From LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Fri Sep 10 19:37:32 1999 Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 20:49:49 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at University of Illinois at Chicago (1.8c)" To: Laura Quilter Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF-LIT LOG9905D" ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 19:14:20 GMT Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Robin Reid Subject: BDG: Grass (the nature of 'evil') Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Interesting comments on the hippae and evil. What strikes me most about GRASS however is not just that the hippae are presented as evil, but how many of the humans are a lot like the hippae. When the bons meet in their first council at the start of the book, they pretty much say that they don't care if all the rest of the human race dies of the plague because, basically, good riddance to "fragras" (their word for foreigner or outsider which is pretty much used as an obscenity). When Roderigo is first told of the plague and the threat to humanity by his uncle, the Hierarch of Sanctity, his reaction is much the same: he thinks it will kill off humans everywhere else, or the Sanctified, perhaps, but it doesn't bother him in the least. It takes him a while to understand that the threat is to all humans, everywhere. I'm not sure most of the bons ever get the idea--and since people on Grass don't get the plague, they can afford not to care. The new Hierarch's plan, revealed by a careless dropping of a letter, is that, sure, find the cure, but don't worry about most people who are alive (especially those outside the control of the Church)--let most of them die off. So the hippae, with their "joy to kill strangers" (I don't have the book with me so am not sure I'm quoting exactly) are not that much worse--the 'others' they enjoy killing off are not their own species, at least, (the foxen are what some hippae change into) while some humans are presented as not caring whether the rest of the human race dies off, or as actively working toward that goal. The Moldies are a terrorist group dedicated to spreading the plague in order to bring about the "Last Days," total destruction of the human race. A common theme through Tepper's work--and very strong in the GRASS/RAISING THE STONES/SIDESHOW group of related novels--is that some humans apparently are hardwired or completely genetically unable to NOT oppress others (one of the characters in STONES advances a theory about that minority), especially women, children, and those having less power. But even other humans are inclined to follow that dominant ideology--the 'solution' advanced in the novels... SPOILER ALERT........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . is that something from outside changes humans so that they are more empathic--more aware of what other people feel (and the corollary there is that they are aware that other people do feel). Even when Marjorie spreads the idea of a new philosophy/religion, as the Prophetess of Thyker, given a thousand or so years of men 'interpreting' her words, the new philosophy can become institutionalized as an oppressive religion. On the other side of the 'coin,' so to speak, from the hippae are the Arbai (who are not really extinct as it turns out): they are a race so inherently/genetically/totally good that they have no concept of "evil" done as a conscious choice. They choose to withdraw rather than try to act, but their communications device is the outside factor. Before you can really analyze the concept of evil in GRASS, I think you have to look at the two other novels which are not a traditional trilogy but awfully tightly connected to GRASS. And the construction of the aliens (the hippae, the Arbai, the Celerians, etc.) are interesting to 'compare' to humans in the novels as well. Robin ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 16:05:43 -0400 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Suzanne Feldman Subject: Re: Breadfruit Empire MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Big Yellow Woman wrote: > Suzanne Feldman wrote: > > > > I have a new story just up on Ellen Datlow's Event Horizon sf/webzine > > called THE BREADFRUIT EMPIRE. I'd love to get feedback on it. > > > > Here's the site: > > > > http://www.eventhorizon.com/sfzine/ > > > Glad you liked it Susan---and the part about her mom that you brought up---this may turn into a novel one of these days, and then I'll be able to go into more depth. > Spoilers if you haven't read the story > > Suze, > > I really enjoyed the story! One part that really came through to me was > actually the weather. Perhaps it was beacause my feet were cold while I > read it, but I really had a sense of Lisa's cold and wet and that dark > blizzard-coming feeling. You know,that my-feet-are-icy-and- > soaking-wet-and-I'm-going-to-die-of-hypothermia feeling. > > The tension built well and there was definitely some fear generated over > Bob and what he was up to. I got a picture of him as an all purpose > paraniod militiaman/hippe?