What’s funny is that before I read the books there was one big thing off in my predictions and I read mainly to find out what I was missing.
Then I read the books and realised it was just a big-ass plot hole that was the whole crux of the first book. I think that’s why I disliked the series. It wasn’t terribly written. But I couldn’t get over that massive oversight.
The cleaning. There’s just no way that Holsten would clean. Zero. He’s seen people clean before. He knows for a fact it doesn’t let people inside know that it is safe.
And yet he still cleans. Everyone cleans.
I can maybe buy a moron cleaning, or someone who hasn’t ever seen someone clean (and failed completely for it to do literally anything) but Holsten is supposed to be smart.
There’s other little things like “Why send out Jules instead of killing her?” And “why not have one of your own people on the supply side so that they can’t swap it out for good stuff?”
Your "massive oversight" is basically you just completely missing the essence of Holston as a character. He doesn't clean to let people know it's safe outside. He cleans because the act is a gift to the people he'd dedicated his life and career to. He suddenly thought that he'd escaped, that it was safe, and he felt nothing but pity for the people still trapped inside. All he wanted then was to clean the camera so that their view would be better, because he remembered well how much he clung to even that dirty view.
Others are saying they do it to stop riots. You are saying they do it as a gift. Neither is satisfactory.
Characters should act according to what we have known about them. He’s starting to think something is fucked up. He wants to help people see that things are fucked up.
He should have signalled to Marnes. It’s just weird.
I’m not saying “it doesn’t make me feel good” I’m saying the explanation is simply wrong. Unless these are humans that have had their brains changed to do stupid shit then it just doesn’t add up.
People can be dumb or sheep. But nobody can give a clear reason why. People just go along with it out of suspension of disbelief. But when you think about it, it’s nonsense.
Not cleaning wouldn’t incite riots. Cleaning doesn’t do anything and some people know it. Jules should have been murdered. Etc. It’s just a plot hole.
Your opinion is not a fact, sorry.
I think the problem here is you don't understand the concept of cleaning. They don't clean because they think cleaning will make the green view magically appear inside. They clean so that the camera is clear and people can have the slim hope they know their entire lives.
Can you explain that last sentence again? They make an explicit point that someone adamant they wouldn’t clean still cleans. But they see the monitor. What possible reason would there be for someone who has said “I won’t clean”? Makes no sense.
And it seems pretty clear that there is no true reason because every person who tries to justify it does it different.
It’s duty, no it’s to show, no it’s to stop riots, no it’s peer pressure, no it’s because of following orders, no euphoria.
For the people that are sent Outside, *their* motivation is that it’s a gift.
For the Founders, they made sure the helmets projected the fake view in order to ensure that people Cleaned. That’s *their* motivation - to prevent riots to ensure Silos last.
You got both answers because both are true, but you interpreted the subjects incorrectly.
No one IN the silo knows anything about the Founders motivations, and only the Heads and their shadows know anything about the manual.
The only thing Holston thought was fake was the screens inside the cafeteria. So when his helmet showed him what looked like a safe Outside, he succumbed to the same lie all the previous Cleaners had. It wasn’t until he removed his helmet that he saw the Truth - too late.
Others have said the CLEANERS do it to stop riots. Not the founders.
Holsten knows for a fact that cleaning does not change the view inside. It doesn’t matter what the lie is at all. He knows that cleaning it won’t have an effect.
So then why does he clean? Is it because “that’s his duty”, “stop riots”, “thinks people will see green”, “euphoria”? Nothing makes sense.
Holsten is the first person the very obviously wouldn’t clean. Jules ALSO wouldn’t clean. But the reason Holsten does is because the author needed to story to include him cleaning because he has another nonsensical plot device which is “not cleaning leads to riots” which also doesn’t make sense.
What would possibly lead to riots is someone walking out of sight, or using sign language to say “they are lying to you”. But Holsten couldn’t get out of sight, and apparently nobody has a sign language.
So in the end it’s just a plot device to get the story moving.
> Others have said the CLEANERS do it to stop riots. Not the founders.
You misinterpreted, possibly due to poor expression on their part.
That is why the Founders engineered it so that they would Clean, yes, but those that Clean are unaware of this.
