[HN Gopher] Ted Chiang has won the PEN/Faulkner Foundation's sho...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ted Chiang has won the PEN/Faulkner Foundation's short story prize
        
       Author : bookofjoe
       Score  : 181 points
       Date   : 2024-06-13 17:14 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (lithub.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (lithub.com)
        
       | jebarker wrote:
       | Well deserved. "Hell is the absence of God" is my favorite of his
       | stories. It's one of the few short stories I find myself
       | repeatedly re-reading.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | Mine too. Beautiful work. The characters. The imagery. The
         | language. Magical. It's published in an anthology that has many
         | other good stories too.
        
         | nlawalker wrote:
         | One of my favorite sentences in any book.
         | 
         | "And God sent him to Hell anyway."
        
           | fleshdaddy wrote:
           | God I love that line. I almost wish the story ended right
           | there.
        
         | sunshowers wrote:
         | My favorite as well.
        
       | eh_why_not wrote:
       | Interesting that he's never written a full novel, only short
       | stories.
       | 
       | I wonder if that in itself made his works higher quality: no
       | pressure for high word count, and thus economy with words and no
       | filler content.
        
         | soneca wrote:
         | What differs a short story from a novel is definitely not
         | "economy words and filler content". The two are very different
         | narratives, structure and concepts. You don't usually start
         | writing a novel and realize it's a short story or vice versa.
         | Even if you do, then you rethink your whole structure.
         | 
         | Economy with words and filler content might differentiate a
         | good from a bad novel, but not a novel and short story.
        
           | eh_why_not wrote:
           | Good point.
           | 
           | Which novels would you recommend that had no filler content?
        
             | bookofjoe wrote:
             | "A Canticle For Leibowitz"; "The Stranger"; "The Fall";
             | "Childhood's End"; "Riddley Walker"; "The Martian
             | Chronicles"; "The Sea of Tranquillity"; "Animal Farm";
             | "Catch 22"; "The Catcher in the Rye"; "A Clockwork Orange";
             | "Dr. Strangelove"; "To Kill A Mockingbird"; "The Little
             | Prince"; "The Unbearable Lightness of Being"; "Lord of the
             | Flies"; "Charlotte's Web"; "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn"; "All
             | Quiet on the Western Front"; "The World According to Garp";
             | "Invisible Man"; "Flowers for Algernon"; "Sophie's Choice";
             | "The Road"; "All the Light We Cannot See"; "The Goldfinch";
             | "Atonement"; "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-
             | Time"
        
             | marshray wrote:
             | To the other great nominations, I would add:
             | 
             | "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"
        
             | Tavore wrote:
             | What is "filler content"?
             | 
             | Because from how I understand it I'd argue there is no such
             | thing as "filler content" in novels.
        
             | soneca wrote:
             | "Filler" is very subjective. A very long chapter going on a
             | tangential introspective mourning thoughts may be viewed by
             | some, as it "doesn't move the plot forward", but it can be
             | the most pungent point of emotional connection in the
             | entire novel for others.
             | 
             | Sometimes going on talking about minor characters routine
             | is kind of the main point of an author's intention, but it
             | may read as "filler" by some.
             | 
             | Or something like Brandon Sanderson books, where his fans
             | enjoy spending more time in that universe, but make their
             | novels very long.
        
           | m_fayer wrote:
           | I think of movies as the equivalent of short stories and
           | serialized series as novels. That distinction also seems to
           | hold when it comes to adaptations.
        
         | imwm wrote:
         | evidenced by the huge variation in word count among his short
         | stories. some are a couple pages, while others are essentially
         | novellas.
        
         | karaterobot wrote:
         | Given how long he's been writing (he sold his first story in
         | 1989), the fact that he's only published 18 short stories and
         | no novels in his entire career probably says a lot about his
         | approach.
        
           | jonas21 wrote:
           | For most of that time, he was working as a technical writer
           | (at Microsoft, I believe).
        
             | lurker919 wrote:
             | I would love to read his documentation! Even if I don't
             | know anything about the topic.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | He has also written ~15 short stories over 35 years. Quality
         | over quantity.
        
       | constantinum wrote:
       | Division by Zero (short story) Is my favourite of his.
        
