
Kim Stanley Robinson’s “New York 2140” - hownottowrite
http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/03/kim-stanley-robinsons-new-york-2140-review-a-drowned-nyc.html
======
kbenson
_I took a graph of a map of Manhattan and of the greater New York region and
U.S. Geological survey’s print then looked at the streets and the contour
levels and I simply marked the 50-foot intervals to see what kind of an island
was left, what kind of a bay. And then I walked around town with a tourist-map
version of that that I had altered so that I could have a smaller version of
that. I wandered around and I looked at the terrain and I looked at the
streets running from like Fifth and Sixth avenues between the Empire State
Building and say 20th — there’s a 10-foot drop there that would [in a 50-foot
sea-level rise] be the tidal zone that is actually several blocks of the
wetland at low tide, but underwater at high tide. Even though it would be the
shallows with waves breaking._

That actually sounds incredibly fun. Taking pictures and photoshopping in
water at the appropriate levels would be pretty cool too.

I have to say, not having been to New York and having nothing on the line,
that actually does sound like an incredibly cool setting.

~~~
johan_larson
Would it really be remotely cost-effective to take a skyscraper and refit the
bottom three stories to be underwater? Sounds like a stretch. It would
probably be cheaper to abandon low-lying areas and demolish the buildings
there.

~~~
kbenson
Given that skyscrapers seem to describe buildings of 40+ floors, losing 3 is
less than 10% of the total floors, possibly a little more of the total floor
space given that upper floors may not have the same dimensions, offset by
possibly fewer elevator shafts beyond certain points. If the bottom can be
retrofitted to be very secure in water (extra concrete?), then I don't see why
you would abandon it. It's not like you're constructing a whole new building
and have to forego three floors, it's already existing and it's just a matter
of putting the work in to make sure it's still usable.

These things are all anchored into bedrock anyway, so it's not like you should
have to worry about the material under the foundations shifting or eroding.

~~~
L_Rahman
Most of the things that skyscraper needs in order to be a viable structure -
electricity, data, water, sewage - lie underground in systems that will not
survive extended submersion beneath seawater.

~~~
sevensor
Kim Stanley Robinson has this problem in general. It's as if he just doesn't
care about the science in his sci-fi. Engineering problems just get hand-waved
around whenever they're inconvenient. Terraforming Venus? No problem! Ten
kilometer tall spiral launch structures? Sure! A service corridor that goes
all the way around a planet? Easy! I might be more inclined to forgive him if
he could write a halfway interesting character, or manifest some semblance of
a theme, but I'm just constantly disappointed. His work seems more ambitious
than spaceships and rayguns, but it always comes up short. I'd rather spend my
limited leisure reading time on mindless space potboilers like _The Expanse_.

~~~
jessaustin
I've just about given up halfway through _Years of Rice and Salt_. If the
writing is this pedestrian, I need more of a point than _reincarnation!_

In truth, I'll probably read the whole thing eventually, since I bought the
paperback already, but it's certainly not a page-turner.

~~~
jhbadger
The point isn't reincarnation -- that's just an excuse to have similar
characters in different eras. The point is to think about how different
(better in some ways, worse in others) the world would have been if Western
Europe hadn't been as dominant as it was in our history.

------
Florin_Andrei
I've very mixed feelings about KSR. His ideas are interesting and worth
thinking about, but I've always found his writing style unbearably flat and
boring. I really wanted to read the Mars trilogy, but gave up after the first
volume, the writing was so dull and lifeless.

So here we go again - a book that seems like it's focused on interesting
ideas, but is that worth plowing through acres of arid prose?

~~~
mikenew
I got through about 2/3 of Red Mars and put it down a few years ago. Even
though it was fascinating and unbelievably well researched, it just felt like
work to read it. A few years later I decided to try again and ended up reading
the whole trilogy. And loved it. I think you have to adjust your expectations
a bit and look at his writing for what it is; an exploration on "what would it
really be like if X happened".

Most sci-fi is a narrative set in some kind of technologically-different
universe. His is more like a serious meditation on what that universe would be
like if it really did exist.

~~~
simplicio
Red Mars has kind of a weird rhythm to it. I think Robinson was trying to make
a sort of "fake history", so plot lines and characters kinda peter-out or go
no where in a way that happens in real life, but not in most fiction (GRR
Martin is the only other author I've read with a similar style). I really like
the technique, but I can see why its not everyones thing.

