#as failing to understand the historical existence of lgbt people BUT these two paragraphs seem like the easiest to isolate and I really like

[steveyockey]

Once you start looking, you see queer presentism everywhere. It pops up when politicians espouse our “unprecedented” ability to love who we love, and when recent book bans are said to “roll back the clock” on LGBTQ+ rights, implying that clocks tick continually toward progress. It manifests in Oscar Wilde hagiography, which elevates him to the status of singular queer martyr and extrapolates an epochal paradigm from his 1895 trials. It seeps into our everyday speech, in our references to “forbidden love” and our use of the term “Victorian” to imply prudish homophobia. It both stems from and structures the editorial projects that publishers pursue, giving rise to catalogues like the NYRB Classics, where the oldest work tagged LGBTQ+ is Colette’s The Pure and the Impure (1932) — as if nothing queer was written before.

The truth is that there’s a world of queer writing that predates Colette, volumes of manuscript and books that aren’t so much products of historical suppression as they are suppressed by today’s “it’s gotten better” mindset. This is convenient for a culture industry in search of the sui generis and always eager to pat itself on the back for its own enlightenment. But the almost total neglect, outside the academy, of the queer literary archive is a shame, and not only because it propagates factual errors. In limiting our horizons for understanding how our predecessors lived, loved, and wrote, we end up narrowing our own vistas. When we apply the repressive hypothesis, we’re actually repressing ourselves.

Colton Valentine, “Against Queer Presentism​ | How the Book World Neglects the Archive,” The Drift, October 25, 2022.

[hayleewritesaboutbooks]

Seveneves by Neal Stephenson

My Overall Thoughts - 3.8/5

- The moon blew up without warning and for no apparent reason. -

To say that Neal Stephenson wrote a novel entitled Seveneves would be misleading. What Stephenson did with Seveneves is write an elaborate world-building exercise in the form of an historical account, sprinkled with a few moments of story. Now, from a technical and world-building perspective, Stephenson has written a masterpiece. The speculation offered: What might humanity do in the face of certain apocalypse…if they had two years to prepare? is thoroughly thought through and played with. It is, of course, debatable what humanity would do if we were forced to evacuate the planet in order to survive. But the ideas offered and acted upon through the cast of characters in this work is believable and—necessarily—faulty. Plans never go as you hope. Everything that can go wrong will. Politics weasels in a screws up otherwise perfectly laid plans. 

I cannot say that I enjoyed Seveneves. I really didn’t. I was intrigued, yes. Educated. Interested until the end. But it wasn’t a fun read. It was dense and technical and while I appreciated it, I didn’t really pick it up expecting to have fun. 

To compare it to other works of his: It is as dense as Anathem without any of the character development or anticipation of the climax. If you read and loved Snowcrash like I did, don’t pick up this book and expect anything like that. While I have yet to read Cryptonomicon (it’s on my list!) I understand the level of technicality and intensity to be somewhat similar. 

Mild spoilers follow under the cut.

Character Development - 2.5/5

This is where Stephenson suffers the most. I really shouldn’t even say “suffers” because I thoroughly believe that his choice to only mildly develop his characters was a conscious one. Where there are many character-driven books out there (and they tend to be my favorite), this book isn’t about that. It’s about the science and the speculation and WHAT IF. The characters were really just vehicles for exploring the what ifs. It’s not my favorite element of this book, the lack of character development, and I found myself clinging desperately to every moment of character delving there was. I’d read about an emotion and squeal with delight because I felt connected…even though it would be something minor, something that wouldn’t make me bat an eye in other books.

It’s interesting in that way, that because of the thin character focus, I appreciated every bit of what development there was on a very deep level. 

Story Structure - 3/5

On the one hand, everything that happened followed a relatively logical course. On the other, there’s not a simple story arc to point out. If you zoom out completely, you get this arc: Moon blows up (inciting incident), humanity struggles to figure out how to survive (rising action), humanity almost fails (climax), humanity doesn’t fail (resolution). But that doesn’t seem right. And it doesn’t really space itself out in the book in a way that would follow the proper “arc” shape. I mean, the listed climax and resulting resolution happens with over 200 pages left in the book. 

On the other hand, you have this really detailed account of some historical events and throughout the clinical, detailed account, you have a few sprinklings of stories. There’s a story involving Dinah and her relationship. There’s a story about Doob and his family. There’s a story about Julia and her…general seeding of dissension. There’s a story about Aida and the Swarm. There’s a story about Kath Two and her job as a scout. But none of those help move the main narrative forward. Not really. They were all too small. Every individual story is a microscopic part of the main story arc. 

*Major Spoilers in this paragraph!* One of the major complaints I have heard about Seveneves is that it doesn’t have an ending, that it just arbitrarily stops. Some people complain that it doesn’t keep going, others complain about the last third of the novel existing at all. However, upon finishing the novel I felt it ended incredibly well. There was a distinct sense of hope. And while the book does not really follow a traditional story arc, the “account” of this book ends, sensibly, once all branches of the human race have reunited. The Agent leads to division: the Spacers, the Diggers, and the Pingers; the conclusion of the story happens when all of humanity has come back together in (something resembling) harmony. I, personally, have no problem with that.

Tone/Style - 4.5/5

For what Seveneves is, Stephenson writes it well. He wrote exactly the book he wanted. Hard science fiction isn’t really meant to appeal to the masses, so the thick technical narration isn’t really a problem for its genre. Let me be clear: this book isn’t for everyone! Plenty of people, even long-time Stephenson fans, disliked it. That’s fine. I can see why. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a masterful piece in its own right. 

World Building - 5/5

Well, since this book (especially the final third) is literally about building a world, I’d say this one scores pretty high. While we open in a familiar Earth, we end over five millennia later to find a new set of human races as well as biologically engineered animals and planets. Even the atmosphere is man-made. It’s a fascinating look at how our world could become something utterly unrecognizable, both physically and culturally. Honestly, this book could be of great benefit to any serious worldbuilder who is willing to dedicate the time. 

Representation/Diversity - 4/5

Characters from various nations and cultures are represented and make up a large chunk of them “main cast.” There are also several LGBT characters. 

Content 

Some language and mild sexual content and conversations. Most everything, including sex, is handled very clinically.

My Final Thoughts

I totally see why this novel got so-so reviews. However, I found it impressive and fascinating. I recommend it to hard sci-fi readers and people who find the science and worldbuilding of novels equally interesting to the character and story. I’ll probably read something utterly ridiculous next to help shake up my very overloaded brain. Be prepared for a review of something silly coming soon!