       | fsloth wrote:
       | Ted Chiang is extremely recommended to anyone who enjoys
       | inventive fiction. His work borders fantasy and science fiction,
       | switching effortlessly from one topic to the next, with absolute
       | mastery, being thought provoking, sophisticated, yet never stuffy
       | or boring, with his only aim to tell a good story.
       | 
       | If you like Borges, Clarke, Stephenson and others you will love
       | Mr. Chiang. Some of his writing is the best I've read in creative
       | fiction in any genre.
        
         | 7thaccount wrote:
         | His stuff is amazing. The only one I've read so far that I
         | haven't liked was the one on the virtual pets. That one seemed
         | to go on forever.
        
           | justinpombrio wrote:
           | Well the virtual pet story had two problems! The first is
           | that it seemed to go on forever, and the second was that it
           | ended before the story was complete.
        
         | wyager wrote:
         | Also strongly recommend Greg Egan, who I place in a similar
         | bucket to Chiang.
         | 
         | Egan has some books that fall into an (afaik) completely unique
         | sub-genre that I have heard described as "math-fi".
         | 
         | Some of his books are (credibly) described as a textbook
         | wrapped in a narrative veneer. E.g. he has 3 books set in a
         | universe with a ++++ metric tensor, and another book set in a
         | ++-- universe. He painstakingly rederives many details of
         | physics, chemistry, etc. to a level of detail that I've never
         | seen even in physics textbooks, and then creates a story where
         | characters in that universe discover its properties. The books
         | are good even without paying too much attention to the math,
         | but if you find that part interesting, he has detailed
         | supplemental materials on his website.
        
           | justinpombrio wrote:
           | Eactly, Eagan is "math-fi", and Borges is "philosophy-fi".
           | And yeah, what Eagan does is absolutely mind blowing. He
           | mathematically derives entire universes entirely unlike our
           | own, determines what it would be like to live in them, and
           | then writes about characters that do.
           | 
           | (And this isn't boring shit like "this world is four-
           | dimensional, so its inhabitants need more legs, woah!", this
           | is bizarre shit like "better clear the road so that we can
           | rotate the museum down it, before the sun moves on".)
        
           | mos_basik wrote:
           | I've read something like 7 egan books now but my math isn't
           | good enough to know if they're any of the four you described
           | via metric tensor (cause the wiki page on it went over my
           | head). Surely not Incandescence? Maybe Schild's Ladder?
           | Curious which ones you mean, a list of names is fine if you
           | don't want to spoil anyone.
        
             | wyager wrote:
             | The Clockwork Rocket trilogy is ++++, and Dichronauts is
             | ++--.
             | 
             | Reading these really helped my intuitive grasp of
             | relativistic mechanics.
             | 
             | Incandescence is also cool but (minimal spoilers) is more
             | or less the normal +--- metric. Not nearly as mind-bending
             | as ++++ or ++--.
        
       | _xander wrote:
       | Absolutely love 'Anxiety Is the Dizziness of Freedom' by him
        
         | RandomCitizen12 wrote:
         | +1. Possibly my favorite story ever.
        
         | superposeur wrote:
         | Reading this story inspired me to work through Joe Polchinski's
         | classic paper on the "Everett phone" [1]. The paper partially
         | answers a question I've long had about Quantum Mechanics, what
         | is so special about linearity? In a nutshell, the paper
         | demonstrates that even the tiniest bit of nonlinearity (at
         | least of a certain sort) would allow for communication between
         | branches of the wavefunction, like in the Chiang story. Super
         | deep stuff that, in my opinion, physics hasn't even fully come
         | to terms with.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Everett-Wheeler_telephone
        
       | bangonkeyboard wrote:
       | I was hoping this had meant he'd written a new story.
        
         | hrdwdmrbl wrote:
         | I would really like to know why he continues to work a day-job.
         | Does he enjoy writing technical documentation that much?
        
       | vessenes wrote:
       | I feel like the only person in scifi who doesn't LOVE Ted Chiang.
       | Don't get me wrong -- I _like_ his writing a lot. But, I often
       | feel like it 's a little 'light' -- not sure how to describe this
       | exactly.
       | 
       | I guess I'm saying he's not Philip K Dick or Stanislaw Lem, or
       | even William Gibson, but he's awarded/discussed as much.
       | 
       | I will, of course, buy his next book, short or long-form. But I'd
       | love it if he went a little higher/deeper conceptually. I think
       | he has it in him.
        
