Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

In this section we have an interesting meeting with some Garuda. I'd love to hear comments on that whole set-up.

Then, Isaac and Yagharek talk some pseudo-science. What do readers think of Mieville's invented set of 'natural rules' to which the Bas-lag universe conforms? The thaumarurgy mixed in with some pseudo-science? Might this perhaps be to strengthen the quasi-Victorian, Steampunk feel of the setting?

What do you think of Isaac's 'crisis energy'?

I found the whole discussion between Isaac & Yag about crisis energy so fascinating, I was riveted to me seat!

I was very excited about the 'science' at first, until i realized that it wasn't 'real'.. Argh, what did i expect! :P

This isn't really tagged as SF, let alone "hard" SF, so..
But Mieville does get full marks for his imagination, doesn't he?

I'm not really so interested in reality... I'm thinking of it as more fantasy than scifi but I dont read enough of either genre to be influenced or disappointed!

When pressed for genre by unimaginative interviewers, Mieville describes his work as Weird Fiction. But I think he just being cute with the media.

In genre this is quite close to the work of Jeff VanderMeer .

(Who also describes himself as New Weird, and both have an interest in Steampunk. )

I personally think that the whole science business was just a big slog of exposition that, while extensive, didn't lead up in a way that exposition should. You have to have a point to it all beyond a sudden jump from potential energy to 'crisis energy is the key!!!!!!'. I know it's not real science, but a more credible lead up would've been nice.
At least his vocab usage was pretty.

Hmm. I must admit that crisis energy does have a function later on in the novel, as one sees when it becomes....more pertinent to the story.

So, admittedly, i do think CM was going somewhere with setting up the Crisis energy idea.

Yeah, I figured, considering how happy Isaac was about the idea. I just wish Mieville had used an analogy a little bit more exciting than an energy diagram that keeps pushing the reaction state up towards the highest point using the energy created in falling from it. He could've fed me a nuclear powered spring and I would've been happy.
He did manage to stick the word transition in there. Wonder how Motley would feel about crisis energy...

Well, Isaac and Yagharek do discuss the use of nuclear technology a bit later on, in Chapter 19, which i thought was rather interesting.
I suppose one has to remember that Mieville is a political economist though, not a physicist or a natural scientist...

Has our group read fizzled out? Nobody read up to this point yet? Should I be contributing in more detail on the threads?

You know, i find it interesting how Mieville always seems to be spotlighting marginalised individuals and societies, but not the center, if you know what i mean.
We saw Kinken, now the garuda settlement, we saw the political dissidents like Derkhan, and we saw the other end of the spectrum, Mayor Rudgutter, who seems to be the head of a police state. We see Isaac who is himself a marginalised quasi-intellecual.

We saw Motley, who seems to be not quite on the 'right' side of the law.

But we never see just normal, run-of-the-mill citizens. Everyday people like clerks and teachers and plumbers and doctors and lawyers. Maybe they don't need those in New Crubozon. CM always mentions sludge and filth, but never plumbing. So, maybe they don't have that or plumbers in NC! Heh.

It's true you don't see too many of the "little people", though you do see dock-workers from afar and a few functionaries. Mostly, though, you just see undifferentiated slum denizens without any apparent purpose, eh? I suppose it's just not that sort of novel.

Miéville does seem to focus more on character than setting, if you ask me: the backdrop is more than just rough brushstrokes, of course, but he only fills in enough to suit the plot. For example, New Crobuzon is almost entirely considered in isolation in Perdido Street Station---because the world outside really doesn't matter. The reader is aware there are other states, other nations (and presumably an old Crobuzon), but the city is clearly depicted as the centre of the universe---whereas in The Scar it is portrayed as a superpower, but for all that one of many entities which vies for power on the world stage.

It does make me wonder about how Iron Council portrays the city.

J. wrote: "It's true you don't see too many of the "little people", though you do see dock-workers from afar and a few functionaries. Mostly, though, you just see undifferentiated slum denizens without any a..."

