Allie Kleber > Recent Status Updates

I'm enjoying this book enormously, but the author's frequent and persistent misuse of "assent" (using it as a synonym of "confirm," as in to confirm a statement or supposition) is really starting to irritate me.

The real horror in this story is the way that the characters cannot seem to learn to actually communicate with one another. It's not bad writing--it's believable--but dear god, I want to shake them so hard.

Wow, that was an extremely passive aggressive take on people choosing not to completely give up alcohol and/or smoking. "Unable or unwilling," gosh. I hate cigarettes and rarely drink nowadays, and I still find that deeply obnoxious.

New experience: grad school friend's on-again off-again theatrical series gets name-dropped as aspirational in a book I'm reading. (Not exactly shocking, but strange and a bit delightful!)

The intense self-centeredness of these characters is really starting me want to give my brain a shower.

You just couldn't resist that line, could you, Sarah?

Somehow, indeed.

That is a truly inexcusable number of epigraphs. I don't care that many of them are made up. Good grief.

GOOD FOR HER.

I'm slightly disturbed by how much more interesting I find the tech-based aspects of the story than the interpersonal relationships, although a big part of the problem is that I am really coming to despise the father, who of course is one of the (arguably the primary) POV characters.

I don't know why I'm surprised anymore, but ... during the Cold War, there was research into "weaponizing birds" by turning them into flying "germ bombs"? EXCUSE ME???

Humans were a mistake.

That was the WORST use of a Dark Knight quote I have ever encountered. Which is saying something.

... of COURSE daffodils aren't native to Massachusetts, Jamie!

Okay, obscure nerd moment over. Carry on.

"The educated Boston patter that everyone learns to affect"? Maybe this is something you encounter in humanities grad programs. I've seen no sign of it working for an engineering department, and I suppose I have a relatively low quotient of academics in my local circle of friends nowadays.

"That's what this company is, and I was part of it. I failed when I tried to change it."

... finally. Good grief. I expected much of the awfulness in this book, but I confess, I did not expect the level of frustration and quite often disgust that I've felt towards the author and her narrative-shaping choices.

In addition to all the building awful which is really quite serious, the contact embarrassment is excruciating.

On the whole I have been enjoying this book thoroughly, but I'm not sure how long I can endure this particular stint of not only miscommunication, but intentional lack of communication. Argh!

And now for something completely different ...

(The version I'm listening to has an afterword by Orson Scott Card, which I can't help raising an eyebrow at. Not sure I want to listen to that.)

There was no concept of invasive species in the Regency ... but I realize that expecting any sort of historical accuracy whatsoever is a fool's errand, so nevermind.

Well, I'm admittedly a little dubious so far, but I'm giving it a chance!

Reading these aloud definitely adds some interesting perspective for me. I appreciate Sophos a bit more than I ever have before, tbh.

Hmm. I do enjoy a good Wodehouse pastiche. Let's see if Aaronovitch is up to it.

I'd like to declare a moratorium on holding up neurodivergence (of whatever type) as somehow morally or philosophically symbolic of "our times," okay? Okay. (Carry on with the turtle talk, pls kthx.)

This is an incredibly stressful read. I want to finish it, but I will be very glad to be done.

I'm one essay in, and this is already probably the most important book I've read in ... well, a long time.

There is so much of value in this book, but boy, I am deeply bothered by this footnote rattling off a list of personality type tests and astrology (which she apparently consulted--it's unclear how seriously--in assessing her compatibility with one of her own partners) without any caveats.

"Astrology is the study of the influence that distant cosmic objects have on human lives." Um.

Blanket legitimacy is implied.

“As new partnerships form with people in pre-existing CNM relationships, or polycules, these new partners too should not be expected to just fit right in to the CNM structure that was there before they arrived. While it’s important that new partners acknowledge and respect the unique configuration of relationships they are connecting up with [...] there also needs to be space for new people to influence the system"

On the one hand, I think it's worth pointing out that invasive species aren't "evil" or "malicious" or any of the other moralized projections humans put on them.

That said, if you're going to talk about how the plants are simply particularly tenacious and successful, it's unhelpful to leave it there. After all, what DOES makes these invasives "unnatural" and beyond the scope of normal environmental change is US.