This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Might be useful. -- Philcha ( talk) 20:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
A lot of the books are undated on this list, although they generally provide enough information to give them dates:
Any holes or problems that make using those dates problematic?-- Werthead ( talk) 00:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Very interesting discussion, I have no first-hand info but I am keen on reading the books in (chrono)logical order, so I have noted discrepancies as to the time of Excession. The main page of the present article lists c. 2067 AD. The discussion here suggests 18th century AD. The main page for the Looking to Windward article suggests 19th to 20th century AD. As far as I can tell all info comes from Excession, The Player of Games (2083 AD ?), and Looking to Windward (2170 AD ?), all referenced to Consider Phlebas. Could additional cross-check come from material in Matter? If the times for The Player of Games and Looking to Windward are correct, then I imagine it is possible to resolve the discrepancies as to the time of Excession. I woud eventually accept the above-noted inconsistency as a residual, on the premise that the masterMind may be faillible! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nrlsouza ( talk • contribs) 11:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I keep seeing that reference to the Sleeper Service in Excession causing problems for chronologically dating Matter... however, having just read Excession, it is clearly Grey Area that "disappears" so I'd place Matter as correctly being set at the later date and the reference to Sleeper Service being something else... (I vaguely remember there being more than one reference to it in other books but I'll have to finish rereading them to find it I guess. 2019/07/02. *<:@) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.125.41.18 ( talk) 07:01, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
I believe the main timeline conundrum with Excession is its position relative to The Player of Games. The latter is generally accepted to be set around 2083, that is, 716 years after the end of the Idiran War in 1367. Excession has a line that seems to place it before The Player of Games: "Nothing like this had been seen in the galaxy since the worst days of the Idiran war five hundred years earlier..." (chapter 11, V), but it also references events in The Player of Games: "Under the terms of the Temporary Emergencies (Allowed Subterfuges) Post-Debacle Steering Committee report following the Azadian Matter..." (chapter 3, IV). In other words, Excession claims to happen in 1867 (500 years after the war), but also knows about the events (the Azadian Matter) in The Player of Games from 2083. There is a Wired-interview [1] with Iain M. Banks where he acknowledged Excession having a chronology issue like this: "There was a loose end in Excession where the chronology went awry, and it was happily both before and after an earlier novel." He said there that this error was fixed in later editions of the book, but I have yet to find any edition that differs in this from the very first edition. Elanguescence ( talk) 06:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
The title of the article was changed without discussion from "Culture series" to "Culture (series)" with the comment "Using parenthetical disambiguation per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions".
However, "series" is NOT a disambiguation. This article is about the series of books. No one refer to "the Culture" meaning the books. That refers to the society, and there is a separate article about " The Culture". If you want to be pedantic, "The Culture" is the disambiguation. The article would be "(Culture) series" if you insist on parenthesising the disambiguation, which would be absurd. So the title should be returned to "Culture series".
And it is completely wrong to redirect [[The Culture}] to this article, so I have reverted that. "The Culture" refers to the society, no the series of books. Barsoomian ( talk) 02:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Culture series. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:19, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Culture series. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:28, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
This section, in particular, could use some work. Currently, it's poorly cited (a single citation is used to justify a claim about the entire genre of cyberpunk) and the opinion of one or two scholars is presented as fact. Without a greater variety of sources and more attention placed on attributing scholarly opinion AS opinion, this section doesn't meet Wikipedia guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3068:4FE0:A448:FBE6:169C:80D6 ( talk) 06:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
For those catching up - 86.167.5.121 changed the date the book takes place, I reverted it, the IP reverted it, I reverted it again, and User:Yisiririiysiyriyi (newly formed, this is their only contribution - seems to be the same person as the IP) reverted it again. In an attempt to avoid WP:3R, I edited the original version to what I believed was a consensus, reflecting the uncertainty. It's been reverted again, so I thought it time to bring it to the talk page.
Here's the original version before User:Yisiririiysiyriyi stepped in.
