i've got a dumb question about The Overstory | book review 

I really appreciated hearing your thoughts on this novel! I had not heard the criticisms before about this book excluding black and indigenous stories, and it sounds like it definitely could have used some more nuanced characterization for what characters of color are present. I am still interested in this book because of the trees part, and I find your discussion about how it might have worked better as a short story collection to be really insightful! This is one of those books that idealistically I would like to get to one day, but it hasn't really been a priority and I feel like the longer time goes by, the less likely it is that I will gravitate towards this one above others.

I appreciated your insights because I was struggling with why I didn't like it and I think you are right, the fiction seems forced onto the ideas. Thank you for articulating that for me.

I completely agree about the non-white characters. They felt very caricatured to me. On the topic of "the point of the fiction", I also agree. Being a science writer, you might have already read the more recent work Entangled Life by Merlin Sheldrake. It's non-fiction, with the main protagonists being fungi, but due to the ecosystem of mycorrhizal fungi and their interaction with trees, the message about the collective health of forests and the impact to that collective health when aspects of the ecosystem are harmed is very present. I think it's a great example of non-fiction being able to creatively narrate such a topic in a compelling way. I also personally have a theory as to why the characters in The Overstory feel a bit empty. I think that Powers might have intended a Science Fiction interpretation to the story where the characters are all AI aspects of Neelay's game. The odd connection between the childless Brinkman couple and Olivia/Maidenhair can't be easily reconciled without some sort of multiverse or simulation element being involved.

This was one of the best books I have ever read... for so many reasons (I am planning my own full explanation about why in a video in a bit/ the trees will understand the timeline;) but seriously, if you go back to page three and really think about who or what the narrator is... and how Eastern philosophies and Indigenous people were not only included but highlighted in the last section of the book (SEEDS) for a greater understanding of everything, and everything in this book. This book needs to be read carefully and slowly, just as a tree grows... and then hopefully you can see all of the beauty.

What made you want to read this book in the first place? Could you recall the way your week flowed up to the first time you heard about the book? What kind of person recommended the book?? This information is probably somewhat important if Im going to be thinking on about your question

After hear your thoughts about literature, inadequacy and techniques and esthetic, how do you typically handle more avant-garde literature icons? I.E: pynchon & lispector. I honestly find literature stuck into two main camps, the collegiate circle who are a bunch of people who have amazing prose & a sloggy nooze fest, or your hyperstylized writers like Raymond carver or an Ali smith. Richard Powers openly stated that the main focus was a manifestation of 2 things. 1.) first hand experience of “the old world forest of America” where he goes on to state were at the time covering only 4% of the modern American geography. He in turn became profoundly inspired left his home in Silicon Valley, quit his Ivy League teaching job and moved to the Smokey’s. 2.) recognizing that deep literature and the mainstream at large has really turned away from this style of novel. But also the themes and it’s overall focus have become very watered down and transparent, so I’m assuming he set out to write very inspired and motivated language about trees, a passion novel. Love your thoughts, super cohesive! Thanks so much! As for the question on powers’s lack of usage of indigenous, P.o.c and so on, that seems to be a complicated issue at large in the literary world. Inclusion is incredibly important. I can’t even begin to imagine how many wonderful stories we may not ever get to experience in the effects of colonialism and the social issues and conflicts it’s caused. I always feel this is a complicated problem brought on by the wrong reasoning. If no representation is the biggest concern I think those, reviewers or readers may be missing the point. No representation IMO, is a lot better than the current problem and trend, tokenism. It’s caused a lot of dilemmas in the literary world at least what I’ve seen looking in. (I don’t really care as to what the established literary world says about what, they’ve always been behind the trend) We have fantastic literary voices, amazing people of color making remarkable stories. Zadie smith, Colson whitehead, fernanda Melchor, junot Diaz, James McBride, adania shibli. Just to name a few, there’s never been a time where black queer writers are up for prizes. It’s special. And I feel lucky to witness that. But to make an answer I’m sure some won’t appreciate, if that’s your biggest complaint about the novel, there’s other places you can look. This book is about trees. Plain and simple. These characters for the most part can be pretty much anyone. Also idk if characters being black, or indigenous would change the impact, tone, meaning or commitment to the prose or ideas implemented here. Thanks so much for this video, insightful and I’m very excited to be a new viewier of your channel! Sending my best!

I really liked The Overstory but I often feel the same way you do about literary fiction, in other words did I get it? I doubt I do get it most of the time, but with this book, I loved the tree stuff and the character Patricia enough that I did not care. I do love your idea that his ideas may have worked better as a short story/essay type collection.

Great video! I really liked this book but didn't get to finish it.

I haven't read the book! But I couldn't help noticing a few things, which I feel, might relate to your question. But it's really a "testballoon" in bad weather! The book has been written by a guy right? I dare to ask, being a "member". This centering of everything around one idea, the "good old tradition" of objectifying, here, provided I understand you correctly, of the characters in the stories as mere "vectors/structural steel bars/treebranches who were shaped with no other purpose than to transfer the wind load of the "tree-novel-edifice" to the foundation? I have to say though, that this might or might not have to do with the fact that this mindset has become my general source of annoyance, happily provided by my Testosterone inflicted social surroundings...

I enjoyed this book a lot, I found it flawed as a novel but wonderful as propaganda for climate change and deforestation.

I'm not even sure The Overstory has a good argument besides "trees good." Quite frankly this book was trash.