"FEMINISTSF LOG9708E" ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 06:40:50 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Christopher Shaffer Subject: Re: SF and Ecology In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, Sean Johnston wrote: > >However, the world of Trek is one where the military-industrial complex > >controls just about everything. Yuck. > > Huh? I think this is the perception because the Trek stories focus on the > Trek characters, most of whom are in this military. However, it's clear > that there are a lot of other leveld to the Trek universe than the > Federation. Is Earth controlled by a Starfleet Admiral? How about Bajor? Sorry, I guess I have a mistaken impression. Never having watched many of the Star Trek shows, I guess I jumped to conclusions. I'm definitely not a fan nor likely to become one. ----- "If navigating the world wide web is computer literacy, then the meaning of literacy has really been debased." --Walter Miller Chris Shaffer shaffer@uic.edu http://www.uic.edu/~shaffer/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 07:24:09 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sean Johnston Subject: Re: SF and Ecology In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, Sean Johnston wrote: > >> >However, the world of Trek is one where the military-industrial complex >> >controls just about everything. Yuck. >> >> Huh? I think this is the perception because the Trek stories focus on the >> Trek characters, most of whom are in this military. However, it's clear >> that there are a lot of other leveld to the Trek universe than the >> Federation. Is Earth controlled by a Starfleet Admiral? How about Bajor? > >Sorry, I guess I have a mistaken impression. Never having watched many of >the Star Trek shows, I guess I jumped to conclusions. I'm definitely not >a fan nor likely to become one. > >----- >"If navigating the world wide web is computer literacy, then the meaning >of literacy has really been debased." --Walter Miller >Chris Shaffer shaffer@uic.edu http://www.uic.edu/~shaffer/ Chris, Before deciding that for sure, watch two episodes: "The Measure of a Man" and "Lal". -Sean ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:57:18 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Debra Euler Subject: Re: Event Horizon -Reply -Reply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Nalo Hopkins wrote: >NH: In this case, I think that the producers' conservatism backfired. I could be wrong, but my sense is that even 'mainstream' audiences are not liking the film in droves. Nalo-- I think audiences don't like the film because it was dumb, not because there weren't any strong female characters. Look at Independece Day: all the women were accessories to the men, it had a dumb plot, but still made gazillions of dollars because it was exciting. My point is that mainstream SF movies are about 30 years behind print SF; after all, what's one of the next big movies this year, but the screen adaption of "Starship Troopers?" Even "Mimic" is loosely based on a story written over 50 years ago. Unfortunately, the costly special effects that are seen to be necessary for the success of SF movies preclude most attempts at the independent features which push the envelope for characterization and plot. Debra Euler ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:52:55 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joel VanLaven Subject: Re: SF and Ecology In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII That is definitely one thing to keep in mind. Star Trek is not one huge monolithic vision (Like Babylon 5) but more like a large number of short stories that all happen to invlove the same characters. The newer star treks are less like that, but the two "real" star trek shows are like that. Since I don't remember the names of the episodes, I'll tell you which ones I assume you are talking about. "Lal" must be the the episode where Data creates a daughter (named Lal). That was incredible. Another episode that was really good was the episode where Picard lives out life on another world as a married man. Once I saw that episode and couldn't stop crying for hours. I had to go to the computer lab and compose a message to my favourite teacher/best friend about the whole thing. People looked at me ery strangely, but I didn't have an internet connection in my room, it was late at night, and all of my friends were asleep or something. I bet they assumed that someone had dumped me or that my dog or my parents had just died or something. If only they had known, I bet they would have thought I was crazy. Most Star Trek episodes are complete trash/junk/garbage but some of them are incredible, much like the sole purpose of most mainstream movies is to waste time and make us appreciate the good ones all the more. -- Joel VanLaven On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Sean Johnston wrote: > >On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, Sean Johnston wrote: > > > >> >However, the world of Trek is one where the military-industrial complex > >> >controls just about everything. Yuck. > >> > >> Huh? I think this is the perception because the Trek stories focus on the > >> Trek characters, most of whom are in this military. However, it's clear > >> that there are a lot of other leveld to the Trek universe than the > >> Federation. Is Earth controlled by a Starfleet Admiral? How about Bajor? > > > >Sorry, I guess I have a mistaken impression. Never having watched many of > >the Star Trek shows, I guess I jumped to conclusions. I'm definitely not > >a fan nor likely to become one. > > > >----- > >"If navigating the world wide web is computer literacy, then the meaning > >of literacy has really been debased." --Walter Miller > >Chris Shaffer shaffer@uic.edu http://www.uic.edu/~shaffer/ > > Chris, > Before deciding that for sure, watch two episodes: "The Measure of > a Man" and "Lal". > > -Sean > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:17:39 -0400 Reply-To: pyork@localnet.