Here's what User:Yisiririiysiyriyi changed it to:
Here's my consensus change:
There are a couple things at play here:
If we can't reach a consensus, I'd like to request a WP:3O. Smith (talk) 21:03, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
do you actually have a response to my reasoning for making it 2967? Yisiririiysiyriyi ( talk) 15:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Banks is contradictory with the the dates of things and whether they take place before or after each other in the Culture history, he makes reference to the player of games in Excession even though the book repeatedly dates itself to hundreds of years before Player. I'm sure the actual reason Banks gives three different dates is just that he got the time line mixed up in his head, but if I'm trying to come up with an in universe way to reconcile them this is my argument, “1500” could be an approximation and “chel debacle” is vague enough not to necessarily mean the cast war
Yisiririiysiyriyi (
talk)
19:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
I still think the Chell reference is to vague, would you settle for having it 2875 to 2967? Yisiririiysiyriyi ( talk) 19:18, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Culture series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Culture series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:49, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
No consensus. Almost a month old and two relists, and still don't see general agreement below to rename these articles as proposed or to any of the suggested titles and qualifiers. As is usual with a no-consensus outcome, editors can strengthen their arguments and make another attempt in a few weeks to garner consensus for the proposed titles. A merge was proposed and opposed; however, that's a different discussion. There is no prejudice if editors want to try to garner consensus for a different title(s) (such as the other title(s) suggested below). Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! ( nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 14:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be
renamed and moved.
The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment. Links:
current log •
target log |
– A couple of issues here. The series article is disambiguated with "series" which isn't exactly addressed at WP:BOOKDAB but it does say to disambiguate with "type" and "series" is not a type as it can mean "film series" "TV series", season in the UK sense, and more. So if needed to be disambiguated, then either "book series" or "novel series". The fictional culture that appears in the work shouldn't at the primary location. NC:BOOKS again doesn't help here as it does not talk about how to disambiguate fictional topics. WP:NCTV says to use (series element)), so in this situation it would be The Culture (The Culture civilization) which I have no problem with, but expected others would so which is why I proposed "(fictional civilization)". Gonnym ( talk) 11:01, 2 July 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. — Newslinger talk 07:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC) --Relisted. Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 09:23, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
an article describing and summarizing the items of the franchise... should usually occupy the primary article title (eg. Star Trek, Harry Potter), and having this article at the base title is certainly in the same spirit. No such user ( talk) 12:43, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved ( non-admin closure) ~SS49~ {talk} 12:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
The Culture (series) → Culture series – I proposed this move be made during the course of the preceding requested move, which failed, and received support and no opposition, so I herein propose it formally.
This move will revert the title of the article currently located at " The Culture (series)" back to its original—" Culture series"—under which it was located before it was controversially moved without discussion—also see the similar previously-reversed move—to its current title, which contains a superfluous article ("The") and an unnecessary parenthetical disambiguator.
Thank you for your time. 144.134.2.40 ( talk) 08:42, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
As rationale I quote the text of my proposal from the aforementioned RM:
[...] Move Back this article to Culture series (i.e. The Culture (series) → Culture series), its original, correct tile which was in line with naming conventions—those used, e.g., for the article Foundation series—as explained on this talk page. The novel series described in The Culture (series) is known properly as the Culture series NOT The Culture (which is the name of the civilisation in the novels) series in the same way that the Foundation (not The Foundation) series is located at Foundation series. The article located at The Culture is in the correct place, is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and should not have a superfluous disambiguator [...]
— User:144.134.49.104 03:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Timmccloud: Respectfully, your edit summary makes no sense. There is no source that can justify 'the dystopian direction of modern capitalism' or calling anarcho-communism humane, in Wikipedia's voice, any more than stating 'rape is the most enjoyable pastime', since those are both (highly subjective and controversial) opinions, not facts. This isn't controversial. And I have no idea what you mean by asking for sources for the removal/rephrasing of content. Frankly, it's a bit piss-takey.. Ya hemos pasao ( talk) 07:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Beliefs in my culture 41.115.21.221 ( talk) 12:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Not explicitly a Culture novel, but recounts what appear to be the activities of a Special Circumstances agent and a Culture emigrant on a planet whose development is roughly equivalent to that of medieval Europe. The interwoven stories are told from the viewpoint of several of the locals.
