"FEMINISTSF LOG9710D" ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 01:11:20 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Barbara Benesch Subject: Re: child raising, etc. I would like to start off by saying that I hope I'm not stepping on toes or offending anyone here, but I would like to point out that the recent debate over home schooling/day care/etc. is an excellent example of something I have seen mentioned in a great deal of writing about feminism. The only examples I can currently think of are Susan Faludi's _Backlash_ and I believe it was also addressed in Naomi Wolf's _The_Beauty_Myth_, but I know I have seen it mentioned in many other works as well. Basically, my point is this: As I see it, feminism is basically about giving women the right to choose the direction of their own lives. It's about women evaluating the options available to them (feminism is also about opening the arena of options wider than it would be if left to patriarchal mores), and deciding what is the best option for *themselves*. I've always believed that the point is feminism is to give the same level of legitimacy to *all* women. Those who choose not to have children, those who choose to have children and stay at home to raise them, and those who choose to have children and careers both. The point is that women should be free to make their own choices, free of society-induced guilt or pressure. Thus, it's really nobody else's business if a woman chooses to send her children to day care or home school her children or whatever (obviously keeping the well-being of the children foremost). It's a matter for the woman and her family and no one else to debate the suitability of her decision. The recent ruckus over child care/home schooling/etc. is an excellent example of society managing to break down the solidarity feminism is trying to foster between women and reduce us instead to fighting each other rather than those things which are actually causing us grief. Stacey and Marina have both made excellent points, as have the other people who have made comments on the subject. And obviously these are two women who have made and will continue to make very different decisions in the course of their lives. My point is that both of them should be free to make their decisions and not feel forced to defend their very *lives* against the censure of others, particularly those whom they are supposed to be able to count on for support. My point is this: We're falling for one of the most classic (and unfortunately effective!) tools of patriarchy to keep women from actually gaining ground. In our society, a woman is "wrong" no matter what she does. A mother who works and sends her children to day care "doesn't care enough" about her children, while a mother who stays home to raise and nurture her children herself "doesn't have a life of her own." Who exactly are WE to say who is right? We all live very different lives and a choice that is right for me may not be right for any other woman on this list or anywhere, in fact. The problem is that society has us so hard on the defensive that if someone says something that *might* be construed as criticism, we feel we must leap to our own defense for fear of being informed that there is something wrong with the choices we have made and the ways we have each chosen to live our lives. It's been said on this list before, and I'll repeat it: Home parenting isn't for everyone, and neither is the double life of women who are good mothers and carry on successful careers of their own. It's our job to respect the women who *can* be successful mothers and careerwomen, and also to respect the women who can spend their days schooling their children at home as well as making the community one the working women like coming home to. I'll certainly grant that there are some women who stay at home to raise their children and don't do such a good job, and there are women who try to sustain a career while raising their children and end up neglecting one or the other. But it's up to us as feminists to support and respect the decisions of all women. This is so that the pressure placed on women by society is lessened, and so fewer and fewer women make decisions based on what society expects and rather on what is really *best* for them. Okay, that's my spout-off, and I'll say off the bat that you're all free to disregard this as so much hooey, but I had say this. Barbara Benesch BJBenesch@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 01:14:12 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: Tolkien In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Yvonne, I'd like to tell you that you did a great job giving a pretty negative view on Tolkien without being derogatory. I wish my own diplomatical skills were a little better. I like Tolkien maybe because I see it like somehow more realistic than usual representation of what life was like in Medieval Europe. Since this may sound strange, let me explain. When I was growing up being a white minority in a very traditional Asian country, I always noticed how much more native people there were connected to their cultural past than Europeans and European-dominated cultures of the First World. Honestly, I did not envy them too much, because I don't think I'd like to live exactly like my ancestors a thousand years ago and follow a bunch of outdated and meaningless rules just because "it's our tradition". However, it was interesting to see that any more or less literate person could recite poems of some guy who had been dead for twenty five hundred years, and that any teenager was basically an expert in traditional folk songs, dances, and clothing. What made me remember this here in America, was The Eve of Nations -- one of those student activities held at the University of Oklahoma the last Spring before they kicked me out. Students from dufferent countries (mostly Asian) gave pretty stunning presentations of songs and dances from their countries. They were very good: music, costumes, and performance itself. To the extent that it was hard for those unfamiliar with the specific culture (I, for example, know nothing about Malaysia other that they have a king and that you get a death penalty for possession of 20 grams of marijuana) to distinguish them from professional performers. And all of them were students with totally non-artistic majors, like Electrical Engineering or International Business. Our European Student Association (which I asways suggested to transform into a coed sorority, since all we were doing there was partying) came up with one joined number. A crowd of people dressed in pajamas got out on the stage and sang, rather awfully, Freire Jacob in several different languages. That was it for the European folk culture presented, and hopefully, squeesed between a guy from Central Africa giving a fascinating solo on a drum, and a group of Indonesian girls dancing in elaborated costumes, this failure was not noticed or remembered. I don't know if you agree with me, but I think that the only trace of what European culture before Post-Industrial, or even Industrial age was like, can be now found only in fairy tales. All that stuff about knights in shiny armor, faire ladies, King Arthur, and so on. But people are still curious sometimes, what had been going on there, before the steam engine was invented. Maybe that's also part of the reason why Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose, set in a 12th senury monastery, was such a success. Strangely for a fantasy, most of Tolkien's books have some sense of realism absent from traditional fairy tales, hero-rescuing-a-princess type or those hilarious Disney versions of the classics (like them turning Little Mermaid into an action movie structured like one of the Hong Kong karate flicks we liked to watch in junior high). For example, when characters set to go somewhere, they don't just hop on a horse and enter the gates of the destination point in the very next scene. They have to ride or walk for weeks, in rain and cold weather, without nylon clothes or water-resistant shoes, sleep on the ground, and defend themselves from enemies with swords, which unlike guns, require facing the person at the close distance. Their castles are dark and cold, with no water or electricity, and the only medicine available is magic, which means in reality people were dying like flies. And the characters still have some energy and willingness to go through all that in order to fight some evil. I find it kind of romantic. When I read the first three books in my teens, my favorite character was Gandalf. He always knew better than anyone what was going on. He had to fight the most dangerous creatures, like Barlog, or Saruman. And when he got killed, they sent him back in a different image so he could later sail West with Elves when his mission was complete. Anyway, Tolkien's books have a lot of imperfections. Besides being sexist, I think it's also pretty racist. Besides, he often get carried away with making the language too much of "the-ancient-manuscript" style. However, some passages in the book were breath-takingly beautiful. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 01:32:01 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long Comments: To: Stacey Holbrook In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Stacey, Your postings are just as full of assumptions as mine. My attitude is my attitude, and it in no way can interfere with what people want to do with their lives, unless they are insecure about their choice. There are lots's of people who think like me, there are lot's of people who think like you, that's the way world is. You cannot make them change their mind by telling them they don't know what they are talking about. Of course you can try if you want to. And disagreement is not an insult unless one believes they are never wrong. Marina On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Stacey Holbrook wrote: > On Mon, 20 Oct 1997, MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > > (snip) > > I don't have any personal issues to resolve, with anyone on the list. I > > said what I said, and I stand by every word. If anyone has taken it for a > > personal attack instead of the abstract argument it was, it's really sad. > > I am sorry they feel that way. > > Your "abstract argument" was full of assumptions about women who choose to > stay at home. Since I am one of those women, I took your statements > personally. I didn't want to get into a fight with you, I just wanted you > to stop posting on this thread since so much of what you had written was > insulting and stereotypical (watching soaps all day, being overly involved > in their children's lives, being dependent and "hiding behind their > husband's back", not having a life, "wasting the best years of their > lives", children are not allowed to develop as independent human beings, > etc...) > > (snip) > > Finally, nothing I said was in any way more insulting than the talk about > > "selfishness of childless people" or those "shunting away their little > > ones". No one made a big deal about _that_. Even though with all the > > pressure society puts on working mothers, the last thing they probably > > need are guilt trips from fellow feminists. And I don't remember any of > > them apologizing. > > I don't recall any statements regarding the "selfishness of childless > people" and in fact several people commented on "shunting away their > little ones". And, while there is a lot of pressure on working mothers by > society in general, -your- statements that were so full of contempt were > about stay at home mothers. While society pays lip service to stay at home > parents, the truth is that many people have your attitude. > > > As I already said once, it's always easier to act angry or upset (or > > spiteful -- remember "stupid" discussion of Demi Moore movies) than to > > come up with something better. Or prove, logically, that the opponent is > > wrong, instead of saying that she "does not know what she is > > talking about" (that _is_ an assumption, by the way). > > I didn't want to continue this thread which is so off topic. But, I > consider the above statement a challenge... > > The vast majority of the mothers that I know who choose to stay at home do > not watch an inordinate amount of television, lack independence, or hide > behind their husband's back. They have better things to do like go to > seminars, work on newletters, write a book, campaign for local or national > governmental reforms, garden or care for livestock, run their home > business, develop web pages, become involved in a support network (La > Leche League, for example), midwifery, take lessons, give lessons, travel > and just pursue whatever interests they might have. > > All of these things are done while raising children. Marina is correct in > one way, staying home to raise children isn't for everyone. It is hard and > demanding work but very rewarding for those of us who choose to make child > care our primary focus. > > (snip) > > And for God's sake, Stacey, I am not talking about you. I don't even know you. > > I've seen plenty of other families children who spent their "best years" > > running from a music tutor to a ballet class to some sport place they > > genuinely hated in order to satisfy their parents' vanity. Your case > > might be different, and it is not the point. What I am trying to say > > is that a lot of parents I've met who bent over backwards trying to be > > non-traditional, and considered "making something" of their children the > > central goal of their lives, would do the greatest favor to their children > > by just letting them be and getting on with their own lives. I am sure > > there are exceptions. But I am afraid, they just prove the rule. > > And I see far too many parents "letting them be" and "getting on with > their own lives". IMO if more parents were involved in their children's > lives there wouldn't be as many teen-age drug addicts, alcoholics, > pregnancies etc. I think that in the long run most children will > eventually grow up and be grateful that their parents cared enough to be > involved in their lives. And the ultimate pursuit of most stay at home > parents I know isn't to "make something" of their children. It is to raise > their children to be caring and happy adults. > > > And one more time I repeat -- those who don't like a thread, don't have > > to read it, that's what Subject lines are for. They all are > > wellcome to start one of their own, we'll all be happy to participate. > > This thread was very interesting when it started. > > > Thanks for your time, > > > > Marina > > Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 01:26:05 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Susan Armstrong Subject: Re: Tolkien Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Yvonne Rowse wrote: > >> I love the shire, i love the hobbits, particularly Sam, although I >> wish he were less subserviant ( was *he* gay do you think?), I like >> Faramir but the battles and high glory leave me bored to tears. > >Excuse me, but Samwise was not gay...he does have a family back in the Shire >(only hobbit I can think of who's married). And I wouldn't go so far to call >him subservient...yes, he had a great loyalty to both Bilbo and Frodo, but >that's because they let him work at what he loved: the garden. > >- Geoffrey >------------------------------ Actually Sam isn't yet married when he leaves home to go on the quest. He does leave behind a serious girlfriend, Rose Cotton. After the hobbits get home a year later, Sam talks to Rosie about tying the knot. I have to paraphrase this from memory since my copy of LOTR have long gone missing -- and I don't want to look, because I know that were I to try to reread it now (as a 39-year-old feminist woman), my remembered youthful pleasure in LOTR would probably evaporate. No, sometimes you can't go home again. Anyway, Sam brings up the topic of marriage, and Rosie makes a comment to the effect that it's about time, because "after all you've gone off and wasted a whole year already." "Wasted? I wouldn't call it that", says Sam indignantly. Recalling that little scene now, I have quite a different reaction to Rosie's irreverent comment than I originally did -- and it's surely not the reaction Tolkien intended. :-) Since we're already off-topic and on-Tolkien: Any LOTR fans out there should definitely get hold of a copy of the BBC's 13-hour dramatization of LOTR, produced ca. 1981. It's very nearly all that one could (but dared not) hope for in a radio dramatization. The talents of Ian Holm as Frodo are especially moving and memorable. -- Susan A. Susan Armstrong * Vancouver, Canada * anariska@mortimer.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:07:25 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Yvonne Rowse Subject: Re: Tolkien MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Geoffrey > > Excuse me, but Samwise was not gay...he does have a family back in the Shire > (only hobbit I can think of who's married). You're right. Sorry. Speaking of which, does anyone know how dwarves reproduced? As far as I recall there was never any sign of female dwarves. Is Terry Pratchett right? All dwarves have beards and have to spend months diplomatically working out the sex of the other before propositioning them? Must make for a very complicated sex life. And I wouldn't go so far to call > him subservient...yes, he had a great loyalty to both Bilbo and Frodo, but > that's because they let him work at what he loved: the garden. You're probably right again. Sam is certainly a very conmpetant, self-sufficient hobbit. I don't like the way Merry & Pippin talk to him though. Of course, I've never had a servant so perhaps that's what grates. Yvonne ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:59:37 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Yvonne Rowse Subject: Re: Tolkien MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Marina You wrote: > I don't know if you agree with me, but I think that the only > trace of what European culture before Post-Industrial, or even Industrial > age was like, can be now found only in fairy tales. Perhaps so, although lots of people try to recreate it they only like to be the knights in shining armour. The mud, the cold and the darkness are more real but less romantic. Have you read _A History of their Own_ by Bonnie Anderson and Judith Zinsser? It's subtitled Women in Europe from prehistory to the present. I found it fascinating. They suggest that life for peasant women didn't change much from the 9th until the 20th century. Fairy tales are one of my favourite sorts of literature. We, my children and I, have particularly liked _Tatterhood_ which