Harryo’s Comments (group member since Mar 27, 2017)

Harryo’s comments from the The Long Way... To a Common Orbit flash group group.

Oh yes--Kirk "schmexying" his way around the universe!!! How funny!!!

One of the big differences between the American idea of heroics and Eastern heroes is that the lone Superman does it all, all by himself, and nobody else can help. From Kirk to to Dirty Harry--these men typify you average Joe's day dreams about conquering all obstacles. Women think so much more about creating solutions in teams, and without power struggles or palace intrigue, if they can help it.

Becky's characters have individual problems that are best solved in partnership, and she's interested in the negotiations more than potential personal conflicts. Sidra/Lovey is unique in that she has to first come to grips with the fact that she is s separate person, before she can enter a partnership. This kind of story crafting feels new and fresh to me--but that's just because I don't read a lot of books written about people trying to create partnership. Maybe it's not all that fresh.

Is this the chapter when she pulls a runner and falls into the trash pit? I wanted to spank her behind. It reminded me so much of that awful Harry Potter book (Order of the Phoenix? In which Harry was unbearable). That was the only Jane chapter I didn't luuurve.

And yes "heart-warming without being sappy". Second the motion.

I read this a few months ago and because I was reading it on my phone it was really too fast to enjoy. Library book--otherwise I would've reread it. It was so fun to read it with so many "demmed fine" readers!!

So in this 21st century world, I admit I still have difficulty with some piercings and implants. I know I'm not PC in this, and I know my position is really indefensible, and I still can't help my visceral reaction. I wouldn't EVER vote to legislate against body modification, but I still don't like looking at it. Yeah, I know I'm in the wrong.

Yes it is. Becky Chambers totally rocks at impromptu band names.

I felt similarly. I skim-read most of Sudra, but really sunk into and relished Jane's story. As a foodie I was drawn into the story when it. And to her constant quest for nourishment--eating dog and mushrooms inspired me to stir fry a big pan of lavender-tinged king oyster mushrooms and chopped skirt flank. It was wonderfully disgusting! Imagine living on that for 15 years. You'd get scurvy.

Maybe they grabbed the little girls by the nape of their neck and dragged them around the room. I had a boyfriend who did that to me once. It was pretty scary.

Consummate survivor.

I love the visual of "an angry mother". Reminds me of the maid-robot on the Jettsons .

I guess I won't retread any of the excellent points you many cool and clevah peeps made, but I do feel impelled to defend Becky (actually, now I want her to be my best friend) on some of her choices. Her meandering, inchoate plot was actually refreshing to me, mainly because I didn't have to worry about being drawn into the dark places that passes for plot in so many post-modern novels. In some sense I was happy to let her steer me through a variety of civilized social interactions instead. Two of them stood out for me (alright THREE of them. I love "Socks! ... Match my hat!" So much I put it to music and walked around singing it as loud as I could for about a week) as the darlings of an author who could've edited for story, but clearly didn't want to. These were: 1) dr. chef pointing out that most human games are based on a zero sum outcome e.g. win or lose. I mentioned it to my brilliant niece who countered "What about making a puzzle?" To which I could only say, "Maybe the definition of game is winning/losing." ... Is this right? ... thoughts?

And 2) the scene in which Jenks politely listens to the A.I. Information unit all the way through the end, thereby demonstrating his respect for the inanimate, which bookends delightfully with his utter desolation when losing Lovey. It makes sense that he is the symbolic defense for inanimacy (my neologism) because he's the character who has the relationship that is the least based on physicality.

In terms of how we feel about AI these days I learned a lot listening to Sam Harris' March 1 interview with Kate Darling of MIT's Center for Robot Ethics. She does a terrific job describing our current ambivalence towards robots, and pointing out how as robots learn to think, act and sound like humans we find ourselves in an ever-evolving dialogue about their rights.

Mimi, that was an enjoyable article. Thanks for the link.

Me, too. Here, that is. Thank goodness for commas.