So what do you think, should I delve into this big momma or what?
yes
>>7642409
Do you recommend taking it in real slow and trying to comprehensively understand it all or brushing through it at a normal pace and letting my subconscious figure it all out
Last question goes to anybody actually not just the dude I replied to
>>7642428
kinda both
don't worry too much imo
>>7642373
don't worry its still a shit when you're done. haven't you seen any of the "what i read/what i expected" threads?
I audiobooked it over a drug-binge long weekend
It was a fun ride, but I'm not sure I would have finished it had I given it a conventional read
>>7642428
There's some long stretches you'll have to plow through but some sections, like Drakes conversation with the fortune teller, that you'll want to take slow and read and reread.
Don't worry about it. Just go with the flow.
>In 1986 the trilogy won the Prometheus Hall of Fame Award, designed to honor classic Libertarian fiction.
>>7642761
A large part of the book also bashes libertarians.
read this instead
>>7642373
I'm trapped between the second and third books, but I've enjoyed it so far.
>>7642428
The authors didn't take the book seriously, the book doesn't take itself seriously, the characters don't take themselves seriously and are almost always either lying, joking, or mistaken.
So yeah, take it real slow and seriously.
>>7642373
I gave up after 5 pages. Is it based on current events or does RAW switch between characters satirically throughout the trilogy? I looked and saw 695 pgs remaining and instead picked up The Magus.
I might try it later.
>>7642982
>Is it based on current events or does RAW switch between characters satirically throughout the trilogy?
Not sure what this means.
Some of it is pure fiction, some is based on real conspiracies/events fictionalized, and some characters/references are what you'd call "historically accurate" - but it was written in '75 so nothing is still 'current'.
It is very satiric, but I wouldn't consider it primarily a satire.
>>7642695
This is probably how it's intended to be absorbed.
>>7642887
Shows how smart they are.
>>7642994
>It is very satiric, but I wouldn't consider it primarily a satire.
The whole point is RAW saying to be skeptical of both the libertarians/anarchists and the statists. Little of the novel isn't satiric, or at least little isn't ironic
>>7642373
it changed my life
>>7642373
Literally a meme book.