is published by the feminist press. All that stuff about > knights in shiny armor, faire ladies, King Arthur, and so on. But people are > still curious sometimes, what had been going on there, before the steam > engine was invented. Maybe that's also part of the reason why Umberto Eco's > The Name of the Rose, set in a 12th senury monastery, was such a success. In the UK Ellis Peter's books about a detective monk (!) have been very popular. Cetainly it's the historical and herbal healing details which make them interesting although I don't know how accurate these are. > Strangely for a fantasy, most of Tolkien's books have some sense of > realism absent from traditional fairy tales, hero-rescuing-a-princess > type or those hilarious Disney versions of the classics (like them turning > Little Mermaid into an action movie structured like one of the Hong Kong > karate flicks we liked to watch in junior high). But I just love the bad witch. For example, when > characters set to go somewhere, they don't just hop on a horse and enter the > gates of the destination point in the very next scene. They have to ride or > walk for weeks, in rain and cold weather, without nylon clothes or > water-resistant shoes, sleep on the ground, and defend themselves from > enemies with swords, which unlike guns, require facing the person at the > close distance. Their castles are dark and cold, with no water or > electricity, and the only medicine available is magic, which means in > reality people were dying like flies. And the characters still have > some energy and willingness to go through all that in order to fight some > evil. I find it kind of romantic. Yes, this is true. I like the walking very much although I think my favourite bit is the pub in Bree and the Hey Diddle Diddle nursery rhyme extension. Talking about the reality of war etc, have you read _The Lions of Al-Rassan_ by Guy Gavriel Kay? I cultivate a poor memory so I can read things again and be (relatively) surprised and it's been a year since I read it but I remember it being streets ahead of Tolkein on the reality in fantasy front. I think I'll read it again and bring it up for discussion. > When I read the first three books in my teens, my favorite character was > Gandalf. He always knew better than anyone what was going on. He had to > fight the most dangerous creatures, like Barlog, or Saruman. And when he > got killed, they sent him back in a different image so he could later sail > West with Elves when his mission was complete. I think I agree with Geoffrey, Sam is my favourite character. He's provincial and practical and i like him a lot. > Anyway, Tolkien's books have a lot of imperfections. Besides being > sexist, I think it's also pretty racist. Besides, he often get carried > away with making the language too much of "the-ancient-manuscript" style. > However, some passages in the book were breath-takingly beautiful. I agree with you. There is a lot of LotR that's worth reading. I just would like not to have to read all the boring battle scenes coming up. Unfortunately my son loves boring battle bits and would prefer the (interesting to me) character interactions not to get in the way. I'd get him the tape of the book but I'm told it runs to 18 cassettes! Yvonne ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 12:32:29 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Edward James Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 19 Oct 1997 to 20 Oct 1997 In-Reply-To: <199710211659.QAA05000@etsuodt.TAMU-Commerce.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII" On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Robin Reid wrote: > > A side note: one of my favorite British writers Barbara Pym has an entry in > her journal about seeing Tolkien lecture when she was student at > Oxford--this was before LOTR was published and he became famous. She didn't > think too much of him as I recall! > > Robin > Robin_Reid@tamu-commerce.edu > Thank you for your long interesting letter about Tolkien etc. I thought people might be interested in an extract which the best known current children's fantasy writer in Britain, Diana Wynne Jones, has just published in my journal FOUNDATION, in an autobiographical piece for our special issue on "Young SF" (which also has articles on Ursula Le Guin, on women in sf for small children, on Lois Lowry, Gudrun Pausewang etc). She wrote: "When I was a student at Oxford, both C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien were lecturing there, Lewis magnificently and Tolkien badly and inaudibly, and the climate of opinion was such that people explained Lewis's children's books by saying "It's his Christianity, you know", as if the books were a symptom of some kind of disease, while of Tolkien they said that he was wasting his time on hobbits when he should have been writing learned articles. Neither of them ever lectured on their secret hobbies. and yet somehow not only I butnumerous others, such as Penelope Lively, Jill Paton Walsh and Penelope Farmer, to name just a few -- and we none of us knew one another there -- all went away and produced books for children. Strange of us really." And I could add that Tolkien DID lecture on his passion wwhen I was a student at Oxford, but I was too late to get in the room... I gather he was inaudible then, too. Edward James ............................................................................. Professor Edward James, Dept of History, Faculty of Letters and Social Sciences, University of Reading, Whiteknights, READING RG6 6AA, UK http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~lhsjamse/home.htm Editor: FOUNDATION: THE INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SCIENCE FICTION Joint Editor: EARLY MEDIEVAL EUROPE .............................................................................. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:32:33 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Teragram Subject: Re: child raising, etc. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >My point is this: We're falling for one of the most classic (and >unfortunately effective!) tools of patriarchy to keep women from actually >gaining ground. In our society, a woman is "wrong" no matter what she does. > A mother who works and sends her children to day care "doesn't care enough" >about her children, while a mother who stays home to raise and nurture her >children herself "doesn't have a life of her own." Who exactly are WE to say >who is right? We all live very different lives and a choice that is right >for me may not be right for any other woman on this list or anywhere, in >fact. The problem is that society has us so hard on the defensive that if >someone says something that *might* be construed as criticism, we feel we >must leap to our own defense for fear of being informed that there is >something wrong with the choices we have made and the ways we have each >chosen to live our lives. BINGO! Thanks for putting it down. Right now there is an unfortunate case in Boston, in which the mother left her young child in the care of an au pair while she was working (part time) - the child died, possibly as a result of being shaken by the au pair, and it's all gone to trial now. Pretty much an everyday tragedy, from where I stand. But there has been an astounding outpouring of hate mail/talk attacking the bereaved mother for 'abandoning' her child - no matter that she had hired the au pair through a supposedly reputable agency, no matter that she had taken the 'mommy' track and was only working part time, no matter that she has just lost her only child - she is being cast as the villian in her own tragedy by men and women alike. In much of public opinion, she is being held culpable for her child's death - as much as if she had killed her child with her own hands. This seems ridiculous to me on so many levels - and, sadly, wholly typical. It is small wonder women tend to be defensive about the choices they have made when they are so apt to be attacked for those choices - no matter what they are. 