Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lemmsjid 803 days ago
Jemisin is one of the more visceral and imaginative writers I've encountered in recent years, and she did indeed produce and publish written works, so I do believe she is a real author, yes. I'd certainly be interested in reading and maybe discussing an actual critique, this being a forum where substantive posts are required in the guidelines.
3 comments

I read The Fifth Season and hated it, but she's definitely a real author. I'd be interested if she has any other books that I might like better.

My main problems with the story were: - The setting was almost unspeakably brutal, but there seemed to be almost no one interested in fighting those brutal systems. I could understand 1-2 characters being brainwashed to go along with the brutality, or even most, but no one seems to even attempt to go against the system. This made the setting feel unbelievable to me.

- There are two big twists at the end of the book. I won't spoil them, but they didn't feel like well-foreshadowed twists. The timelines for the different chapters weren't clear, which made it hard to guess the first, and the 'clues' felt like bad writing mistakes. For the second, the only clue is what words people don't say.

The plot also hinges on a misunderstanding of how tsunamis work, but that's forgivable to me.

I feel like in real life, that's how things work. People mostly accept the brutality of the society they find themselves in, because its normal. Its just in most books people want to focus on the drama. [Mild Spoilers] The fifth season starts with everyone kind of accepting, the characters are chewed up, and they do try to rebel in the end. So its not like there is no rebelling at all.

Generally i liked the fifth season, but i think people think its a bit deeper than it actually is. I find le guin to be a bit more nuanced and leave you thinking a bit more. The fifth season felt a bit more: evil people are obviously evil. The other side is i think jemisin has better developed characters than le guin. A lot of le guin (much like a lot of older scifi) feel very much like idea books where character development & plotting came second.

If you like those two authors, i would really reccomend Octavia Butler, who i think is a bit similar but better than both (lets see if i start a flamewar ;)

No flamewar here, I quite agree! I really enjoyed The Fifth Season (if "enjoy" is a word that can be applied to something so dark), but it did have flaws (I used "visceral" and "imaginative" in my above comment because I think those are her strengths: I really felt immersed in her descriptive writing).

Meanwhile Octavia Butler is absolutely one of my favorite authors regardless of genre. Her work stuck with me for quite a while, as has le Guin's (specifically, Left Hand of Darkness, I've actually had trouble getting into some of her other works, though I mean to try again). Butler to me is a visionary alongside my other favorites in the sci fi canon.

In general I can understand the quote

> I feel like in real life, that's how things work. People mostly accept the brutality of the society they find themselves in, because its normal.

For something like modern day police brutality, sure, most people aren't active advocates.

However, I think that really understates the level of brutality in The Fifth Season. The main characters are the oppressed people, like Jewish people during the Holocaust or Black people under Southern-slavery levels of oppressed. Yet there appears to be absolutely 0 mention of resistance fighters or an underground railroad. There appears to be 0 active resistance anywhere, even beyond the main characters. No protests, no riots, no terrorist attacks, no one even suggesting that maybe outright eugenics and genocide is a bad idea and then getting disappeared. It doesn't have to be the main characters getting involved, just a rumor that someone somewhere is doing something. If someone punched me in the face, I wouldn't let them get away with it and then punch myself a couple extra times for good measure.

I think what you're seeing there is Jemisin actively foregrounding and exploring a difficult fact, which is that people who were abused are more likely to turn around and be abusers.

Often times books turn abuse into the catalyst for a noble struggle and cathartic improvement, when in fact that often isn't the case. There's large swathes of human history where oppressive regimes were powerful enough to quickly and brutually suppress rebellions. When violence and abuse are normalized in a culture, it can take a long time and a lot of failed struggles to truly unwind the violence.

I think Jemisin is actively trying to explore that mentality, which is pretty brave because it does make the characters off putting. As the reader you want so badly for them to rise out of the muck and take on a noble struggle, but they're caught up in the cycle of violence.

I say this with respect for your viewpoint, I think you're being very fair about expressing your response, and I completely see where you're coming from.

For me the biggest problem with that series is that it seems to endorse collective responsibility on a scale massive enough that calling it genocide is a no-brainer. Several times, even.
1. There is nothing imaginative about it. A child throwing out random ideas and copying cool scenes from TV shows at random is not "imaginative". It's made worse when every edgy social-commentary trope is forced in.

2. The biggest offense, of course, is the word "science" in her being labelled a "science fiction" author. A 4th grade understanding of the first chapter of a geology book that is immediately violated is not "science fiction".

Of course, I am mainly upset about the destruction of the Nebula Awards by the inclusion of the Fifth Season in the list among authors who actually understand science, computer science, served in the military, and overall have, and further, an understanding of how things work. Jemisin might be on par with that guy who wrote about magic balls catching lightning (Sanderson) in the Stormlight Archive, but neither of them belong on a good science fiction list.

On your first point, you have to at least acknowledge that a ton of people strongly disagree with you. I've certainly bounced off of widely read and highly rated novels before, but rarely do I leave with a complete dismissal of the quality of the work. It seems almost personal to you, calling a widely and multiply published author a "child throwing out random ideas".

On your second point: The Nebula Awards specifically target "science fiction" and "fantasy" genres. I'm quite widely read in science fiction. I took a look at the list of novels that have won or been finalists for the Nebula Awards. It turns out I've read quite a few of them, scattered over the decades the Nebulas have existed. The Fifth Season is far from the only set of books with fantastical elements to have won, and the ones I've read that have won have plenty of world building elements that would be incorrect by a fourth grade textbook (FTL? Reincarnation? Fire breathing dragons?). Yes, the Game of Thrones novels (a Song of Ice and Fire), though quite excellent, are quite firmly in the realm of fantasy, and they were often Nebula finalists! By your criteria, the Nebula Awards were "destroyed" a long time ago. Several books, including some from the very early years of the Nebula Awards, are now called "science fantasy", i.e. science fiction that leans into fantastical elements. The Fifth Season is actually typically labeled as "science fantasy".

If the Fifth Season "destroyed" the Nebula Awards, then you would see more recent winners being almost exclusively science fantasy. I haven't read as many of the newer winners as I have older winners, but two of my favorite novels of recent years won or were finalists: Network Effect by Martha Wells, which is pretty much a core science fiction novel, and Piranesi, by Susanna Clarke, which is even more fantastical than the Broken Earth.

One of my favorite recent-years science fiction novels, Children of Time, surprisingly didn't get a Nebula, but it did get a Hugo. Looking at its publishing year though, 2015, I see why! Three Body Problem was nominated, and Annihilation, which I absolutely adore (but can't spell), won that year.

I will acknowledge that people have tastes I don't understand - Children of Time was another collection of filler tripe that contributed nothing to the genre. Definitely put it down when I realized it's "A Deepness in the Sky", without the good parts, just "lol prehistory with spiders."

You brought up Martin - he has a passing understanding of history, combat, and was a veteran (aka is somewhat grounded in reality while writing fantasy), which is why Gemisin and Brandenson should not be used in the same sentence with him, and definitely not with Tolkien.

Nora Jemisin is real. I've met her.

I read the first novel of her trilogy. I didn't like it. I have #2 and #3 but I've not bothered. I may never do so.