Stephen Markley’s “The Deluge”

[Ego]

There are so many overlaps between the forum and this novel. I am currently about 1/3rd through.

Library Link: https://www.worldcat.org/title/1311360349

Lukewarm New York Times Review https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/10/book ... eluge.html

[7Wannabe5]

Looks interesting. Added to my stack. His previous novel "Ohio" also looks worthwhile.

[7Wannabe5]

Finished the book. It's over 800 pages, but it's compelling read, chock-full of intelligent characters (so many, almost requires notes to keep track of them) approaching the problem of climate change from a wide variety of perspectives. I agree with Ego that there are some almost eerie overlaps with the forum. In fact, at one point in my reading, I was kind of gobsmacked by the particulars of the overlap. However, one overwhelming difference would be the majority of the solutions explored in this novel are towards top-down and political. This quote from Kate, a highly assertive/charismatic polyamorous female activist, might be representative:

"First of all, forget about your carbon footprint. "Carbon footprint" is a PR term invented by an oil company. I want you to remember two words.."
These words replace 430 (ppm) behind her. THEY KNEW.

"They" are the Carbon Majors, the one hundred companies responsible for over seventy percent of emissions since the eighties...

They knew, and they told us to focus on our consumer behavior while they locked us all into structures of hyper-consumption. They knew and they waged a propaganda war of denial and delay. They knew, and they're still doing it! There is no other way to put it, they are committing the greatest atrocity in human history and they knew. They knew, and they told us to worry about our fucking carbon footprints.

The character who holds the personal philosophy most congruent with ERE would likely be Ash, who is a scientific genius and also somewhere on the autistic spectrum, but he is an advisor to major political figures in the novel, so his take still manifests as top-down policy.

Anyways, highly recommend. Beyond being a great read, I think it offers some insight into small group dynamics dealing with the issue, and also some viewpoints that are Eco-ERE adjacent.

[grundomatic]

Just got it from the library today, and was surprised to find it heftier than many of the non-fiction books recommended around here.

[Ego]

I was devouring it but ran out of time and had to return it to the library before leaving. I will have to reserve it again when we get back.

[jacob]

Wow, that was dark!

It's like Kim Stanley Robertson (Ministry for the future) meets Cory Doctorow (Little Brother) meets Neil Stephenson (Sevenes). It's all presented in the style of Syriana (the movie), so it really helps to know what's going on already, because it's not being presented as a simple narrative. I think the ability to appreciate this novel is proportional to already knowing a great deal about the component parts and their interactions. Overall, I consider this work impressive---Markley is the full package of the individual strengths of the above-mentioned authors.

My minor quibble is how the catastrophic impacts are exaggerated relative to the temperature development that otherwise tracks to business as usual line. (Perhaps T(t) should have been changed by shooting off the clathrate gun? The title of the first chapter suggests that this might have been how the thesis of the book started, but that hypothesis isn't developed very much after that. Instead the Thwaites collapse gets the most attention. This would raise ocean levels but not create superstorms in and of itself.)

Without pulling a possible but unlikely worst-case twofer, it would be more realistic if all these catastrophes were stretched out over the 2020-2100 timeline, but that on the other hand would make the politics/activism (why do so many of these novels highlight activism which in reality has a mostly imperceptible impact, I wonder? Probably because it makes it easier to focus on the characters of a few intrepid heroes' top-down influence than the small actions of many bottom-up humans finally doing the right thing) much harder to describe because it would happen over 3 generations instead of half-a-career. Conversely, keeping the story to 2020-2035 makes it much easier to connect events with current politics ... but that would make the underlying climate change kinda boring in comparison as there wouldn't be much "change" over such a short time scale. In short, the politics and the natural science don't operate on the same spacetime-scale here, but if it did it would make for a boring story. And indeed, this is exactly why the world doesn't really pay attention.

(If I had any fictional chops, I think a good solution would be to follow the Sevenes strategy. Describe the first half of the collapse, say 2020 to 2080. Skip the "altithermal" entirely. Then restart with new characters in 2250.)

[Slevin]

Only about 2/3rd of the way through, but this line will sit with me for a bit:

Depictions of genocide in popular culture have tended toward the cartoonishly evil, likely in order to abrogate the viewer from thinking of him- or herself as a participant.

This is a great disservice, for at its core the practice of genocide is about eliminating competition for one’s children.

Agree with @jacob about the time scales. Too much too fast.