'Welfare mothers' are attacked for being too lazy to get out and get a job, mothers who work outside the home are attacked for 'abandoning' their children, women who choose not to have children are attacked for being selfish and selfcentered (or, god forbid!, 'unnatural'), women who choose to be stay at home mothers are attacked for being 'regressive' - this is hardly a win/win situation, and the list goes on. You always have your choices, and you are always wrong. Can you say 'backlash'? Sure you can..... meg ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:32:37 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Jana C. McCormick" Subject: Re: Butler's Dawn The idea I kept coming back to while reading this book has been percolating in my brain for quite some time and I perceived another connection within this book. -Our society reveres courage, perseverence, ambition and intelligence above all things, as most societies. A person displaying these qualities may become a highly esteemed member of our community. We praise these qualities and teach them to our young people. Survival of the fittest, look out for number one first and then maybe we'll have time to help others and we can be revered for self-sacrifice, taking time away from personal gain...or is it? There is the question of true altruism. However, our society does not regard empathy as a trait worth devoting such time and praise. Our schools do expend effort to teach this, we do not know how to go about it. We do not value it...we begin to teach tolerance but is that enough? The Webster's Dictionary defines empathy as "intellectual or emotional identification with another." Is that specific enough? My definition of empathy is not merely divining how I would feel in the same situation but how that person with all that person's mode of thoughts, reactions and beliefs (to the best of my knowledge) would feel in such a situation and why. We do not react the same as a people to similar situations. Add some communication skills to empathy and you may have a society which works a bit more smoothly. In Butler's Dawn, I feel courage, perseverence, ambition and intelligence were displayed in abundance by the humans and aliens. The critical ingredient missing most of the time was empathy. For instance, Nikanj obviously cared for Lilith and he tried to understand her but he was incapable, not merely callous. Lillith wanted to help her human friends, including Tate, but was unable to fathom were they were coming from entirely. She did understand their reactions when they converged with her own, but when they reacted differently, she became impatient. This is a common human reaction among us all. We understand those who act as we do. When the paths diverge, we lose patience, understanding and cease our efforts. This is what chisels away at our ability to communicate, lack of empathy. This is the message I inferred from Dawn. Lack of empathy, communication and interest in a cohesive, diverse society destroy the fabric of that society. The Ooloi and the Oankali fail in this endeavor as do the humans. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:36:46 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: Re: empowerment of children Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Afew months ago I founfd myself re-reading Heinlein's The Star Beast as an > adult and was struck by the off-handed way he slipped in a reference to > children divorcing their parents. reminded me of the flap over Hillary > Clinton's supposed endorsement of that idea. I hadn't heard about the First Lady's "supposed endorsement of that idea". I do recall in _Grumbles_, though, that there was a lot of heat from Heinlein's editor at Scribner's about that. He tended to have a lot of trouble with Scribner's. I don't know if any of his "juvenile" books were non-controversial. You have sparked the question for me, though... Did Heinlein treat women and children (going on the theory that children are marginalized similarly to women or to how women have been) differently? I.e., did he deal with their marginalization in similar ways (making the assumption that he tried to "de-marginalize" them)? Something to think about, perhaps. -allen -- Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 10:27:59 -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: Tolkien In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII My friend had some sort of record of lotr thtat we listened to when I was a kid. I didn't think it was that long but it might have been. Anyway, it left me with the greatest feminist impression because the one segement that I loved and can still remember today is when some evil bad demon or something meets ?his? doom at the hands of a woman: "Dost thou not know the scriptures? No mortal man may hinder meeee!" "But I am not a man, I am a woman!" "Aaaiiieeeeee" (basically a death wail from the bad thing) The voice of the evil thing was great, I can still hear it but not reproduce it. Anyway, I often think about that passage when people discuss the sexism in the word man/men meaning both males specifically and males and females generally. -- Joel VanLaven ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:41:19 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Re: raising kids -- Marina and Stacey Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Marina stated: >Stacey, >Your postings are just as full of assumptions as mine. My attitude is my >attitude, and it in no way can interfere with what people want to do >with their lives, unless they are insecure about their choice. There are >lots's of people who think like me, there are lot's of people who >think like you, that's the way world is. You cannot make them change >their mind by telling them they don't know what they are talking about. >Of course you can try if you want to. > >And disagreement is not an insult unless one believes they are never >wrong. > >Marina > I think perhaps Laura should shut this down, unless someone can bring it back to an SF related topic. The child empowerment thread seems to be doing this. Marina: a point of netequitte -- opinions are prefaced by comments like "I think," or "IMHO," in my experience. Statements are not. Perhaps you will cause less offense by keeping this in mind. In any event, as someone who can not only choose her messages by subject line (which it would be nice, IMO, if people were more careful about changing when the subject changes -- the "Tolkien" to "5th Element" thread comes to mind), but also by the sender's line, I will no longer be reading messages from Marina. Pax, Maryelizabeth Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX http://www.mystgalaxy.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 18:01:21 +0100 Reply-To: Bronwen Reid Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Bronwen Reid Subject: Re: Tolkien In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971020191621.006a2748@pop5.ibm.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 20 Oct 1997, Luz Guerra wrote: > I loved reading the Hobbit and Rings Trilogy when I was a child, and spent > a some time reading these at night with my own son. I've just finished rereading Lord of the Rings for the first time in about 15 years. I turned back to it because I'd been reading Le Guin's non-fiction (Language of the Night?) and she writes about Tolkien there. There were two essays; one describing the impact the Rings had on her when she read it for the first time, and the other discussing language and style in fantasy writing. Le Guin makes the point that fantasy as a genre barely existed before Tolkien. She also managed to explain why the writing was so wonderful. [Someone said convoluted - I'd disagree, I love the style] What struck me on rereading was the intensely visualised landscape and geography of Middle Earth - I was imagining Tolkien with handmade maps which probably covered the entire floor of his house. At every point you are told exactly where the characters are, and what mountains, rivers, plains, forests lie to the north, south, east and west. The introduction to my edition said the book was written over a period of 11 years, and was originally started because Tolkien has invented a language and wanted a world and a history to go with it. But I have always found the adventures of Aragon-the-hero and friends a struggle. As a child I skipped half the book as a child to get away from him, and I'm still unable to take any interest in him. -- Bronwen Reid, Mailbase, Computing Service, University of Newcastle, NE1 7RU Tel: (0191) 222-8214 Email: B.A.Reid@newcastle.ac.uk ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 18:13:49 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Bronwen Reid Subject: C.S.Lewis In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII "Hideous Strength" (1945?) has an evil lesbian who enjoys burning people with cigarettes. Also polemics on the subject of marriage - Lewis believed that a wife should obey her husband. But I love the man's imagination - if you want to read about the joy, delight and sheer wonder of visiting a strange planet try "Out of the Silent Planet" - I don't think it's ever been done better. Silent Planet also has a great line in anti-colonisation. On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Yvonne Rowse wrote: > Incidentaly, while we're talking about Oxford dons, how about CSLewis for a > woman hater? His women are all evil or unpleasant and his girls have to be > pretty and boyish (as opposed to girlish), able to follow orders and not > blubber. I still have some affection for the Narnia books but they are full > of petty nastiness that I could well live without. -- Bronwen Reid, Mailbase, Computing Service, University of Newcastle, NE1 7RU Tel: (0191) 222-8214 Email: B.A.Reid@newcastle.ac.uk ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 12:32:39 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: Re: Butler's Dawn In-Reply-To: <971022090825_932911547@mrin40.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" "Jana C. McCormick" wrote: > >-Our society reveres courage, perseverence, ambition and intelligence above >all things, as most societies. I'm not so sure about the "most societies" part. Are you familiar at all with the Yiddish idioms (though everything in Yiddish is an idiom) "mensch" or "shayner yid"? > There is the question of true altruism. One of the "three things which sustain the world" in Judaism is charity. Maimonides distinguishes eight (IIRC) levels of charity, the higher being more completely anonymous. Again, it has been said that where our culture's purpose is to maximize Gross Product, the purpost of the culture of Tibet is to maximize compassion. Neil Rest NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 11:25:09 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: Re: Ideals of Feminism In-Reply-To: <971022010412_1869112303@mrin42.