5 ms·

I've read it cover-to-cover at least three times, gifted a copy, and read it out loud to my son. I find it very playful and mind-expanding. I will admit that it

I've read it cover-to-cover at least three times, gifted a copy, and read it out loud to my son. I find it very playful and mind-expanding. I will admit that it is verbose and wandering, but I think that's part of the charm. Out of curiosity I wandered through Amazon's 1-star reviews of this book to see what other people had to say. "Obtuse and impenetrable", I can certainly understand. It takes a certain bent to put the effort into reading it, and a certain level of interest to sustain that effort. The bulk of the critiques, though, including the OP, seem to be that it's too shallow in some specific area. How could it possibly dive any deeper into a fraction of the topics covered without being split into a multi-volume set? Perhaps more economical prose would allow for deeper dives, but personally I think it serves as an excellent layperson's introduction to a huge number of topics in logic, philosophy, theology, biology, music, art, language, etc.

deepaksurti 8y ago
>>takes a certain bent to put the effort into reading it Years back, I scanned through a few pages and realized it needed effort as you mention. OTOH, I think there are 2 kinds of great books: one which just suck you into their world and other which demand effort/tax to pay to immerse in that world. The former are incredible books, while the latter are still great. I found `On Lisp` by PG in the same latter category though GEB and OL tackle different subjects.
- optimuspaul 8y ago
  I find the latter to be too tedious usually. If they don't at least start out as the former then the latter will never be finished by me. I think that those two kinds are poles of a spectrum and I believe there is a falloff point not too far past the middle that I find acceptable. I think it is interesting you say the one end is incredible but the other end is "still great". Does that mean you enjoy them less?
  - ludston 8y ago
    > Does that mean you enjoy them less? Enjoyment is not the point. I am a different person because of reading GEB, and my coding style changed because of reading On Lisp. With internalisation and comprehension, the first kind of book will change the way that you think forever. This kind of book is going to be a boring if you are unable understand the concepts that it is trying to communicate. If these concepts are going to change you forever it might take some reflection (i.e. if you continue perusing the entire book at "reading speed" you will hit a point where you no longer understand what the author is talking about due to not sufficiently internalising the earlier material.)
    - optimuspaul 8y ago
      That's lovely, but didn't answer the question. But I can see that perhaps I offended you, I was just curious, so sorry.
extralego 8y ago
I agree with you for the most part. My central issue while reading was Hofstadter’s self-references. They eventually fall into the background but it was a turn-off for me in the beginning. And they aren’t inherently distasteful but in context of the ‘wandering’ and precarious nature of the work, I had to wonder if the dependency on one’s own series of particular fascinations do have an intellectual corollary or not. If I had to conclude, I’d say they do, but the book itself might still be a house of cards, however inspiring and all the rest.
- jweather 8y ago
  "House of cards" is an interesting analogy. Most books do a better job of appealing to a wide audience, while GEB comes with a long list of potential pitfalls, even for interested readers.

deepaksurti 8y ago

>>takes a certain bent to put the effort into reading it Years back, I scanned through a few pages and realized it needed effort as you mention. OTOH, I think there are 2 kinds of great books: one which just suck you into their world and other which demand effort/tax to pay to immerse in that world. The former are incredible books, while the latter are still great. I found `On Lisp` by PG in the same latter category though GEB and OL tackle different subjects.

optimuspaul 8y ago
I find the latter to be too tedious usually. If they don't at least start out as the former then the latter will never be finished by me. I think that those two kinds are poles of a spectrum and I believe there is a falloff point not too far past the middle that I find acceptable. I think it is interesting you say the one end is incredible but the other end is "still great". Does that mean you enjoy them less?
- ludston 8y ago
  > Does that mean you enjoy them less? Enjoyment is not the point. I am a different person because of reading GEB, and my coding style changed because of reading On Lisp. With internalisation and comprehension, the first kind of book will change the way that you think forever. This kind of book is going to be a boring if you are unable understand the concepts that it is trying to communicate. If these concepts are going to change you forever it might take some reflection (i.e. if you continue perusing the entire book at "reading speed" you will hit a point where you no longer understand what the author is talking about due to not sufficiently internalising the earlier material.)
  - optimuspaul 8y ago
    That's lovely, but didn't answer the question. But I can see that perhaps I offended you, I was just curious, so sorry.

extralego 8y ago

I agree with you for the most part. My central issue while reading was Hofstadter’s self-references. They eventually fall into the background but it was a turn-off for me in the beginning. And they aren’t inherently distasteful but in context of the ‘wandering’ and precarious nature of the work, I had to wonder if the dependency on one’s own series of particular fascinations do have an intellectual corollary or not. If I had to conclude, I’d say they do, but the book itself might still be a house of cards, however inspiring and all the rest.

jweather 8y ago
"House of cards" is an interesting analogy. Most books do a better job of appealing to a wide audience, while GEB comes with a long list of potential pitfalls, even for interested readers.