/loony entrepreneur. The descriptions of the > bread and cheese were vivd. The irony seems to be that even though he is > completely wacko, he is right about the aliens. > > I really liked the tension with the 911 calls --like a bad dream!! > > Yr description of the breadfruit/eggs was good, sensual and suggestive. > > the only thing I didn't quite get was Lisa's dislike for her mother. > One just had to take your word for this. Of course the length of the > story precludes much going into that relationship. > > Wonderful job! thanks for sharing!! > > Susan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 17:35:06 -0700 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Joyce Jones Subject: BDG Grass Susan, Thanks for your long comments on the nature of evil in Grass. I hadn't thought that Tepper might have meant that it was the results of evil that can't be uncreated, but I certainly agree with your views there. I've always had a hard time with the forgive and forget concept. I imagine if my children or I were raped I might in time be able to forgive the rapist (how, I don't know, but it's possible) but to forget would be out of my power. In that sense the evil couldn't be undone. I thought, however, Marjorie, meant that a person (or other sentient being) could be made evil but that being couldn't then become not evil. I think, as Jennifer and others have mentioned, Tepper is saying something about the nature of evil itself. In Gibbon's Decline and Fall she shows a person who has become evil, which is sort of understandable given his background. This is the type of character that's more familiar to my non-Christian outlook on life. But then she also points toward a character who is evil personified. He is essentially Satan and glorifies in the misery of others. This character can't be unmade evil, because evil is his nature. He seems to be the guiding influence behind the organized religions portrayed in Tepper's books. I agree that the Sanctified church presented in Grass is the LDS church, not Scientology. It just fits so perfectly. I don't see how she's managed to avoid the wrath of the fundamentalists, maybe they haven't read her. Is Tepper saying that if a person welcomes that evil spirit into his heart, there's no way to get it out? In Gate To Women's Country she has little hope for the majority of men outside the gates. The women don't waste their time trying to reason with them, in fact educating them is against the law. The women are content to have those men just kill each other off. Again these men seem to be "genetically" evil. Trying to change them into decent human beings who could live within the women's community would be a waste of effort. Maybe Tepper has had her fill of endless debate. At her age she must have confronted mindless patriarchy enough that she's unwilling to waste any more time on it. As realistic an approach as that might be, and I think most of us have had enough confrontation with die-hard male chauvinists to understand the position, it just seems so hopeless to me. I myself am no longer willing to engage in those debates, I'm just surprised that so eloquent a writer shares the same resignation. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 07:05:29 EDT Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: BDG Grass MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/24/99 5:35:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time, hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM writes: << Tepper >> I always felt that Tepper was writing about colonialism. I didn't feel that the Mounts were evil, so much as responding to invaders to their land. If you just consider, as an example, Cotton Mather in the colonies in early America: he instigated at least one morning massacre of sleeping natives (men, women and children) in the name of god, writing that god glorified in the deed. He certainly didn't consider himself evil, nor did those who accompanied him. He was fully convinced that he was in the right, doing what was normal and destined for Heaven. The native americans certainly must have held a different view. There are countless examples of this: where horrific evil is meted out by people who think they are righteous. So I don't see her works as a study of evil so much as a study of loss of empathy, of a kind of moral failure to thrive. How do you face evil, not when it comes from devils, but when it comes from those who feel their hearts are pure, motives godly, and actions in line with duty (and manliness)? How do you remain staunch when you can see that the people doing evil are innocent in their hearts because of their beliefs? How do you deal with it? I find her worlds complex and challenging. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:51:20 -0400 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Frances Subject: Re: BDG Grass POSSIBLE SPOILERS for Gate to Women's Country > In Gate To Women's Country she has little > hope for the majority of men outside the gates. The women don't waste their > time trying to reason with them, in fact educating them is against the law. > The women are content to have those men just kill each other off. Well, the whole point was trying to breed out the military mindset: the men have the opportunity to opt out between the ages of 15 to 25, if I recall, and Joshua was a late returner. Killing each other off, let's face it, is what military men do; it's what males have done forever, one way or another, for the right (fancied or actual) to get access to the prime breeding females. The martial skills of the servitors and Councilwomen are strictly for self-defense. Not sure what would happen if the breeding program succeeded and an invasion occurred which needed a military response; or one that needed a high-tech weapons response. > Again > these men seem to be "genetically" evil. Trying to change them into decent > human beings who could live within the women's community would be a waste of > effort. Not evil, necessarily: just not the genetic traits being selected for! > Maybe Tepper has had her fill of endless debate. At her age she > must have confronted mindless patriarchy enough that she's unwilling to > waste any more time on it. All those years in Family Planning...! As realistic an approach as that might be, and I > think most of us have had enough confrontation with die-hard male > chauvinists to understand the position, it just seems so hopeless to me. I > myself am no longer willing to engage in those debates, I'm just surprised > that so eloquent a writer shares the same resignation. And when she does debate, some call her didactic! But I think her "hard-wired" analogy is very valid: "If one rose from the dead, yet they would not believe!" Frances ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 13:57:43 EDT Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Jessie Stickgold-Sarah Subject: Re: BDG Grass and Tepper's conception of evil In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 May 1999 11:51:20 EDT." <00ac01bea6c6$7a291240$f7fc6420@frances> I'm in agreement with the person who said that Tepper is talking about a lack of empathy. If you can get your hands on the Jinian books, part of her True Game series and, alas, very out of print. you see it there very clearly. "Evil" or the ability to do evil is seen as an inborn thing, something which can't be overcome. At one point Jinian punishes a group of horrible people, and is told that this is the wrong thing to do: they can't learn from punishment or reason or compassion: they can't become good. They just don't understand how. This is not to say that good people can't do bad things, or that people who do wrong can't learn; just that some people are so far gone that they can't be good. Perhaps, now that I think about it, she's saying that true evil *is* the lack of empathy, the inability to understand why you can't hurt other people. jessie ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 19:00:12 -0500 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Big Yellow Woman Subject: Re: BDG Grass - evil MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jessie Stickgold-Sarah wrote: Perhaps, now that I think about it, she's saying > that true evil *is* the lack of empathy, the inability to understand why > you can't hurt other people. This reminds me of M. Scott Peck's argument in _People of the lie_ that evil is evil because of the refusal to acknowledge the harm one has done. I spent a short while in social work and can guess why Tepper would conclude that some people are just hard-wired evil, yet I don't believe that myself. I'm going to have to start rereading more Tepper with this idea in mind. BTW, really appreciated the insights about colonialism. Does it make a difference that Cotton Mather was massacring natives while the the Hippae were manipulating and killing colonists? It seems like it might. one might argue self-defense for the Hippae, at least in regard to the Bons. Their malevolence toward the Foxen adds another twist. Susan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 09:38:21 -0400 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: "Bucci, Elizabeth" Subject: [*FSSFU-LIT*] BDG Grass: Huh? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I have read all of your posts with much interest and now would like to put in my two cents. I'm warning you though...I'm afraid that I cannot share your gushing enthusiasm for this novel. It's good, but...but...but... My first impression of Grass was disappointment...keeping in mind that I am an avowed Tepper fan and joined this list only to discuss her novels, this is saying alot! What disappointed me initially was the similiarity of Grass to Shadow's End (actually the other way around, Grass was written first) : a « plague » that is threatening all other planets in the universe, one planet that is « immune », someone sent there to find out why and a series of taboos and rituals on the immune planet the secret of which Tepper very cleverly keeps the reader guessing until the very end. I guess I was disappointed that Grass resembled so much another one of her novels, especially when you consider that novels such as Beauty and Gateway to Women's Country (my all-time favorite) are so very refreshingly different. Throughout my reading of this novel, I couldn't