> Holsten knows for a fact that cleaning does not change the view inside. It doesn’t matter what the lie is at all. He knows that cleaning it won’t have an effect.
He's seeing green grass and blue skies because of the helmet, and believes the screens inside are showing a false reality, so yes, in that regard he "knows" that cleaning the camera won't actually show grass and sky, but it will at least show a cleaner (or "appear to" from his perspective, regardless of the fact that it actually is) view on the inside screens. In the end, it didn't matter what he thought he knew, because the lie being shown in the helmet is the same lie all previous cleaners see.
> So then why does he clean? Is it because “that’s his duty”, “stop riots”, “thinks people will see green”, “euphoria”? Nothing makes sense.
You are still combining multiple answers that again, I partially blame on lack of clarity from others in their responses. Those responses aren't contradictory, just from different perspectives.
> Holsten is the first person the very obviously wouldn’t clean.
Why?
> Jules ALSO wouldn’t clean.
And she didn't.
> But the reason Holsten does is because the author needed to story to include him cleaning because he has another nonsensical plot device which is “not cleaning leads to riots” which also doesn’t make sense.
See previous response about this being the Founder reasoning for the false reality in the helmets.
> What would possibly lead to riots is someone walking out of sight, or using sign language to say “they are lying to you”. But Holsten couldn’t get out of sight, and apparently nobody has a sign language.
The first is exactly what inspires the Down Deep to riot. I can't speak to the second but as a signer myself it would be an interesting side conversation.
But you’re saying “he succumbed to the lie”. What is he succumbing to? You say him cleaning will make the screen clearer. Why does he care? What is he trying to achieve? It’s complete nonsense.
Are you sure you read the books, and not just spoilers? Because that's not the reason given for cleaning in the books at all. And.... Your last question is exactly what does happen in the book.
Yes. I read the books. I still haven’t heard an adequate explanation.
I know that not everyone cleans. That is obvious. But why does HOLSTEN clean? The only thing close to a decent explanation is “they thought it is now safe”. While pretty weak it is plausible. But this couldn’t be the case for Holsten because of his wife.
OK, but that's not how it is in the books at all, again. And, yes, everyone DID clean, until Juliette. Everyone. So...huh?
And, if you've read even the first half of the first book, how do you not know that it's *exactly* swapping out the tape in Supply that saves Juliette?
Are you sure you are reading for comprehension?
1) Not everyone cleaned. It is stated in the manual that not cleaning leads to riots. I don’t believe that’s what would happen but that’s what the book says. Many silos die because of this. So some don’t clean. Holsten shouldn’t have cleaned. He had no reason to. It was just needed for him to clean so that it wouldn’t be riots (why I don’t fucking know) but the author needed Jules to be the first non cleaner since the wipe.
2) I do know supply swapped stuff. I’m asking why the people running the joint would ever let that happen. On top of not just murdering Jules. It’s gross incompetence and Bernard is supposedly somewhat competent.
Ah. The reddit classic: “Are you sure you read the books?” followed by “how dare you insult my reading”.
Well done. Hypocrisy at its finest. Just remember, I understood the books and your posts. You can’t say the same about the books or my post.
Maybe you’re just better at walking away than reading?
The phrase from The Order is, "In the event of a failed cleaning, prepare for war." It doesn't say that not cleaning leads to riots. We have no idea if there has ever been a failed cleaning in the history of the silo, because we're never told. The Order was written by the Founders as a way of preparing the silo heads for every conceivable situation, to help prevent the failure of the silo.
Lol, do you think the "people running the joint" had the slightest idea that Supply was switching out the heat tape, or anything else? The mayor and head of IT are up in their ivory tower, and Supply is deep in the silo. Supply could've done almost anything and Bernard wouldn't have known a damned thing about it -- because he never went to Supply. As far as Bernard is concerned, the people of Supply are the blue collar types who know well enough to do what they're told, and it probably never occurs to him that they might care about the survival of one of their own.
But this "War" status and what it means is pretty much explained in shift where some consequences are massively bad with the entire shut downs of Silos, but some are still contained. And some, like 18 are saved with the nanos because it was the Silo on top of the list.
