Post by @picklefactory@awful.systems

2026-09-04 22:18 UTC

The main thing I have noticed, thinking back, is that his books often require an Interesting Billionaire to move the plot forward – Dodge, T.R. Schmidt, Eliza, the sultan of Kinakuta, whatever – and my suspension of disbelief can no longer always rise to the occasion on that count, even in an SF setting. Which is also I think why Anathem remains my favorite.

Replies (2)

@schnoopy@awful.systems 2026-09-05 00:19

It has been ages since I’ve read them but anathem is definitely his best work. I did really enjoy zodiac, snowcrash, and the cryptonomicon when I read them ~15 years ago though. His books are always a bit libertarian (usa meaning, derogatory) although snowcrash is a very funny send up of what that might actually look like if adopted wholeheartedly so idk how much they can be said to endorse it wholeheartedly. Some of it reminds me of the incoherence of Pratchett’s politics. A sort of “Just let smart people with good values do what they want and things will be ok” without establishing how you determine who that applies to or really sitting with how fragile that is.

Open ##4621363
@cstross@wandering.shop 2026-09-05 08:55

@picklefactory@awful.systems The point of the "interesting billionaire to move the plot forward" is that for science fiction to engage the reader it plausibly needs a character with *agency*, i.e. the ability to drive a change in the status quo. Having a Magic Billionaire on call allows the author to neatly sidestep the humongous amount of maneuvering it takes to put an Ordinary Joe in a position to start the plot moving. (Neal did it in Cryptonomicon and it was painful to behold: ate a third of the book.)

Open ##4622552