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I was goin gto wait a little, to see how this thread did, before contributing, but Barbara Benesch got ahead of me with a comment Re: child raising, etc. >Basically, my point is this: As I see it, feminism is basically about giving >women the right to choose the direction of their own lives. It's about women >evaluating the options available to them (feminism is also about opening the >arena of options wider than it would be if left to patriarchal mores), and >deciding what is the best option for *themselves*. I've always believed that >the point is feminism is to give the same level of legitimacy to *all* women. >The point is that women should be free to make their own choices, free >of society-induced guilt or pressure. I come to "feminism" from sort of a minority direction: I'm an anarchist. I believe in free, informed choice. I believe one-size-fits-all doesn't. I oppose enforced formulas. If you start near there, feminism is, in my opinion, implicit. Some women want to cook, sew and keep house. Some women want to raise children. Some women want to do both. Some women want to be astronauts. Some women want to be lumberjacks. One of my favorite bits from Emma Goldman's autobiography is from the first decade of this century, when she made a lot of her income as a public speaker on the Chautauqua circuit. Some of her friends took her aside and told her she'd do a lot better if she didn't give such prominence to what today we'd call gay rights and contraception. She replied that since it was all of a piece, she didn't understand how she could. & incidentally, Barbara, welcome to the list! Neil Rest NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 21:10:32 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Vonda N. McIntyre" Subject: Le Guin in Seattle In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Ursula K. Le Guin is going to be at the Northwest Bookfest in Seattle this weekend. She kindly agreed to come at the last minute, so isn't on the printed schedule. There's information about the Bookfest on my home page (see .sig). She'll be speaking on Sunday, 26 October, at 3:30 p.m. If you are in Seattle or know someone who is and might be interested, please let them know. Best, Vonda http://www.sff.net/people/Vonda ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 21:11:32 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Vonda N. McIntyre" Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 19 Oct 1997 to 20 Oct 1997 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jill Paton Walsh also has a terrific mystery out -- I lent it to a friend and have spaced out the title, but it's about quilting, feminism, women in mathematics, and (a [tapdance quickly over whether it's a possible] variation on) Penrose tiles. I liked it a lot. Vonda On Wed, 22 Oct 1997 12:32:29 +0100, Edward James wrote: >... >She wrote: > >"...Jill Paton >Walsh ... http://www.sff.net/people/Vonda ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 17:35:21 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Nina M. Osier" Subject: Re: Tolkien MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My experience in more than 25 years of adult involvement in church leadership (Protestant, several different denominations - including some formal study toward ordination) has been that male pronouns are treated by many religious people as including women when work is being handed out - but when privileges are being defined, suddenly "he" and "him" definitely mean "males only." Which of course is utter nonsense.... Nina Osier Joel VanLaven wrote: > My friend had some sort of record of lotr thtat we listened to when I > was > a kid. I didn't think it was that long but it might have been. > Anyway, > it left me with the greatest feminist impression because the one > segement > that I loved and can still remember today is when some evil bad demon > or > something meets ?his? doom at the hands of a woman: > > "Dost thou not know the scriptures? No mortal man may hinder meeee!" > > "But I am not a man, I am a woman!" > > "Aaaiiieeeeee" (basically a death wail from the bad thing) > > The voice of the evil thing was great, I can still hear it but not > reproduce it. Anyway, I often think about that passage when > people discuss the sexism in the word man/men meaning both males > specifically and males and females generally. > > -- Joel VanLaven ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:49:15 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Jana C. McCormick" Subject: Re: Tibet and Compassion & Empathy Neil Rest says: << the purpost of the culture of Tibet is to maximize compassion.>> Tell me, though, is that compassion for the sake of understanding and possibly aiding in a way that is truly helpful to the individual? Or is that compassion for the sake of esteem for the giver...? It's tough to say and ideals may interpreted and used as the individual sees fit. Purpose dictates action...and knowledge of true empathy. Empathy and compassion do not go hand in hand. Compassion can be just for form's sake. Have you ever spoken to a smug teacher or a smug social worker that was condescending to those she was "lowering her/himself to help"? I have. I need to research Tibet, though. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 19:33:39 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Luz Guerra Subject: Re: Tibet and Compassion & Empathy In-Reply-To: <971022234905_661337312@emout20.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:49 PM 10/22/97 -0400, you wrote: >Neil Rest says: ><< the purpost of the culture of Tibet is to maximize compassion.>> lg: I would only suggest that "culture" is a term that encompasses a universe of social and individual behaviors/interactions and I don't believe the culture of any one society/people has a single purpose. Some cultures are more likely to nurture/value/encourage or even require certain emotional responses to suffering -- one of these responses is compassion. I don't know enough about the culture of Tibet to discuss it with any authority, so my question is basic -- is all of Tibet/are all Tibetans Buddhist? I do know that Buddhism has "three gems": Buddha, Dharma (the way of understanding and loving) and Shangha (the community that lives in harmony and awareness); so I assume that the culture of Tibetan Buddhism also follows this path of compassion. But other societies that practice Buddhism are not necessarily known for their compassion.... It's too early for me to bring this to a FSFFU thread? paz, luz Luz Guerra lguerra@ibm.net Austin, Texas "...No es para mi sino el polvo/ la lluvia cruel de la estacion/ No me reservo nada si no todo el espacio/ y alli trabajar/ manifestar la primavera...." -- Pablo Neruda ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 08:40:51 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: Re: Tibet and Compassion & Empathy In-Reply-To: <971022234905_661337312@emout20.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" "Jana C. McCormick" replied: ><< the purpost of the culture of Tibet is to maximize compassion.>> > >Tell me, though, is that compassion for the sake of understanding and >possibly aiding in a way that is truly helpful to the individual? Or is that >compassion for the sake of esteem for the giver...? Yes, no. > Have you ever spoken to a smug teacher or a smug social worker that was >condescending to those she was "lowering her/himself to help"? I have. >I need to research Tibet, though. While the sample is small, I have never encountered a Tibetan who was anything remotely like smug, much less a lama. The lamas are in the service of all sentience. Neil NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 16:03:40 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robin Reid Subject: Re: choices; Tolkien Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Barbara Benesch >BJBenesch@aol.com wrote: >My point is this: We're falling for one of the most classic (and >unfortunately effective!) tools of patriarchy to keep women from actually >gaining ground. In our society, a woman is "wrong" no matter what she does. > A mother who works and sends her children to day care "doesn't care enough" >about her children, while a mother who stays home to raise and nurture her >children herself "doesn't have a life of her own." Who exactly are WE to say >who is right? We all live very different lives and a choice that is right >for me may not be right for any other woman on this list or anywhere, in >fact. The problem is that society has us so hard on the defensive that if >someone says something that *might* be construed as criticism, we feel we >must leap to our own defense for fear of being informed that there is >something wrong with the choices we have made and the ways we have each >chosen to live our lives. http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~lhsjamse/home.htm > Barbara: thank you for some good comments regarding the recent debate. I belive you have pointed accurately to what is happening. I know for some years I have been following the media presentation/construction of "working" women vs. "housewives" (as if all