Hey, I forgot this thread existed, oops.

So I just finished [b]Thank You For Your Cooperation[/b] by [b]Adam Wasserman[/b]. This book was a gift from a friend, because they knew I GM the Paranoia Tabletop System and this was apparently somewhat inspired (see: ripped off) from it. For those of you that don't know, Paranoia (and this book) are both set in sci-fi dystopias where humanity has somehow destroyed the world and now lives in an underground bunker under the totalitarian control of a paranoid and insane AI computer.  

Overall it was a mediocre experience. The best parts of the book in my opinion were its setting and world building, which were largely lifted from its influences, and to a lesser extent the rather action packed plot. When it came to characterisation, it is pretty abysmal, esepcially so for the main character who was a text book Gary-stu with multiple unexplained hidden talents and frankly came off as something of an obnoxious arsehole when I think he was supposed to be likable. There characters who were supposed to be very intelligent, with very dumb plans, and a love interest who does something so repugnant to the main character it is ultimately inconceivable to me that he (or anyone else for that matter) would ever want to be with her.

There were some nice moments, particularly in a character that partially represented the child-like wonder and joy of experiencing a world outside of the totalitarian nightmare of the bunker. There was one particularly excellent scene where they show the main character fish living in river, it really conveyed just how magically it would be to see creatures that lived under water for the first time. 

I also had some issues with the writing style, it was a very colloquial first person, but it didn't seem to completely commit to writing in the voice of someone raised in the kind of environment the story portrays. Lots of word choices that stuck out to me, and made me go 'but how does this character know about X?'. The author also has a habit of jumping around in the narrative, often jumping straight to an event and then explaining how they got there afterwards. It worked once or twice, but felt overused by the novel's end. It's also a self published affair, and unfortunately my edition was not particularly well proof-read. 

I am currently reading [b]On Friendship[/b] by [b]Michel de Montaigne[/b], a collection of Essays, by the author that first popularised the format. Not too much to say since I've only just started it. But it seems pretty readable for a 16th century translated philosophy text.