The later books in the series slowly take on a more traditional structure,
with focus more on a smaller cast of "heroes" about whom most of the action
takes place.

~~~
Florin_Andrei
It's not the structure of the narrative. It's the writing style itself. Feels
very detached and cold, very clinical. The characters have the emotional
personality of shadows on a wall; they may have guts but have no heart. When
people were dreaming in the 1960s about computers writing literature, this was
the stereotype of computer-written text.

Meandering plot lines I'm fine with. I kinda like it in fact.

~~~
Tossrock
That's an interesting critique that is very opposed to my own reading. Do you
have specific examples? From my perspective, things like the Sax/Anne debate
about terraforming Mars, or Frank's resentment at living in Boone's shadow, or
Boone's amusement at/exploitation of being a larger-than-life figure struck me
as very well developed emotionally.

------
soared
Very intriguing article - I'm going to get the book. A major nitpick that made
me stop reading the article though..

>To truly spoil the end of the book...

You've just convinced me to buy it, and now I can't read further in your
article. I don't know if its safe to keep reading, and I'm not going to tempt
spoiling the book. Even if it is tongue-in-cheek, how would I know that for
sure?

~~~
stagbeetle
Knowing the ending may make you want to read it even more.[0]

I know, atleast for me, it can help influence what I should consume when given
time constraints.

[0][http://pages.ucsd.edu/~nchristenfeld/Publications_files/Spoi...](http://pages.ucsd.edu/~nchristenfeld/Publications_files/Spoilers.pdf)

~~~
PhasmaFelis
I know that, when I read/see a surprising or exciting twist in a story, I get
a thrill of excitement and delight; if I knew it was coming, though, it's
replaced with, at best, a duller sort of "yep, there it is" sensation. Knowing
that I've missed out on that thrill is upsetting.

Relatedly (because I have actually had people argue with me about this before)
I really don't get why so many people (like these researchers) feel the need
to tell me that those sensations I just described are invalid or imaginary.

------
metricodus
Here's a higher res copy of that nice cover art by Stephan Martiniere
([http://www.martiniere.com/](http://www.martiniere.com/)):

[https://fsmedia.imgix.net/6c/17/d1/3e/0a61/470f/a3e8/85c1e77...](https://fsmedia.imgix.net/6c/17/d1/3e/0a61/470f/a3e8/85c1e775f036/robinsonnewyork2140-hcjpg.jpeg)

(Looks slightly upscaled, but probably from a better source than in the posted
article.)

~~~
kbenson
Very cool. The one thing about this picture is that I imagine there would be a
lot more sky bridges in a situation like that. Perhaps that's covered in the
story. I guess I'll have to find out. :)

~~~
metricodus
It would make the picture too cluttered, I think.

------
Apocryphon
Any thoughts on KSR's thoughts on hacks?

> What I wanted to say with that part of the plot is you can’t hack the
> system, you have to legislate the system. Because hacks are reversible and
> they are too secret and they’re kind of like a desire for a technical,
> silver-bullet solution like you might get out of Silicon Valley people but
> in fact these are laws, global laws. So what you really need is legislation
> to change them and Piketty-ing the tax code.

~~~
l33tbro
I didn't understand that point. Wouldn't legislation be more reversible than
hacking (eg, healthcare, USDA, EPA, etc at the moment due to change of
government)? I must be missing something.

------
mozey
One of my favourite authors. I like how optimistic his books are, reminds me
of the Culture series.

~~~
squires
This is a surprising to me since, of Robinson's work, I've only read Aurora.
One of the primary impressions it had on me was the overwhelming bleakness of
the universe and the futility of space exploration/colonization.

Perhaps I should muster the courage to try some of his other work.

~~~
cscheid
The unfortunate part about Aurora is that it is "optimistic" only in the
context of all of the Red Mars trilogy, and 2312, and really only in the last
chapter, where...

 _SPOILERS below_

the characters go "well, eff it, I guess we have to make it work here on
Earth". It seems to me that, in the arc of KSR's work, Aurora is the effective
acceptance that humans will have to make Earth work for them, for better or
worse, even as they collectively wrecked the planet. And that seems a nice
segue into New York 2140.

~~~
EthanHeilman
Aurora is also told from the PoV of characters that are extremely anti-
extrasolar travel.