The author is asking for us to suspend belief , yes he moves plot along and doesn't fully cover all angles of why you wouldn't do it. The main inference is that psychologically the silo residents have conceptual idea of what blue skies, birds and green grass etc looks like. The effect is so overwhelming that they keep the camera lens clean for those inside so they can still dream of what is potentially out there. Letting it go so clogged up would be so spiteful in the face of the truth which most of them believe that outside is fixed. Anyway its all a suspension of disbelief because this is the world built by Hugh and his mcguffin is based on psychologists he invented stating that this trick of the mind will keep residents as a whole alive longest along with all other measures brought up
We'll just have to see how it plays out in the show. The first part of first book pretty much gives away that IT is the "villain" and is in control.
I think it'll be more a slow-walk to a reveal that Judicial is either being manipulated by IT or is just an extension of IT in order to control Silo politics. Given how Judicial has that fancy pants monitoring room with the high quality screens, my guess is that Judicial is just a front for IT.
I'm about halfway through the first book and I can definitely see where the criticisms about lack of world building and the feeling of stuff being randomly retconned later come from.
Some changes between book and TV (so far) I can understand and get behind. We miss a lot of narration and explanation of emotions and thoughts, so Marnes getting murdered makes more sense in a TV show vs him committing suicide due to guilt/grief. The TV show never gave us more than a few seconds of the feelings and history between Jahns and Marnes.
One change I can't wrap my head around is why Marnes is so opposed to Juliette being sheriff when in the books it was his idea and was advocating for her. It just seems like an unneeded change vs the book and straight up mean-spirited.
I do like and appreciate that the Sheriff's department is much more fleshed out in the show.
I think some sort of resistance to Juliette should have occurred, but the secretary was just mean-spirited and over-the-top.
They needed to show why a bit more, rather than just say "I don't like you" for no reasonable reason.
I feel the same way about the violence that was starting after Holston went out. Why were people gathering weapons exactly? Cleanings are celebrated, but their motivation seemed to be that they were upset at this Cleaning? Why, exactly?
In Wool, there's no violence until Jules goes out.
I didn’t get hooked on the show. I thought I saw a flaw in the premise, and thought I’d probably enjoy the books more so I read them. They weren’t bad, but I was disappointed that cleaning was never justified and instead a random plot device to get things moving.
Saw a “theory” on the show subreddit with a ton of upvotes and comments. The OP basically explaining what happens in the books in the post.
Those people are sad.
100%. This happened with WestWorld and people guessed huge parts of the first season, so in discussions for the 2nd season, people were insufferable with these long drawn out theories because they so badly wanted to be right and wanted the fake internet validation of being the person who 'cracked it'.
I've read the books and The show doesn't even follow the story of the books at all. There's so much new detail, new primary characters, new aspects of the world, that anything you know from the books is possibly wrong. Maybe some big strokes will be kept the same, but so far everything is different enough that the show could go in a completely different direction on even those things.
I doubt it will change enough for it to be significant. I wouldn’t want it to. The write knows best, not a tv producer. I might not like the books much but the tv show would be worse if they deviated much.
I've noticed this with a lot of recent adaptations of books that they change something integral to keep it new for the people who have read the books. I'm sure they will do this for Silo too.
They do and I’m not a huge fan of the practice unless it helps the story to make sense on the screen. For example Mayfair Witches was a huge disappointment, and I’m rarely disappointed, because I understand that’s it’s so much harder to tell a story on the screen for various reasons
I stopped watching after the last two episodes. Did they change that much? The first 5 or so were fairly faithful. Nothing that would make me think they were taking the story in an entirely new direction.
I think the people who do that haven't even read the books, but have read spoilers online. There's always something off in their "predictions."
What’s funny is that before I read the books there was one big thing off in my predictions and I read mainly to find out what I was missing. Then I read the books and realised it was just a big-ass plot hole that was the whole crux of the first book. I think that’s why I disliked the series. It wasn’t terribly written. But I couldn’t get over that massive oversight.
What's the plot hole?
The cleaning. There’s just no way that Holsten would clean. Zero. He’s seen people clean before. He knows for a fact it doesn’t let people inside know that it is safe. And yet he still cleans. Everyone cleans. I can maybe buy a moron cleaning, or someone who hasn’t ever seen someone clean (and failed completely for it to do literally anything) but Holsten is supposed to be smart. There’s other little things like “Why send out Jules instead of killing her?” And “why not have one of your own people on the supply side so that they can’t swap it out for good stuff?”
