6 ms·

I hate speaking negatively about Ministry for the Future, because I admire KSR, and we need fiction that confronts the climate crisis and shows people taking po

I hate speaking negatively about Ministry for the Future, because I admire KSR, and we need fiction that confronts the climate crisis and shows people taking positive action to change the world for the better. Still, I sadly cannot recommend this book. To quote from my spoileriffic review, "This does not help us imagine realistic positive outcomes to the climate crisis. Robinson correctly diagnoses the threats we face and immerses the reader in a very plausible near future. Unfortunately, any happy ending feels unearned as the world is essentially saved through magic, as humans/society respond in vanishingly unlikely ways." https://bookwyrm.social/user/skyfaller/review/381179/s/compelling-descriptions-of-problems-ludicrous-solutions https://bookwyrm.social/user/skyfaller/review/381179/s/compe...

aaomidi 3y ago
> Unfortunately, any happy ending feels unearned as the world is essentially saved through magic, as humans/society respond in vanishingly unlikely ways. Honestly, that just makes the book better in my eyes and I haven't even read it.
allemagne 3y ago
Can't agree more. The wet bulb event chapter is definitely worth a read, though. The sad reality is that the world's actual response to something like that happening will probably be about as disappointing and anticlimactic as the rest of the book was to read.
- mikeyouse 3y ago
  If the comment sections on any news story about e.g. the Maui fire or any other natural disaster are an indication - the world's response will be hyperpartisan conspiracy mongering involving random rich people (Oprah, Zuckerberg and Obama in Maui), shady groups of profiteers (developers and clean energy installers), and fictional tech (directed energy weapons and various "lasers) rather than the shortest moment of introspection.
  - dingnuts 3y ago
    If climate activists wish to change minds, they simply cannot react with apoplexy that after a generation of messaging about how "weather is not climate" that the new generation responds to catastrophic weather events with "weather is not climate" But of course, weather isn't climate. https://www.axios.com/2023/08/14/climate-change-heat-wave-causes https://www.axios.com/2023/08/14/climate-change-heat-wave-ca... If climate activists only wish to broadcast how virtuous and smart they are for not denying The Science, by all means, look down on the uneducated unwashed masses for arguing as to whether or not a hot day or season is definitive evidence of human caused climate change -- even though that's exactly what the climate activists taught them not too long ago.
    - mikeyouse 3y ago
      1. I didn't even mention climate change or weather? b. Your own source is making a different point that the one you're making.. > What they're saying: Climate scientist Zeke Hausfather summarized the volcano's contribution to 2023's record high temperatures this way: "So, not nothing, but only a small part of the story in the exceptional warmth the world is experiencing," he told Axios via email. > Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University, also thinks the significance of the volcano's warming role pales in comparison to human-driven climate change and other influences. > Dessler likens climate change to a "rising tide" that is elevating the baseline temperatures from which heat waves begin. "This means that our heatwaves become hotter, essentially 'floating' on the 'rising tide' of our warming world," he said via email.
      - dingnuts 3y ago
        The Maui wildfire was driven by a hurricane, a weather event. Did you not mention that? The Axios article providing context and discussion around a topic -- some of which does argue in the affirmative for climate change -- is not contradictory to my post because I was not arguing against climate change. I'm arguing with your attitude towards the commentators on news stories, who you seem to view as ignorant, when they are parroting exactly the messaging that the climate activists trained them to parrot.
mikeholler 3y ago
Yes. Thank you. His book Aurora does a much better job at steering us towards action while still showing consequences of environmental disaster and I highly recommend it.
NegativeLatency 3y ago
You might enjoy the monk and robot series from Becky Chambers in case that you’re looking for something more hopeful.
blueboo 3y ago
Crucially, after it tip goes into the complexity of global diplomacy and consensus building, a special black ops team of super eco-terrorists effect the change that really needs to happen. It’s right at home with right-wing military fantasy, Frederick Forsyth-“to bear the baddies we need to be worse than the worst of em” silliness
- dee-bee 3y ago
  Hell if we're calling reactionary politics a reaction to climate change, call me a reactionary.
  - blueboo 3y ago
    “All rebels are closet aristocrats. That’s why I can convert them so easily” Leto II, God Emperor of Dune, Frank Herbert
abeppu 3y ago
I agree that the plot repeatedly follows society making choices which I find implausible -- but if one reads that alienation (one's inner critic saying "this is not the world we live in") as part of the experience of the work, then it can function as a kind of compelling tool. Noting all the points where humanity in the book takes necessary and beneficial actions to improve their situation, that are available to but refused by our society, one arrives at a pretty jarring condemnation. Not only is the current disaster entirely of our making, but all the ways in which it will fail to be addressed are also our responsibility.