 _SPOILERS below_

Note however at the end of the book cryo-sleep is developed. This technology
removes the main moral argument and technological difficulty against extra-
solar travel as presented in the book. It is even noted in the book that a new
wave of human colonization is taking place. KSR seems to be making both
arguments at once but only telling one side of the story.

~~~
SideburnsOfDoom
> This technology removes the main moral argument and technological difficulty
> against extra-solar travel as presented in the book.

Not quite. The other difficulty presented is the sparsity of places suitable
to settle at. And what you do then if you're not very lucky on arrival.

~~~
EthanHeilman
>And what you do then if you're not very lucky on arrival.

Option 1: Go to sleep and go home.

Option 2: Setup a small research station in a spun up asteroid and get
terraforming.

Option 2 is much nicer with cryo-sleep. Try a terraforming experiment and
sleep for 50 years to see how it worked out. You can even cycle people between
Earth and the research station (see the plot of Alien). Planetary Geologists
can live their lives on geologic time scales.

Or you could improve your odds by sending robots or small teams to many
different stars (sleep, explore, sleep). You don't need to bring a full-cycle
ecosystem until you decide to stay. Find good planetary sites and then send
over the supplies.

My read of Aurora was that interstellar colonization was about to take place,
but the PoV characters were against it.

------
ilamont
I haven't read Robinson's book, but the interview is intriguing ... many
speculative worlds based on the premise of man-made ecological catastrophe are
positively grim ( _On The Beach_ , _Jem_ , etc.) but Robinson's NYC is
(apparently) coping quite well.

JG Ballard tackled a somewhat similar scenario in 1962 with _The Drowned
World._ (1) It was London, not NYC, and the catastrophe was still progressing,
which would lead ultimately to human extinction or the triumph of the
reptiles. The beauty in the book was Ballard's language, the evocative
descriptions of the world, and the sad main character living out his remaining
days in a skyscraper penthouse. Worth reading (and comparing with Robinson's
book).

1\. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10273413/Will-
Self-...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10273413/Will-Self-on-JG-
Ballards-The-Drowned-World.html)

~~~
jhbadger
Yes, I love Ballard's catastrophe novels. But of course as prophetic as the
_The Drowned World_ seems to us today, Ballard wasn't writing it as a serious
prediction of the future -- he just liked writing about the world ending in
weird ways -- water, fire, a mysterious wind, etc.

~~~
Pamar
My theory about most of Ballard's "sci-fi" was that he just liked to throw his
characters in (or immediately after) some world-shifting event (mostly in the
sense of "catastrophe") and see what kind of neurosis or madness would emerge
from the new environment. So the external environment was mostly a backdrop
for the development of the characters' mental maladies.

It's pretty rare to find a character in Ballard's stories who acts
"rationally" and usually (at least in my experience) the few that do tend to
look alien/mad because they are still using human logic and common sense in a
world that has obviously moved in a totally different direction.

------
rrdharan
Related, this is a fun tool to play with - well if your idea of fun includes
enacting disaster fantasies anyway:

[http://gothamist.com/2015/10/13/nyc_climate_change_map.php](http://gothamist.com/2015/10/13/nyc_climate_change_map.php)

------
rl3
The cover has a similar asthetic to SimCity 2000's box art:

[http://agentpalmer.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/02/SimCity-20...](http://agentpalmer.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/02/SimCity-2000-Box-Cover-Art.jpg)

------
peterbraden
I read it already and really enjoyed it. It's a mixture of the quiet
descriptiveness of the science in the capital series with the forward thinking
genius of his earlier scifi, interspersed with some serious nerding out over
the economy and it's role in the world. Thumbs up.

------
SubiculumCode
I have lived in his small home town of Davis for a decade, and I still haven't
bumped into Kim Stanley Robinson. From his writing, I was sure I'd run into
him at Delta of Venus café one day. No such luck.

~~~
camillescott
He even mentions a "Delta of Venus" in 2312; however, his preferred spot seems
to be Mishka's.

~~~
SubiculumCode
Interpreting personality from books to predict hangouts is a funny endeavor,
but I can see how Mishka's would be his choice. If it isnt the good coffee,
tea, and pastries, Mishka's is filled with college students and professors,
many of whom are scientists. Obviously scientists play a central role in his
writing. Delta of Venus attracts the more alternative crowds, as well as
english lit students and the like. The people there have edremind me of some
of the characters and settings in Green or Blue Mars.

In any case, these are just passive musings. I frequent Delta of Venus because
I like the patio.

