Rachel Swirsky

I've never heard of the term UBI, for universal basic income before, but I think the general idea of that is something that I'm familiar with. This was overall a pretty tough read even though it was short, because it was very grim feeling for most of the time. The situations are often difficult, and it seems like no one is really happy. That's definitely sample size at play here as well since this is only four possible stories, really, but it was definitely on the darker side.

UBI is definitely a principle that is shown in poor light here. There are maybe a FEW ways it's presented positively, but typically by a character shown as being in the wrong or untrustworthy in some way. Any positives seem vastly outweighed by the negatives. Since there's a storyline specifically with a journalist/activist angle on the subject, some of that comes in direct discourse rather than leaving the reader to draw their own conclusions. Granted, there is some back and forth in those sections on the different sides to the argument, but it felt like there was a clear "right answer" being presented. I don't even necessarily disagree, it just felt very one-sided in reading it.

Since this is split into four totally separate narratives, you could probably just choose one character and read their sections all the way through, then do the same with another character. This might help if you prefer less jumping between people and places. It took me 2 or 3 times with each to really place them, which was tough when there was only about 5 chapters for each character (short story). There might be some historical notes and nuance that would be missed until you went to the next character, but I think overall each of them is pretty discrete and coherent on their own.… (mais)

I've never heard of the term UBI, for universal basic income before, but I think the general idea of that is something that I'm familiar with. This was overall a pretty tough read even though it was short, because it was very grim feeling for most of the time. The situations are often difficult, and it seems like no one is really happy. That's definitely sample size at play here as well since this is only four possible stories, really, but it was definitely on the darker side.

UBI is definitely a principle that is shown in poor light here. There are maybe a FEW ways it's presented positively, but typically by a character shown as being in the wrong or untrustworthy in some way. Any positives seem vastly outweighed by the negatives. Since there's a storyline specifically with a journalist/activist angle on the subject, some of that comes in direct discourse rather than leaving the reader to draw their own conclusions. Granted, there is some back and forth in those sections on the different sides to the argument, but it felt like there was a clear "right answer" being presented. I don't even necessarily disagree, it just felt very one-sided in reading it.

Since this is split into four totally separate narratives, you could probably just choose one character and read their sections all the way through, then do the same with another character. This might help if you prefer less jumping between people and places. It took me 2 or 3 times with each to really place them, which was tough when there was only about 5 chapters for each character (short story). There might be some historical notes and nuance that would be missed until you went to the next character, but I think overall each of them is pretty discrete and coherent on their own.… (mais)