to do to either promote or interfere with technological development in a timeline. It honestly would help a lot if the editor had added footnotes with wikipedia links related to the history of technology.

[–] boxer_dogs_dance@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

The Sympathizer by Viet Thanh Nguyen is a new one. It only has a few parts that are directly war, but I believe it is a great book. It starts with the fall of Saigon.

[–] boxer_dogs_dance@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Gene Wolfe. I love the Wizard Knight. It's mysterious and moody but not difficult to read.

[–] boxer_dogs_dance@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Historical fiction is often evaluated as more or less historically accurate, but sometimes the most accurate is a worse story.

[–] boxer_dogs_dance@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

I don't know for sure, but I thought the Johnny Fontane chapters were referring to Frank Sinatra. I'm sure someone has written about the releationship of the Godfather novel to the real life mob in Vegas and elsewhere.

I first read the book at the age of 12 and yeah, Sonny and Lucy at the wedding was a bit much for young me.

 

After giving This is How You Lose the Time War a five star review, I started scrolling through other reviews and I found thoughtful, well reasoned arguments for the other side. This is a thoroughly crafted well written book that is not going to be to everyone's taste.

The premise is two opposing secret agents, saboteurs, time and history manipulators who work for conflicting civilizations become aware of each other and start to exchange letters. It becomes a love story.

The nature of the work each main character does to manipulate history across many centuries and many parallel universes makes the narrative confusing. I can't imagine it done effectively any other way, but I also like other confusing time shifting stories where the story starts to make sense later.

The characters only meet through their letters with a couple of exceptions, so some say the love story is unbelievable. For me, it reflects the extreme isolation and loneliness of their work and how even minimal tenuous companionship of a peer would satisfy a gaping need.

The writing includes extravagant romantic feelings and poetic literary allusions to go with the science fiction and time travel aspect. I appreciated it, but people who like romance and poetry don't always like science fiction and time travel and vice versa.

The authors lean into the epistolary format. It's not exclusively letters but a significant percentage of the writing is the letters these two characters exchange.

This book reminds me of some classic novels that also are somewhat polarizing.

!Romeo and Juliet, (I know a play), Tale of Two Cities, O Henry Gift of the Magi!<

The creative forms the letters take were fun for me and seemed like a valid extrapolation of actual historical spycraft if you assumed much greater ability to manipulate matter. However some people find them over the top.

It is an exuberant, enthusiastic book that is fun if you like it and possibly cringy if you don't