------
csneeky
Love this, from one of the answers the author gave:

> "You can indeed become enormously wealthy and still be a good person just
> playing the game. That point needed to be raised because, as Orson Welles
> once pointed out, everybody has their reasons. Very few people are thinking
> as a sociopath might think, that nothing matters to me."

Glad to see this sentiment is a driver in this book's dystopia. A little slice
of healing for our political climate.

------
samirillian
>"why neoliberal capitalism is the only real villain of the book"

I doubt that neoliberal capitalism will be "the real villain" 100 years from
now. Capital is in the process of being superceded by information (a further
rarification/reification of social relations).

Either way, it's hard to imagine neoliberalism making a good sci-fi villain.
At all.

~~~
jacquesm
> Capital is in the process of being superceded by information

Sometimes I really can't follow comments on HN for technical jargon, this one
I can't follow because I have no idea what you're on about.

How do you see capital being replaced by information?

~~~
L_Rahman
I'm not the GP but here's an example of larger trend that they might point to
in support of their argument:

Excerpted from Matt Levine's Money Stuff newsletter:
[https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-04/hacienda-...](https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-04/hacienda-
hedges-and-unicorn-votes)

> One simple story to tell here is that globalization and technology have
> shifted the bargaining power between entrepreneurs and providers of capital.
> These days, if you want to start a social-media company, you don't need to
> raise a lot of money from investors to build a factory. You just need a dorm
> room, and your parents are probably paying for that. And if your social
> media company is a success, it can go global instantly with near-zero
> marginal costs. (Yes, I know, this does not exactly describe Snapchat, which
> is focused on developed economies and which has weirdly enormous costs, but
> still.) The path to being a gigantic profitable company is paved relatively
> more with ideas, and less with capital:

Vivek Wadhwa, a distinguished fellow at Carnegie Mellon University’s College
of Engineering, says the “winner-take-all” culture in which a few tech
companies emerge as hugely profitable from among a far-larger number that fail
encourages investors to give tech executives more leeway.

Meanwhile the same forces of globalization and technology mean that there are
a lot more people with capital. U.S. tech companies can raise money from
China, or the Middle East, rather than limiting themselves to New York and San
Francisco. Globalization opens up new markets, which makes good business ideas
more valuable, and new sources of capital, which makes those ideas easier to
fund.

So winning entrepreneurs are more valuable, while capital is less valuable and
less scarce. Of course the bargaining dynamic between the people with ideas
and the people with capital has shifted. You'd expect to see some of that
playing out in price -- investors paying billions of dollars for unprofitable
social-media companies -- but at some level, if you are a young billionaire
entrepreneur, you don't really need any more money. You might as well bargain
for more power, or more freedom.

~~~
gech
>are a young billionaire entrepreneur, you don't really need any more money

Oh good, I'm glad the future can only be described as how the options of a
select few are going to be different

~~~
L_Rahman
That's my mistake, I included a paragraph that wasn't relevant to this
specific topic but was covered in the article itself.

------
malyk
Lots of interesting ideas in the book spread out through a really mundane
story. The best part of the book for me is the chapters with the New York
Citizen telling us the history of the city and how it got to be to where it is
in 2140. The story itself has some highlights, but overall it was mostly a
slog to listen to.

------
caio1982
Funny, he really seemed interested in drowning NYC in his book 2312 (very good
novel). I suspect he wanted to expand on the topic, besides the drowned city
just being the setting for a few situations in the book. It might be worth
comparing both descriptions of NYC to see what changed after his research.

------
myrandomcomment
It seems more likely they would go damns and dikes then let the water over run
the city. Manhattan surrounded by a wall where the ground of the city is were
it always is, and a 50ft wall around it.

------
rodionos
This is great, I want to see a whole series of these scifi books for other
cities of interest around the globe.

~~~
panglott
There's at least one scene that's similar to the premise of this book in one
of the Mars Trilogy books—but set in London, where the Thames is flooded.

------
arethuza
Nitpick about New York 2140 - did KSR mix up neap and spring tides at one
point?

------
nicostouch
All the bitcoins will be mined

------
cryptoz
Really excited to read this book! I live by the Mars Trilogy, and by 2312, and
I'm currently in 40 Signs of Rain. I'll add this to the list!

Note that there's a key typo in the introduction, suggesting the setting is
2040, and that made for a confusing first few minutes, but really, the book is
set in 2140 indeed. Can't wait!