really shake this feeling of disappointment. While I enjoyed the novel, I found the ending to be a bit of a let-down : too many unanswered questions and not all of the ends tied together. In this respect, I found Shadow's End to be a much more satisfying novel. Don't get me wrong : I couldn't stop reading Grass. Tepper's style did keep me reading right until the very end : she is a wonderful writer and my disappointment with Grass will not change her stature as one of my favorite writers. Similar to some of your other posts, I too loved how she opens with a description of the Hunt, which the reader doesn't really understand until allowed to watch it through Marjorie's eyes considerably later in the novel. I was really disturbed by the Stella-Marjorie relationship (I am a mother of two young daughters and would hate to have my relationship with any of them end up like Stella and Marjorie's) but this is why I read Tepper! I like to be disturbed as it forces me to rethink assumptions and paradigms, which is what I think literature is all about. Ditto for Rigo/Marjorie and Sylvan/Marjorie : I kept expecting the happy ending, and I didn't get it. That's okay : I don't like clichés and stereotypes and this is not the reason for my disappointment. And, of course, I loved the planet Grass : the opening chapter where she describes the planet, the grass, the bons...that first chapter sucked me right into the story. So, why the disappointment? What bothered me the most was the storyline with the disappearing girls. Again, too many unanswered questions. Why girls? Why young girls and not boys? Why would the Hippae have the concept of gender? They're animals...how can they be attracted to women? And why would the Hippae « erase » their brains? Apparently, they manipulated their minds so that the girls derived sexual pleasure from following commands : why? Was it just for the pleasure of torturing? What would be in it for the Hippae? I don't get it. Again, referring to Shadow's End, the answers to the mystery of the veiled women were clear, precise and very feminist : women were made to pay a price for a bargain that the songfathers made with a certain entity. (This is deliberately vague for those of you who haven't read it yet.) I don't get this sense of closure in Grass with respect to the disappearance of the women. As I was reading Grass, my guess was that the Hippae « kidnapped » girls whose minds could not be manipulated and therefore posed a threat to the Hippae. But this is not the explanation that Tepper gives us...in fact, there isn't one, which is what I found the most frustrating. For those of you who have read this novel more than once and loved it so much, can you shed any light on this question? It's literally driving me nuts and taking away from my post-novel pleasure! Looking forward to your thoughts, Elisabeth. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 19:41:45 +0100 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: [*FSSFU-LIT*] BDG Grass: Huh? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >So, why the disappointment? What bothered me the most was the storyline >with the disappearing girls. Again, too many unanswered questions. Why >girls? Why young girls and not boys? Why would the Hippae have the >concept of gender? They're animals...how can they be attracted to >women? And why would the Hippae « erase » their brains? Apparently, >they manipulated their minds so that the girls derived sexual pleasure >from following commands : why? Was it just for the pleasure of >torturing? What would be in it for the Hippae? I don't get it. I wondered about this, but when re-reading _Grass_ just now I wondered if this was another example of the Hippae being aware of other species' feelings/sensitivities and deliberatly trampling on them - i.e. they somehow _knew_ that humans would find what they do to young girls particularly horrible? Also, they are using the girls to transmit plague, but the girls themselves are seen in the Town as harmless, victims, not agents, however unconscious, of harm - this might not apply in the case of men or boys? On another level it fits in with Tepper's themes about male exploitation of women and disregard for their feelings and perceptions - e.g. right at the beginning it is made clear that several of the female members of Sylvan's family hate the Hunt and don't want to go but are forced to. The Hippae's use of the girls matches the patriarch's view of them as disposable. Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 15:34:03 -0400 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Frances Subject: Re: [*FSSFU-LIT*] BDG Grass: Huh? My take on the questions below: I think there was a mention of an occasional young boy (I could be wrong). < Why would the Hippae have the concept of gender? They're animals...how can they be attracted to women? And why would the Hippae « erase » their brains? Apparently, they manipulated their minds so that the girls derived sexual pleasure from following commands : why? Was it just for the pleasure of torturing? What would be in it for the Hippae?