- allemagne 3y ago
  Is it particularly jarring to realize that central banks issuing a carbon-backed cryptocurrency will probably not save us from climate change?
  - abeppu 3y ago
    I'm not familiar enough with international diplomacy or central banking for that to be the most jarring part. But, when the head of an international organization takes a week and a half to get to a meeting on the other side of the planet, and thinks that it's nicer to take a sequence of trains and sailing ships than it used to be to fly ... that seemed totally alien. When subsistence farmers were surprised by the large amount of money they were paid for getting more carbon into their soil, that seemed really implausible. When KSM glosses by how easy and quick it was to make giant wildlife corridors across North America, and talks about whole communities packing up and voluntarily abandoning towns to ceded those areas to nature ... that seemed wildly implausible. There were a lot of these moments for me, and while I get the people that use these as a criticism against the realism of the book, I also think that gap is a criticism against all of us.
  - kelseyfrog 3y ago
    As much as the story centered around central banking machinations, the buried narrative was that a lot of people in power probably have to die. This realization and it's impossibility make the story a tragedy when compared to the real world.
adolph 3y ago
> we need fiction that confronts the climate crisis and shows people taking positive action to change the world for the better. Like Termination Shock? https://www.amazon.com/Termination-Shock-Novel-Neal-Stephenson/dp/0063028069/ref=monarch_sidesheet https://www.amazon.com/Termination-Shock-Novel-Neal-Stephens...
- jbu 3y ago
  I really prefer Ministry to termination shock. I mean, it's a fun book, but it offers no solution (eg sulphur seeding does nothing for ocean acidification, not to mention termination shock). The fact that people read it and thing it offers a solution is puzzling. Now Anathem is another matter! Brilliant! (although again I have quibbles).
  - adolph 3y ago
    Anathem is my favorite too. There is so much there and I keep encountering things it fictionalalized. For example, I wasn’t really familiar with the Everettian many worlds interpretation of quantum physics until after I read it. Likewise it’s treatment of the analemma as something coming before the splitting points of the different worlds and interpretable by all since the axis and orbital elipse would constitute a planetary signature. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/many-worlds_interpretation https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/many-worlds_interpretation
ch4s3 3y ago
I feel similarly, and really love his older books. However his slide towards glorifying terrorism in his recent work is really troubling. The increasing focus in his work on uni-bomber like characters is really off putting.
specialist 3y ago
The omission of the reactionary backlash was especially implausible. > shows people taking positive action to change the world for the better You might be interested in the Volts' podcast. https://www.volts.wtf https://www.volts.wtf The recent interviews with Saul Griffith ("use our sunlight and iron ore and rare minerals to transform Australia into the world's forge"), Tim Latimer (Fervo Energy pioneered advanced geothermal, now scaling up), and Ramez Naam (climate tech investor) were quite uplifting. Lots of gems in the Volts archive too.
aidenn0 3y ago
Indeed; terraforming mars is more likely than the end-game of Ministry for the Future.
- dee-bee 3y ago
  The Mars Trilogy relies on a number of very idealistic characters to carry the politics specifically past what the earth was capable of, as well as unrealistically effective resolutions when violence does occur. But I really think you've chosen the wrong author if you're hoping for realism.
aaroninsf 3y ago
Have you heard him speak on it? I have, in person, several times, and this aspect of the book (which I am tepid on, as a novel for other reasons myself) is something that's been pulled apart. I believe you can find recordings from e.g. his interactive discussion of it, in the archives of "SF in SF" which are typically recorded and available, maybe at SomaFM as Rusty usually runs sound. Strongly recommended and it should give you a frame for understanding why the narrative takes the path that it does. TL;DR it's overdetermined and the opposite of naivety or wishful thinking; it's strategic. You may disagree with the strategy, of course.
dee-bee 3y ago
I agree with this assessment. However, the book was never supposed to be realistic, simply a plausible beginning to a story. Idealistic hope, and imagining yet unimagined sci-fi stories that specifically reject the dystopian mindset that can often plague sci-fi, is kind of KSR's thing. All of his books are like this.
dredmorbius 3y ago
MftF is best understood as a best case scenario for successfully resolving the climate crisis. That is, if we're to successfully address this challenge, with minimal global disruption (and where "minimal disruption" means all aircraft falling from the skies), then something like KSR's path is required. I've seen your criticism voiced elsewhere (a major publication review that I'm lapsing on presently). This particular critique misses the book's point entirely.

aaomidi 3y ago

> Unfortunately, any happy ending feels unearned as the world is essentially saved through magic, as humans/society respond in vanishingly unlikely ways. Honestly, that just makes the book better in my eyes and I haven't even read it.

allemagne 3y ago

Can't agree more. The wet bulb event chapter is definitely worth a read, though. The sad reality is that the world's actual response to something like that happening will probably be about as disappointing and anticlimactic as the rest of the book was to read.

mikeyouse 3y ago
If the comment sections on any news story about e.g. the Maui fire or any other natural disaster are an indication - the world's response will be hyperpartisan conspiracy mongering involving random rich people (Oprah, Zuckerberg and Obama in Maui), shady groups of profiteers (developers and clean energy installers), and fictional tech (directed energy weapons and various "lasers) rather than the shortest moment of introspection.
- dingnuts 3y ago
  If climate activists wish to change minds, they simply cannot react with apoplexy that after a generation of messaging about how "weather is not climate" that the new generation responds to catastrophic weather events with "weather is not climate" But of course, weather isn't climate. https://www.axios.com/2023/08/14/climate-change-heat-wave-causes https://www.axios.com/2023/08/14/climate-change-heat-wave-ca... If climate activists only wish to broadcast how virtuous and smart they are for not denying The Science, by all means, look down on the uneducated unwashed masses for arguing as to whether or not a hot day or season is definitive evidence of human caused climate change -- even though that's exactly what the climate activists taught them not too long ago.
  - mikeyouse 3y ago
    1. I didn't even mention climate change or weather? b. Your own source is making a different point that the one you're making.. > What they're saying: Climate scientist Zeke Hausfather summarized the volcano's contribution to 2023's record high temperatures this way: "So, not nothing, but only a small part of the story in the exceptional warmth the world is experiencing," he told Axios via email. > Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University, also thinks the significance of the volcano's warming role pales in comparison to human-driven climate change and other influences. > Dessler likens climate change to a "rising tide" that is elevating the baseline temperatures from which heat waves begin. "This means that our heatwaves become hotter, essentially 'floating' on the 'rising tide' of our warming world," he said via email.
    - dingnuts 3y ago
      The Maui wildfire was driven by a hurricane, a weather event. Did you not mention that? The Axios article providing context and discussion around a topic -- some of which does argue in the affirmative for climate change -- is not contradictory to my post because I was not arguing against climate change. I'm arguing with your attitude towards the commentators on news stories, who you seem to view as ignorant, when they are parroting exactly the messaging that the climate activists trained them to parrot.

mikeholler 3y ago

Yes. Thank you. His book Aurora does a much better job at steering us towards action while still showing consequences of environmental disaster and I highly recommend it.

NegativeLatency 3y ago

You might enjoy the monk and robot series from Becky Chambers in case that you’re looking for something more hopeful.

blueboo 3y ago

Crucially, after it tip goes into the complexity of global diplomacy and consensus building, a special black ops team of super eco-terrorists effect the change that really needs to happen. It’s right at home with right-wing military fantasy, Frederick Forsyth-“to bear the baddies we need to be worse than the worst of em” silliness

dee-bee 3y ago
Hell if we're calling reactionary politics a reaction to climate change, call me a reactionary.
- blueboo 3y ago
  “All rebels are closet aristocrats. That’s why I can convert them so easily” Leto II, God Emperor of Dune, Frank Herbert

abeppu 3y ago

I agree that the plot repeatedly follows society making choices which I find implausible -- but if one reads that alienation (one's inner critic saying "this is not the world we live in") as part of the experience of the work, then it can function as a kind of compelling tool. Noting all the points where humanity in the book takes necessary and beneficial actions to improve their situation, that are available to but refused by our society, one arrives at a pretty jarring condemnation. Not only is the current disaster entirely of our making, but all the ways in which it will fail to be addressed are also our responsibility.