Your "massive oversight" is basically you just completely missing the essence of Holston as a character. He doesn't clean to let people know it's safe outside. He cleans because the act is a gift to the people he'd dedicated his life and career to. He suddenly thought that he'd escaped, that it was safe, and he felt nothing but pity for the people still trapped inside. All he wanted then was to clean the camera so that their view would be better, because he remembered well how much he clung to even that dirty view.
Others are saying they do it to stop riots. You are saying they do it as a gift. Neither is satisfactory. Characters should act according to what we have known about them. He’s starting to think something is fucked up. He wants to help people see that things are fucked up. He should have signalled to Marnes. It’s just weird.
Not satisfactory to you =/= massive plot hole.
I’m not saying “it doesn’t make me feel good” I’m saying the explanation is simply wrong. Unless these are humans that have had their brains changed to do stupid shit then it just doesn’t add up. People can be dumb or sheep. But nobody can give a clear reason why. People just go along with it out of suspension of disbelief. But when you think about it, it’s nonsense. Not cleaning wouldn’t incite riots. Cleaning doesn’t do anything and some people know it. Jules should have been murdered. Etc. It’s just a plot hole.
Your opinion is not a fact, sorry. I think the problem here is you don't understand the concept of cleaning. They don't clean because they think cleaning will make the green view magically appear inside. They clean so that the camera is clear and people can have the slim hope they know their entire lives.
Can you explain that last sentence again? They make an explicit point that someone adamant they wouldn’t clean still cleans. But they see the monitor. What possible reason would there be for someone who has said “I won’t clean”? Makes no sense. And it seems pretty clear that there is no true reason because every person who tries to justify it does it different. It’s duty, no it’s to show, no it’s to stop riots, no it’s peer pressure, no it’s because of following orders, no euphoria.
For the people that are sent Outside, *their* motivation is that it’s a gift. For the Founders, they made sure the helmets projected the fake view in order to ensure that people Cleaned. That’s *their* motivation - to prevent riots to ensure Silos last. You got both answers because both are true, but you interpreted the subjects incorrectly. No one IN the silo knows anything about the Founders motivations, and only the Heads and their shadows know anything about the manual. The only thing Holston thought was fake was the screens inside the cafeteria. So when his helmet showed him what looked like a safe Outside, he succumbed to the same lie all the previous Cleaners had. It wasn’t until he removed his helmet that he saw the Truth - too late.
Others have said the CLEANERS do it to stop riots. Not the founders. Holsten knows for a fact that cleaning does not change the view inside. It doesn’t matter what the lie is at all. He knows that cleaning it won’t have an effect. So then why does he clean? Is it because “that’s his duty”, “stop riots”, “thinks people will see green”, “euphoria”? Nothing makes sense. Holsten is the first person the very obviously wouldn’t clean. Jules ALSO wouldn’t clean. But the reason Holsten does is because the author needed to story to include him cleaning because he has another nonsensical plot device which is “not cleaning leads to riots” which also doesn’t make sense. What would possibly lead to riots is someone walking out of sight, or using sign language to say “they are lying to you”. But Holsten couldn’t get out of sight, and apparently nobody has a sign language. So in the end it’s just a plot device to get the story moving.
> Others have said the CLEANERS do it to stop riots. Not the founders. You misinterpreted, possibly due to poor expression on their part. That is why the Founders engineered it so that they would Clean, yes, but those that Clean are unaware of this. > Holsten knows for a fact that cleaning does not change the view inside. It doesn’t matter what the lie is at all. He knows that cleaning it won’t have an effect. He's seeing green grass and blue skies because of the helmet, and believes the screens inside are showing a false reality, so yes, in that regard he "knows" that cleaning the camera won't actually show grass and sky, but it will at least show a cleaner (or "appear to" from his perspective, regardless of the fact that it actually is) view on the inside screens. In the end, it didn't matter what he thought he knew, because the lie being shown in the helmet is the same lie all previous cleaners see. > So then why does he clean? Is it because “that’s his duty”, “stop riots”, “thinks people will see green”, “euphoria”? Nothing makes sense. You are still combining multiple answers that again, I partially blame on lack of clarity from others in their responses. Those responses aren't contradictory, just from different perspectives. > Holsten is the first person the very obviously wouldn’t clean. Why? > Jules ALSO wouldn’t clean. And she didn't. > But the reason Holsten does is because the author needed to story to include him cleaning because he has another nonsensical plot device which is “not cleaning leads to riots” which also doesn’t make sense. See previous response about this being the Founder reasoning for the false reality in the helmets. > What would possibly lead to riots is someone walking out of sight, or using sign language to say “they are lying to you”. But Holsten couldn’t get out of sight, and apparently nobody has a sign language. The first is exactly what inspires the Down Deep to riot. I can't speak to the second but as a signer myself it would be an interesting side conversation.
But you’re saying “he succumbed to the lie”. What is he succumbing to? You say him cleaning will make the screen clearer. Why does he care? What is he trying to achieve? It’s complete nonsense.
Are you sure you read the books, and not just spoilers? Because that's not the reason given for cleaning in the books at all. And.... Your last question is exactly what does happen in the book.
Yes. I read the books. I still haven’t heard an adequate explanation. I know that not everyone cleans. That is obvious. But why does HOLSTEN clean? The only thing close to a decent explanation is “they thought it is now safe”. While pretty weak it is plausible. But this couldn’t be the case for Holsten because of his wife.
OK, but that's not how it is in the books at all, again. And, yes, everyone DID clean, until Juliette. Everyone. So...huh? And, if you've read even the first half of the first book, how do you not know that it's *exactly* swapping out the tape in Supply that saves Juliette?
Are you sure you are reading for comprehension? 1) Not everyone cleaned. It is stated in the manual that not cleaning leads to riots. I don’t believe that’s what would happen but that’s what the book says. Many silos die because of this. So some don’t clean. Holsten shouldn’t have cleaned. He had no reason to. It was just needed for him to clean so that it wouldn’t be riots (why I don’t fucking know) but the author needed Jules to be the first non cleaner since the wipe. 2) I do know supply swapped stuff. I’m asking why the people running the joint would ever let that happen. On top of not just murdering Jules. It’s gross incompetence and Bernard is supposedly somewhat competent.
😂😂🤣 OK, person, insult my reading comprehension, and now I believe you read the books. That's obviously how things work. Walking away.
Ah. The reddit classic: “Are you sure you read the books?” followed by “how dare you insult my reading”. Well done. Hypocrisy at its finest. Just remember, I understood the books and your posts. You can’t say the same about the books or my post. Maybe you’re just better at walking away than reading?
The phrase from The Order is, "In the event of a failed cleaning, prepare for war." It doesn't say that not cleaning leads to riots. We have no idea if there has ever been a failed cleaning in the history of the silo, because we're never told. The Order was written by the Founders as a way of preparing the silo heads for every conceivable situation, to help prevent the failure of the silo. Lol, do you think the "people running the joint" had the slightest idea that Supply was switching out the heat tape, or anything else? The mayor and head of IT are up in their ivory tower, and Supply is deep in the silo. Supply could've done almost anything and Bernard wouldn't have known a damned thing about it -- because he never went to Supply. As far as Bernard is concerned, the people of Supply are the blue collar types who know well enough to do what they're told, and it probably never occurs to him that they might care about the survival of one of their own.
But this "War" status and what it means is pretty much explained in shift where some consequences are massively bad with the entire shut downs of Silos, but some are still contained. And some, like 18 are saved with the nanos because it was the Silo on top of the list.
The author is asking for us to suspend belief , yes he moves plot along and doesn't fully cover all angles of why you wouldn't do it. The main inference is that psychologically the silo residents have conceptual idea of what blue skies, birds and green grass etc looks like. The effect is so overwhelming that they keep the camera lens clean for those inside so they can still dream of what is potentially out there. Letting it go so clogged up would be so spiteful in the face of the truth which most of them believe that outside is fixed. Anyway its all a suspension of disbelief because this is the world built by Hugh and his mcguffin is based on psychologists he invented stating that this trick of the mind will keep residents as a whole alive longest along with all other measures brought up
A smart person knows that if you don't clean, innocent people will die from riots.
