Paranoid science fiction author Philip K. Dick believed that Stanisław Lem was not a single person, but a collective of authors operating under the direction of the Polish communist government. He suspected Lem's work was being used to disseminate communist propaganda and infiltrate Western intellectual circles. Dick's accusations, fueled by his own mental health struggles and Cold War anxieties, stemmed from the difficulty he had contacting Lem directly, the perceived uniformity of Lem's diverse output, and the rapid translation of his works. Dick's theory extended to the idea that Lem's writings aimed to control public opinion and that Lem himself was a functionary tasked with critiquing Western science fiction. While unsupported by evidence, this episode reveals much about Dick's mindset and the sociopolitical context of the time.
In 1964, Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges met Marvin Minsky, a pioneer of artificial intelligence, at a symposium. Borges, initially skeptical and even dismissive of the field, viewing machines as incapable of true creativity, engaged in a lively debate with Minsky. This encounter exposed a clash between Borges's humanistic, literary perspective, rooted in symbolism and metaphor, and Minsky's scientific, computational approach. While Borges saw literature as inherently human, Minsky believed machines could eventually replicate and even surpass human intellectual abilities, including writing. The meeting highlighted fundamental differences in how they viewed the nature of intelligence, consciousness, and creativity.
HN commenters generally enjoyed the anecdote about Borges' encounter with McCulloch, finding it charming and insightful. Several appreciated the connection drawn between Borges' fictional worlds and the burgeoning field of AI, particularly the discussion of symbolic representation and the limitations of formal systems. Some highlighted Borges' skepticism towards reducing consciousness to mere computation, echoing his literary themes. A few commenters provided additional context about McCulloch's work and personality, while others offered further reading suggestions on related topics like cybernetics and the history of AI. One commenter noted the irony of Borges, known for his love of libraries, being introduced to the future of information processing.
The Paris Review blog post questions Robert Frost's status as a great American poet. While acknowledging his popularity and iconic status, the author argues that Frost's work is often simplistic, sentimental, and technically unadventurous compared to his modernist contemporaries. They suggest his folksy persona and accessible language contributed to his widespread appeal, overshadowing potentially more deserving poets. Ultimately, the post provokes readers to reconsider Frost's place in the literary canon, suggesting his reputation might be more product of skillful self-promotion and cultural circumstances than genuine artistic merit.
Hacker News users largely disagree with the Paris Review blog post criticizing Robert Frost. Many commenters find the author's analysis shallow, pedantic, and lacking in understanding of Frost's work, particularly his use of sound and meter. Some suggest the author is projecting their own preferences onto Frost and failing to appreciate his skill and impact. Several users defend Frost's accessibility and emotional depth, citing specific poems as examples. A few commenters agree with some of the author's points about Frost's simplistic themes, but the overall sentiment is strongly in favor of Frost's poetic merit. Several commenters also criticize the tone of the article, describing it as pretentious and unnecessarily provocative.
The article "Who's Afraid of Tom Wolfe?" explores the mixed critical reception of Tom Wolfe's fiction, particularly focusing on A Man in Full. While acknowledging Wolfe's journalistic talent and cultural influence, the author dissects the criticisms leveled against his novels: simplistic prose, cartoonish characters, and sprawling, unwieldy plots. The piece ultimately suggests that the negative reactions stem from a discomfort with Wolfe's satirical portrayal of societal elites and his embrace of realism, which challenges prevailing literary trends favoring minimalism and postmodernism. Wolfe's ambition and popularity, the article implies, threaten the established literary guard, leading to a dismissive attitude toward his work despite its insightful social commentary.
HN commenters largely agree that Wolfe's decline in quality began after A Man in Full, with some attributing it to his reliance on formulaic social satire and others to his adoption of a more conservative viewpoint. Several suggest that his earlier works like The Right Stuff and The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test remain classics of New Journalism, praising Wolfe's immersive reporting and energetic prose. Some counter that Wolfe's work was always shallow, stylistic flourish over substance, and enjoyed more popularity than deserved. A few commenters discuss his influence on other writers and the legacy of New Journalism more broadly. One highly upvoted comment notes the irony of Wolfe, who mocked academia, now being the subject of academic analysis.
Fraser McDonald's diary entry in the London Review of Books reflects on the centenary of Nan Shepherd's birth and the enduring power of her nature writing, particularly The Living Mountain. McDonald contrasts Shepherd's intimate, embodied experience of the Cairngorms with the more detached, scientific approach of contemporary nature writers like Robert Macfarlane. He emphasizes Shepherd's focus on direct sensory perception and her rejection of anthropomorphism, highlighting her unique ability to merge with the mountain landscape and find a profound sense of belonging within it. The piece also touches upon Shepherd's other works, including her poetry and novels, and her dedication to representing the distinct character of Northeast Scotland.
HN commenters largely appreciate the diary excerpt focusing on Nan Shepherd's nature writing and her connection to the Cairngorms. Several share personal experiences of reading Shepherd's work, particularly "The Living Mountain," praising its evocative descriptions and philosophical insights. Some discuss the challenges of modern nature writing, contrasting it with Shepherd's focus on immersive observation and internal reflection. A few commenters also touch on the beauty of the Cairngorms themselves, recommending visits and sharing related resources. The overall sentiment is one of admiration for Shepherd's writing and the power of nature to inspire deep connection.
Hélène de Beauvoir, younger sister of Simone, was a talented painter whose career was often overshadowed by her famous sibling. Though she moved in the same intellectual circles as Jean-Paul Sartre and Picasso, who even painted her portrait, Hélène forged her own artistic path. This article highlights her skill as a portraitist, capturing the nuances of her subjects' personalities, and celebrates her independent spirit, which led her to choose a different, less conventional life than her sister's. Despite facing sexism within the art world and familial complexities, Hélène's dedication to painting and her unique artistic vision deserve recognition and rediscovery.
Several Hacker News commenters express surprise at not knowing about Hélène de Beauvoir, with some noting that Simone de Beauvoir's fame overshadowed her sister. A few discuss the common phenomenon of siblings of famous individuals being overlooked. One commenter questions the framing of Hélène as "forgotten," pointing out her successful art career and suggesting the article aims to capitalize on Simone's name. Others find the dynamic between the sisters fascinating, particularly Hélène's seemingly more traditional life choices compared to Simone's. There's also some discussion of the article's mention of a supposed romantic relationship between Hélène and Picasso.
Summary of Comments ( 34 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43660520
Hacker News users discuss the validity and context of Philip K. Dick's accusations against Stanislaw Lem. Some commenters point out Dick's documented mental health struggles and drug use, suggesting his claims should be viewed through that lens. Others highlight the political climate of the Cold War, where such accusations were common and often leveraged for personal gain or to silence dissenting voices. A few commenters defend Dick's paranoia, suggesting that while perhaps misdirected toward Lem specifically, his concerns about censorship and state control of information were valid in the context of the Eastern Bloc. Several commenters express interest in learning more about the historical and political backdrop of this literary feud. Finally, some lament the sensationalist title of the article, arguing it detracts from a more nuanced understanding of the situation.
The Hacker News post titled "Philip K. Dick: Stanisław Lem Is a Communist Committee" generated a moderate amount of discussion with a mixture of perspectives on the accusations Philip K. Dick made against Stanislaw Lem.
Several commenters focused on the context surrounding Dick's accusations, highlighting his documented mental health struggles and paranoia, particularly during the period when he made these claims. They suggest that his accusations should be viewed within this context, acknowledging the possibility that they were influenced by his mental state rather than reflecting objective reality. Some commenters expressed sympathy for Dick while also emphasizing the importance of not taking his claims at face value.
Another line of discussion explored the political climate of the time, noting the Cold War tensions and the prevalence of surveillance and suspicion. Commenters pointed out how such an environment could exacerbate existing paranoia and contribute to the formation of conspiracy theories. Some also discussed the challenges of verifying or refuting such accusations, given the complexities of international relations and the limited access to information during that era.
A few commenters expressed skepticism about Lem's work, echoing some of Dick's sentiments, though not necessarily endorsing his specific conspiracy theory. They questioned the depth and originality of Lem's writing, with one commenter suggesting it felt formulaic.
However, other commenters defended Lem and his work, praising his intellectual depth, philosophical insights, and literary skill. They argued that Dick's accusations were unfounded and unfair, possibly stemming from professional jealousy or misunderstanding.
Some of the most compelling comments provided historical context, linking to primary sources such as Dick's letters and FBI files, which offered further insight into his state of mind and the circumstances surrounding his accusations. These comments enriched the discussion by grounding it in documented evidence.
A few commenters also explored the broader themes of censorship and intellectual freedom, reflecting on the pressures faced by writers in different political systems.
Overall, the discussion on Hacker News provides a nuanced view of the controversy, acknowledging Dick's struggles while also defending Lem's literary reputation. The comments encourage critical thinking about the accusations, urging readers to consider the context and avoid drawing hasty conclusions. The most insightful comments provide valuable historical context and encourage further exploration of the topic.