But, the thing is, like you mentioned in the first thread,--are there no affluent people living in this city at all? Is the entire city composed of scientists, artists, dockworkers, the unemployed and criminals?
Earlier in the discussion, people equate NC to possible locations in the real world, and of course we know that Mieville likes to use London as his backdrop. But if a quasi-London, where is Bishop's Avenue and Buckingham Palace?

Yes, I'd like to get to Iron Council-apparently it returns to NC again.

Traveller wrote: "J. wrote: "It's true you don't see too many of the "little people", though you do see dock-workers from afar and a few functionaries. Mostly, though, you just see undifferentiated slum denizens wi..."

Not sure what chapter, but Lin shops in an upscale store and the clerks look down their nose at her but take her money anyway. I suspect that's as close to affluence as a well paid artist of a low-regarded social caste can get.

hmm, so many questions Trav has raised here.
1. Trav, this is my first group read, I'm not sure how they work, but it seems to be galloping along and I'm struggling to keep up. I'll try to do better.
2. The question about ordinary/marginalised protagonists: the gut feeling I get is that his worlds are filled with denizens that seem unusual to us, but then this is not Earth and they are possibly not human, so perhaps everyone in his worlds is similar and the characters he explores and describes in detail might be absolutely ordinary in the context of his creation.
ie what I'm trying to say is that this is the New Weird after all, maybe everyone is weird.
3.The "science" I see as rather fun, possibly not meant to be taken seriously in isolataion, but rather as a vehicle for possibilities that aid storytelling. And as a vehicle for introducing the term "crisis enegry", which again suggests change and transition. Perhaps this is the whole point of the elaborate structure?
But I'm not politically savvy enough to see metaphors for political structures in his "Field Theories". Perhaps someone could comment here?

Dear members, regarding the progress of the group read:
Please only open a thread when you've already read the contents of the chapters described in the thread title, or else you'll be spoiled.

Remember that we said at the beginning of the read, in the "preparation" section, that our group has vastly varying reading speeds, (as measured by the poll we did), and to avoid frustration for the faster readers, we will be opening the whole book in advance so that the faster readers can go ahead and the slower ones have only small sections of book to deal with per section (roughly 40 pages), so that when they open that section, they should have already read that part, and therefore it won't spoil anything for them if others have already posted there.

So, if you see others posting ahead of you, please don't worry about that, just keep reading and posting at your own pace, these threads aren't going to run away. We will still be here when you reach that part of the read.

Some of the members who promised that they were going to take part in these discussions, have not even started at all yet, and they may still decide to come in at some stage, so, don't worry, i'm pretty sure there will always be someone to talk to about issues in the threads.

Keep in mind that i have also gone to some measures to have these topics show up on the book's home page, so we might just pick up some members as we go along, who might see our threads and may want to have their say as well.

This is why I'm trying to say only the bare minimum in my little thread introductions, to give you guys leeway and space to write down your thoughts and interpretations.

you're doing a great job of leading our motley (;p) crew, Trav. And I'm finding your insights very...insightful. Seriously.

I am fascinated by the idea of crisis energy.

It seems to posit a source of energy that either was not there (in breach of the second law of thermodynamics) or it is there, but needs to be stirred up a bit before it manifests itself.

If a crisis can be created, there seems to be energy that can be harnessed. Thus, new energy can be created by the stimulation of a psychological crisis.

This means that crisis energy might be a form of psychic energy.

This energy is also potentially the basis of perpetual motion.

So to the extent that extra energy can be created, PSS seems to me to be defying thermodynamics and entropy.

To this extent, it stands in opposition to "Gravity's Rainbow".

This ability to self-generate energy can be linked to the concept of self-organisation or construction which appears elsewhere (e.g., the ability to create yourself out of nothing or to raise yourself to another level of existence or being).

This is a form of progress in the opposite direction to entropy.

Ian wrote: "I am fascinated by the idea of crisis energy.

It seems to posit a source of energy that either was not there (in breach of the second law of thermodynamics) or it is there, but needs to be stirred..."