[7Wannabe5]

@Slevin:

The character who linked genocide to the parental instinct also argued that all first world pets should immediately be converted into foodstock to alleviate human starvation, because cats eat more fish protein than humans and dogs burn more kilowatt hours of energy than vegetarian humans

Anyways, I think maybe I had a slightly different take on that highly disturbing chapter due to being somebody who nourished two other humans exclusively on breastmilk until they weighed 30 lbs. On some significant level, a human who is not yet capable of foraging on their own is not an individual. And, the modern perspective which allows for the calculation of kcals and kilowatt hours is also the perspective of extreme individuation. One of the primary causes of infant starvation in the 20th century was the marketing of artificial formulas in third world settings where clean water and sufficient funds to continue purchasing formula were not a given, yet the primary means by which human starvation has been greatly reduced over the last 60 years was the Green Revolution of scientifically designed, petroleum dependent agriculture. Complexity abounds.

The reality of genocide has existed since "we" wiped out and only 2% incorporated the other early human species with whom we roamed the planet, but the concept of "genocide" is Modern-era. Pinning it to the parenting instinct is too modern-goggled, because any human female prior to around 100 years ago would de facto be gathering/preparing food for infant by gathering food for herself, and any human male hunting/plowing would be sharing his production with his woman, not directly with his infant. So, it might be more logical to assign any sort of boundary violence to sex/pair-bonding. However, the inter-cultural mating which is instinctive in humans as out-breeding species would tend towards blurring us/them boundaries, so pretty much it seems like "genocide" is pretty much the provence of those humans with pair-bonding tendencies most in alignment with "marrying the boy/girl next door." (Okay, not really, my point being that any sort of weak argument along these lines can be made.)

[Slevin]

Yeah I’m gonna agree with you on genocide being a bit of a modern era idea. And 100% agreed that the whole chapter was one of the most messed up things I’ve ever read (which is surprising given how dark this book is).

But overall yeah, I also found said character disturbingly human-centric in his wild policy proposals. Some of the arguments are still generally valid, there’s not really a reason you need to be feeding your dog meat, you could feed it a vegetarian diet and it would be totally fine and use a lot less resources. Also seems in line with having a larger permaculture property with ducks/chickens etc. I filed it away as a thing to do if I ever own a dog. Some small amounts of research are showing cats may be able to eat this way too (with correct supplementation) but it’s not clear or repeated enough that I would try it with mine. Dog food is generally low quality meat, so supporting the dog food industry meat is inherently supporting CAFOs. Cat food that isn’t fish is probably this way too (And the fish have their own distinctive problems).

From a strictly climate perspective, avoiding ruminants and pigs in the pet food should clean the image up enough to look much better (as it does with humans, it turns out cow milk / dairy and cows are generally the worst offenders by a huge margin, and almost everything else is orders of magnitude less bad). I’m also extremely curious about insect based pet food. Something akin to the soldier fly larvae trick can be implement at scale with waste products, I wonder if you could turn that into a viable protein source for pets, with emissions numbers maybe exactly in line with plants.

Side nitpick on the story here: this story focuses a bit too much on politics and pain, and not all the cool ways humans will adapt. If food prices go up too far, people will start growing food, at least the stuff they can easily grow (veg, and lots of potatoes and squash that are higher calorie). Pumpkin used to be a staple crop because of its easy preservation etc, I think squashes in general will come back in an even bigger way in a rougher climate. I want to see the stories of human ingenuity at the brink. This narrative infantilizes them a bit too much as just political and economic machines.

[jacob]

This narrative infantilizes them a bit too much as just political and economic machines.

Too much ... or just being realistic about it? I have a couple of rules-of-thumb for predicting reactions and adjusting expectations:
1) I imagine the worst case outcome. Then divide by two to account for corrective feedback.
2) I figure what J.R. Random person should be able to do. Then divide by two to figure what they'll actually manage to do.

The problem with "just growing zucchinis", for example, is that food shortages come in shocks. Once the shock hits, it's too late to start a garden. A few months after the shock fades, it is quickly forgotten. The ability/tendency for humans to plan ahead for more than a week, take initiative, and follow through is very limited w/o scaffolding. Technically, the scaffolding would be easy except that different factions try to build different scaffolds while trying to tear the other scaffolds down. I think the book covers this aspect rather well. Most humans basically are machines sitting around waiting for someone telling them what to do (or that everything is gonna be alright). It's how humans are trained.

PS: I'm probably channeling Ashir here. Incidentally, I found him rather relatable. I don't recall him being described as autistic or neurodivergent in the book (7wb5?). As far as I tell, his subjective world is stereotypically INTJ (albeit a strongly typed case with little regard for Fe) which is quite different than the spectrum---the subjective descriptions give it away.

[Slevin]

Sure, some subset of humans are dumb. But even if we take a rather pessimistic view of humanity and say only the INT*’s can hold a logical thread for a long period of time, that’s still roughly 5% of the population. Most of them just probably don’t care about it as the highest priority right now, but it’s already becoming less and less of a thing you can just “wave away as not happening”. The real question is whether or not people can turn away from the loud constant distractions pulling every which way and see the obvious thing, and yeah, maybe they can’t. Just like they haven’t until now.

As highlighted in book “reality”, and yes this was only mentioned in passing several times, food prices skyrocketed past 2030ish or something like that. Given a feedback loop of food being very expensive (I think mid 2030s someone mentions a box of Mac and cheese being $6) and budgets dwindling, it’s not too hard to imagine most people going “oh, yeah, I gotta supplement this with my own food” over time. This is perfectly normal in parts of the world where people can’t always afford food / food is a massive budget item. Community gardens are already a thing, so most communities already have people with the knowledge, in fact my farmers market even has a master gardeners stand where you can ask them about anything (or buy some funky cool rare plants). People adopt fashion trends all the time, so once they see some famous influencer doing it, oh it’s cool and they should do it too. Also more normal with immigrants here (guy down the street grows massive tomatoes in his front lawn). More problematic is probably the actual climate issues affecting the gardens. That and actual physical displacement, which obviously impedes having the ability to grow things.

I generally agree with the “some humans building scaffolding, others rip it down” perspective, but things like eating and feeding people generally don’t require scaffolding, just hunger.

[7Wannabe5]

Side nitpick on the story here: this story focuses a bit too much on politics and pain, and not all the cool ways humans will adapt. If food prices go up too far, people will start growing food, at least the stuff they can easily grow (veg, and lots of potatoes and squash that are higher calorie). Pumpkin used to be a staple crop because of its easy preservation etc, I think squashes in general will come back in an even bigger way in a rougher climate. I want to see the stories of human ingenuity at the brink. This narrative infantilizes them a bit too much as just political and economic machines.

I agree. Maybe it's just because my social circle tends towards middle-aged Midwestern, but most people I know have some homespun skills that they don't maximize due to comparative advantage. The first food shock might be forgotten, but after a few are experienced practices will change.

I don't recall him being described as autistic or neurodivergent in the book (7wb5?).

Ashir uses the term "neurodivergent" in reference to his behavior at age 13 at his 10 year old sister's birthday party. He couldn't handle how all the girls were talking over each other, so he started screaming, and was later mortified by his own behavior. I agree that he is almost certainly INTJ, but such behavior at age 13 would likely put him over the line of some diagnosis of neurodivergence, such as Asperger's Syndrome.

[zbigi]

The real question is whether or not people can turn away from the loud constant distractions pulling every which way and see the obvious thing, and yeah, maybe they can’t. Just like they haven’t until now.

Pre-WWII Poland is a good analogy. Towards the end of the thirties, for anyone willing to read papers and think a little about what they're reading, it was apparent that a great catastrophe is coming. And yet, a vast majority of people kept living as if nothing was happening. A lot of them was lulled into a false sense of security by government propaganda about our mighty and powerful army - but I think believing that was largely a choice, an easier and more convenient one at the time. The smart thing was to grab your family and try to leave the country (or, better yet, the continent), but vanishingly small number of people did that before September 1st 1939. Maybe people don't trust their conclusions to the degree required to pursue such radical step? They would certainly look stupid if they moved to say Argentina and there was no war after all.

[7Wannabe5]

The Kate character was most interesting to me. Although not the same type as me, 8 (the Leader)on the cusp of 7 (the Explorer) AKA The Maverick, as opposed to 7 (the Explorer) on the cusp of 6 (the Traditionalist) AKA The Con-Artist, I was weirded out by how some of her ideas/actions intersected with mine. For instance, her group started one of their urban-renewal permaculture projects in the exact location where I attempted (before becoming ill) my last urban-renewal permaculture project. She is also an overt practitioner of polyamory (although significantly more Domme and bi than me) and, although generally uber Liberal, she consciously chose to include uber Conservative/Republicans in her "strategy" or "coalition" towards higher goals (which I also did, but more at the level of the personal is the political in the form of Grouchy Old Men/Engineers.) Obviously, none of these ideas/practices are unique, but it occured to me that the conjunction might represent one alternative path at boundary of Yellow which some other forum members might also more readily identify with.