Having just finished Galatea 2.2 I turn to the Amazon.com reviews to see what other people got out of it - but have I really gotten out of the book or is this just another self referential extension of it? - maybe he will incorporate these reviews into his next "autobiographical" fiction!
I loved the book. I have lived it for the last two weeks. I have no claim to an objective interpretation of it, but I rolled with it. I enjoyed the embedded literary references to works that I thought I had long forgotten. It reminded me how much I loved literature once and how important I thought it was. It reminded me of my own Taylors.
The relationship with C. seems pretty integral to the story unless one is trying to read Galatea as sci-fi, which I don't think we can blame Powers for. That relationship and the book as a whole seem as ambiguous and complex as real life. Galatea was an illumination to me not because it provided any real answers, but simply because it cast more light in the dimness that often shrouds everyday life and everyday suffering.
I enjoyed the cognitive noodling, but I didn't take it as science as much as metaphor: Waking up to the millions of ways the mind can look at itself and still not really know much about anything.
Other reviewers seem to assume that the narrator and the author are basically identical. This is a big assumption. I personally think that Powers probably wove his story backwards from his previous books, and the only autobiographical elements are those that were already in the public record. As far as I can tell, no one really knows much about Power's actual life, and it is seems unlikely that he would forego the privacy he has striven to maintain by incorporating the details of his private life (esp. a relationship with "C.") in this book. Emotionally, I'd actually like to think of the book as autobiographical, but...
I'll be rereading this book for a while, hopefully parsing some of the sentences that I couldn't figure out how to untie. Operation Wandering Soul is next on my list.