What I find fascinating about the anatomy of the Culture novels is the dissonance between Banks’s straightforward statements about the Culture and certain recurrent features of the stories he writes. Banks talks about how “nice” the Culture is, and yet we see hidden cruelties and open desires for universal domination. He clearly envisions the overcoming of scarcity as the signal achievement of the civilization made by the Minds, and yet he focuses time and again on objects of unfulfilled desire. He is aware that the very language of the Culture is a subtle but immensely powerful training in “correct” ideology.To some extent these oddities are … the inevitable consequence of the decision to write novels about the Culture. It is not possible to come up with stories as such about people who are perfectly nice and can have everything they want instantly. But one might also say that people of whom no stories can be told are not really people in any sense recognizable to us; and the lives that they experience are not lives in any sense recognizable to us.
The best crafted of the 'Culture' novels is probably Use of Weapons, although Look to Windward gives the fullest sense of Banks's technological, social, and moral vision.
I think the "Culture" novels are hard to read. I prefer Peter Hamilton's "Commonwealth" (Pandora's Star, Judas Unchained) and "Void" novels to be much easier and more enjoyable to read.
They are both outstanding writers/universes. If you like ether I also recommend Scalazi's "Old Mans War" trilogy.
The Culture can indeed be conceived as a sort of “computer-aided” anarchy. In this perspective, the Culture cycle can also be taken as a very interesting way to develop philosophical and political reflections on the potential role of “intelligent” machines in an advanced society: http://yannickrumpala.wordpress.com/2010/01/14/anarchy_in_a_world_of_machines/
Comments are closed.