I just finished reading Inversions, and it occurs to me that it is explicitly a Culture novel, since the primary plot involves the aforementioned use of the alien planetary culture by special circumstances agents "as a control group in the Culture's long-term comparison of intervention and non-interference", which is represented respectively by the Doctor (intervention) and the Bodyguard (non-interference). Critic Nick Gevers explains this in detail in his review. Viriditas ( talk) 22:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
My copy of Consider Phlebas says persecution, not idolatry. 82.36.70.45 ( talk) 18:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Elon Musk, on May 23 of 2024, during the Viva Tech event, made reference to these Culture books calling them “the most accurate portrayal of a future with super intelligent AI”. Source: https://x.com/VivaTech/status/1793668491079290942 2607:FEA8:E0A4:7F00:CD01:3CC5:A392:C9A3 ( talk) 00:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Might be useful. -- Philcha ( talk) 20:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
A lot of the books are undated on this list, although they generally provide enough information to give them dates:
Any holes or problems that make using those dates problematic?-- Werthead ( talk) 00:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Very interesting discussion, I have no first-hand info but I am keen on reading the books in (chrono)logical order, so I have noted discrepancies as to the time of Excession. The main page of the present article lists c. 2067 AD. The discussion here suggests 18th century AD. The main page for the Looking to Windward article suggests 19th to 20th century AD. As far as I can tell all info comes from Excession, The Player of Games (2083 AD ?), and Looking to Windward (2170 AD ?), all referenced to Consider Phlebas. Could additional cross-check come from material in Matter? If the times for The Player of Games and Looking to Windward are correct, then I imagine it is possible to resolve the discrepancies as to the time of Excession. I woud eventually accept the above-noted inconsistency as a residual, on the premise that the masterMind may be faillible! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nrlsouza ( talk • contribs) 11:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I keep seeing that reference to the Sleeper Service in Excession causing problems for chronologically dating Matter... however, having just read Excession, it is clearly Grey Area that "disappears" so I'd place Matter as correctly being set at the later date and the reference to Sleeper Service being something else... (I vaguely remember there being more than one reference to it in other books but I'll have to finish rereading them to find it I guess. 2019/07/02. *<:@) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.125.41.18 ( talk) 07:01, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
I believe the main timeline conundrum with Excession is its position relative to The Player of Games. The latter is generally accepted to be set around 2083, that is, 716 years after the end of the Idiran War in 1367. Excession has a line that seems to place it before The Player of Games: "Nothing like this had been seen in the galaxy since the worst days of the Idiran war five hundred years earlier..." (chapter 11, V), but it also references events in The Player of Games: "Under the terms of the Temporary Emergencies (Allowed Subterfuges) Post-Debacle Steering Committee report following the Azadian Matter..." (chapter 3, IV). In other words, Excession claims to happen in 1867 (500 years after the war), but also knows about the events (the Azadian Matter) in The Player of Games from 2083. There is a Wired-interview [1] with Iain M. Banks where he acknowledged Excession having a chronology issue like this: "There was a loose end in Excession where the chronology went awry, and it was happily both before and after an earlier novel." He said there that this error was fixed in later editions of the book, but I have yet to find any edition that differs in this from the very first edition. Elanguescence ( talk) 06:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
The title of the article was changed without discussion from "Culture series" to "Culture (series)" with the comment "Using parenthetical disambiguation per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions".
However, "series" is NOT a disambiguation. This article is about the series of books. No one refer to "the Culture" meaning the books. That refers to the society, and there is a separate article about " The Culture". If you want to be pedantic, "The Culture" is the disambiguation. The article would be "(Culture) series" if you insist on parenthesising the disambiguation, which would be absurd. So the title should be returned to "Culture series".
And it is completely wrong to redirect [[The Culture}] to this article, so I have reverted that. "The Culture" refers to the society, no the series of books. Barsoomian ( talk) 02:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Culture series. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:19, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Culture series. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:28, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
This section, in particular, could use some work. Currently, it's poorly cited (a single citation is used to justify a claim about the entire genre of cyberpunk) and the opinion of one or two scholars is presented as fact. Without a greater variety of sources and more attention placed on attributing scholarly opinion AS opinion, this section doesn't meet Wikipedia guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3068:4FE0:A448:FBE6:169C:80D6 ( talk) 06:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
For those catching up - 86.167.5.121 changed the date the book takes place, I reverted it, the IP reverted it, I reverted it again, and User:Yisiririiysiyriyi (newly formed, this is their only contribution - seems to be the same person as the IP) reverted it again. In an attempt to avoid WP:3R, I edited the original version to what I believed was a consensus, reflecting the uncertainty. It's been reverted again, so I thought it time to bring it to the talk page.
Here's the original version before User:Yisiririiysiyriyi stepped in.
