Scan barcode
A review by akemi_666
The Player of Games by Iain M. Banks
5.0
So, imagine if America was actually a class-less society, and that the CIA and military industry complex, instead of supporting foreign dictators through brutal coups unto American capitalist hegemony, actually intervened out of humanitarian desire (as they often/always present themselves as doing).
Essentially, this book is an investigation into two forms of hegemony: that of force and that of consent. Imperialism through the lens of Gramsci.
Because the Culture is a post-scarcity society, there is no economic inventive for violent expansion — for the conquest of ever more resources, markets and/or labourers — and yet, the idealism of compassion — that ideological front of past imperialist ventures — is made a reality through the collapsing of the economic brutality that is capitalism.
The book then posits the question. How does a technologically and culturally advance socialist society, gain hegemony over (what it sees as) more violent and cruel societies, without undermining the autonomy of those said societies? How does one instigate collectively-determined bottom-up change, from what is, invariable, an administrative top-down ('enlightened') perspective?
Well, apparently not that differently from the CIA. Thanks Iain, you fucking cynic.
—
But you know, the book isn't actually about all that. That's simply the ideological front of the Culture. What this book is interested in is desire — arbitrary, restless, endless desire — the flux of becoming that moves us, regardless of whether we consciously choose to or not, or, whether we think we chose to or not.
The desire of multiple players, on multiple playing fields, interpellated and positioned by one another, differentially aware of one another, and sitting at the very top of them all, the Culture, presenting itself as a beacon of humanity, when in actuality, the most obscene, calculated and cruelly arbitrary of them all.
The Culture, an assemblage of hyperintelligent beings, who move beyond the violent imperialism of old, not out of compassion, but out of boredom, because it's too easy to slaughter and oppress, too predictable the eventual rebellion, the totalitarian reaction, the societal collapse. The Culture, prides itself on peaceful conquest, because of the challenge.
The Culture as the ultimate player of games, capable of mobilising the other's desire, sterile and cold at the moment of the other's realisation that their own desire could be so totally captured, utilised and discarded.
Essentially, this book is an investigation into two forms of hegemony: that of force and that of consent. Imperialism through the lens of Gramsci.
Because the Culture is a post-scarcity society, there is no economic inventive for violent expansion — for the conquest of ever more resources, markets and/or labourers — and yet, the idealism of compassion — that ideological front of past imperialist ventures — is made a reality through the collapsing of the economic brutality that is capitalism.
The book then posits the question. How does a technologically and culturally advance socialist society, gain hegemony over (what it sees as) more violent and cruel societies, without undermining the autonomy of those said societies? How does one instigate collectively-determined bottom-up change, from what is, invariable, an administrative top-down ('enlightened') perspective?
Well, apparently not that differently from the CIA. Thanks Iain, you fucking cynic.
—
But you know, the book isn't actually about all that. That's simply the ideological front of the Culture. What this book is interested in is desire — arbitrary, restless, endless desire — the flux of becoming that moves us, regardless of whether we consciously choose to or not, or, whether we think we chose to or not.
The desire of multiple players, on multiple playing fields, interpellated and positioned by one another, differentially aware of one another, and sitting at the very top of them all, the Culture, presenting itself as a beacon of humanity, when in actuality, the most obscene, calculated and cruelly arbitrary of them all.
The Culture, an assemblage of hyperintelligent beings, who move beyond the violent imperialism of old, not out of compassion, but out of boredom, because it's too easy to slaughter and oppress, too predictable the eventual rebellion, the totalitarian reaction, the societal collapse. The Culture, prides itself on peaceful conquest, because of the challenge.
The Culture as the ultimate player of games, capable of mobilising the other's desire, sterile and cold at the moment of the other's realisation that their own desire could be so totally captured, utilised and discarded.