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat York Subject: Re: Expendable MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Jill. Yeah, I read it, and liked it a lot. The key to the story (imo) is that societies must have scapegoats to do their less pleasant/more dangerous jobs. In the world Gardiner has created, the society has to create scapegoats, more or less. So people with birth defects, speach impediments, terrible b.o. etc., aren't 'repared', although they could be with the technology of the time, they are nurtured as explorers. The premise is that their deaths will not cause the pain that the deaths of the best, brightest and most beautiful would. While I don't really buy the premise, I was willing to accept it for the sake of enjoying the book. And it was still a terrific book. I reminded me a lot of the reading experiences of early Heinlein etc. Jill Gillham wrote: > > Anyone else read Expendable by James Alan Gardner? Light reading, but > enjoyable. The basic premise is that humanity has become part of the > League of Peoples and life is very good for most people. However, there > is still need for a group of people who do the dirty and dangerous work > within society. That's where the Expendable Crew Membes like out > protagonist Festina Ramos come in. > > Jill Gillham > jilkey@grfn.org jillmari@aol.com http://members.aol.com/ferndock2 > "Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies." ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:16:08 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: FemSF and movies (was Re: Event Horizon) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > after all, what's one of the next big movies this > year, but the screen adaption of "Starship Troopers?" I'm kinda wondering how this one will look. I expect that will center on the action of the story. IMO, the action was peripheral to the real story in that novel. I'm also curious if the pilots will be female (as Heinlein had them--for superior reflexes, etc.). Carmen (I think that was her name) was cool. :-) That is, if we even see or hear about the pilots... On films in general, it would be nice to see more fair treatment of men and women, but I think it's unreasonable to ask every film to do something non-standard. That is, I think that it's condemnable that far too few movies have strong female characters and far too many movies have only stereotypical characterizations. I also think that a movie displaying one or two stereotypes and/or not having a strong female (or male or black or gay, etc.) is not necessarily condemnable by itself. -allen -- Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:18:32 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Nalo Hopkinson Subject: Re: Event Horizon -Reply -Reply In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Debra Euler wrote: > Nalo Hopkins wrote: > >NH: In this case, I think that the producers' conservatism > backfired. I could be wrong, but my sense is that even 'mainstream' > audiences are not liking the film in droves. > > Nalo-- > My point is that mainstream SF movies are about 30 years > behind print SF NH: Yes, you're right about that. I'd probably find it more interesting to discuss independent sf film. But it's so much *fun* to dish the big guys! Anybody seen any independent sf film/video that they think is grist for this discussion? I always immediately think of Julie Dash's "Daughters of the Dust." I'll be attending the Toronto International Film Festival in September, and I'm hoping to stumble across some speculative fiction there. -nalo "There are two kinds of dates; the kind that you go out with, and the small fruit that you eat." -my aunt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:30:42 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kate Williams Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" hello everyone, I am at a school that teaches high school students to design and build robots along with the regular academics -- its a 2 and soon a 4 year program. we are building a reading list for the students. what would you all recommend? I especially want the books that give social critiques and search for or present alternatives to today's applications of robotics (i.e. eliminate jobs AND shut masses of people out of the economy and out of society). I'm worried about extreme cynicism (like snow crash, although its on my list cause its so technologically creative) and about books being too dense for typical high school kids -- these kids are straight outta toledo (ohio). like, he she and it parable of the sower snow crash is my list so far thanks a lot kate --- Kate Williams University of Toledo Community and Technical College Project Coordinator, Toledo Technology Academy kwillia8@uoft02.utoledo.edu (419) 479-3161, fax (419) 479-3192 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:25:46 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: DAVID CHRISTENSON Subject: Re: Feminism in Trek? (was SF and Ecology) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii -- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- >From past posts: > >> >However, the world of Trek is one where the military-industrial complex > >> >controls just about everything. Yuck. > >> > >> Huh? I think this is the perception because the Trek stories focus on the > >> Trek characters, most of