         | karaterobot wrote:
         | Oh wow! I'm late to the Ted Chiang game, having only read his
         | books last year, but I've read a lot of PDK, a fair amount of
         | Gibson, and a little bit of Lem. I think Chiang's less eager to
         | end on a grim note than they are. And maybe that's what you're
         | feeling. But I think the topics he deals with can be incredibly
         | big, and incredibly dark. For instance, _The Lifecycle of
         | Software Objects_ was so realistic, and so dismally cynical
         | about the software industry in particular, that it made me feel
         | palpable fear and pre-emptive shame for the future.
        
         | elevatedastalt wrote:
         | I get you. A lot of short stories feel a bit... empty? to me.
         | Like there's an effort to be profound but they don't get there.
        
         | poszlem wrote:
         | To me reading his work feels often more like going through a
         | news report than enjoying a short story.
        
         | phillryu wrote:
         | For me Ted Chiang short stories are like a little trip in a
         | story form. He's not the most rounded storyteller in atmosphere
         | or dialogue and rich characters, but the central idea he's
         | interested in exploring in each story often blows my mind, and
         | that seems like his end goal, like breaking open the boxes
         | we're stuck inside a little bit. He seems satisfied if he's
         | able to reach that destination concisely.
        
         | ttjjtt wrote:
         | I just want to counter balanced this by sharing love ted chiang
         | but cannot happily get through any p k dick and little Gibson
         | either. I find Chiangs work hits me deeper on a conceptual
         | level and perhaps it's that exact lightness of tone. I find
         | Dick and Gibson too affected with gravitas and a vision of
         | stylistic coolness that I do not share for me to enjoy them.
         | But that is all purely subjective preference, they're both
         | objectively fine writers
        
           | spookybones wrote:
           | I wouldn't say PKD is gravitas. He is often funny and has a
           | workingman prose. Gibson, yes. Though, I find his later
           | works, like Peripheral, less stylized and serious.
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | I used to read all the collections of "The Years Best Science
         | Fiction" by Gardner Dozois
         | 
         | I stopped reading them after a while, because it felt like
         | eating a box of assorted donuts. Very creative/stimulating but
         | too many idea changes, too short and too quick.
         | 
         | I really find novels more compelling compared to short stories.
         | They seem to have more depth, explore more adjacent things,
         | allow for character development, take the time.
         | 
         | In fact, nowadays from time to time I go too much the other
         | way. I quit at book 7 of the 20 book series because there're
         | not enough new ideas/momentum.
        
       | modernerd wrote:
       | "What's expected of us" is wonderful.
       | 
       | https://www.nature.com/articles/436150a
        
       | kaiokendev wrote:
       | Highly recommend his Tower of Babylon, I think about it
       | regularly, love his brand of sci-fi
        
         | Mobius01 wrote:
         | I re-read it often. It's one of the best short stories I've
         | read in the entire life.
        
       | loudmax wrote:
       | Ted Chiang's "Story of Your Life" was the basis for Denis
       | Villeneuve's film "Arrival". The movie isn't a literal adaption
       | of the short story, but IMHO it is very true to the original.
       | 
       | Since all of Chiang's stories are short stories or novellas,
       | they've very approachable. You're not committing to a full novel,
       | you can easily read these stories in a single sitting.
       | 
       | Ted Chiang is one of my favorite writers. I don't think I've read
       | a single story of his that I didn't find interesting, and a lot
       | of the ideas raise profound deeply engaging questions.
        
         | stavros wrote:
         | The anthology "Stories of your Life and Others" was the best
         | scifi anthology I've read.
        
           | bognition wrote:
           | Personally I love "Exhalation" a lot more
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | That's up there too, maybe it's because I read SOYLAO
             | first. I really liked both, though.
        
             | marshray wrote:
             | Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate
             | 
             | I shared this with a friend who grew up native in an
             | Arabic-speaking country. After finishing it, he said he'd
             | like to read it again but in the original Arabic. He'd
             | interpreted it as authentic from his native storytelling
             | culture.
             | 
             | Such an amazing writer.
        
