A rare linkpost is sighted

[dolorosa_12]

I've been hoarding links over the past week — mainly via the same two sources, which are blogs of meaty-but-light-touch, longform criticism, pop cultural commentary, and book reviews — the kind of stuff that's what I most miss about the old-school, pre-social media internet, and which I was delighted to discover still exists, if not in quite the same volume or prevalence.

First up, two reviews specifically of Travis Baldree's Legends and Lattes and more broadly commenting on the 'cosy' SFF trend. I'm not sure I'd be quite so firm in my conclusions (sometimes, you just want to read gentle, low-stakes fiction, and that's okay), but I thought both made some interesting, and persuasive points. Review number one is by Liz Bourke, and review number two is by Wesley Osam.

Also by Osam, this post on extractive AI, and a review of Tone (Sofia Samatar and Kate Zambreno), which is another reminder that I really do need to read through Samatar's entire bibliography.

If any of you contributed to the Kyiv Independent's fundraiser for small local media outlets in Ukraine (in the wake of the US government's freezing of international aid; I posted about this a few months back), you might be interested to know the results of your contributions: there's an update on the Gofundme page outlining all the fantastic things the three organisations (in the frontline regions of Sumy, Mykolaiv and Kharkiv) have been able to achieve thanks to the donations.

I've also just really been appreciating Timothy Snyder's newsletter, which helps me continue to feel like I'm not losing my mind in this terrible, unmoored world, but I assume that anyone who vaguely shares my politics is already aware of it.

Comments

[dolorosa_12]

You're welcome!

I really try to be careful when criticising things, because not all reading needs to be worthy and high stakes and literary and thought-provoking, and if people want to spend their spare time resting their brains in the undemanding, literary equivalent of pick-and-mix sweets, they should feel no need to justify their choices. I read a lot of silly fluff myself, and I don't want to be a hypocrite about these things.

It's more that this kind of 'cosiness' doesn't work for me. (I'm pretty sure it's because I have actually worked in a lot of customer service roles in the kinds of settings people pick as being cosy and conflict free: bakeries, cafes, libraries and so on, and there's something really irritating to me about seeing these places presented as just a cool spot to hang out with your friends, without any awful behaviour from customers, or irreconcilable interpersonal conflicts between coworkers, or really any need to do any work at all. It's as if the authors think of bakeries, coffeeshops, indie bookshops, florists, libraries etc as these kinds of fantasy setting with no conflict, where every colleague is automatically part of a close-knit found family, and work is incidental.)

I felt very seen in discovering that at least a couple of reviewers felt the same way!

[yarnofariadne]

there's something really irritating to me about seeing these places presented as just a cool spot to hang out with your friends, without any awful behaviour from customers, or irreconcilable interpersonal conflicts between coworkers, or really any need to do any work at all. It's as if the authors think of bakeries, coffeeshops, indie bookshops, florists, libraries etc as these kinds of fantasy setting with no conflict, where every colleague is automatically part of a close-knit found family, and work is incidental.

Yes, this! I worked customer service at Target in the US, and middle class women were always telling me that Target was their happy place, that I must've been so happy to work somewhere that they were so happy to grab a Starbucks and abuse the staff while ransacking the $1 section and yelling at cashiers while extreme couponing. It really is telling which people find these spaces 'cosy' and conflict-free.