whom are in this military. However, it's clear > >> that there are a lot of other leveld to the Trek universe than the > >> Federation. Is Earth controlled by a Starfleet Admiral? How about Bajor? My impression of Trek's universe, from my unschooled feminist perspective: there is a military-style complex, but not military- industrial, since manipulation of energy and matter have made industry, as we know it, pretty much obsolete. (Some folks claim this will be accomplished in the real world by nanotechnology, but I'm not holding my breath.) Star Fleet operates very much on the 20th-century military model, with that same comforting clarity of structure, but apparently without as much civilian control at the top. In one sense, the military model can be better for the advancement of minorities and women, because it acknowledges merit and effort more fairly than the corporate model, where merit is judged more subjectively, and is often rated by one's willingness to play golf with the boss. The military model is not immune from abuse, however, as we know, and a lot of gays and lesbians found out the hard way. In our world, an expeditionary ship like The Enterprise might well have a cultural split between the military and scientific wings, with each keeping to itself - Antarctica comes to mind as a real-world example, "The Thing From Another World" and "The Abyss" as cinematic examples. But on the Enterprise, the culture is strictly military, while many (most?) planets colonized by Federation folks have more of a scientific- academic culture. Most of these scientific colonies seem dominated by one genius type, usually a man. Anyway, women seem to do O.K. in Star Fleet - in general, I mean, not among the continuing characters - but they're still operating and advancing within a male-created model of organization. For good or ill. (I understand that, in creating the original series, Roddenberry felt that an organization similar to that of a ship-at-sea, as in much written SF, would be easily comprehensible to general audiences.) -- David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com "Yet, throughout the book there exists the whole gamut of strange facts which we ourselves had been aware of for years, all carefully mustered to support a theory doomed by every process of logic to be forever incomprehensible." - Ray Palmer ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:35:29 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Nalo Hopkinson Subject: Re: FemSF and movies (was Re: Event Horizon) In-Reply-To: <19970829111608.26901@puma.macbsd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Allen Briggs wrote: NH: Ditto Allen. Where we perceive that they fall short is where we get to have the fun of critiquing them. And someone else pointed out that blockbuster movies have such a wide audience that it's usually impossible to please everyone. -nalo > and women, but I think it's unreasonable to ask every film to do something > non-standard. That is, I think that it's condemnable that far too few > movies have strong female characters and far too many movies have only > stereotypical characterizations. I also think that a movie displaying > one or two stereotypes and/or not having a strong female (or male or black > or gay, etc.) is not necessarily condemnable by itself. > > -allen > > -- > Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com > "There are two kinds of dates; the kind that you go out with, and the small fruit that you eat." -my aunt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:43:04 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Teragram Subject: Re: Event Horizon/Star Trek Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >This may also be the reason why I cannot watch old Star Trek, in spite of >the fact that everybody says it is better that New Generation. YES! I get so tired of watching women having to do their jobs in supposedly equal society in a) long trailing tripping skirts or b) uniforms that barely cover their crotches. Not to mention that they rarely get the jobs with power/esteem, and instead get stuck in the traditional 'nurturing' or 'sex kitten' roles. I can see all that in real life, thanks - and I'm not happy about it there either, but at least the women I know aren't smiling about it as they get the coffee. I grew up watching reruns of the original Star Trek, and, for me, they have a certain nostalgic quality but I also remember, even then (lo, these many years ago) feeling dissatisfied with the portrayal of the female characters. It seemed clear that there was nothing for me to aspire to in their roles - I feel the same dissatification when I see a current movie or series that runneth over with heros and villians with the few women characters reduced to pretty wallpaper and comfort bearers. I can't see myself - nor anyone I'd want to be - I don't exist in these scenarios, and neither does any other women I know. Why would I want to watch them? meg ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:11:57 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Debra Euler Subject: Re: Event Horizon -Reply -Reply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Marina Yereshenko wrote: >_Aliens_ was a big-budget SF movie, so is _Mimic_. Films with powerful women _can_ be marketable and bring lots of cash. Ack! I didn't mean to get into a huge discussion about this. Anyway, yes, "Aliens" was a big-budget movie that made a good profit (and is one of my all-time favorites), but it was a sequel to another very successful movie. I don't think the producers could have gotten away with Ripley's character if "Aliens" was a completely original film. I'm not saying that no one would have gone to see it, or that people wouldn't have enjoyed such a movie, but I really doubt it would have been made. And I haven't seen "Mimic" yet, but the ads I've seen are pushing it as more of a horror movie, with the typical woman in danger motif. And Mira Sorvino's character is a scientist, which women have been "allowed" to be in horror movies for a while now (see "Relic," etc.). Debra ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:16:11 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Debra Euler Subject: Contest Comments: To: bl213@freenet.toronto.on.