site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   2424 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for October 11, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So, what are you reading?

I'm attempting Ahmed's Archaeology of Babel: The Colonial Foundation of the Humanities, so far a seemingly interesting open access find, interesting because it seems critical of common names in anti-colonial thought, who he thinks have adopted colonial forms of thinking in philology.

The philological revolution against anciens régimes in both East and West turned immediately, in other words, into the rule of this historical consciousness, which was consequently identified with human liberation. Philology still possesses that identity in Erich Auerbach’s and Edward Said’s dialectically opposed concepts of comparatism. Colonialism’s first trick is to make language appear to be the colonizer’s possession. Its second trick, per Jacques Derrida, is the idea of “liberation,” which internalizes the colonizer’s concept of language within the colonized. As the chapters that follow demonstrate, this colonial trick explains phenomena as apparently disparate and politically opposed as language-based racism, Islamic fundamentalism, Hindu nationalism, and the global discourses of environmentalism and indigeneity, all of which descend from colonial philology.

I'm terribly behind this year. I set my goals for the year at 80 rather than 100+ because I'm working full time and was finishing a masters degree. But then last week I thought fuck it I am not going to have the first year of my (remembered) life where I read less than 100 books. So now I need to finish another 20 something books in 2.5 months. To try to get myself back into things I picked up the first Mrs Polifax/Pollifax spy novel and its exactly the kind of light read I was looking for. Think Agatha Christie writes a spy novel about an old lady from NJ in 1970. What many cozy writers don't duplicate about Christie is the exoticism/escapism and the heroine has a sort of aggressive charm that mostly gets her out of trouble. I've also been slowing on my wheel of time reread, I'm more than a week into book 4 and still at 25%. Sadly book 4 seems to be the beginning of the saggy middle for the series, i'm not looking forward to the three fold land or white cloaks storylines in this book. I'm rereading Bleeding London, which I read once for a school class, it mostly just makes me sad for the London that is lost. Also more Simon Rich because they are quick and snacky and often make me laugh. Books that have fallen by the wayside - May Sarton's At 70. I have this one on my phone so I get a page or two done every day or two but I doubt I'm absorbing it at that rate. Just not as writerly of a journal as her previous work or the journals of nin / woolf. The Final Empire - I like Sanderson but I don't love him, I'm not sure Mistborn is really in the cards for me. Wizards guide to defensive baking - cute I guess? but I'm not as charmed by humorous fantasy as I was in the days of Pratchett.

How do you find time to read so much?

I remember why I read less, because when I do read I'm a fucking addict. I started and finished Will of the Many (240,000 words) by James Islington on Saturday. My girlfriend already had the second book Strength of the Few, which I got a copy of on Sunday and am now 75% of the way through.

It's decent. It really reminds me of Sanderson's style. Which apparently is because Mistborn inspired Islington to become an author. However Islington writes way worse characters than BSandy. His main character is 100% a Gary Stu, and unlike Kvothe there isn't really excuses about unreliable narrators, deeper threads, or deliberate embellishments that are applicable. However the world building is good, I like the twist at the end of WotM, not one that I've seen in other literature, it's an interesting concept. I think the roman-esque world building is definitely designed to appeal to the male reader. The plot is good overarchingly (strategic) but is definitely bogged down by his bad characters, with their unbelievable interactions with each other (tactic).

I need to discuss it with the GF tonight because she read WotM a bit ago, as thought it was merely ok, whereas I thirsted for the second book to understand the worldbuilding ramifications of the ending twist. I think there is also an interesting portrayal of democracy philosophically.

I just finished reading Hardboiled Wonderland and the End of the World by Murakami. Started it like a year ago, stopped reading at the 70% mark. The vibes are pretty good. It's effectively two stories in one. One's sort of a detective style story, the other feels like a dark fairy tale. The prose in the dark fairy tale part is really powerful.

My friend gave me shit for taking a year to finish reading a book. So to prove a point I read After Dark by Murakami in three days. The plot and themes were much more allegorical than Hardboiled Wonderland. Much more dream/magical thinking logic in play. It didn't get great reviews on reception, but it was a better use of my time than doomscrolling. A lot of the deeper themes seem like gesturing at Moloch (in Scott's sense) and the underbelly of japanese society. It makes me want to stay up all night at a Denny's while on LSD.

Thinking of starting Kafka's The Trial. Or I could pick up Blood Meridian again. I stopped that one halfway through.

I loved Hard-boiled Wonderland. I was painfully underwhelmed by The Trial.

Hardboiled Wonderland makes me feel like I need to be buying Jazz records. I just started The Trial and I'm surprised by how fast I'm reading it.

Read 10 Books That Screwed Up the World by Benjamin Wiker. An interesting critical review of several "foundational" books on modern liberal culture. Of course, not without bias, as one might have guessed from the title, and one can debate the selection until blue in the face, but leaving that aside, the author raises some interesting points. Of course, blaming a handful of books in all the troubles of humanity is a bit too harsh, in my opinion, but if you take them not only as books but as expressions of the dominating thought patterns and cultural phenomena, then I think the author has a good ground to stand on.

Finishing that, I've switched to a different area and started Monster Hunters International. Pretty fun so far, though I think I like Dresden's writing a bit better. Will report more when I finish it.

Maybe 80% of the way through The Story of the Lost Child. The, uh, titular event has occurred, but there's still more than a hundred pages left.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats