Yesterday, I finished reading Anathem, which is the third Neil Stephenson book I've read. I liked it quite a lot, but I've also come away with many thoughts and ruminations, and I thought I'd put them here for discussion. It's an interesting book.

Firstly, I loved the setting. The juxtaposition of the ancient monastery-like enclave in which our protagonist starts out and the surrounding postmodern world is fascinating, and the rate at which we learn new information about both places is well-paced. I do think the latter third of the book suffers from pacing issues, but it starts out well. The slow beginning gives us time to settle into our POV character's universe and patterns of thought, so that when things start to go wrong for him we have enough context to be hit with the same emotional gut punch.

Now for the spoilery part: While I enjoyed the book and thought it had a fairly satisfying ending, I disagreed with the ultimate conclusion of Stephenson's philosophy. This is the point at which I bring in the Hylean Theoric World, which in our universe is known as Platonic idealism philosophy.

In short, I don't think there should be a hierarchy of living worlds involved in that philosophy. I was introduced to Platonic idealism early in my education by my ninth grade Geometry teacher, and in my mind the Platonic ideal is, by definition, sterile. It contains objects represented in their most perfect form. But life is inherently imperfect - it grows and changes. Living things can strive towards a Platonic ideal but they will never achieve it, because the Platonic ideal is a frozen state of perfect being.

So, the conceit of "Anathem", that Earth represents some sort of ideal version of the planet Urnud and the protagonists' Arbre is a yet more ideal version of Earth, falls apart for me.

Am I overthinking this? Definitely, but I can hardly be blamed for that since all the characters in the book do the same thing. It's also possible that Discworld simply got to me first. In "Thief of Time" the Discworld Auditors nearly destroy the world in an attempt to freeze it so that they can make an accurate record - they hate all life because it generates so much extra paperwork.

All in all, I would recommend this book if you want something long and chewy to sink your teeth into. It's also very funny, especially if you are in academia and/or like to make fun of academics, but of course there's plenty of serious drama and tension as well. My main issues are pacing (especially towards the end), and a philosophical disagreement with the premise that I discussed under spoiler tags. On the plus side, the main character is easy to like and his friends are entertaining. Let's say... 8/10 stars.