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Hey, Nalo, I'm new to this list so I don't know if it was already discussed, but congratulations on winning the Warner Aspect First Novel Contest! I just saw it in the new September Locus, with a nice picture. Anyway, "Brown Girl in the Ring" sounds great, and I'm looking forward to reading it. Debra Euler DAW Books ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:17:43 -0400 Reply-To: tzt@earthlink.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Tracy Zollinger Turner Subject: Re: Event Horizon/Star Trek MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, I am brand-new to this group, but I felt I had to jump right into this conversation with an anecdote. When I was a kid, I used to try play "Star Trek" with friends on the back porch. The problem was, if there was more than one girl playing, we'd have to fight over who got to be Lt. Uhuru. I was gleeful in one episode where a Lt. Tracy was introduced, but she and Dr. McCoy were reduced to cubes (supposedly all of the water content was taken out) by some alien villain, who crushed one of them. Of course, it was Lt. Tracy that would not return to life. How scarring! At any rate, I also wanted to comment on the question about Star Trek being part of a military complex. It's true... but I think (in Next Gen., etc.) we find a military that is primarily focused on scientific research, and reluctant to go into battle. Plus, I think to write off the show for that reason would be shortsighted, simply because the writers use that environment to explore very human relationships between the crew characters themselves and with other species. Plus, Capt. Picard seems to suffer serious chagrin everytime he is faced with the prospect of violent confrontation. ST's image of the universe is not intended to be a Utopian one. In the world of mainstream entertainment, I have never seen a show that explored gender roles and cultural difference so sensitively. ^×Tracy Teragram wrote: > > >This may also be the reason why I cannot watch old Star Trek, in spite of > >the fact that everybody says it is better that New Generation. > > YES! I get so tired of watching women having to do their jobs in supposedly > equal society in a) long trailing tripping skirts or b) uniforms that > barely cover their crotches. Not to mention that they rarely get the jobs > with power/esteem, and instead get stuck in the traditional 'nurturing' or > 'sex kitten' roles. I can see all that in real life, thanks - and I'm not > happy about it there either, but at least the women I know aren't smiling > about it as they get the coffee. > > I grew up watching reruns of the original Star Trek, and, for me, they have > a certain nostalgic quality but I also remember, even then (lo, these many > years ago) feeling dissatisfied with the portrayal of the female > characters. It seemed clear that there was nothing for me to aspire to in > their roles - I feel the same dissatification when I see a current movie or > series that runneth over with heros and villians with the few women > characters reduced to pretty wallpaper and comfort bearers. I can't see > myself - nor anyone I'd want to be - I don't exist in these scenarios, and > neither does any other women I know. Why would I want to watch them? > > meg ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:50:29 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Heather MacLean Subject: Re: Mimic (! some spoilage) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:11 AM 8/29/97 -0400, you wrote: >Marina Yereshenko wrote: >>_Aliens_ was a big-budget SF movie, so is _Mimic_. Films with >powerful >women _can_ be marketable and bring lots of cash. > Mimic is awful, awful, awful, and besides which, it's full of cockroaches (I love snakes, spiders are no big deal, but roaches... *shudder* Must be the housewife in me. ;). The trappings of "power" re: the female protagonist are all hyper-stereotypical role-reversals, up to the "No, take me!" bravado stance to save the poor little autistic boy from being annihilated... To top it all off, there's some really weird kinda nasty racist stuff going on in there, or at the very least, the same role-reversal/PC effort towards redemption that doesn't even vaguely mask the still anti-woman, anti-black paradigms underlying it all... And, the special effects are nil. Judgementally yours, Heather =) hmaclean@kent.edu http://kent.edu/~hmaclean/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:08:39 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Teragram Subject: Re: Star Trek Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Hi, I am brand-new to this group, but I felt I had to jump right into >this conversation with an anecdote. >When I was a kid, I used to try play "Star Trek" with friends on the >back porch. The problem was, if there was more than one girl playing, >we'd have to fight over who got to be Lt. Uhuru. >I was gleeful in one episode where a Lt. Tracy was introduced, but she >and Dr. McCoy were reduced to cubes (supposedly all of the water content >was taken out) by some alien villain, who crushed one of them. Of >course, it was Lt. Tracy that would not return to life. How scarring! Ah, anytime you'd see a new character beam down to the planet in the company of the regulars, you just knew they were cannon fodder and that was the last time you'd be seeing them until the reruns.... >In the world of mainstream entertainment, I have never seen a show that >explored gender roles and cultural difference so sensitively. It's definitely gotten better with each new verision, IMHO. 