Crisis Energy is a fascinating concept! Around all energy are laws of some sort or another, and the one for crisis energy that is especially cool is that the crisis has to be real, or it won't work. This ties in with the self-creation or current trend of creating your own reality, in that you REALLY REALLY have to believe it -- or it won't work. Faith too can take the out that if it doesn't work (like when the priest is unsuccessfully trying to excise a demon, that the issue is a flaw in the priest's faith. Seems crisis energy needs that element of pure belief in the crisis --that the crisis cannot be simulated.

Most everyone has felt that surge of adrenaline that animates us during a perceived threat. When I read crisis energy, memory of that feeling gave the term immediate power.

Andrea wrote: "But I'm not politically savvy enough to see metaphors for political structures in his "Field Theories". Perhaps someone could comment here?
.."

You mean his little schematic of UFT? (Unified Field Theory?) or , rather, his being a MUFTI, a (Moving Unified Field Theorist) as opposed to a SUFTI, (Static Unified Field Theorist)?

Regarding "crisis energy" I think it might be worthwhile to note that one of the themes of the novel tends to be 'transition' as already noted with sections regarding to Mr Motley among others.

I think an important aspect of crisis energy to note, is that it is created when something is hovering on the brink of transition; like when something static is about to become moving - that moment of crisis before a substance or object transitions from one state to another.

Of course, it cannot be "harvested" in our world in the sense that Isaac proposes to do, but it's a rather fun idea created by Mieville anyway, and it definitely serves as a plot device in the novel.

It is my opinion that Mr Miéville is also a talented practitioner of self-parody.

Mosca wrote: "It is my opinion that Mr Miéville is also a talented practitioner of self-parody."

Looking at photo's and interviews with the man, i seem to rather agree; the man does at the very least seem to have a good sense of humor. You need only to look at the 'ducky-mucky' photo in our photo gallery, and the red seamonster photo that we have up on the home page. :)

I think Isaac as fat bastard is self-parody. Unfortunately, for some of us, it's reality. Even if it's fast disappearing as you walk the streets of your town.

The trip to meet garuda in Spatters was interesting, and I was pleased that the chapter didn't end with the cliché I nearly expected ((view spoiler)[someone sidling up to him at the last minute, and agreeing to his terms (hide spoiler)]). Once again, Lin is shows as the more perceptive of the pair.

As for the pseudoscience towards the end of chapter 14, I think it was a tad too expositional, but Mieville almost acknowledges that when Isaac thinks to himself "ten years of research have improved my teaching" and "the process of explaining his theoretical approach was consolidating his ideas". The idea of crisis energy does remind me somewhat of Hitchhiker's infinite improbability drive.

Traveller wrote (comment 11): "...You know, i find it interesting how Mieville always seems to be spotlighting marginalised individuals and societies, but not the center...But we never see just normal, run-of-the-mill citizens...."

Rather like those who do past-life regression were never a nondescript peasant in a rural backwater, oblivious to important events. If they are humble, they're always somewhere/when interesting, such as a slave a the court of Cleopatra. ;)
I guess it's just that outsiders are more intriguing.

Traveller wrote (comment 13): "...are there no affluent people living in this city at all?..."

The people on the edge of the city, near Spatters, sound affluent, and there was mention of the wealthy when Ben and Derkhan were discussing the Suffrage Ballot. I'm guess in that Mayor Rudgutter might be wealthy.

Cecily wrote: "Traveller wrote (comment 13): "...are there no affluent people living in this city at all?..."

The people on the edge of the city, near Spatters, sound affluent, and there was mention of the wealthy when Ben and Derkhan were discussing the Suffrage Ballot. I'm guess in that Mayor Rudgutter might be wealthy.
"

Sure, but Mieville very rarely shows us even a glimpse (or much more than a glimpse) of it. Of course Motley is, but we don't really see much of it beyond his obvious power.

Maybe another reason Mieville rarely portrays the rich and powerful in any detail is political and idealistic (he doesn't want to give them space)?

Cecily wrote: "Maybe another reason Mieville rarely portrays the rich and powerful in any detail is political and idealistic (he doesn't want to give them space)?"

You are absolutely echoing my own thoughts there. Hence, he gives a kind of lopsided view of a world as much as showing only the rich and glamorous would have done.