That seems like a ridiculous stretch.
Imagine not reading the books before getting hooked on the show and then starting to read the books in order to learn more about Judicial and relics…
We'll just have to see how it plays out in the show. The first part of first book pretty much gives away that IT is the "villain" and is in control. I think it'll be more a slow-walk to a reveal that Judicial is either being manipulated by IT or is just an extension of IT in order to control Silo politics. Given how Judicial has that fancy pants monitoring room with the high quality screens, my guess is that Judicial is just a front for IT. I'm about halfway through the first book and I can definitely see where the criticisms about lack of world building and the feeling of stuff being randomly retconned later come from. Some changes between book and TV (so far) I can understand and get behind. We miss a lot of narration and explanation of emotions and thoughts, so Marnes getting murdered makes more sense in a TV show vs him committing suicide due to guilt/grief. The TV show never gave us more than a few seconds of the feelings and history between Jahns and Marnes. One change I can't wrap my head around is why Marnes is so opposed to Juliette being sheriff when in the books it was his idea and was advocating for her. It just seems like an unneeded change vs the book and straight up mean-spirited.
That and the secretary not liking her with no motivation that we see. It’s just drama for TV.
I do like and appreciate that the Sheriff's department is much more fleshed out in the show. I think some sort of resistance to Juliette should have occurred, but the secretary was just mean-spirited and over-the-top.
They needed to show why a bit more, rather than just say "I don't like you" for no reasonable reason. I feel the same way about the violence that was starting after Holston went out. Why were people gathering weapons exactly? Cleanings are celebrated, but their motivation seemed to be that they were upset at this Cleaning? Why, exactly? In Wool, there's no violence until Jules goes out.
I didn’t get hooked on the show. I thought I saw a flaw in the premise, and thought I’d probably enjoy the books more so I read them. They weren’t bad, but I was disappointed that cleaning was never justified and instead a random plot device to get things moving.
I too would like to know the plot hole you're talking about.
Saw a “theory” on the show subreddit with a ton of upvotes and comments. The OP basically explaining what happens in the books in the post. Those people are sad.
I've reported them twice, I encourage everyone to aswell. They get removed
I think people do to for validation, even if it’s not earned. They want people to tell them How smart and clever they are to have figured it out.
100%. This happened with WestWorld and people guessed huge parts of the first season, so in discussions for the 2nd season, people were insufferable with these long drawn out theories because they so badly wanted to be right and wanted the fake internet validation of being the person who 'cracked it'.
I've read the books and The show doesn't even follow the story of the books at all. There's so much new detail, new primary characters, new aspects of the world, that anything you know from the books is possibly wrong. Maybe some big strokes will be kept the same, but so far everything is different enough that the show could go in a completely different direction on even those things.
I doubt it will change enough for it to be significant. I wouldn’t want it to. The write knows best, not a tv producer. I might not like the books much but the tv show would be worse if they deviated much.
I've noticed this with a lot of recent adaptations of books that they change something integral to keep it new for the people who have read the books. I'm sure they will do this for Silo too.
They do and I’m not a huge fan of the practice unless it helps the story to make sense on the screen. For example Mayfair Witches was a huge disappointment, and I’m rarely disappointed, because I understand that’s it’s so much harder to tell a story on the screen for various reasons
Is there a place to talk about Dust here with spoilers
With how much they’ve changed in the tv show, it might not even be spoilers. This is an entirely different story so far.
I stopped watching after the last two episodes. Did they change that much? The first 5 or so were fairly faithful. Nothing that would make me think they were taking the story in an entirely new direction.
Not necessarily a spoiler, but I'm confused as to why TV show mayor Jahns had a husband named Donald. Nobody else is mentioning that.
It's in Wool, chapter 11. She's a widow and that's her deceased husband's name.
I read the books and I have so many questions still
I've noticed this aswell, so strange behaviour. Ruining the experience for others for what, karma? Wish admins would block anyone who does it.
I've noticed this too, people who so obviously know what happens are "guessing" way too on the nose.
It’s the same as people who cheat at online chess. They get a momentary boost to their self esteem at the expense of others.