Comments on: I Am a Strange Loop http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/ Let joy be unconfined. Let there be dancing in the streets, drinking in the saloons, and necking in the parlor. Wed, 23 May 2012 05:37:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Book Review: Bonk | jmadigan.net http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-206119 Book Review: Bonk | jmadigan.net Fri, 12 Nov 2010 19:49:20 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-206119 [...] reviews I am a Strange Loop by Douglas [...] [...] reviews I am a Strange Loop by Douglas [...]

]]> By: Speaking of Consciousness…. « The Book-Driven Life http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-174934 Speaking of Consciousness…. « The Book-Driven Life Sun, 12 Apr 2009 03:38:21 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-174934 [...] “Left flat and underwhelmed“: Here's the issue: Hofstadter is not, to me, a good writer. He goes to great pains to be accessible, taking a page from Stephen Hawking's book and speaking in clear English, with plenty of visual language, examples, and metaphor. But (and isn't there always a but), Hofstadter takes so long to actually make a point that by the time he does so, it's underwhelming and foregone. The first half of the book, literally, is spent in short, digestible little sections which are generally little ramblings tangents about whatever ill-chosen metaphor Hofstadter to illustrate his point. … [...] Let me profess at this point that Douglas Hofstadter is a Pulitzer-prize-winning author and I am a schmuck with a blog. It is entirely possible—nay, likely—that I Am a Strange Loop is a brilliant book, full of both technical insight and philosophical comfort, but I confessed to being left flat and underwhelmed by the whole book. It seemed to me a long and arduous (not to say semantically-tricky) way of talking about memes, the psychosocial behaviors which are passed onto progeny, and first proposed (using such a word) by Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene. Granted, there are differences between a multi-generational look at common behaviors and a more invasive exposition on the idea of “I”-ness or the sense of self, and how it self-creates and propagates, but it seems to me as though Hofstadter's point actually proposed very little about the human brain except that its capacity of self-reference currently escapes our ability to describe mathematically with any kind of philosophical comfort. [...] [...] “Left flat and underwhelmed“: Here’s the issue: Hofstadter is not, to me, a good writer. He goes to great pains to be accessible, taking a page from Stephen Hawking’s book and speaking in clear English, with plenty of visual language, examples, and metaphor. But (and isn’t there always a but), Hofstadter takes so long to actually make a point that by the time he does so, it’s underwhelming and foregone. The first half of the book, literally, is spent in short, digestible little sections which are generally little ramblings tangents about whatever ill-chosen metaphor Hofstadter to illustrate his point. … [...] Let me profess at this point that Douglas Hofstadter is a Pulitzer-prize-winning author and I am a schmuck with a blog. It is entirely possible—nay, likely—that I Am a Strange Loop is a brilliant book, full of both technical insight and philosophical comfort, but I confessed to being left flat and underwhelmed by the whole book. It seemed to me a long and arduous (not to say semantically-tricky) way of talking about memes, the psychosocial behaviors which are passed onto progeny, and first proposed (using such a word) by Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene. Granted, there are differences between a multi-generational look at common behaviors and a more invasive exposition on the idea of “I”-ness or the sense of self, and how it self-creates and propagates, but it seems to me as though Hofstadter’s point actually proposed very little about the human brain except that its capacity of self-reference currently escapes our ability to describe mathematically with any kind of philosophical comfort. [...]

]]> By: adam http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167891 adam Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:21:09 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167891 I put GEB back on the shelf 4 or 5 years ago after reading the introduction. Might pick it up again this winter, but I said the same about Gravity's Rainbow last year (which I liked, it's just so very long, and I was still recovering from the Baroque Cycle). I put GEB back on the shelf 4 or 5 years ago after reading the introduction. Might pick it up again this winter, but I said the same about Gravity’s Rainbow last year (which I liked, it’s just so very long, and I was still recovering from the Baroque Cycle).

]]> By: Ben http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167886 Ben Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:17:28 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167886 That would be the danger of mistyping once and copying and pasting multiple times. That would be the danger of mistyping once and copying and pasting multiple times.

]]> By: Steve http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167884 Steve Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:48:49 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167884 Unless you were trying to be funny, "an eternal golden braid" is quite different from an "eternal golden brain". Re-read the book . . . it might make more sense to you if you s l o w down and read the actual words . . . Unless you were trying to be funny, "an eternal golden braid" is quite different from an "eternal golden brain". Re-read the book . . . it might make more sense to you if you s l o w down and read the actual words . . .

]]> By: Johnsenclan » Blog Archive » Book Review: Resolution http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167781 Johnsenclan » Blog Archive » Book Review: Resolution Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:11:35 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167781 [...] reviews I am a Strange Loop by Douglas [...] [...] reviews I am a Strange Loop by Douglas [...]

]]> By: Brady http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167486 Brady Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:22:05 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167486 Perhaps it wasn't his intention, but I think the idea of being "caught in an endless loop of statement and clarification" applies fairly well to the human experience. "And that's like us, isn't it?" Perhaps it wasn’t his intention, but I think the idea of being "caught in an endless loop of statement and clarification" applies fairly well to the human experience.

"And that’s like us, isn’t it?"

