dinguini's review
reflective
fast-paced
3.5
The thesis, though articulated in a roundabout way, is that art/literature produced by people living through a climate crisis will be inevitably imbued with the experience of that crisis, regardless of intention, because the ever-unfolding consequences of that crisis constitute the reality of anyone's experiences, perceptions, understandings, impressions today. It therefore clambers through various forms and genres to seek those references to the crisis that its thesis implores must be there. I think the most important conceptual takeaways from the introduction that the reader should take with them into the rest of the book are the recognition of climate change as a hyperobject, and the mechanics of Queer film theory. Though only mentioned briefly, these conceptual tools enableBould (and the reader) to take alternate readings of various books/films through a recognition of climate change as a system made up of many different parts (including capitalism, inequality, petroculture, environmental collapse etc) that are incomprehensible at once, but whose influence can be acknowledged respectively, and therefore can be attributed to some level of climate anxiety where they appear in the works cited.
als_adventures's review
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.75
I think i enjoyed this. Started off well by focusing on how climate change and nature seeps into everything we do. I think it lost its way a little towards the end. Some interesting sections and lots more books to read off the back of it.
maurawilson's review
slow-paced
0.5
So boring and not what I wanted it to be. His references are old and irrelevant.
octavia_cade's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
3.0
I have to admit, I enjoyed the wide variety of primary texts here - everything from Sharknado to Amitav Ghosh to The Fast and the Furious - but I remain wholly unconvinced by the author's thesis. I'm actually reviewing this for Strange Horizons, so a full review will be up there shortly, but in a nutshell: there's an awful lot of bullshitting here, and I say that as someone who has done their academic share of it. Don't get me wrong, it's entertaining bullshit, and Bould's prose is for the most part lively and opinionated, with minor rambles into academic turgidity, but it seems to me, by the end, that he's overlooked an obvious counterargument. I can understand why, goodness knows I too am baffled by the levels of indifference people can display to our depressingly ongoing apocalypse, but wishful thinking doesn't make something so, and it's clear to me, at least, that Bould is wishing hard.
frasersimons's review
4.0
With such a short page count, you can imagine it’s near impossible to provide a definitive thesis on the subject. But I think the point is still pretty well made through the short hand of literature and visual media.
Essentially, it boils down to the notion that within culture, regardless of specific intent, there is a climate fiction through-line in contemporary fiction and media, though even further back is probable. Dystopia or utopia, mere visual aesthetic or otherwise, there is knot of anxiety in the cultural consciousness around climate effects.
While some properties combat this with popular delusions—an amusing correlation being the fast and furious franchise, literally making petrol fuelled fantasias before the oil runs dry or everyone dies; a product trying to milk every last Penny from the people denying reality and constantly wish to imagine that what we consume for entertainment has no basis in reality. As if it could actually be divorced.
The author goes into how the framing of climate fiction in particular is curious as well. Authors who don’t classify their works and others as “cli-fi” often use motifs that specifically invoke environmental changes from climate change to great effect. So when can or should a story be “about” climate effects and change?
Though consumers don’t want to acknowledge the realities of the crisis, it bleeds through into art and politics and entertainment regardless, subconsciously. I think that’s quite true. And the attempt to sketch a few salient points ends up being extremely entertaining to read. Short; punchy; conversational, yet deploying specific jargon and diction, the piece walks an effective line between making an argument and keeping the attention and accessibility of the text.
Essentially, it boils down to the notion that within culture, regardless of specific intent, there is a climate fiction through-line in contemporary fiction and media, though even further back is probable. Dystopia or utopia, mere visual aesthetic or otherwise, there is knot of anxiety in the cultural consciousness around climate effects.
While some properties combat this with popular delusions—an amusing correlation being the fast and furious franchise, literally making petrol fuelled fantasias before the oil runs dry or everyone dies; a product trying to milk every last Penny from the people denying reality and constantly wish to imagine that what we consume for entertainment has no basis in reality. As if it could actually be divorced.
The author goes into how the framing of climate fiction in particular is curious as well. Authors who don’t classify their works and others as “cli-fi” often use motifs that specifically invoke environmental changes from climate change to great effect. So when can or should a story be “about” climate effects and change?
Though consumers don’t want to acknowledge the realities of the crisis, it bleeds through into art and politics and entertainment regardless, subconsciously. I think that’s quite true. And the attempt to sketch a few salient points ends up being extremely entertaining to read. Short; punchy; conversational, yet deploying specific jargon and diction, the piece walks an effective line between making an argument and keeping the attention and accessibility of the text.
iliapop's review
1.0
An indulgent and frustrating work of exegesis – Bould takes novels and films almost at random and reads them radically (with little regard to authorial intent) to provide tenuous connections to climate change. So the book is less an exploration of the unconsious fear of climate change underlying contemporary culture, and more about Bould's own conscious efforts to find that fear in every article of culture he chooses. His argument is that such readings, if they become mainstream (a big if), will help fortify resolve to address the crisis. It's a claim I don't find particularly convincing – there are probably better ways to inspire action on the climate. On that, it's notable that Bould's broad-brush depiction of the failures of governments and businesses, which might help raise the reader's consciousness on the climate emergency, are not footnoted at all, in contrast to the sections analysing culture, which are densely, sometimes pointlessly, footnoted (there's no need for so many ibids...)
I'll admit that I find Bould's approach to criticism (always a risk, no final proof), to be ultimately unsatisfying. The notion that all readings are equal is a radical one, but I think it leaves the practice at a dead end. For me the patient work of excavating authorial intent is more fruitful, but I'm prepared to look past this if the readings are at least interesting. I don't think the book succeeds in this department either, however. Bould spends far too much time describing the works he's supposed to be analysing, and only briefly ties those descriptions to an argument. The book discursive nature makes it feel longer than it is, and frequently leaves you unsure of the point Bould is trying to make. To be honest, my eyes started glazing over towards the end.
I'll admit that I find Bould's approach to criticism (always a risk, no final proof), to be ultimately unsatisfying. The notion that all readings are equal is a radical one, but I think it leaves the practice at a dead end. For me the patient work of excavating authorial intent is more fruitful, but I'm prepared to look past this if the readings are at least interesting. I don't think the book succeeds in this department either, however. Bould spends far too much time describing the works he's supposed to be analysing, and only briefly ties those descriptions to an argument. The book discursive nature makes it feel longer than it is, and frequently leaves you unsure of the point Bould is trying to make. To be honest, my eyes started glazing over towards the end.
More...