             | ACS_Solver wrote:
             | I read both collections after, like others, getting
             | introduced to Ted Chiang because of Arrival, and both rank
             | highly among my favorites. Chiang can write some beautiful
             | prose (best exemplified by "The Merchant and the
             | Alchemist's Gate") and excels at taking a single
             | interesting idea and taking it somewhere fascinating. With
             | very few exceptions, his stories don't have real characters
             | - they're just named tools to express ideas - but that
             | works well with the kind of stories he writes.
             | 
             | Highlights for me from Exhalation:
             | 
             | The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate - beautifully written
             | story in the style of Arabic literature
             | 
             | The Lifecycle of Software Objects - resonated strongly with
             | me due to its criticism of the software industry, and
             | raises great ethical questions about AIs
             | 
             | The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling - I was intrigued
             | by the Tiv tribe's concepts of truth, and blown away when I
             | later found out that "mimi" and "vough" are real concepts
             | and not Chiang's imagination
             | 
             | Anxiety Is the Dizziness of Freedom - a great and plausibly
             | seeming examination of the psychological and social effects
             | of communicating with alternate realities
        
               | adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
               | I understand that it's not really a story, but The Great
               | Silence is also excellent.
        
               | m_fayer wrote:
               | Funny the last 3 are also among my highlights, but I
               | would venture that they're specifically good examples of
               | Chiang's ability to do character work. In various ways,
               | they give a marvelously detailed and lyrical picture of
               | people evolving over time, dealing with and coming to
               | peace with circumstances and adversity.
        
           | marshray wrote:
           | Tower of Babylon, man. Just wow.
        
             | pfdietz wrote:
             | Science fiction as if it had been written 4000 years ago.
        
               | marshray wrote:
               | Right?!
               | 
               | It makes me want a time machine just to go back and share
               | it just to see the reaction.
        
         | JadeNB wrote:
         | > The movie isn't a literal adaption of the short story, but
         | IMHO it is very true to the original.
         | 
         | I think it depends on what you mean. It takes the literal plot
         | in a different direction--I think necessarily, because it'd be
         | very hard to convey on film the important parts of the story
         | without something like very heavy-handed voice-over. But I
         | could go for the argument that it is true to the spirit and
         | mood of the story. (Personally, I enjoyed it--it's by far my
         | favorite Villeneuve's movies--and, as a huge Ted Chiang fan, I
         | didn't feel cheated, but neither did I feel that I'd seen a
         | very faithful adaptation.)
        
           | paxys wrote:
           | It wasn't a different direction. Everything in the story is
           | in the movie as well. The movie just contains a ton of more
           | plot and details because of course you can't just translate a
           | handful of pages of a sci-fi concept to the big screen.
        
         | ericol wrote:
         | I watched the movie first, found out who wrote it, and read the
         | book it was in.
         | 
         | I did love a lot the short story, and kind of got mad at
         | "Arrival" for some of the changes it makes to the story. But.
         | After several (SEVERAL) re watches of the movie, I got to
         | "understand" what Villeneuve was about, and I fell in love with
         | the movie as well.
         | 
         | It currently sits in probably my top 5 preferred movies to re
         | watch (Being the others both Blade Runners, About Time &
         | Notting Hill in no preferred order)
        
           | Fellshard wrote:
           | I think Villeneuve - out of the current cream-of-the-crop
           | directors - best understands how to /adapt/ for film. Chiang
           | has a masterful grasp of the short story format, in turn.
           | Both the short story and film delighted me, and both seem
           | suited well to their medium.
        
             | hehdhdjehehegwv wrote:
             | Arrival and Dune Part 1 are both really good, 10/10,
             | adaptations.
             | 
             | Dune 2 to me shows that even with an amazingly talented
             | adapter/director, that there are some limits to what can be
             | conveyed from literature to film.
             | 
             | The limit in Dune 2 comes down to the fact that much of the
             | "action" in the novel takes place via internal monologue.
             | To convey that in film ends up being very, very hard and
             | with Dune you can't escape it.
             | 
             | In my viewing of Dune 2 I thought they weren't able to
             | really show the vastness of Paul's internal journey, his
             | visions of Jihad, struggling with his place in the universe
             | as his mind is transforming. I didn't feel that was in the
             | film and made a lot of other actions and motivations more
             | confusing.
             | 
             | I'm glad we have so many ways to tell stories, and I'm
             | wholeheartedly for adaptations, but the fact that some
             | types of ideas and stories are best expressed via one
             | medium over another is something to embrace as well.
        
