Vance identifies as a Conservative. I identify as a Democratic Socialist. Politically, it would look like we are opposites..... yet, there is a lot of common ground on our theories of how the issues of poverty can be solved. The reason, in my mind, for that common ground is our shared experiences. Those of us who have lived it understand it in a way that those who haven't never will. This is why we need elected officials from every corner of every class of people we can find. The lenses they are currently looking through are much too narrow.
"An Authentic Experience" is one of those books that I call a builder. At the beginning I didn't like Silver. Not even a little. She seems hollow, selfish and shallow. BUT....(and here is why I call this book a builder) by about the middle of the book I realized that her initial shallowness was part of her evolution as a character. This is one of those books about growing up. It's about gaining wisdom through experience. "An Authentic Experience" is really about how lifes challenges (whether they be our own challenges or those closest to us) morph us into someone different. Someone deeper. Someone wiser. Someone who is actually authentic.
Something readers should take away from this part of Ishikawa's story is how a persons environment has a direct affect on their character. Some will argue that one must rise above such things but the reality is that most do not and in all honesty shouldn't be expected to. The existence of such oppression is what matters. Life shouldn't be a series of trial by fire. Are we not evolved past this? Are we all still primal beasts unable to transmogrify our society?
In "Artemis", we are also introduced to some judicial ethics that, if not carefully considered and worked out now, will plague us as we've already experienced with the explosion of tech and our judicial systems sluggish pace in keeping up. Is it ethical to deport someone to a planet they haven't been on since they were a young child knowing that it will cause them severe health issues? Is it ethical to deport someone to a country they know nothing of since they didn't grow up there? What constitutes a persons citizenship? As humanity becomes ever more connected is it ethical to continue to divide us into countries? How we move forward with these issues now and later will have a huge effect on our momentum technologically.
The old, "if i have to go through it, so do you" thing. I didn't understand it then and as I've gotten older, I understand it even less. Being hurt is not a rite of passage. Life does not have to be a contest of who can endure the most.
Geurts delivers a compelling tale of the reluctant orphan who finds himself to be more than he could ever have imagined. Imharak's place in the world is so much more than the sum of his bloodline. Finding himself in the midst of invasion, Imharak must discover which side of himself to align with. Will he be the conqueror or the conquered?
While one woman examines the cultural implications of Ugandan names, another describes being tortured in a secret prison, and a third traces the mix of African and imported religions that shaped her. One mocks girls’ traditional sex education, while another voices her love of sports and a third reflects on her struggle to overcome a legacy of growing up in a war zone. All challenge social expectations, yet many view "modernization" with ambivalence.