16 days later, i’ve finally finished ‘nexus’ by yuval noah harari.
my verdict though: a definite meh…! not bad – just a bit much.
to elaborate, allow me to try the opposite of a compliment sandwich: a critique sandwich (critique – compliment – critique).
first up
part one of the book: in my book (pun intented), this was all about setting the scene. before harari could explore AI’s impact on human structures and societies, he had to first explain how, what he calls, information networks worked in the past – in both democracies and totalitarian regimes.
but this scene-setting wasn’t a chapter. it was the entire first part.
it’s not that it wasn’t interesting – it was. and it wasn’t off-topic – part two made that clear. it was just… unnecessarily long.
now to the compliments
1 – the quality of the argument
once i reached part two, i kept catching myself disagreeing with harari – only to find the next paragraph addressing that very objection. almost like a conversation. i don’t know how many people he must have spoken to in drafting this, but that part of the book felt surprisingly universal. he’s clearly thought long and hard about what he wanted to say. and it paid off.
2 – perspective-taking
we often hear that humankind is but a particle of dust in the universe’s past timeline. harari reminds us we’re just as small in its future. i found that equal parts comforting (in the scope of things) and alarming (in the context of AI). which is ultimately why i read (and love) nonfiction. i expect it to unsettle me and shift my thinking.
to close, one last critique
i have a high pain threshold for dense, academic writing – and ‘nexus’ tested it.
your mind needs to be sharp to follow it. forget reading it before bed – unless you want a lullaby. in which case, perfect choice.
harsh, i know. but i do believe much of this book could have been said more simply – and in about two-thirds the space.
a powerful and urgent message buried under too many words.
