Reviews and Comments

To start off 2025, I wanted to read a gelderloos essay because I find his writing usually focuses on posi, optimist, and big picture topics and I had just got my hands on this pocket book.

The title essay is broken into 3 sections, starting off with a look at formal and informal formats and trying to suggest when and how these different forms support a struggle, and when adherence or critique of any one form will hinter an expansive struggle.

Second section looks what keeps people going, keeps people around and in the scene, and has people burning out. Mostly it focuses in the ideas and dynamics that create that inner fire people have to push forward against opposition and resistance.

The third section looks at community, which in this content really is an exploration of power dynamics -- formal or informal -- within a scene, how they play out, are acknowledged or ignored. It is definitely an argument for the inevitability of power and specialization but that there is so many direct or nuanced ways to confront toxic dynamics if they begin to do harm.

Overall I liked the essays, the parts that get really granular about organization were alright, and there was references without explanation to lessons learned and experiences from Barcelona social struggles that I wish had been worked into the essay.

There was little bits that didn't jive with me, a section on spirituality, a new term for privilege called "zones of whiteness" and generally interesting discussions of informal power and gender dynamics, as these seem to be bigger contradictions on the Barcelona scene than race, sexuality, class or ability. (I am sceptical this is the case, but rather that it's a certain uniformity on these other topics that has the essay delve into the less.)

There is a second essay, which puts forward a critique of equality, in a similar vain to critiques of democracy, justice which groups like crimethinc or other Anglo authors have written more extensively about. The main thing in that essay was the specialisation in some tasks was useful, and generalization of reproductive labour was necessary.

My final thoughts -- on the design and publishing side of things -- was just that it looked beautiful, very legible but there was desperate need of a copy editor or second set of eyes before publishing the first edition. There is some were italicized "compa" text that comes up every time those string of letters appears in the text. The footnotes lack numbers for most of the book and one of the section titles was copy and pasted and is wrong. I found all this kind of distracting while reading it and can't not mention it here.

Would recommend, check it out. Not for the purest of any sectarian anarchist persuasion but perhaps they could benefit from reading with an open mind.

I really liked this book when it started out. A historical fiction looking at new York during the aids crisis from the perspective of a young gay black kids. It had a ney York specific star studded cast with significant enemies and hero's of the gay and civil rights movements and Republicans represented. I loved the world building and the significant cruising spots, bath houses and gay/fetish clubs name dropped in it.

But there was so many downsides I often encounter with literature from a pretty left of center perspective on grassroots politics. There was icon and quotable lines, and a strong beginning third of the book but as they tried to represent struggle, non violence, political struggle and the gay agenda it really fell apart for me and had me almost hate reading until the end.

I wish I could rate this a 4 star and a 1 star at the same time because I felt like so conflicted about the book as a whole piece in the end.

So I've been a big fan of the shining movie and wanted to see how the book told the story cause I heard that a) Stephen King didn't like the movie b) the story was different.

So considering that I felt like I was reading a story I really enjoyed specifically to appreciate the differences. At points it felt like a slog, with date rusty and clumsy politics and such. But some of the differences I really appreciated about the book included the greater sympathetic lens we view jack Torrence through, his suicidal tendencies, struggles with alcohol, and love for danny cast him in a much more sympathetic light, which makes his descent into unhinged murderous rage much more disturbing and tragic.

The shining and magic of the world is also much more prevalent and explored and even the jump scares and horrors focus on hornets, hedges, anthropomorphic ghouls, and possession than the blood tidal waves, and creepy twins that are so iconic from the film.

Definitely better appreciate all the liberties that were taken with the film and world building shoved aside that make up the novel. I can see why Stephen King felt antagonistic to the film, and appreciate the story better for it all.

But all in all, don't think I really like Stephen King's writings that much, this being my first read, and might just stick to how pop culture interprets and bastardizes his works in the world of b-rate horror films.

Some things are just better seen than read.

Ok, this book was very fun and gave me some of those excitement in the streets feels at moments I am just always there for. Going in blind to the story, it took me way to long to feel invested in the story, it being fantasy and starting off with a tale about god, I was pretty much ready to swipe left on this one. But then the world came into focus and I was hooked.

I read a review that said in the fantasy world, it's hip to be exploring the magic/creatures/polygod world's through a lens of the industrial revolution rather than bronze or medieval developments. And within this modern trend this is Adrian Tchaikovsky's contribution to that.

I couldn't help but map Marx's capital onto this world, updated by my stronger and stronger appreciation of Tchaikovsky's work and left politics. We have main characters from the factory works, lumpen proles, sex workers, students, immigrants, and heretic theologians. The book explores a world colonized by an analogue of Roman Catholic conservatism and empire. There is even a parallel of Marx's theory of dead-labour embodied in commodities as magic embed in objects, which lends them value and can be distilled and extracted to produce further value.

Definitely a strong nationalist anti-colonialism bent to the societal tensions, with nostalgia and ghosts of feudal ethnic powers and the folk cultures and traditions lost to urbanization and proletarianization.

Reading it as a Marxist, one would be happy by its interpretation of struggle, class and modernization with greater heed paid to the lumpen proles and gender. Reading it as an anarchist, there are critiques to be made around the appeal of nationalism, hierarchy, and power as little fiefdoms and warlords struggle to remain dominant above and sometimes oblivious to the peoples struggles in the streets.

I would highly recommend this book, 1 of 2 in the series as of yet, as a fun read that gets your heart racing while both escaping from this world to better view it as an outsider.

Probably gonna stay in my top 5 of 2024!