I really like it. And I did not expect to.

And the reason I like it is related to why it is so difficult to explain why I like it. It does not fit any moulds. But I'll try.

First, I am usually rather attracted to stories of those opposing a homogenising entity; but this attraction leaves a bad taste because the big bad is almost invariably the government and the hero the one refusing to participate in the ordered society. This does not work with my ideological stance. I am in favour of a strong government, one in which we pay a lot of tax and get a lot in return. This gets swept over in the rather facile "fight the man" scenarios. I am thinking in part about Firefly.

But this book takes on patterns and changes them. It is what it does. That is the point of it, in a way. And one of the things it does is take the pattern of lone hero vs big bad entity, and inserting using it to discuss the inhumanity of big corporations instead. I like that. In part because it fits much better with my world view.

But I must stress that the changing of patterns itself is what really appeals to me. I like how the form, the shape, of the book harmonises with the content (yes, I know the opposition of the two is old-fashioned, but sometimes it is useful) and the expression of the book to such an extent. Simplified: it is about the danger of simply following patterns, about how departing from them, rejecting them and going down a different path is good; the book then expresses this through a story which itself takes patterns and changes them -- the ninjas and pirates are not the ninjas and pirates of the internet subculture, the big bad vs hero is not the conventional one, mimes are not scary, I could go on and on --; and then the language itself is purposefully idiosyncratic. That is what all those weird formulations come in.

And I love the characters, but I'll discuss that below.

I love the way it pretends to be linear and rambling, and then picks up again precisely those things which at the time you first read them seemed like they had simply been put in because the author's mind was overflowing and his editor did not want to cut it. It is baroque. All those people who love minimalism are going to hate this book, but the baroque style appeals to me. And it takes things apart in order to put them together in a different way -- and that is something I value very highly in literature.

And now I am going to sound a little nuts. Usually, when I read, books or sections of books have colours and shapes in my mind. It is not a conscious thing, but something my brain uses to make sense of the world, I think. Philosophy texts usually only have one colour. So do some books, where the focus is on one pattern, one idea and the development of it. This one has an insane number of colours and shapes. That is a good thing.