I finished reading Dirk Gently earlier. I found the ending to be under-explained a bit so I wanted to see what people thought of it online. What I found was a bunch of redditors making shit up and apparently basing their explanations on a Wikipedia article filled with bullshit. Spoilers ahead: >Richard, Reg, and Dirk travel to Somerset in 1797 and interrupt Coleridge at work. This prevents Kubla Khan (containing the necessary information on how to repair the ship) from being finished Not once is it said that Kubla Khan contains information on how to repair the ship. The Engineer says, however, that HE KNOWS how to repair the ship (preventing it from blowing up to begin with being trivial, since you just need to tell the Electric Monk to fuck off). This point is not only wrong but it is also retarded, because the Engineer left his Coleridge book behind. >Reg nevertheless still sympathizes with the engineer, and so travels back to the accident once more. He transports the crew off the landing craft just before the explosion and brings them to the mothership, enabling them to continue on their quest elsewhere. The book mentions a fucking explosion in space and then Reg apologizes to Richard quietly, under his breath. He didn't save anyone but sabotaged the mothership. He did so in 1797 too, since that's when it blew up. And the aliens had their accident eons ago, btw ("For millions of years, and then billions, I stalked the mud utterly alone.") And now a big grip I have with all the plebbitor posts I've read: >muh it doesn't work because then it would create a paradox, so I NEED to headcanon a bunch of shit >like really, TWO Engineer ghosts walking the Earth? Preposterous. You fool. You absolute nitwit. DNA wrote a short paragraph to explain to the likes of you why paradoxes do NOT matter. The universe will sort it out. See: >“If the Universe came to an end every time there was some uncertainty about what had happened in it, it would never have got beyond the first picosecond. And many of course don’t. It’s like a human body, you see. A few cuts and bruises here and there don’t hurt it. Not even major surgery if it’s done properly. Paradoxes are just the scar tissue. Time and space heal themselves up around them and people simply remember a version of events which makes as much sense as they require it to make. > >“That isn’t to say that if you get involved in a paradox a few things won’t strike you as being very odd, but if you’ve got through life without that already happening to you, then I don’t know which Universe you’ve been living in, but it isn’t this one.” Fuck these idiots. Anyway. I do think that relying on the idea that destroying half of Kubla Khan will be sufficient to stop the Engineer from connecting with and taking control of Michael is, well, somewhat flimsy. But it worked so hey, what do I know? Thanks for reading my blog.
Anonymous :
6 days ago :
No.4637
>>4645
>>4637
His Hitchhiker books are pretty fun* but yeah, he was a bit of a proto-redditor. I like how absurd his style is and, unlike your average redditor, he's not actually stupid.
* except Mostly Harmless
>>4646>>4637
If humorous sci-fi sounds appealing, you should check the first Hitchhikers book. He's a bit of a god to the Reddit atheists, yeah, but he lacked their annoying smugness and could actually write.
You're welcome, even though I know nothing about neither this book nor Adams. Is he worth reading? I lump him in with reddit and epic science atheist types for some reason, but I don't think I actually have a grudge against him or his works.
He is absolutely among the ground zero guilty for general nerd humor like Monty Python. "reddit and epic science atheist types" are just watered-down descendants of their 20th century paleolithic nerd ancestors. Either you have the stomach for it or you don't.
>>4637
You're welcome, even though I know nothing about neither this book nor Adams. Is he worth reading? I lump him in with reddit and epic science atheist types for some reason, but I don't think I actually have a grudge against him or his works.
His Hitchhiker books are pretty fun* but yeah, he was a bit of a proto-redditor. I like how absurd his style is and, unlike your average redditor, he's not actually stupid.
* except Mostly Harmless
>>4637
You're welcome, even though I know nothing about neither this book nor Adams. Is he worth reading? I lump him in with reddit and epic science atheist types for some reason, but I don't think I actually have a grudge against him or his works.
If humorous sci-fi sounds appealing, you should check the first Hitchhikers book. He's a bit of a god to the Reddit atheists, yeah, but he lacked their annoying smugness and could actually write.