           | tenpies wrote:
           | I do wish to add that while Villenueve was great, to me, the
           | key man in this adaption was Eric Heisserer, who wrote the
           | screenplay.
           | 
           | There's a really good interview of the changes he made, how
           | the script came to be, and how he got Villenueve on board:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDXlaa9JpuI
           | 
           | The anecdote about the most important line in the film is
           | also really funny in that the line seems so deep and
           | philosophical, but it came about almost entirely through
           | improvisation at the last minute.
           | 
           | The whole thing is one of those rare cases where I consider
           | the original story by Ted Chiang, the script by Eric
           | Heisserer, and the film by Denis Villeneuve to all be
           | complimentary.
        
           | kubectl_h wrote:
           | I guess I should re-watch it since I read the story first,
           | then watched the movie and I had a hard time with what I
           | perceived was unnecessary monkeying with the story of the
           | daughter that I felt made the movie story less rich and
           | complex. But it's probably time to revisit both mediums.
        
           | acchow wrote:
           | As much as I enjoy the original Blade Runner, it really does
           | not feel like a _masterpiece_ the way 2049 does.
           | 
           | Note the usage of quotes from Nabokov's Pale Fire during the
           | baseline test. A few I liked:                 Do you feel
           | that there's a part of you that's missing? Interlinked.
           | Did you buy a present for the person you love? Within cells
           | interlinked.
           | 
           | * spoiler alert *
           | 
           | Joe (aka "K") has to pass the baseline test to demonstrate
           | his lack of emotional state.
           | 
           | There's a scene early on in the film where K will be giving a
           | present to his hologram love, Joi. She's the opposite of K -
           | full of emotion, joy, sadness. Joe just had a rough day,
           | comes home, and she tries to cheer him up                 Joi
           | : Would you read to me?       [gets up, crosses to table,
           | 'picks up' Nabokov's Pale Fire]        Joi : It'll make you
           | feel better.       'K' : You hate that book.
           | 
           | Yes, of course she hates that book. She is a glowing ball of
           | emotion and doesn't want to ever give that up. She's the most
           | emotional character in the whole film.
           | 
           | It's clear the film is a true labor of love from Hampton
           | Fancher and Michael Green. They put their entire being into
           | this work.
        
             | spookybones wrote:
             | I barely remember 2049. I remember so much of the original.
             | Ridley Scott and team created the world from scratch and
             | mastered the atmosphere. 2049 is very good, but it's
             | basically a requel.
        
         | chillee wrote:
         | I actually don't think that it's very true to the original -
         | arguably, it loses the entire point of the original. In
         | particular, I agree with Gwern's take (https://gwern.net/story-
         | of-your-life) that the original Story of Your Life does _not_
         | involve any time travel /precognition, while Arrival makes it
         | very clear that Louise has precognition.
         | 
         | To be clear, I quite like Arrival. I just think its message is
         | quite different from the short story.
        
           | why_at wrote:
           | Yeah I agree. I read the short story after having seen the
           | movie and I thought the language/time stuff was clearly
           | different. That's also why they changed the cause of the
           | daughter's death from a climbing accident to an illness,
           | because it wouldn't make sense for her to be killed by
           | mountain climbing if her mother could have seen it coming.
        
             | travismark wrote:
             | Disagree. I thought there's a part in the story where the
             | narrator talks about the inability to change the future.
             | she knew her daughter would die in a fall and couldn't
             | change it
        
               | why_at wrote:
               | Maybe my previous comment wasn't clear enough, since I
               | agree with you. I think both versions make sense in their
               | own context:
               | 
               | In the short story she sees all of her life
               | "simultaneously" but it all still works with our typical
               | notions of causality. The future can't influence the
               | past, and so she can't use knowledge of the future in the
               | present.
               | 
               | In the movie, she gets glimpses of the future which she
               | then uses in the present. She learns the Chinese
               | general's phone number from a memory of the future and
               | then calls him. In the movie it wouldn't have made sense
               | for her to see her daughter die in an accident and then
               | not act on that information at all, so they changed it to
               | an illness which she couldn't prevent even with
               | foreknowledge.
        
               | lmm wrote:
               | > She learns the Chinese general's phone number from a
               | memory of the future and then calls him.
               | 
               | Didn't she do something like this in the short story as
               | well? The part where she learns the non-zero-sum phrase?
               | 
               | > In the movie it wouldn't have made sense for her to see
               | her daughter die in an accident and then not act on that
               | information at all
               | 
               | It didn't make sense in the story either. I remember
               | being infuriated.
        
       | philipkglass wrote:
       | Frederik Pohl said "A good science fiction story should be able
       | to predict not the automobile but the traffic jam."
       | 
       | Chiang's stories are good SF stories in this vein -- even the
       | stories with magic. He considers the consequences of his What-If
       | hypotheticals in depth, whether they are plausible according to
       | known physics or operate on fantasy suppositions.
       | 
       | Consider his story [1] "Liking What You See: A Documentary." It's
       | about a world in which people can have their perceptions of human
       | beauty suppressed as an anti-discrimination measure. In some
       | authors' voices this would be a strident sermon about a dystopian
       | Equality Gone Too Far, or in others, about the new Utopia that
       | arises when people are judged on their actions instead of their
       | appearance. But Chiang doesn't preach to any choir. He plausibly
       | represents how people would react to this hypothetical
       | technological development without putting his thumb on the scale
       | to tell readers how to feel about it.
       | 
       | Most ideas are not as clearly bad as the Torment Nexus [2], nor
       | as clearly beneficial as the polio vaccine. I love that Chiang
       | can write about ideas that might as well be a pitch for a Black
       | Mirror episode but with much more consideration than Black Mirror
       | would treat it. His slow writing pace probably helps too.
       | 
       | [1] https://waldyrious.neocities.org/ted_chiang/liking-what-
       | you-...
       | 
       | [2] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/torment-nexus
        
       | z5h wrote:
       | As someone with aphantasia, who typically reads non-fiction and
       | watches fiction, Ted Chiang's work really stands out for me. Most
       | visual descriptions are in service to technical details, and
       | therefore they are enjoyable conceptually.
        
         | shawnc wrote:
         | Thank you! I too have aphantasia and I really appreciate this
         | comment :)
        
         | mkoubaa wrote:
         | I'm another aphant who really appreciates Chiang's writing! I
         | wonder if he is one too
        
         | theragra wrote:
         | You make me doubt myself. I can't imagine stuff with the closed
         | eyes, but when I read book I kind of can imagine stuff
         | somewhat. Is it aphantasia or not? Matter of degree?
        
           | z5h wrote:
           | Aphantasia is objectively measurable. Aphants lack a pupil
           | response to "imagining" shapes of various brightness. They
           | also lack the measurable "stress/anxiety" response to anxiety
           | provoking written passages, but not images.
           | 
           | If any part of your imagination is like the experience of
           | seeing, you probably don't have it.
        
       | leshokunin wrote:
       | If you haven't had the chance, I highly recommend his short story
       | called Understand. It'll resonate with a lot of people who are on
       | the spectrum and like to think very meta.
        
       | MattPalmer1086 wrote:
       | Slightly off topic, but I now refuse to read any web site that
       | does "malicious compliance" with cookies.
       | 
       | If my only options are "consent" or manually going down a very
       | long list unchecking everything, and don't forget to click on the
       | little "vendors" link because there's an even longer list in
       | there too... Then I give up.
       | 
       | This isnt even compliant (you have to offer a way to reject
       | easily). I don't know why they even bother; it's already illegal,
       | and is just annoying.
       | 
       | Bye!
        
         | marshray wrote:
         | IMO, discussion of website function ought to be always on-topic
         | on HN.
         | 
         | My solution is simply to open every website (that I don't
         | specifically want to be logged-in to) in incognito mode, accept
         | all cookies, and close all the windows when I'm done.
        
           | MattPalmer1086 wrote:
           | Ah, nice solution to prevent the cookies persisting. But I'd
           | rather simply not give them my attention, if they're going to
           | treat their audience with such contempt.
        
       | injuly wrote:
       | Well deserved. My top 3 Ted Chiang works:
       | 
       | 1. The merchant at the alchemist's gate. 2. What's Expected of us
       | 3. Exhalation
        
         | n4r9 wrote:
         | Thanks. I've only read Exhalation but really enjoyed it. Will
         | check out the others.
        
       | gyre007 wrote:
       | I loved Stories of Your Life and Others. It had some really great
       | stories. Exhaltation on the other I found mediocre. Stories are
       | either elaborate or very tiresome.
        
         | n4r9 wrote:
         | What did you dislike about Exhalation?
        
       | cubefox wrote:
       | Science fiction is perfectly suited for short stories. It's a way
       | to explore thought experiments, without being too constrained by
       | the possibilities of the present, while also not being able to be
       | as arbitrary as in fantasy and similar genres.
        
       | datadrivenangel wrote:
       | If you like Ted Chiang and scifi short stories, consider checking
       | out Jay Lake's Last Plane to Heaven, or Charles Stross's Wireless
       | collection.
       | 
       | Short stories are such a fantastic and frustrating format,
       | because the best ones blow your mind and leave you wanting
       | another thousand pages.
        
       | mtalantikite wrote:
       | I thought most of the authors nominated for PEN prizes this year
       | were boycotting the organization and the awards were canceled?
       | [1]. I guess Ted Chiang didn't withdraw his nomination like
       | everyone else did.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.npr.org/2024/04/23/1246578813/pen-america-
       | cancel...
        
         | anamexis wrote:
         | From your linked article:
         | 
         | > But the event was canceled when nearly half of the writers
         | and translators nominated withdrew their books from
         | consideration. The awards will still be granted to those who
         | did not withdraw.
        
           | mtalantikite wrote:
           | Looks like this is sort of a lifetime achievement award you
           | can't withdraw from. Other authors donated their winnings to
           | Palestine in protest, so maybe he will as well.
        
         | deanCommie wrote:
         | I read the letter [0] and am deeply confused.
         | 
         | For context, I agree with the basic philosophical premise. I'm
         | a Jew, but Israel is a repressive apartheid state, and while it
         | had a right to defend itself, it's approach in Gaza absolutely
         | meets the internationally accepted definition of genocide. The
         | positions of individual Jews and Israelis are on a wide
         | spectrum, but it's also not controversial to say that as far as
         | the current Israeli leadership, this genocide is not an
         | accident, not even from a lack of care. It is absolutely within
         | their goals and desires to have all Palestenians eliminated
         | from the territory administrated by Israel, and they're going
         | as far as they can without losing the international support of
         | the United States.
         | 
         | With all of that said, I have no idea what PEN has to do with
         | this. If they are endorsing it, they should stop. If they're
         | funding it, they should stop. If they're invested in
         | organizations directly supporting the Israeli government, they
         | should stop.
         | 
         | But if all they are is "an organization in the US", then their
         | tax dollars are going to fund the genocide. And every single
         | American taxpayer is equally complicit here, which is to say
         | not at all. People SHOULD be fighting for change, and
         | advocating for it. But not through empty speeches or
         | statements. Statements from PEN do not protect or save the
         | rights of Palestinians.
         | 
         | I also think this is meaningfully different from the BLM era
         | when protestors stated that silence is violence, and a lack of
         | a statement is a tacit rejection of the movement. BLM was/is
         | about an inherently American problem of systemic racism. White
         | Americans benefit from systemic racism through no action of
         | their own, so acknowledging it and at least making an effort to
         | get woke to it (the original meaning of the term) is at least a
         | necessary step to choosing to helping to dismantle it. American
         | Corporations do play a part in that.
         | 
         | But on Israel/Palestine, I just think these moves do not help
         | the cause.
         | 
         | [0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VEF-
         | Hrg8wN7WHiSljqwd9IqH...
        
           | mtalantikite wrote:
           | Yeah, you're right, this letter doesn't give a lot of
           | context, and honestly I'm only knowledgeable about the
           | context because my wife is a writer and has judged awards for
           | them in the past/we have a lot of friends in NYC lit circles.
           | 
           | One of the major things that pushed things over the edge for
           | writers affiliated with PEN is they were platforming Mayim
           | Bialik [1]. They're an organization founded around free
           | speech and protecting writers and they hadn't made any
           | statements about the journalists killed in Gaza. For an
           | organization that is often virtue signaling for (progressive)
           | political causes their silence was pretty loud for many
           | writers that interact with them as literary community
           | members. They had even canceled events that featured stories
           | of Palestinians due to not wanting to stir controversy. And
           | then they go and platform Bialik and I think a lot of people
           | just turned on them in frustration at that point.
           | 
           | [1] https://lithub.com/two-novelists-have-cut-ties-with-pen-
           | over...
        
       | gallerdude wrote:
       | For someone who loves Ted Chiang, what adjacent writers would
       | people recommend? I tried Borges, and I like him, he just seems
       | less accessible and intentionally opaque at points.
        
       | gtsnexp wrote:
       | I wish he would write more often, especially if he decides to
       | tackle non-fiction using his distinct prose style. His
       | creativity, combined with factual writing, could make for a
       | deep/transformative read.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-13 23:01 UTC)