Books - What are you reading?
Discussion
Altered Carbon by Richard K Morgan
Excellent premise (The 'Sleeviing' of human beings) and soon to be made into a 10 part Netflix TV show.
From wiki
In the novel's somewhat dystopian world, human personalities can be stored digitally and downloaded into new bodies, called sleeves. Most people have cortical stacks in their spinal columns that store their memories. If their body dies, their stack can be stored indefinitely. Catholics have arranged that they will not be resleeved as they believe that the soul goes to Heaven when they die, and so would not pass on to the new sleeve. This makes Catholics targets for murder, since killers know their victim will not be resleeved to testify. A UN resolution to alter this legal position forms one strand of the novel's plot, to allow the authorities to sleeve a deceased Catholic woman temporarily to testify in a murder trial.
While most people can afford to get resleeved at the end of their lives, they are unable to update their bodies and most go through the full ageing process each time which discourages most from resleeving more than once or twice. So while normal people can live indefinitely in theory, most choose not to. Only the wealthy are able to acquire replacement bodies on a continual basis. The long-lived are called Meths, a reference to the Biblical figure Methuselah. The very rich are also able to keep copies of their minds in remote storage, which they update regularly. This ensures that even if their stack is destroyed, they can be resleeved.
Excellent premise (The 'Sleeviing' of human beings) and soon to be made into a 10 part Netflix TV show.
From wiki
In the novel's somewhat dystopian world, human personalities can be stored digitally and downloaded into new bodies, called sleeves. Most people have cortical stacks in their spinal columns that store their memories. If their body dies, their stack can be stored indefinitely. Catholics have arranged that they will not be resleeved as they believe that the soul goes to Heaven when they die, and so would not pass on to the new sleeve. This makes Catholics targets for murder, since killers know their victim will not be resleeved to testify. A UN resolution to alter this legal position forms one strand of the novel's plot, to allow the authorities to sleeve a deceased Catholic woman temporarily to testify in a murder trial.
While most people can afford to get resleeved at the end of their lives, they are unable to update their bodies and most go through the full ageing process each time which discourages most from resleeving more than once or twice. So while normal people can live indefinitely in theory, most choose not to. Only the wealthy are able to acquire replacement bodies on a continual basis. The long-lived are called Meths, a reference to the Biblical figure Methuselah. The very rich are also able to keep copies of their minds in remote storage, which they update regularly. This ensures that even if their stack is destroyed, they can be resleeved.
Completed volume 1 (parts 1 & 2) of Solzhenitsyn's 'The Gulag Archipelago'.
Compelling reading but requires dedication.
If you have ever harboured any tendencies towards defending the era of Communist Russia, particularly under Stalin, then I strongly suggest reading this. Any illusions (delusions) one might have about how things might have been better under Lenin or Trotsky should be fairly quickly dissipated as well.
Before beginning volume 2 (of 3), I am taking a short break.
First I've read 'The Rage Against God' by Peter Hitchens.
I have never been academically satisfied by the arguments of the anti-theists C. Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris.
I've always felt that there was too much cherry picking of useful (to their cause) biblical passages, without a true knowledge of the subject, and that they often debated people considerably less competent than themselves.
Probably quite a few opponents were taken by surprise by the outright viciousness of their arguments and claims besides.
As much as I have often enjoyed listening to C. Hitchens, he could be quite unnecessarily brutal, and despite his claims to the contrary, he occasionally modified certain 'facts' during debates, knowing that the majority would never check, and that they certainly could not be checked during the debate.
As one would expect from Peter H., it is written in excellent and cultured English.
(this being PH, I must however mention that I found two typos)
An interesting historical insight into the causes and history of the decline of the Church of England in Britain, some of which I was quite aware of, and it does provide some strong arguments against some of the better known anti-theist claims.
There are some quite interesting passages, historical and modern, regarding Soviet and post-Soviet Russia.
For those with an open mind for, or conversely those with a desire to provide themselves with ammunition for any future arguments against, I would recommend it.
"He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that.
His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side;
if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion."
- John Stuart Mill
I doubt it would provide sufficient argument to bring about any conversions by it's reading, so you may feel quite safe that if you are today an atheist, you will likely remain so after reading it, though a better informed one.
Beginning tonight; 'No One Left To Lie To' By Christopher Hitchens
A polemic directed particularly at William Jefferson Clinton, but also at Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (most definitely not named after Sir Hillary of Everest fame).
This one promises to be fun
Compelling reading but requires dedication.
If you have ever harboured any tendencies towards defending the era of Communist Russia, particularly under Stalin, then I strongly suggest reading this. Any illusions (delusions) one might have about how things might have been better under Lenin or Trotsky should be fairly quickly dissipated as well.
Before beginning volume 2 (of 3), I am taking a short break.