]]> By: Ben http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167485 Ben Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:18:29 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167485 Don't worry: I'm not being so diplomatic because I fear criticizing your suggestion; I just understand that Hofstadter is very smart, and I might have enjoyed the book more had I the time and expanded facilities to fully appreciate it. Not to be too timely, but I compare Hofstadter's verbosity against the similar verbosity of the late, great David Foster Wallace, and I can't help but feel as though every single word of Wallace's verbosity was necessary and great. Hofstadter, by comparison, seems a bit convoluted, as though caught in an endless loop of statement and clarification. Wait, maybe it's all just meta-irony? Don’t worry: I’m not being so diplomatic because I fear criticizing your suggestion; I just understand that Hofstadter is very smart, and I might have enjoyed the book more had I the time and expanded facilities to fully appreciate it.

Not to be too timely, but I compare Hofstadter’s verbosity against the similar verbosity of the late, great David Foster Wallace, and I can’t help but feel as though every single word of Wallace’s verbosity was necessary and great. Hofstadter, by comparison, seems a bit convoluted, as though caught in an endless loop of statement and clarification.

Wait, maybe it’s all just meta-irony?

]]> By: Brady http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167480 Brady Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:59:40 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167480 You know, you don't have to be so apologetic if you don't like a book that I do like. I appreciate the attempt at being diplomatic, though. The previous commenter is right in that Hofstader is more profound when he's obliquely referring to ideas of consciousness through his thoughts on math, music, language, and art than when he is trying to be "straightforward" about it. Your criticism of his writing is valid, because you tend to favor clarity in writing whose goal is to clarify, and Hofstader, while accessible, is not exactly what I would call clear. However, something about Hofstader's inability to get to the core of the thing, the way he eternally seems to dance around a clear, concise theory of consciousness, appeals to me. His corny, complex, convoluted wordplay appeals to my love of the same, and the paradoxes he explores have the function of a Zen koan on me, not handing me truth on a platter but putting me into "feeling" of it beyond words, something on the tip of my tongue but never further. Thanks for taking my suggestion though- I'll try to hit closer to your mark next time. You know, you don’t have to be so apologetic if you don’t like a book that I do like. I appreciate the attempt at being diplomatic, though.

The previous commenter is right in that Hofstader is more profound when he’s obliquely referring to ideas of consciousness through his thoughts on math, music, language, and art than when he is trying to be "straightforward" about it.

Your criticism of his writing is valid, because you tend to favor clarity in writing whose goal is to clarify, and Hofstader, while accessible, is not exactly what I would call clear. However, something about Hofstader’s inability to get to the core of the thing, the way he eternally seems to dance around a clear, concise theory of consciousness, appeals to me. His corny, complex, convoluted wordplay appeals to my love of the same, and the paradoxes he explores have the function of a Zen koan on me, not handing me truth on a platter but putting me into "feeling" of it beyond words, something on the tip of my tongue but never further.

Thanks for taking my suggestion though- I’ll try to hit closer to your mark next time.

]]> By: Nicholas Tam http://heliologue.com/2008/09/19/i-am-a-strange-loop/#comment-167471 Nicholas Tam Sat, 20 Sep 2008 11:02:50 +0000 http://heliologue.com/?p=2680#comment-167471 Hmm. <em>I Am a Strange Loop</em> is on my shelf unread, but I've read a significant chunk of Hofstadter's works (and am in fact working through his book on translation, <em>Le Ton beau de Marot</em>, this week). Curiously, I've always felt that he offers his best explications of human cognition not when he is talking about human consciousness in and of itself, but when he coaxes it out as a conclusion to some statement or other that he makes about a work of art, music, or literature. I think you would be more satisfied with a work like <em>Metamagical Themas</em>, his collected essays as a <em>Scientific American</em> columnist in the 1980s. There, he focuses on tight, manageable examples in small packages, and he also has room to go into a bit more detail than he does in his longer works. The attraction of behemoths like <em>GEB</em> is as much the intricate structural composition as the ideas themselves (you can probably tell he's big on toying with the form/content boundary, as anyone serious about music appreciation needs to be), but if that's a bit too circumlocutory for your tastes, <em>Themas</em> will be more to your liking. I happen to like Hofstadter's digressions, but that's my fetish for wordplay talking. Hmm. I Am a Strange Loop is on my shelf unread, but I’ve read a significant chunk of Hofstadter’s works (and am in fact working through his book on translation, Le Ton beau de Marot, this week). Curiously, I’ve always felt that he offers his best explications of human cognition not when he is talking about human consciousness in and of itself, but when he coaxes it out as a conclusion to some statement or other that he makes about a work of art, music, or literature.

I think you would be more satisfied with a work like Metamagical Themas, his collected essays as a Scientific American columnist in the 1980s. There, he focuses on tight, manageable examples in small packages, and he also has room to go into a bit more detail than he does in his longer works. The attraction of behemoths like GEB is as much the intricate structural composition as the ideas themselves (you can probably tell he’s big on toying with the form/content boundary, as anyone serious about music appreciation needs to be), but if that’s a bit too circumlocutory for your tastes, Themas will be more to your liking. I happen to like Hofstadter’s digressions, but that’s my fetish for wordplay talking.

]]>