'The New Generation' was still fairly limited as far as the regular female characters went (boy-toy Troy or the caring surgeon mother figure were the options I remember once the cool security chief got killed off), but dropped more women in competent background roles. And then there's Dax and Kira in the next offering .... they don't need to wear dresses, AND they're taken seriously! Progress is being made. Thank ye gods and little fishes. meg ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:54:35 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Janice E. Dawley" Subject: Re: Event Horizon/Star Trek In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:43 AM 8/29/97, Teragram wrote re: Star Trek, the Original Series: >It seemed clear that there was nothing for me to aspire to in >their roles - I feel the same dissatification when I see a current movie or >series that runneth over with heros and villians with the few women >characters reduced to pretty wallpaper and comfort bearers. I can't see >myself - nor anyone I'd want to be - I don't exist in these scenarios, and >neither does any other women I know. Why would I want to watch them? True, the Original Series and the Next Generation both suffered from this pattern. tOS only had Uhura who rarely did anything but expectantly wait for the Captain to give her an order. Apparently, the fact that she was a regular on the show and was stationed on the bridge was a breakthrough in itself, but I certainly didn't feel empowered by Uhura's example. The Next Generation had Crusher, Troi, Tasha Yar and Ensign Ro. Crusher and Troi could both be classified as "comfort bearers" as Crusher was the ship's doctor and Troi was the Counselor (and in fact never seemed to do anything but "sense" things that were obvious anyway). Yar was new and different for Star Trek -- she was a competent and aggressive Security Chief, but of course the actor decided to leave the series and that was the end of Yar... The only other decent female character was Ensign Ro, who I believe was only on temporarily ...? I was not watching much Next Generation at that point. Oh -- and there was Guinan, who was pretty interesting, actually, though she did not appear too often. Things are a bit different on the two current series, though. There's been much argument about Kira and Dax on Deep Space Nine being "feminized" from their original personas, but they are still complex, assertive, physically competent characters who are often the focus of individual episodes of the show. And god knows Voyager sucks, but the captain IS a woman and there is B'Elanna Torres, who is impetuous, aggressive and even, occasionally, lusty! So there has certainly been progress in Star Trek's treatment of women characters over the years, though I would love to see a lot more. At 12:17 PM 29 Aug 1997, Tracy Zollinger Turner wrote: >about Star Trek >being part of a military complex. It's true... but I think (in Next >Gen., etc.) we find a military that is primarily focused on scientific >research, and reluctant to go into battle. Plus, I think to write off >the show for that reason would be shortsighted, simply because the >writers use that environment to explore very human relationships between >the crew characters themselves and with other species. Though there is not that much battle in any of the Star Treks, there is a lot of emphasis placed on the military hierarchy and "direct orders". On tNG especially, conversations often seemed like mere shouting matches. Part of the reason I like Deep Space Nine better than any of the other shows is that Star Fleet really is not the only game in town. There is Bajor, an independent planet whose inhabitants seem to value mystical experience more than military or technical prowess. There is the station itself, which was originally Cardassian and has been occupied by Star Fleet. There are the various merchants whose interests do not necessarily coincide with Star Fleet's (Quark, Garak) and the very interesting Star Fleet rebels, the Maquis. The show seems much more realistic to me as a result. May the next season stretch the boundaries further... -- Janice ----- Janice E. Dawley ............. Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/jedhome.htm Listening to: Songs of Faith and Devotion, Depeche Mode "Reality is nothing but a collective hunch." - Lily Tomlin ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 16:29:07 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sean Johnston Subject: Re: Star Trek In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>Hi, I am brand-new to this group, but I felt I had to jump right into >>this conversation with an anecdote. >>When I was a kid, I used to try play "Star Trek" with friends on the >>back porch. The problem was, if there was more than one girl playing, >>we'd have to fight over who got to be Lt. Uhuru. >>I was gleeful in one episode where a Lt. Tracy was introduced, but she >>and Dr. McCoy were reduced to cubes (supposedly all of the water content >>was taken out) by some alien villain, who crushed one of them. Of >>course, it was Lt. Tracy that would not return to life. How scarring! > >Ah, anytime you'd see a new character beam down to the planet in the >company of the regulars, you just knew they were cannon fodder and that was >the last time you'd be seeing them until the reruns.... > >>In the world of mainstream entertainment, I have never seen a show that >>explored gender roles and cultural difference so sensitively. > >It's definitely gotten better with each new verision, IMHO. 