First I've read 'The Rage Against God' by Peter Hitchens.
I have never been academically satisfied by the arguments of the anti-theists C. Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris.
I've always felt that there was too much cherry picking of useful (to their cause) biblical passages, without a true knowledge of the subject, and that they often debated people considerably less competent than themselves.
Probably quite a few opponents were taken by surprise by the outright viciousness of their arguments and claims besides.
As much as I have often enjoyed listening to C. Hitchens, he could be quite unnecessarily brutal, and despite his claims to the contrary, he occasionally modified certain 'facts' during debates, knowing that the majority would never check, and that they certainly could not be checked during the debate.
As one would expect from Peter H., it is written in excellent and cultured English.
(this being PH, I must however mention that I found two typos)
An interesting historical insight into the causes and history of the decline of the Church of England in Britain, some of which I was quite aware of, and it does provide some strong arguments against some of the better known anti-theist claims.
There are some quite interesting passages, historical and modern, regarding Soviet and post-Soviet Russia.
For those with an open mind for, or conversely those with a desire to provide themselves with ammunition for any future arguments against, I would recommend it.
"He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that.
His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side;
if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion."
- John Stuart Mill
I doubt it would provide sufficient argument to bring about any conversions by it's reading, so you may feel quite safe that if you are today an atheist, you will likely remain so after reading it, though a better informed one.
Beginning tonight; 'No One Left To Lie To' By Christopher Hitchens
A polemic directed particularly at William Jefferson Clinton, but also at Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (most definitely not named after Sir Hillary of Everest fame).
This one promises to be fun
grumbledoak said:
popeyewhite said:
Nothing new there. Done in an Alastair Reynolds book (amongst others) a decade ago.
Altered Carbon was amongst those others; first published 2002. It's a good series.popeyewhite said:
On another note I notice P.K.Dicks' alternative history classic The Man in the High Castle has been copied shamelessly and relocated to the U.K. for a new TV series. I just hope the credits acknowledge how much is owed to P.K.D.
Although SSGB is based on Len Deighton's 1978 book with the same title.andy_s said:
Although SSGB is based on Len Deighton's 1978 book with the same title.
Yes, the success of the TV series based on the book The Man in the High Castle(1962) was accepted and recognised by the producer of SSGB in a recent interview, however he denied taking any advantage of its popularity 
Seems a stretch, but there you go.andy_s said:
popeyewhite said:
On another note I notice P.K.Dicks' alternative history classic The Man in the High Castle has been copied shamelessly and relocated to the U.K. for a new TV series. I just hope the credits acknowledge how much is owed to P.K.D.
Although SSGB is based on Len Deighton's 1978 book with the same title.
Given the circles they moved in it's entirely possible Len Deighton wasn't aware of PKD.
Even if he was, so what - alternate history stories have been around for a LONG time, there's not that much commonality between the storylines.
(I've read both, BTW - SS GB ages ago, TMITHC a few years back)
Just finished Dominion - CJ Sansom, whilst we're on the subject of the Nazis winning the war. I thought it was pretty good, albeit with an ending that wraps things up very hastily.
On to Seven Eves now, intrigued by the idea of the moon breaking up in to fragments. It's a big one, 700 pages odd, I'll see where it leads.
On to Seven Eves now, intrigued by the idea of the moon breaking up in to fragments. It's a big one, 700 pages odd, I'll see where it leads.
Can anybody recommend good espionage/terror thrillers?
Loved all the Fred Forsyth books as well as 'I am Pilgrim' by Terry Hayes. I've read 7 or 8 of Gerald Seymour's books and found them a bit hit and miss and the same with Charles Cummings. I recently finished Le Carre's 'A Delicate Truth' and found it pretty tedious. The Daniel Silva 'Gabriel Allon' series is very good but gets very repetitive much like the Jack Reacher and Baldacci type stuff.
Loved all the Fred Forsyth books as well as 'I am Pilgrim' by Terry Hayes. I've read 7 or 8 of Gerald Seymour's books and found them a bit hit and miss and the same with Charles Cummings. I recently finished Le Carre's 'A Delicate Truth' and found it pretty tedious. The Daniel Silva 'Gabriel Allon' series is very good but gets very repetitive much like the Jack Reacher and Baldacci type stuff.
havoc said:
The Man in the High Castle 1962
SSGB 1978
I take your point about commonalities, the basic premise is exactly the same though interweaving plotlines may be different. My comment was more that SSGB - the series - seems to be piggybacking the popularity of TMITHC - the series.
havoc said:
Tak Kovacs is a great character. They're not subtle novels nor great literature, but they're very entertaining and hard to put down...like most of his stuff...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_Carbon_(TV_s...
I loved the books.
Gassing Station | Books and Literature | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff