On 15/04/23 13:40, Tony Nance wrote:
> On Sunday, April 9, 2023 at 10:06:11 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> Camp Concentration by Thomas M. Disch
>>
>> A conscientious objector is given the opportunity to materially
>> advance science. Shame the research is probably junk. Too bad
>> participation is lethal. USA! USA!
>>
>> https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/through-the-dark-cloud-shining
>>
>
> So........the night before you posted this review, I finished a book[1] and
> went downstairs to figure out what to start reading next. I grabbed two
> books, thinking to read Flare (by Zelazny & Thomas)[2] before reading
> Camp Concentration. When your review showed up the next morning,
> I figured "serendipity" and swapped the order to read Camp Concentration
> first.
>
> I just finished the Disch about 30 minutes ago, then read your review, and
> also read through some reviews on Goodreads. In this case, the reviews
> very much helped me digest this book better.

I read James' review after finishing the book but have not read any
further reviews. I appreciate his reviews which are concise, interesting
but clinical. I would prefer more opinion other than comment on what is
not politically correct.

> Although it is short, it took me three different sessions to finish, in
> roughly this way:
> 1st night = fascination with part 1;
> 2nd night = wow, what the hell is this part 2? I'm gonna put it down for a bit;

I almost threw it at the wall.

> 3rd night = well, well, well...hm...part 2 turned out to be pretty intriguing.

Yes. I am glad I persevered.

> In two specific ways, it reminds me of much of the Gene Wolfe I've read:
> 1) While there are some terms and references I did catch, I'm sure there
> are many that I did not.

I'm sure that I missed an awful lot and that much of the philosophy and
religious references went whoosh!

> 2) I suspect this will stick with me a while, even though I'm not yet sure
> what I think about it.
>
> It's well written, memorable, thought provoking, I'm glad I read it... but is it
> enjoyable? Does "enjoyable" even matter?

I am ninety nine per cent certain that Disch had been taking Pallidum
for some months before writing it.
I loved it even though I did not enjoy the episode of his insanely early
excessive brilliance. Perhaps there was too much philosophy, religion
and literary references which were more interesting than enjoyable but I
have recently finished Ada Palmer's Will to Battle, the third of four of
Terra Ignota which was very heavy going and I was looking for a pot
boiler, something light so I was biased to begin with and was not
expecting such depth and, yes, to me enjoyable does matter.

> I very rarely re-read any fiction - ever. But while this is fresh, I may re-read it,
> or perhaps just re-read certain parts.

I do re-read fiction but don't know if I would re-read this even though
it is short but as you said, well written, so maybe.

>
> Tony

On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 1:59:25 AM UTC-4, Titus G wrote:
> On 15/04/23 13:40, Tony Nance wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 9, 2023 at 10:06:11 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> >> Camp Concentration by Thomas M. Disch
> >>
> >> A conscientious objector is given the opportunity to materially
> >> advance science. Shame the research is probably junk. Too bad
> >> participation is lethal. USA! USA!
> >>
> >> https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/through-the-dark-cloud-shining
> >>
> >
> > So........the night before you posted this review, I finished a book[1] and
> > went downstairs to figure out what to start reading next. I grabbed two
> > books, thinking to read Flare (by Zelazny & Thomas)[2] before reading
> > Camp Concentration. When your review showed up the next morning,
> > I figured "serendipity" and swapped the order to read Camp Concentration
> > first.
> >
> > I just finished the Disch about 30 minutes ago, then read your review, and
> > also read through some reviews on Goodreads. In this case, the reviews
> > very much helped me digest this book better.
>
> I read James' review after finishing the book but have not read any
> further reviews. I appreciate his reviews which are concise, interesting
> but clinical. I would prefer more opinion other than comment on what is
> not politically correct.
>
> > Although it is short, it took me three different sessions to finish, in
> > roughly this way:
> > 1st night = fascination with part 1;
> > 2nd night = wow, what the hell is this part 2? I'm gonna put it down for a bit;
>
> I almost threw it at the wall.
>
> > 3rd night = well, well, well...hm...part 2 turned out to be pretty intriguing.
>
> Yes. I am glad I persevered.
>
> > In two specific ways, it reminds me of much of the Gene Wolfe I've read:
> > 1) While there are some terms and references I did catch, I'm sure there
> > are many that I did not.
>
> I'm sure that I missed an awful lot and that much of the philosophy and
> religious references went whoosh!
>
> > 2) I suspect this will stick with me a while, even though I'm not yet sure
> > what I think about it.
> >
> > It's well written, memorable, thought provoking, I'm glad I read it... but is it
> > enjoyable? Does "enjoyable" even matter?
>
> I am ninety nine per cent certain that Disch had been taking Pallidum
> for some months before writing it.
> I loved it even though I did not enjoy the episode of his insanely early
> excessive brilliance. Perhaps there was too much philosophy, religion
> and literary references which were more interesting than enjoyable but I
> have recently finished Ada Palmer's Will to Battle, the third of four of
> Terra Ignota which was very heavy going and I was looking for a pot
> boiler, something light so I was biased to begin with and was not
> expecting such depth and, yes, to me enjoyable does matter.
>
> > I very rarely re-read any fiction - ever. But while this is fresh, I may re-read it,
> > or perhaps just re-read certain parts.
>
> I do re-read fiction but don't know if I would re-read this even though
> it is short but as you said, well written, so maybe.

As it turns out, I haven't re-read any parts of it, and it seems unlikely
that I will at this point. I do think I'll read another by Disch some time,
though.

Thanks for circling back to this - I appreciate your thoughts.
- Tony

On 28/05/23 13:09, Tony Nance wrote:
snip

>> I do re-read fiction but don't know if I would re-read this even though
>> it is short but as you said, well written, so maybe.
>
> As it turns out, I haven't re-read any parts of it, and it seems unlikely
> that I will at this point. I do think I'll read another by Disch some time,
> though.
>
> Thanks for circling back to this - I appreciate your thoughts.
> - Tony

No. Thank you. I wouldn't have read it without reading your reply to
James' review. Even though the writing style reflects 1960s Science
Fiction, it was unique enough not to be "dated". It was a most
fascinating unpredictable short read with unexpected plot twists,
recommended.