A Few Notes on the Culture by Iain M Banks

If you enjoyed this essay, I would recommend reading Why the Culture Wins: An Appreciation of Iain M. Banks by Prof. Joseph Heath (https://www.sciphijournal.org/index.php/2017/11/12/why-the-c...)

Among other things, it compares the Idirans—who have what we consider a more traditional, modern-day culture—with the Culture. For example:

"The war between the Idirans and the Culture is peculiarly asymmetrical, since the Culture is not an empire, or even a “polity” in any traditional sense of the term, it is simply a culture. It has no capital city, or even any “territory” in the conventional sense."

I also love Heath's criticism of Dune (I appreciate the series, but now can't help but notice how often sci-fi series use regressive social structures).

"In fact, modern science fiction writers have had so little to say about the evolution of culture and society that it has become a standard trope of the genre to imagine a technologically advanced future that contains archaic social structures. The most influential example of this is undoubtedly Frank Herbert’s Dune, which imagines an advanced galactic civilization, but where society is dominated by warring “houses,” organized as extended clans, all under the nominal authority of an “emperor.”"

I found the second book in the series, The Player of Games, much more explanatory about what the Culture is than the first book, Consider Phelbas. I enjoyed Consider Phelbas much more upon re-reading after I did an initial read through of the rest of the series than I did having that be the first book I read from him.

It's hard for me to read the Culture novels and not hear Porno for Pyros' "Pets" on loop in my head.

It is amusing that this essay starts with "Government" and does not get down to the intelligences until halfway through -- in my mind, it's all just the intelligences watching the funny monkeys play at still having meaningful role in the Culture and the surprising things they do at the edges of its influence.

I've been reading sci-fi for decades and among it all, the Culture novels have left the greatest single lasting impression. Among galaxies, across time, somewhere a maybe-boring hedonism but free of oppression and want - dwarfing the piddling amateurish nonsense that passes for civilization in our neck of the woods in the here & now.

Purraps to be considered as an admittedly fanciful but not wholly impractical set of goals for the next hundred years here.

BTW note that based on one of his short stories, the Culture does exist "now" in our galactic region. A ship visits us at some point in the 1970s, and as it departs its Mind mischievously creates an EM signature crafted to baffle us.

One of the best series of science fiction ever.

I need to finish off the last few Culture books.

He is missed. It was a shock to hear he was sick. Too young.

I picked up Player of Games on Kindle a few months ago after seeing all these threads on the Culture series here.

I just couldn’t get into it. I made it through about…a third? into the book.

The whole setting just feels so bizarre and exotic. I couldn’t relate or empathize with any of the characters.

I might get back into it someday but for now it’s languishing.

Should I try Consider Phlebas or Use of Weapons first?

Read the essay and then the series, or hold the essay for after reading?

On a related note ... the ship names in the Culture always gave me a laugh. Here is a complete list: https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_spacecraft

Just decided today to re-read the entire series.

I was sad that Amazon did not follow through on producing the TV series.

Also.. rather relieved, because remaining unrealised also means it remains untainted.

Content is great but boy that site is not helping getting that content across.

> Succinctly; socialism within, anarchy without.

Great essay. I feel like I read this 20 years ago, which is the last time I read the Culture novels. My impression at the time, which remains true on reread now, is that the idea that a post-singularity, post-scarcity society would organize itself along something like socialist lines makes no sense to me, and isn't well-supported (by my recollection) in the novels I read. This is a universe where, if you want, you can just fuck off and have your own planet. It's a place where everything is taken care of for you, not through the thoughtful allocation of resources for mutual benefit, but because it's trivially easy for a machine to just give you everything you ask for. There is no need to even think about who owns what, because everyone can usually have what they want, go where they want, do what they want. I see the anarchy, I don't see the socialism.

(1994)

I don't think Iain M. Banks is a good writer. (You can see it in this piece, which falls into the trap of using long words to sound clever.) His sci-fi has a serious flaw: it's static. Nothing changes, everything is inevitable, the baddies are predestined to lose. His characters and dialogue are bland.

The books do have a strength, which is the completeness of their picture of the world. The concept of the Culture is interesting. I think it has less to do with the third dimension of space, and more to do with the 1990s. The Culture looks a lot like confident liberal democracy, pitting its advanced tech and cultural openness against its various (doomed) rivals. That's why a lot of the books seem a bit colonial: travel to a small annoying planet, knock some sense into the primitive authorities holding sway. And it also has that 1990s vibe that one side is in the right, and that side is always going to win.

For a contrast, think of The Three Body Problem. It's set on an equally epic scale - but so much more happens!