> The erasing of the brains was to render the kidnappee a tool that could be sent on errands in the human settlement: specifically to smuggle the infected bats onto spaceships to spread the plague elsewhere. The hippae weren't interested in the girls sexually, but they were VERY intelligent nonhumans, with strong psychic faculties. Sylvan is hard to manipulate: he has acquired the knack of hiding his thoughts. Those who are unsusceptible suffer the mutilating accidents: they "offend a hound" and have limbs bitten off, or are trampled by the hippae. Frances ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 01:30:22 +1000 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Julieanne Subject: Re: [*FSSFU-LIT*] BDG Grass: Huh? In-Reply-To: <00da01bea7a7$e735eac0$3e0870c3@default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit At 19:41 26/05/99 +0100, Lesley Hall wrote: >I wondered about this, but when re-reading _Grass_ just now I wondered if >this was another example of the Hippae being aware of other species' >feelings/sensitivities and deliberatly trampling on them - i.e. they somehow >_knew_ that humans would find what they do to young girls particularly >horrible? I also found this disappointing and not well explained by Tepper. Like the brain filling in the blanks in our visual 'blind spot' - I assumed it was a plot device to illustrate the disposability of girls under patriarchal philosophy, and the Hippae's warped desires to trample over the sensitivities of the human colonists... but still, much of that 'blind spot' of inconsistencies, I couldn't fill in with assumptions. We are told that girls occasionally disappear, (and more rarely a boy). All novice young riders were strongly warned about the necessity of keeping their minds 'blank' during the Hunt, so as not to attract notice of the Hounds. But there is also a hint, that some Bon children had had some contact with Hounds in childhood - the girl who disappears early in the story mentions to her mother that she felt that the Hound which was watching her in her first Hunt, was the same one she had seen earlier in childhood when playing outside the family compound. The Bon daughters who disappear first in the story, are also characterised as 'favourites' of their families - possibly the Hippae knew that the family's grief would be all the more severe? This would be consistent with what we learn of the Hippae's propensity for cruelty - except that the Grassians have no knowledge of what happens to the girls until the first girl returns - so how can the people know how "horrible" it is? Also, it doesn't run parallel with the maiming of the men, as my impression was that it was older, mature men who were maimed, not youths. And the maiming appeared to be more random and ad-hoc than in the selection of the girls. >Also, they are using the girls to transmit plague, but the girls >themselves are seen in the Town as harmless, victims, not agents, however >unconscious, of harm - this might not apply in the case of men or boys? >On another level it fits in with Tepper's themes about male exploitation of >women and disregard for their feelings and perceptions - e.g. right at the >beginning it is made clear that several of the female members of Sylvan's >family hate the Hunt and don't want to go but are forced to. The Hippae's >use of the girls matches the patriarch's view of them as disposable. 'Re-wiring' of the girls brains by hard-wiring sexual response to a command to carry out what was a simple task: - having the girls carry dead bats onto docked ships - seemed a bit of 'overkill' to me. From sheer anatomy their physical response, would be of no interest to the Hippae - so, how come they went to all that effort? Perhaps the Hippae got their kicks out of the girls telepathic 'orgasmic' responses? Which again is consistent with their propensity for evil, except that we are also told that the Hippae didn't need to go to all that effort to elicit control of human responses, sexual or otherwise. One of my biggest questions on this issue was, these girls disappeared without trace to the Grassians, and we are told they were just dead bat couriers - why hadn't any off-planet ship crews ever reported finding dead bats, or mindless girls, showing up in a cargo hold? This had been apparently going on for years, yet nobody ever noticed a dead bat or a corpse (whether breathing, or not) during loading/unloading ? Or did the girls (with or without their bats) at least, return to the Hippae for 'disposal' afterwards? Whatever, we were never told. My reading resulted in assuming that Tepper only used this thread of the story, as a literary device to increase our horror at the evil of the Hippae, and also as a metaphor of patriarchal attitudes concerning violence towards women. Partly by understatement, presenting it almost as a 'minor' side issue - as violence towards women is often presented by patriarchal attitudes. The men were not "erased" or maimed into a state of 'living death', or had their sexuality tampered with. Yet such tampering and erasure is common with acts of violence towards women and is often presented as less violent or traumatic to the victim, than losing a limb. This understatement I saw in the scenes with Sylvan's brother, ( I think), who was in love with the first girl who disappears in the story. When she returns, his initial thoughts and feelings were happiness that she was 'alive and well' and 'no different' - inasmuch she was walking, breathing and physically healthy. She could still have sex, and probably babies, and all her limbs were intact and healthy - what other functionality does a female need in order to be loved? ..... It is some time, before he starts to feel confused and puzzled, and finally acknowledges that the girl he loved has truly 'died' . Even Stella, who isn't completely 'erased' - still finds love afterwards. Paralleled with patriarchy which 'hard-wires' or conditions females into certain 'functions' perhaps? and as long as those functions remain intact - women are considered 'unharmed'? Another aspect of Tepper's understatement of this allegory/metaphor appears later in the book - using the patriarchal stereotypes of the "Hooker with the Heart of Gold" - and the "Good Wife" who both believe it wouldn't be morally right to use the girl as a brothel prostitute. The Wife becomes concerned that the girl is too much temptation for her husband (we all know men cannot control their animal lusts, not their fault, poor things) and trains the girl as a "Ladies Pet" like a trained cocker-spaniel as companionship for the stereotyped "Mistress". and Elisabeth wrote: >Why would the Hippae have the >concept of gender? They're animals...how can they be attracted to >women? And why would the Hippae « erase » their brains? Apparently, >they manipulated their minds so that the girls derived sexual pleasure >from following commands : why? Was it just for the pleasure of >torturing? What would be in it for the Hippae? I don't get it. (snip)>But this is not the explanation >that Tepper gives us...in fact, there isn't one, which is what I found >the most frustrating. ... >It's literally driving me nuts and taking away from my post-novel >pleasure! Perhaps this is another part of the metaphor or allegory Tepper uses, in the apparent lack of any explanation, or consistency, or even 'evil' logic concerning the Hippae's actions. Again, much of the violence towards women under patriarchy, is totally illogical, senseless and without 'rhyme or reason' - there is often no 'method in the madness' at all ..... Possibly the Hippae also act as 'enhancers' or 'amplifiers' of the evil thoughts of other species. The concept of hard-wiring females to be mindless sex machines is reminiscent of the movie _The Stepford Wives_ (which, to me is the most horrific and terrifying film I have ever seen - far surpassing anything Freddy Kruger ever did)....... a patriarchal male fantasy? Civilised men may keep such fantasies under control, but pornography is full of such fantasies. Perhaps the Hippae stumbling over such thoughts, of either desire in the men, or fear in the women, found such thoughts attractive to their 'evil' natures and 'enhanced' the fantasy into reality. Anyway, since Tepper didn't provide any explanations - thats the best I can do with trying to fill in the "blanks":) Julieanne ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 00:29:48 -0400 Reply-To: kamholse@fuse.net Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Sally Kamholtz Subject: Re: [*FSSFU-LIT*] BDG Grass: Huh? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Julieanne wrote: > At 19:41 26/05/99 +0100, Lesley Hall wrote: > >I wondered about this, but when re-reading _Grass_ just now I wondered if > >this was another example of the Hippae being aware of other species' > >feelings/sensitivities and deliberatly trampling on them - i.e. they somehow > >_knew_ that humans would find what they do to young girls particularly > >horrible? > I thought it might be the opposite. That since the structure of Bon society is highly patriarchal, the Hippae mimic their use of daughters--a cunning form of parody.. The Bons use them to form alliances between bloodlines; the Hippae use them to break them down. In both, though, the daughter doesn't count as a person. Both engage in a kind of trafficking in women. Perhaps if the Hippae used sons, particularly heirs, the Bons might be more likely to try to break away, to mobilize against the Hippae. Sally Kamholtz ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 16:45:25 GMT Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Robin Reid Subject: BDG: Grass, huh? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Elizabeth Bucci wrote: > >My first impression of Grass was disappointment...keeping in mind that I >am an avowed Tepper fan and joined this list only to discuss her novels, >this is saying alot! What disappointed me initially was the similiarity >of Grass to Shadow's End (actually the other way around, Grass was >written first) : a « plague » that is threatening all other planets in >the universe, one planet that is « immune », someone sent there to find >out why and a series of taboos and rituals on the immune planet the >secret of which Tepper very cleverly keeps the reader guessing until the >very end. Tepper works with strong similarities across plot/situations/characters -- as she's said in interviews, she has a couple of important messages she wants to get across. I like GRASS more than SHADOW'S END myself. I guess I was disappointed that Grass resembled so much >another one of her novels, especially when you consider that novels such >as Beauty and Gateway to Women's Country (my all-time favorite) are so >very refreshingly different. My personal response to BEAUTY is that it is one of the weakest of her novels (the two AWAKENER novels, NORTH SHORE and SOUTH SHORE are the weakest I think)--although I like GATEWAY > >Throughout my reading of this novel, I couldn't really shake this >feeling of disappointment. While I enjoyed the novel, I found the >ending to be a bit of a let-down : too many unanswered questions and >not all of the ends tied together. In this respect, I found Shadow's >End to be a much more satisfying novel. GRASS is not a stand alone novel. Have you read RAISING THE STONES and SIDESHOW? > >So, why the disappointment? What bothered me the most was the storyline >with the disappearing girls. Again, too many unanswered questions. Why >girls? Why young girls and not boys? Why would the Hippae have the >concept of gender? They're animals...how can they be attracted to >women? And why would the Hippae « erase » their brains? Apparently, >they manipulated their minds so that the girls derived sexual pleasure >from following commands : why? Was it just for the pleasure of >torturing? There is a description or two of the Hunt that make it very clear that at the successful conclusion of a Hunt (the killing of a foxen) all the riders (male and female) are rewarded with intense orgasmic sensations. Apparently this is linked to the Hippae's telepathic communication/manipulation of humans. And in fact, by the end of the novel, it's clear that the Hippae have been controlling/manipulating the bons for generations to help them kill off the foxen. I never have the sense that hippae are sexually attracted to humans in any way. Yes, the girls have some of their neural functions erased and rewired so they follow the commands, but that isn't the only time or the only group the hippae manipulate in this way. Remember too that it becomes clear in the development of Marjorie's and First's relationship that humans and foxen can share a telepathic closeness that is compared very strongly to sexual orgasm -- this is a different sort of relationship than the hippae/human one, but Marjorie is disturbed by it at the first. But the foxen cannot communicate with the hippae telepathically. I agree that this part of the novel is not developed as fully as others, but there's a bit more info than you cover in your original post. And in terms of the girls being chosen--at one point, both one of Sylvan's sisters and his mother (( cannot remember names, sorry )) accuses the men of overlooking the kidnapping of females and being complicit in the whole process. Robin ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 12:23:57 -0700 Reply-To: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC Sender: Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Literature ON TOPIC From: Joyce Jones Subject: BDG: Grass, huh? Elizabeth Bucci wrote: >So, why the disappointment? What bothered me the most was the storyline >with the disappearing girls. Again, too many unanswered questions. Why >girls? Why young girls and not boys? Why would the Hippae have the >concept of gender? They're animals...how can they be attracted to >women? And why would the Hippae « erase » their brains? Apparently, >they manipulated their minds so that the girls derived sexual pleasure >from following commands : why? Was it just for the pleasure of >torturing? I think I remember that both boys and girls were taken, though we see only girls who wander into town. For some reason the hippae pick out the ones they want and wait for whatever opportunity seems right to take them. Rowena knew this when she asked Dimity after her first ride if she'd recognized her mount. Rowena remembered having been watched by a hippae as a child. In any group of people it's frequently easy to pick the popular or attractive ones, the ones with charisma. Evidently whatever humans find attractive about each other is the same thing the hippae respond to when picking out the ones to capture. Maybe it gives them a greater sense of power to take the attractive humans for themselves. I don't know whether or not the hippae have sexual feelings for the humans, but it's very clear that they can induce sexual feelings in the humans. That's one of the ties that binds the humans: the fact that orgasm can be induced by inhuman creatures. The bons are both embarrassed by and obsessed with these feelings. I thought Tepper brought up a point she made very clear in Gibbons Decline and Fall. The powerful ones (patriarchal religious males in Gibbons, hippae in Grass) are quite obsessed with making weaker beings obedient. In Grass the sexual pleasure come from obedience, in Gibbons it comes from forcing that obedience. It's a malevolent obsession with power that Tepper explores through different perspectives. Joyce