'The New >Generation' was still fairly limited as far as the regular female >characters went (boy-toy Troy or the caring surgeon mother figure were the >options I remember once the cool security chief got killed off), but >dropped more women in competent background roles. And then there's Dax and >Kira in the next offering .... they don't need to wear dresses, AND they're >taken seriously! > >Progress is being made. Thank ye gods and little fishes. > >meg Meg, And now, in Voyager, there's Captain Janeway, who's taken very seriously. -Sean ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:33:06 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: L Garforth Subject: Re: SF and Ecology In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hi Emrah On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, emrah goker wrote: > There is a paper in my head to write about ecologist utopias in science > fiction and their cultural, ideological, or who knows, political-economic > implications. I consider criticizing the "gaiaist" position in ecology > which holds that the human species is a point -rather a big one- in the > organic continuum of Nature, being no different than, say, an old oak tree > or a pretty badger. Your post was fascinating. I'm also starting academic work on sf utopias and ecology, although less concerned with Gaian ideas than with current discourses to do with the concepts 'sustainability' and sustainable development that have gained currency since the Brundtland Report. > I plan to analyse first the theoretical aspects of "Mother Earth" kind > of ecological thinking, relating to the deconstructionist and metaphysical > touches on the paradigm. Next, I think, I will use the SF texts to hold my > point. I'm not sure what you're getting at here; my own feeling is that Gaiain thought is open to criticism on a range of points, from essentialism to fuzzy mysticism to its tendency to describe a utopian desire for 'one world' rather as if it were a material actuality... I don't know how different types of sf deal with that. You probably already know that the sf writer John Varley has an interest in Gaiain thought (see especially _Titan_ 1979) ), and I'd also have thought that Vonnegut's _Galapagos_ would be interesting here?! > Specifically, though I have made up a long list of ecological SF books > and stories, I ask to those who are interested to help building on my > list. Maybe we could compare sources? > And for my argument here. > I believe what Theodor Sturgeon has told us is true: 95% of all SF is > junk (or has he said "thrash"?). The majority of SF books, stories, films, > computer games, journals, zines, etc. have successfully been integrated > into the capitalist market for culture. The "cultural industry", now > preaching that "the end of ideology", "the end of history" has come, and > that there is no alternative to capitalist world-system, is making a > perfect use of SF: Just think about the millions of imbecile "Trekkies", > or those incurable Star Wars fans, buying, watching, CONSUMING every junk > big firms throws at them. Your point is well taken; it's not difficult to see how one would theorise sf as satisfactorily coopted into some postmodern frenzy of cultural consumptioon. I'd be loathe to say that was the end of the story though. Those kinds of left cultural criticism that divide culture into non-consumerist = good = oppositional and mass culture = consumerist = coopted tend to be flawed along the lines of their inability to understand (sociologically!) the difference between a cultural *product* and people's diverse, unpredictable and often subversive *uses* of culture. You can't read off the latter from the former. It's got to be more subtle than that? That's why I'm unsure that the question of "literary value" as abitrator in the question of what sf 'counts' is a problematic one. > SF utopias, to be good fiction, to have literary value -though "literary > value" is dangerous waters- must not be in _stasis_. They must not lose > their dynamism. If you don't know it already, you should read Tom Moylan's _Demand the Impossible_ on theorising the non-static, non-blueprint sf utopia. It's a little old now (published in 1986) but still relevant. If you know it already, I'd be interested in what you (or anybody else) thinks about Moylan's stuff - and just to drag it back to list-relevance, the relationship between a new kind of 'critical' utopia and feminist sf he posits? Lisa Garforth ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 08:11:11 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Erik Tsao Subject: science fiction novels critical of robotics? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Kate Williams wrote: >what would you all >recommend? I especially want the books that give social critiques and search >for or present alternatives to today's applications of robotics (i.e. >eliminate jobs AND shut masses of people out of the economy and out of >society). I'm worried about extreme cynicism (like snow crash, although its >on my list cause its so technologically creative) and about books being too >dense for typical high school kids -- these kids are straight outta toledo >(ohio). There are a couple of novels I would suggest. First is Rudy Rucker's series of novels (important for the beginning of "cyberpunk" sci fi) starting with _Software_. Then there is Paul McAuley's recent book _Fairyland_ which is more about organic, artificial robots who are treated like slaves, and their revolution. And of course there's Philip Dick's _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep_. For more advanced readers Dick's novel _Valis_ is quite interesting. These are some of my suggestions, there are probably more that I can't think of at the moment, or are not aware of. Erik Erik Tsao Graduate Student Department of English Wayne State University Detroit, MI "Penciled purples in the daylit dreams wore wool humid and apology bright letters in the doorway, arabic at the edges the colors of science turned jagged at his cease" --From "HPL" by Clark Coolidge ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 10:00:49 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Ildiko Paulovitch Subject: ç MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Kate, What about Split Infinity by Piers Anthony................. ildiko ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:10:48 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Gary Lynch Subject: SF critical of robots MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:30:42 Kate Williams wrote: > > I am at a school that teaches high school students to design and build > robots > > we are building a reading list for the students. what would you all > recommend? > Somebody needs to mention Isaac Asimov's robot series. Am I the only person who remembers Dr. Susan Calvin and her 3 laws of robotics? There was a plot involving a robot accused of murder (which violates one of the laws), another of a robot who had suffered the electronic equivalent of a nervous breakdown ('though not as destructively as HAL in _2001_). I will research specific titles in my collection and follow up. I realize the material is dated, but most of the stuff written today is based upon, or a reaction to it. ============================================================ Gary Lynch bookworm@execpc.com Hales Corners, WI 53130 http://www.execpc.com/~bookworm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "The future ain't what it used to be." -- Arthur C. Clarke ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:53:41 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Nicole Youngman Subject: Re: SF critical of robots << Somebody needs to mention Isaac Asimov's robot series. Am I the only person who remembers Dr. Susan Calvin and her 3 laws of robotics? >> And not just those--the Daneel Olivaw books too, _Caves of Steel_ etc. Seems like it's quite the common SF trope to come up with a character who's "as good as human" and then spend lots of time wondering what it means to be human--Data, Yod, etc. Nicole ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 15:03:39 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: Re: science fiction novels critical of robotics? In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Kate Williams wrote: > >what would you all > >recommend? I especially want the books that give social critiques and search > >for or present alternatives to today's applications of robotics (i.e. > >eliminate jobs AND shut masses of people out of the economy and out of > >society). I'm worried about extreme cynicism (like snow crash, although its > >on my list cause its so technologically creative) and about books being too > >dense for typical high school kids -- these kids are straight outta toledo > >(ohio). You might want to look at Nancy Kress's Beggars trilogy--Beggars in Spain, Beggars and Choosers, and Beggars Ride--which specifically depicts a near-future America where automation has virtually eliminated the need for blue-collar and unskilled labor. A small number of managers, called Donkeys, basically run everything, while the masses devote themselves to television, sports, and other leisure activities. This is a powerful and chilling example of sociological SF. Jack Williamson's The Humanoids is rather dated, but is still powerful. Robots programmed to protect human beings from harm, gradually restrict all dangerous or exciting activiities. Kim Antieau's The Gaia Websters describes a society which intentionally minimizes technology, as do such older feminists utopia/dystopias as Marge Piercy's Woman on the Edge of Time and Joanna Russ's The Female Man. This is also an important secondary theme in the work of such Quaker or Quaker-influenced SF writers as Joan Slonczewski (A Door into Ocean), Molly Gloss (The Dazzle of Day) and Judith Moffett (Pennterra, The Ragged World, Time, Like an Ever-Flowing Stream). Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 20:20:39 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Keri Stone Subject: Re: SF about computers Hi, Kate's post reminds me how I'm sort of looking for short stories and essays both critical and supportive of the increased computer use in our society. These would be for the beginning computing (software) classes I teach on the high school level. My main problem has been that the non-fiction that I've found is on too advanced a level for my students and I don't know of any short stories (being solely a novel reader). My students are very bright but jargon-filled and very technical things turn them off given that the students actually interested in technology pass out of my class through an exemption exam. If anyone has any suggestions or ideas, I would very much appreciate it, Keri In a message dated 8/29/97 3:36:43 PM, you wrote: >hello everyone, > >I am at a school that teaches high school students to design and build >robots along with the regular academics -- its a 2 and soon a 4 year program. > >we are building a reading list for the students. what