allemagne 3y ago
Is it particularly jarring to realize that central banks issuing a carbon-backed cryptocurrency will probably not save us from climate change?
- abeppu 3y ago
  I'm not familiar enough with international diplomacy or central banking for that to be the most jarring part. But, when the head of an international organization takes a week and a half to get to a meeting on the other side of the planet, and thinks that it's nicer to take a sequence of trains and sailing ships than it used to be to fly ... that seemed totally alien. When subsistence farmers were surprised by the large amount of money they were paid for getting more carbon into their soil, that seemed really implausible. When KSM glosses by how easy and quick it was to make giant wildlife corridors across North America, and talks about whole communities packing up and voluntarily abandoning towns to ceded those areas to nature ... that seemed wildly implausible. There were a lot of these moments for me, and while I get the people that use these as a criticism against the realism of the book, I also think that gap is a criticism against all of us.
- kelseyfrog 3y ago
  As much as the story centered around central banking machinations, the buried narrative was that a lot of people in power probably have to die. This realization and it's impossibility make the story a tragedy when compared to the real world.

adolph 3y ago

> we need fiction that confronts the climate crisis and shows people taking positive action to change the world for the better. Like Termination Shock? https://www.amazon.com/Termination-Shock-Novel-Neal-Stephenson/dp/0063028069/ref=monarch_sidesheet https://www.amazon.com/Termination-Shock-Novel-Neal-Stephens...

jbu 3y ago
I really prefer Ministry to termination shock. I mean, it's a fun book, but it offers no solution (eg sulphur seeding does nothing for ocean acidification, not to mention termination shock). The fact that people read it and thing it offers a solution is puzzling. Now Anathem is another matter! Brilliant! (although again I have quibbles).
- adolph 3y ago
  Anathem is my favorite too. There is so much there and I keep encountering things it fictionalalized. For example, I wasn’t really familiar with the Everettian many worlds interpretation of quantum physics until after I read it. Likewise it’s treatment of the analemma as something coming before the splitting points of the different worlds and interpretable by all since the axis and orbital elipse would constitute a planetary signature. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/many-worlds_interpretation https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/many-worlds_interpretation

ch4s3 3y ago

I feel similarly, and really love his older books. However his slide towards glorifying terrorism in his recent work is really troubling. The increasing focus in his work on uni-bomber like characters is really off putting.

specialist 3y ago

The omission of the reactionary backlash was especially implausible. > shows people taking positive action to change the world for the better You might be interested in the Volts' podcast. https://www.volts.wtf https://www.volts.wtf The recent interviews with Saul Griffith ("use our sunlight and iron ore and rare minerals to transform Australia into the world's forge"), Tim Latimer (Fervo Energy pioneered advanced geothermal, now scaling up), and Ramez Naam (climate tech investor) were quite uplifting. Lots of gems in the Volts archive too.

aidenn0 3y ago

Indeed; terraforming mars is more likely than the end-game of Ministry for the Future.

dee-bee 3y ago
The Mars Trilogy relies on a number of very idealistic characters to carry the politics specifically past what the earth was capable of, as well as unrealistically effective resolutions when violence does occur. But I really think you've chosen the wrong author if you're hoping for realism.

aaroninsf 3y ago

Have you heard him speak on it? I have, in person, several times, and this aspect of the book (which I am tepid on, as a novel for other reasons myself) is something that's been pulled apart. I believe you can find recordings from e.g. his interactive discussion of it, in the archives of "SF in SF" which are typically recorded and available, maybe at SomaFM as Rusty usually runs sound. Strongly recommended and it should give you a frame for understanding why the narrative takes the path that it does. TL;DR it's overdetermined and the opposite of naivety or wishful thinking; it's strategic. You may disagree with the strategy, of course.

dee-bee 3y ago

I agree with this assessment. However, the book was never supposed to be realistic, simply a plausible beginning to a story. Idealistic hope, and imagining yet unimagined sci-fi stories that specifically reject the dystopian mindset that can often plague sci-fi, is kind of KSR's thing. All of his books are like this.

dredmorbius 3y ago

MftF is best understood as a best case scenario for successfully resolving the climate crisis. That is, if we're to successfully address this challenge, with minimal global disruption (and where "minimal disruption" means all aircraft falling from the skies), then something like KSR's path is required. I've seen your criticism voiced elsewhere (a major publication review that I'm lapsing on presently). This particular critique misses the book's point entirely.