Here's what User:Yisiririiysiyriyi changed it to:
Here's my consensus change:
There are a couple things at play here:
If we can't reach a consensus, I'd like to request a WP:3O. Smith (talk) 21:03, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
do you actually have a response to my reasoning for making it 2967? Yisiririiysiyriyi ( talk) 15:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Banks is contradictory with the the dates of things and whether they take place before or after each other in the Culture history, he makes reference to the player of games in Excession even though the book repeatedly dates itself to hundreds of years before Player. I'm sure the actual reason Banks gives three different dates is just that he got the time line mixed up in his head, but if I'm trying to come up with an in universe way to reconcile them this is my argument, “1500” could be an approximation and “chel debacle” is vague enough not to necessarily mean the cast war
Yisiririiysiyriyi (
talk)
19:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
I still think the Chell reference is to vague, would you settle for having it 2875 to 2967? Yisiririiysiyriyi ( talk) 19:18, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Culture series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Culture series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:49, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
No consensus. Almost a month old and two relists, and still don't see general agreement below to rename these articles as proposed or to any of the suggested titles and qualifiers. As is usual with a no-consensus outcome, editors can strengthen their arguments and make another attempt in a few weeks to garner consensus for the proposed titles. A merge was proposed and opposed; however, that's a different discussion. There is no prejudice if editors want to try to garner consensus for a different title(s) (such as the other title(s) suggested below). Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! ( nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 14:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be
renamed and moved.
The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment. Links:
current log •
target log |
– A couple of issues here. The series article is disambiguated with "series" which isn't exactly addressed at WP:BOOKDAB but it does say to disambiguate with "type" and "series" is not a type as it can mean "film series" "TV series", season in the UK sense, and more. So if needed to be disambiguated, then either "book series" or "novel series". The fictional culture that appears in the work shouldn't at the primary location. NC:BOOKS again doesn't help here as it does not talk about how to disambiguate fictional topics. WP:NCTV says to use (series element)), so in this situation it would be The Culture (The Culture civilization) which I have no problem with, but expected others would so which is why I proposed "(fictional civilization)". Gonnym ( talk) 11:01, 2 July 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. — Newslinger talk 07:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC) --Relisted. Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 09:23, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
an article describing and summarizing the items of the franchise... should usually occupy the primary article title (eg. Star Trek, Harry Potter), and having this article at the base title is certainly in the same spirit. No such user ( talk) 12:43, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved ( non-admin closure) ~SS49~ {talk} 12:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
The Culture (series) → Culture series – I proposed this move be made during the course of the preceding requested move, which failed, and received support and no opposition, so I herein propose it formally.
This move will revert the title of the article currently located at " The Culture (series)" back to its original—" Culture series"—under which it was located before it was controversially moved without discussion—also see the similar previously-reversed move—to its current title, which contains a superfluous article ("The") and an unnecessary parenthetical disambiguator.
Thank you for your time. 144.134.2.40 ( talk) 08:42, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
As rationale I quote the text of my proposal from the aforementioned RM:
[...] Move Back this article to Culture series (i.e. The Culture (series) → Culture series), its original, correct tile which was in line with naming conventions—those used, e.g., for the article Foundation series—as explained on this talk page. The novel series described in The Culture (series) is known properly as the Culture series NOT The Culture (which is the name of the civilisation in the novels) series in the same way that the Foundation (not The Foundation) series is located at Foundation series. The article located at The Culture is in the correct place, is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and should not have a superfluous disambiguator [...]
— User:144.134.49.104 03:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Timmccloud: Respectfully, your edit summary makes no sense. There is no source that can justify 'the dystopian direction of modern capitalism' or calling anarcho-communism humane, in Wikipedia's voice, any more than stating 'rape is the most enjoyable pastime', since those are both (highly subjective and controversial) opinions, not facts. This isn't controversial. And I have no idea what you mean by asking for sources for the removal/rephrasing of content. Frankly, it's a bit piss-takey.. Ya hemos pasao ( talk) 07:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Beliefs in my culture 41.115.21.221 ( talk) 12:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Not explicitly a Culture novel, but recounts what appear to be the activities of a Special Circumstances agent and a Culture emigrant on a planet whose development is roughly equivalent to that of medieval Europe. The interwoven stories are told from the viewpoint of several of the locals.
I just finished reading Inversions, and it occurs to me that it is explicitly a Culture novel, since the primary plot involves the aforementioned use of the alien planetary culture by special circumstances agents "as a control group in the Culture's long-term comparison of intervention and non-interference", which is represented respectively by the Doctor (intervention) and the Bodyguard (non-interference). Critic Nick Gevers explains this in detail in his review. Viriditas ( talk) 22:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
My copy of Consider Phlebas says persecution, not idolatry. 82.36.70.45 ( talk) 18:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Elon Musk, on May 23 of 2024, during the Viva Tech event, made reference to these Culture books calling them “the most accurate portrayal of a future with super intelligent AI”. Source: https://x.com/VivaTech/status/1793668491079290942 2607:FEA8:E0A4:7F00:CD01:3CC5:A392:C9A3 ( talk) 00:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC)