Vonda N. McIntyre wrote:
>
> Hi Catherine,
>
> By the way, congratulations on the romantic sf award nomination!
Thanks. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. One reason I was so tickled
with it is that I was warned (with much dire propshesy <g>) that It
Couldn't Be Done, that is, it wasn't possible to mix hard science
fiction with a feminine view point, particularly if it included a love
story, because hard science fiction readers wouldn't tolerate the love
story and romance readers wouldn't tolerate the hard sf. However,
despite all the warnings, it seems to be doing well, perhaps even better
than my first (which is soon to go into a reprinting), though it is too
early to tell yet for certain.
Personally, I think hard science fiction could do with more of the
feminine viewpoint.
> Thanks for the kind words. It's quite a comfort to hear from some folks who didn't
> read Moon & Sun as science-v.-women's intuition, &c.
I didn't read it that way at all! And I'm about as "hard" a scientist
as there is (my doctorate it in theoretical atomic and molecular
physics, which is quantum theory applied to the study of how atoms and
molecules behave).
MJ clearly has a scientific mind. She approaches her work with Yves
with a dedication and insight that makes for a good role model for
students of science. When I was a physics professor, I considered doing
a class on science in science fiction. THE MOON AND THE SUN would have
made a good choice because it shows a great deal about how science is
done, both in terms of good technique and technique to avoid.
> It wasn't at all uncommon for people to have the
> constellation of abilities that Marie-Josephe
> possesses (drawing, music, singing were all
> staples of upper class education, such as it was),
In fact, many mathematicians also play instruments, in particular the
piano. In fact, some researchers apparently believe a correlation
between musicality and mathematical ability.
> so when I get hammered for giving her those
> talents, plus the math and physics interest that
> so often goes along with musical talent, I mostly
> assume that the person who's hammering me knows
> even less about history than I do (which is kind
> of difficult!).
After reading the book, I would say you know a lot about history!
It's a hoot when people say "Oh, a woman can't do all that. Of course
not." Hah hah. What am I, chopped liver? <g> When I tell them I am a
ballet dancer with a doctorate in quantum physics who plays piano, they
quit hammering.
I can't tell you how much a related to MJ.
> The funny thing I found was that women were more
> likely to be allowed to study science than they
> were to be allowed to study the Classics, which
> were considered far too powerful for delicate
> feminine brains.
Perhaps the subjectivity of the Classics is what makes women's take on
it more controversial. In science and math, H(psi)=E(psi) no matter
what you think about the portrayal of women in the discipline. Not so
in the Classics. So I can see how it would be considered "more
dangerous" to have women study it. They might (and do) challenge the
prevailing modes of thought. Even now I am =amazed= at the depth of the
hostility I get when I express my opinion that the so-called literary
canon and the schools of thought involved with its interpretation are
biased against women.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
A
L
E
R
T
> Chartres and Lotte are the children of Madame and
> Monsieur (Louis' sister-in-law; and his brother).
> I don't think there's any credible evidence that
> Madame ever had a sexual relationship with anyone
> other than her husband.
I was curious about Monsier and Lorraine too. Was Lorraine truly
bisexual, or just involved with Monsier because gave him power?
> Louis' lovers (such as -- probably -- Monsieur's first wife, the vivacious, charming,
> high-strung, and in my opinion anorectic Henriette d'Angleterre) were all beautiful.
He certainly got around! One is tempted to think half of France are his
progeny. (well, okay, maybe not =half.= <g>)
> He became progressively more devout after he banished
> Mme de Montespan, after the queen died, and after he
> took up with (& probably married) Mme de Maintenon.
One thing I was puzzled about. Why didn't the King make it clear he
married Mme de Maintenon, if he did? Why let her put up with all the
grief she took? If he didn't marry her, why wouldn't he, given that
they lived together as husband and wife? Also I'm curious, why did Mme
de Monterspan get banished? (I never knew all this historical stuff was
so interesting <G>).
> I took some pleasure in hinting or stating that most
> of the main characters in the book, except Marie-Josephe,
> had different parents than they (or the public) believed,
> not excepting Monsieur and Louis himself. (I think the possibility
> exists that Mazarin had something to do with their existence,
> though I doubt that question can ever be answered.)
Hey. Say more about Louis and Monsieur. I missed those refernces. Who
is Mazarin again?
Another point I was confused on was the shenanigans surrounding Lucien's
parentage. What I got was that the previous queen was his mother and
his acknowledged father was his biological father. His brother was the
son of his acknowledged father's wife but actually had a different
father. But someone else had a daughter who was also a dwarf, and at
birth she was switched with Lucien, because otherwise Lucien threatened
the throne due to his noble birth? And that other daughter had
something to do with the King of Spain? I'm confused! <g>
> It's definitely a broad-spectrum antibiotic. Given the condition
> of medicine at the time, it was the closest thing to an immortality
> potion that anybody was likely to find.
Cool.
Best regards
Catherine
http://www.sff.net/people/asaro/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:07:45 PDT