would you all >recommend? I especially want the books that give social critiques and search >for or present alternatives to today's applications of robotics (i.e. >eliminate jobs AND shut masses of people out of the economy and out of >society). I'm worried about extreme cynicism (like snow crash, although its >on my list cause its so technologically creative) and about books being too >dense for typical high school kids -- these kids are straight outta toledo >(ohio). like, > >he she and it >parable of the sower >snow crash > >is my list so far > >thanks a lot > >kate ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 00:11:59 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: * * Subject: Re: SF about computers It is not a short story but I found it to be very good and some college Freshmen Profs have use it with their students. It is called He, She, and It by Marge Percy. I found it to have a very entertaining plot and it's well written, plus an easy read. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 00:24:14 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: * * Subject: Re: SF critical of robots He, She, and It by Marge Percy is a very good novel which involves robot or as she terms it cyborgs ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 21:20:24 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Holly Yasui Subject: Re: SF and Ecology In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I second the recommendation of Joan Slonczewski's *Door into Ocean* as an excellent ecological utopia, particularly interesting because the ecology of Ocean is, in fact, ocean ... their entire existence is predicated on organic materials (their homes are living things, like in the last book of the Xenogensis trilogy; their long-distance communication system is based on "clickfly" insects; those who are fascinated by non-organic materials are called "stone-sick;" their doctors/engineers are "life-shapers"). I also found the linguistic and social structure of this society fascinating, rich in possibilities for sociological/political analyis. Another book I suggest, though it has not been well-liked on this list, is Starhawk's *The Fifth Sacred Thing.* Starhawk is a marxist ecofeminist activist, and her novel portrays a utopia/dystopia conflict that I also found very juicy in terms of sociology and politics. I guess both these books are eminently "gaiaist" as described by Emrah ... happy critiquing! --Holly ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 12:17:43 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: joanna goltzman Subject: Sf and computers Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I recently read Trouble and Her Friends by Melissa Scott (1994 Tor Books), which is about marginalized people like women, homosexual people, people of color, etc. plugging themselves into the internet. On the net their icon-selves can see, hear, feel, smell, and touch. I really enjoyed Scott's exploration of freedom from the body through technology. Also, I read about Virtual Girl by Amy Thomson (1993 Ace Books) in a critical essay, but I haven't read it myself. It's about a cyborg who gradually builds her own identity. Hope this helps, though I'm not sure how appropriate these books would be for high school students. Joanna ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:29:01 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sean Johnston Subject: Re: Sf and computers In-Reply-To: <199708311717.MAA12845@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I recently read Trouble and Her Friends by Melissa Scott (1994 Tor Books), >which is about marginalized people like women, homosexual people, people of >color, etc. plugging themselves into the internet. On the net their >icon-selves can see, hear, feel, smell, and touch. I really enjoyed Scott's >exploration of freedom from the body through technology. > >Also, I read about Virtual Girl by Amy Thomson (1993 Ace Books) in a >critical essay, but I haven't read it myself. It's about a cyborg who >gradually builds her own identity. > >Hope this helps, though I'm not sure how appropriate these books would be >for high school students. > >Joanna Joanna, I would hope that it would be very appropriate for some. -Sean ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 22:28:50 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Gary Lynch Subject: SF critical of robots, part 2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ok, I found these titles. The robot novels (all published by Doubleday): 1. _The_Caves_of_Steel_ 1954 Doubleday 2. _The_Naked_Sun_ 1957 Doubleday 3. _The_Robots_of_Dawn 1983 Doubleday 4. _Robots_and_Empire_ 1985 Doubleday These are framed around murder mysteries; look at humans using robots to do things they weren't designed for; and robots doing things that seem to conflict with the laws of robotics, but we find out the robots have better analytic skills than their masters. Asimov also wrote a number of robot short stories, collected in _I,_Robot_ (1950) and _The_Complete_Robot_ (1982). I must credit this information to Ed Seiler's Asimov FAQ at http://www.clark.net/pub/edseiler/asimov/Isaac_Asimov_FAQ_ Part_?_of_4, where ? = 1, 2, 3, & 4. They are in undelmited ASCII, not HTML, and difficult to read with a Web browser. BTW: I finished _Snow_Crash_ in June, and saw little treatment of what I call a "robot" (which includes by definition the ability to move). ??? ============================================================ Gary Lynch bookworm@execpc.com Hales Corners, WI 53130 http://www.execpc.com/~bookworm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "The future ain't what it used to be." -- Arthur C. Clarke