women don't work) which seemed to constantly foreground the enmity between these women. As a woman who has chosen not to be married or have children, I don't have much personal stake here except to note that all this focus still seems to be based on the assumption that women SHOULD have children, no matter what. Of course I'm living in a rural part of Texas where the dominant assumption is women ought to be married with kids right out of high school, and there I do believe that the young women are NOT given the chance to make a choice. I have a lot of students who are 24, back in school, divorced (IF they're lucky; the level of reported spousal abuse is horrifying), and trying to raise two or three children on their own. Robin ********************************************** Yvonne wrote: >You're probably right again. Sam is certainly a very conmpetant, >self-sufficient hobbit. I don't like the way Merry & Pippin talk to him >though. Of course, I've never had a servant so perhaps that's what grates. The model for Sam's relationship to Mr. Bilbo, Mr. Frodo, etc is the English class system that Tolkien knew only from the top down. Sam is an admirable character in many ways (remember he takes over for Frodo when he belives Frodo is dead and thus becomes a Ringbearer in his own right and is honored as such by the Elves and others). But he is also a firm believer in the class system, knowing his own place in it and keeping others firmly in theirs. I didn't understand this on an emotional level until I studied at Oxford for a summer abroad program and met some of the scouts who work in the colleges, cleaning, etc. Some of the women (*who were my mother's age*) told me how much they liked the American students who picked up after themselves (made their beds, hung up their own clothes, etc.) and were generally nicer than the British students. Pip, one of the men, once firmly instructed a group of radical American students about how awful it was that a few working class students come to Oxford on scholarship are, and how they shouldn't be allowed, etc. (We also heard a lot of comments about how emotional Americans are, and how much they hug, oh horrors, in public, and so on, showing the perceptions of major cultural differences between the two national cultures.) This may not connect directly to feminism/SF except that the myth that America has no class has often affected feminist philosophy, theory, and practice--trying to work out the intersections of race, class, and gender can be difficult. SF novels, even explicitly feminist ones, often focus more on gender issues, but the 'invisible' aspect of the gender is that it's often anglo-european/middle class women who are presenting their critique of gender roles in their cultures/communities. A further comment on the fantasy/medieval thread: my housemate who is a medieval historian cannot stand to read 99.999999999 of the published fantasy and especially Ellis Peter's Cadfael mysteries because she says they have got it all wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. She does like Eco's novel, but that's about it. Robin **************************************************** Edward James wrote: >Thank you for your long interesting letter about Tolkien etc. I thought >people might be interested in an extract which the best known current >children's fantasy writer in Britain, Diana Wynne Jones, has just >published in my journal FOUNDATION Thank you for running this--it's wonderful! I'll have to subscribe asap so I can receive that issue. Robin ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 12:23:08 -0900 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: choices; Tolkien In-Reply-To: <199710231603.QAA13743@etsuodt.TAMU-Commerce.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, Robin Reid wrote: > > A further comment on the fantasy/medieval thread: my housemate who is a > medieval historian cannot stand to read 99.999999999 of the published > fantasy and especially Ellis Peter's Cadfael mysteries because she says they > have got it all wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. She does like Eco's novel, > but that's about it. > As a Cadfael fan, I need to know - please - what is all wrong about the novels?> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 19:04:50 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 19 Oct 1997 to 20 Oct 1997 >Jill Paton Walsh also has a terrific mystery out [snip] >-- about quilting, feminism, women in >mathematics, and (a [tapdance quickly over whether >it's a possible] variation on) Penrose tiles. Yes, this is part of a series of mysteries by her featuring Imogen Quy. She has also written a wonderful adult novel called 'Lapsing' (not sf, but very highly recommended) Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic,msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 19:09:50 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: Tolkien Nina wrote >male pronouns are treated by many religious people as including >women when work is being handed out - but when privileges are >being defined, suddenly "he" and "him" definitely mean "males only." A point made by pioneering feminist Charlotte Carmichael Stopes (one of the first women to study at Edinburgh University though unable at that time to take a degree) in her 'The Sphere of man in relation to that of Woman in the Constitution', 1907. Her conclusion was that ^Ñ^Ôman^Ô always includes ^Ówoman^Ô when there is a penalty to be incurred but never includes ^Ówoman^Ô when there is a privilege to be conferred^Ò. She was the mother of the birth control pioneer Marie Stopes. Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 16:21:52 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Bill Sansbury Subject: Re: Tibet and Compassion & Empathy In-Reply-To: <971022234905_661337312@emout20.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:49 PM 10/22/1997 -0400, you wrote: excuse me, but as an anthropologist I must state that culture is a natural phenomenon and if it has any "purpose" at all it is the survival of the species. >Neil Rest says: ><< the purpost of the culture of Tibet is to maximize compassion.>> "The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." PKD grok@idt.net http://idt.net/~grok/ bsans@wam.umd.edu http://www.wam.umd.edu/~bsans ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:36:26 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: Tolkien In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Yvonne, Unfortunately, I haven't read the books you mentioned, _The History of Their Own_, and _The Lions of Al-Rassan_. However, I think I've read the series about a detective-monk. Was his name Father Brown? I liked those stories a because they had a sense of humor, which is pretty rare in detective novels. About Tolkien, I found Sam kind of boring, honestly. I was always wondering whether he was going to get sick of babysitting Frodo and do something for himself, because he was stronger and in a lot of ways smarter than the other hobbits. Although, at the end he proved to be more practical and enterprising than all three of the "noble" ones, who always looked down on him. I liked the battle scenes, though. I just wish there were more women engaged in them than just Eowyn and only when her heart was broken. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:53:31 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids -- Marina and Stacey In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Maryelizabeth Hart wrote: > Marina stated: > > >Stacey, > >Your postings are just as full of assumptions as mine. My attitude is my > >attitude, and it in no way can interfere with what people want to do > >with their lives, unless they are insecure about their choice. There are > >lots's of people who think like me, there are lot's of people who > >think like you, that's the way world is. You cannot make them change > >their mind by telling them they don't know what they are talking about. > >Of course you can try if you want to. > > > >And disagreement is not an insult unless one believes they are never > >wrong. > > > >Marina > > > I think perhaps Laura should shut this down, unless someone can bring it > back to an SF related topic. The child empowerment thread seems to be doing > this. > > Marina: > a point of netequitte -- opinions are prefaced by comments like "I think," > or "IMHO," in my experience. Statements are not. Perhaps you will cause > less offense by keeping this in mind. > > In any event, as someone who can not only choose her messages by subject > line (which it would be nice, IMO, if people were more careful about > changing when the subject changes -- the "Tolkien" to "5th Element" thread > comes to mind), but also by the sender's line, I will no longer be reading > messages from Marina. > > Pax, > > > Maryelizabeth > Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 > 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 > San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX > http://www.mystgalaxy.com > That's your choice, Maryelizabeth. Thank you for your time. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 22:54:40 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Reluctant Voyagers In-Reply-To: <971022010412_1869112303@mrin42.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I just finished reading Elizabeth Vonarburg's _Reluctant Voyagers_. I found it fascinating, especially Elizabeth's character. It was also interesting how the author modified the traditional religious beliefs and the facts of world history. If anyone read it, please tell me what you think. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 23:29:52 -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: choices; Tolkien In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Pat wrote: > On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, Robin Reid wrote: > > > > A further comment on the fantasy/medieval thread: my housemate who is a > > medieval historian cannot stand to read 99.999999999 of the published > > fantasy and especially Ellis Peter's Cadfael mysteries because she says they > > have got it all wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. She does like Eco's novel, > > but that's about it. > > > As a Cadfael fan, I need to know - please - what is all wrong about the > novels?> > > Patricia (Pat) Mathews > mathews@unm.edu > I like the Cadfael novels too, particularly A Morbid Taste for Bones. Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 23:31:23 -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: raising kids -- Marina and Stacey In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> Marina: >> a point of netequitte -- opinions are prefaced by comments like "I think," >> or "IMHO," in my experience. Statements are not. Perhaps you will cause >> less offense by keeping this in mind. >> >> In any event, as someone who can not only choose her messages by subject >> line (which it would be nice, IMO, if people were more careful about >> changing when the subject changes -- the "Tolkien" to "5th Element" thread >> comes to mind), but also by the sender's line, I will no longer be reading >> messages from Marina. >> >> Pax, >> >> >> Maryelizabeth >> Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 >> 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 >> San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX >> http://www.mystgalaxy.com >> > >That's your choice, Maryelizabeth. Thank you for your time. >Marina > > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society > happens to be selling at the time." > Naomi Wolf Folkz, What is it that Marina's done that's got some people in such a tizzy? Was it that some of her comments cut too close to the bone, or that they might not have seemed well-informed enough? What happened? -Sean "Moderation or death."--Mickey Zucker Reichert ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:57:24 -0400 Reply-To: gamgee@geocities.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Organization: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/8499 Subject: Off-topic, yet oddly apt MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All- In light of recent conversations, I discovered that a book I'm reviewing for a local newsletter actually covers much the same ground as Marina and Stacey seem to be. The book is _Fruitful_, by Anne Roiphe (Penguin, $12.95). I would highly suggest it for anyone who's ever been connected to a mother. ;) - Geoffrey ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:04:33 -0400 Reply-To: gamgee@geocities.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Organization: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/8499 Subject: Re: Tolkien MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > About Tolkien, I found Sam kind of boring, honestly. I was always > wondering whether he was going to get sick of babysitting Frodo and > do something for himself Sam loves gardening. I'm not going to get into it about class, etc. Sam loves gardening - it's almost unbelievable to him, becuase he gets paid to do something he'd gleefully do for free. Or is it too much to think that some of us who do manual labor may enjoy it? (Oh, boy...incoming...duck 'n' cover!) Maybe Sam is a proto-Martha Stewart. In Sam I see the finest of the hobbits. So he's boring...I'd rather be boring than the center of a ringwraith's attention. - Geoffrey ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 02:05:53 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: John Cerulean Subject: Re: LeGuin Mailing List Please excuse a second request, but if anyone had the address for the LeGuin mailing list and assumed that someone else had sent it along to me, he or she didn't...or at least hasn't yet. :) A number of others have e-mailed me asking me to pass on this information to them also...so if we could prevail upon you, we would appreciate it. If there is no LeGuin mailing list, there appears to be enough interest to start one... Thanks, Cerulean07@aol.com T ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 02:41:38 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Barbara Benesch Subject: Re: a suggestion for the management Chris Shaffer said: > >Barbara Benesch wrote: > >>Hi. I'm new to the list (this is my first day, in fact) and I had > planned on > >>just reading for a while before posting, but it's all too interesting for > me > >>to keep quiet. > > > >One of the things which has interested me about this list is the diversity, > >including geographic diversity, of the members. I stay curious about how > >people hear about it. Might it be worthwhile to add a sentence or two to > >the canned "you are now on the list" note a new subscriber receives > >suggesting that an early post tell where the person heard of the list? > > > > > >Neil > >NeilRest@tezcat.com > > That's a good idea. I enjoyed the "introductions" we did a while back. > I've carboned this to Laura, who should be rejoining the electronic world > soon. As the "true" listowner, she gets to make this kind of change. > > ----- > "Till death do you part means only one of you is getting out alive." > --Lucan > Chris Shaffer shaffer@uic.edu http://www.uic.edu/~shaffer/ > Being new, if anyone still has copies of those introductions (I certainly don't expect you all to go through introducing yourselves again), I would be really appreciative if you could send them to me. Thanks, Barbara Benesch BJBenesch@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 02:52:32 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Barbara Benesch Subject: Tepper at WisCon I don't know if everyone already knows this, but I found this goofing around on the net the other day: Sheri S. Tepper will be at WisCon - a feminist science fiction convention - in Madison, WI over Memorial Day weekend. I just thought I'd mention this in case anyone is interested. I don't really have any of the other information on it (it's still mostly in the planning stages, so there wasn't a whole lot of information up on the site yet), but here's the website address in case anyone wants to know more about it: http://www.sf3.org/wiscon/ Barbara Benesch BJBenesch@aol.com --------------------- Forwarded message: From: bjbenesch@hotmail.com (Barbara Benesch) To: bjbenesch@aol.com Date: 97-10-22 14:15:46 EDT Go to this place and check it out. Also, keep this in mind, it sounds WAY COOL!!! Tell the list about it!! http://www.sf3.org/wiscon/ That's all, you may resume your regular programming now. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 09:00:11 -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: contributor bios (was A suggestion for the management) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Barbara Benesch wrote: > Being new, if anyone still has copies of those introductions (I certainly > don't expect you all to go through introducing yourselves again), I would be > really appreciative if you could send them to me. Barbara, and whoever else is interested: Laura has compiled archives of the mailing list messages and posted them on the Feminist Science Fiction website. They only extend through the end of June at this point, but they can be found at http://www.uic.edu/~lauramd/femsf/listserv/index.html#archive I'm not sure whether the initial flood of introductions falls before the end of June or not (don't have access to my personal archive at the moment). ----- Janice E. Dawley ............. Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/jedhome.htm Listening to: Radiohead - OK Computer "Reality is nothing but a collective hunch." - Lily Tomlin ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 10:08:09 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: Re: Marina and tizzy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > What is it that Marina's done that's got some people in such a > tizzy? Was it that some of her comments cut too close to the bone, or that > they might not have seemed well-informed enough? What happened? I think that Maryelizabeth put her finger pretty close to the mark. I think that it's partially personal and perhaps partially cultural. Marina has strong opinions, makes no excuses for them, and does not state that other opinions exist and are valid (although she has stated separately that that's the case). I certainly value Marina's contributions to this list, and I expect others do, too. I think that the child-rearing thread has degenerated past usefulness--especially for the FEMINISTSF list, though. Of course, people are welcome to split hairs or whatever off the list if they disagree... ;-) Some of these topics are very sensitive, especially because stereotypes are prevalent and unpleasant for homeschoolers, single parents, in-home daycare, etc. Of course, in case it's not clear, this is all my opinion. -allen -- Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 10:34:14 -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: Marina and tizzy In-Reply-To: <19971024100809.62712@puma.macbsd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII My opinion is that once accusations started flying around, it had already become too personal to be addressed in this public forum and should have been addressed person to person, not to the rest of the list. I've been routinely deleting posts about this topic for some time now. -nalo ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 17:05:48 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robin Reid Subject: Cadfael and medieval history Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A couple of people asked: Before I get in a bit too deep, let me say first that I absolutely LOVE everything Ellis Peters/Edith Pargeter has ever written, from her historical novels (OK i have a hard time getting through the one on Richard) to her mysteries. Cadfael is one of my favorites, so much so I am refusing to read all the ripoff ones that have been coming out recently. I adore them. BUT I do not make the mistake of thinking they are an accurate representation of "medieval history" or culture. Despite what seems to be the undeniable fact that they are "wrong" about some aspects of the culture and society, they are "right" in other ways that have to do with being darn good reads and very popular. I hope you've also read her contemporary mysteries as well! My housemate (when asked she reminded me she'd only read half a one years ago, along with another friend in their medieval ph.d. program, and hated it so much she'd never finished it, and refuses to watch the televised version, which was pretty shoddy although I will always watch anything with Derek Jacobi in it) gave me a few examples of what she remembered: the major problem was the overall sense of late 19th-20th century rationalism that Cadfael exemplifies. I realized she's right: he's always looking for the 'rational' answer when others around him attribute it to mysterious cureses, god striking a blasphemer down, etc, more mystical explanations. I have to admit he acts an awful lot like a medieval Sherlock Holmes (she loves Holmes as do I), but that's anachronistic. Peters doesn't present the anachronism in the same way Eco does, apparently. (I haven't read Eco). She also says that someone who had served as a foot soldier during the Crusades would not be a Benedictine monk, but a lay brother (I cannot remember if Cadfael is a full monk or not, but she had the impression from the book she started that he had a much higher status than would be possible). So there are problems with the way the books present the medieval class/caste consciousness and system, both within and outside the order. She says he has too much freedom in terms of skipping the various duties of the day, and also the mixture of literacy (apparently shown by his speaking as well) doesn't mix well with the kind of herb and garden work he's also doing. I'm probably not doing too good a job of conveying her points because I am a 20th century literature person. She does think Tolkien did a good job of presenting SOME aspects of medieval life in his fantasy (which isn't set in medieval Europe as a bunch of the BAD fantasties are), but then he was an academic who was trained in the field. Ditto Eco and Lewis. But most of the Celtic and other faux medieval fantasies out there she considers even worse than Peters. My friend also reads historical novels or mysteries set in periods other than her own, and enjoys them much more because she doesn't recognize all of THEIR problems, so this view is obviously a function of how much knowledge the reader has. I think the "problems" that she points out are one reason why the Cadfael series is so popular with contemporary readers. If she was really presenting the different world that is medieval Shrewsbury, we'd have to work harder to "get it." SF writers run into the same problem: make the culture too alien, and it's a hard read. We can all think of many examples, I'm sure (C.J. Cherryh presents HARD alien cultures; Jo Clayton's cultures, on the surface very alien and different, are awfully similar to each other and to ones we'd recognize, I think). Present too accurate a portrayal of the medieval culture/world-view, and many 20th century readers would struggle. I'm thinking even of Connie Willis' DOMESDAY BOOK, much harder to enter into than Cadfael. My friend's currently reading a romance novel set in England during the 1200's (research: we're planning on writing one, just for fun and an escape from our daily lives), and is muttering about the way the novel shows people wearing cotton underwear which of course did not exist in England at that time. The heroine also has straight white teeth and has invented toothbrushing! I've read some criticism of these historical romances that points out they have to transpose a 20th century worldview of hygiene and relationships and other stuff to this "exotic" past setting, or they wouldn't have any readers at all. Most popular "historical" novels (romance or otherwise) are not historically accurate: my friend is taking advantage of this in an assignment that asks students to read a novel and evaluate it in terms of the historical information. The joke is, one of her students picked Peters! Hope this clears things up a bit--I'm not at all saying don't read or don't enjoy Peters; just be careful about assuming it's an accurate presentation of the history and culture, or that's the novels are parallel to Eco (whom she thinks is quite accurate in many ways). Robin Robin_Reid@tamu-commerce.edu. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 13:12:13 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Laur, Erin M." Subject: Indigo MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I haven't read a whole lot of Sci-Fi novels, but my grandfather have me a bunch of books in the Indigo series by Louise Cooper. The story is a sort of Pandora's box plot. A young princess goes against an ancent taboo and enters a tower set up by Mother Earth as a sort of covenant, i.e. you don't go near the tower and I won't destroy the earth. She thereby releases 7 demons who kill her entire family including her finace before wandering off to torment the world. The girl's penalty is that she will become immortal and have to go off in search of the demons and destory them. Interesting aspects both feminist and sort of anti as well. The warrior hero is a woman (and her only lasting companion is a female wolf), there is the idea of a loving but powerful Earth Mother. But Indigo (as she names herself) is also constantly spurred on by the fact that her lover/fiancee is still alive in limbo and may be released once she finishes her quest. I would love some comment from others who have read this series (but don't spoil the ending, I'm not through all the books yet.) Erin ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 13:29:26 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Beth Widmaier Subject: Feminist Press reprinting Native Tongue Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi all, I am a PhD candidate in English at Penn State who joined this listserv about 5 months ago and this is my third time delurking. Last night in a seminar Suzette Hadin Elgin's Native Tongue came up. My professor, Susan Squier, is on a board at the Feminist Press and they recently sent her all three volumes of Native Tongue and asked whether or not it should be reissued. Since I know many of you have mentioned the work and I remember some bemoaning of the fact that it is hard to find (a sentiment I echoed), I thought you might have some imput that I could pass along. If you have any comments on whether the Feminist Press should reissue Native Tongue, and why, please let me know and I'll make sure Susan hears about it--it might help support her decision and demonstrate demand to the people at the Press. You can contact me directly at bew118@pse.edu, or send it to the list if you think everyone would be interested. Thanks, Beth ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 12:42:41 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Laura Wigod Subject: Re: Feminist Press reprinting Native Tongue In-Reply-To: <199710241729.NAA44908@r02n05.cac.psu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >If you have >any comments on whether the Feminist Press should reissue Native Tongue, >and why, please let me know and I'll make sure Susan hears about it--it >might help support her decision and demonstrate demand to the people at the >Press. You can contact me directly at bew118@pse.edu, or send it to the >list if you think everyone would be interested. OhmygodohmygodohmyGOD! Yes, yes, YES this should be reprinted! And I want copies NOW! Actually, I JUST finished reading Native Tongue two days ago (can you tell? :-D)....and I thought it was BRILLIANT! For one thing, linguistics in general interest me, but, more specifically, to see it treated as the art form it is was really exciting! I love the attention to body parl, etc. One of my biggest frustrations with our culture is how we are so locked in to this rational, intellectual discourse, which seems so reliant on words, words, words - blechh! For one things, no one even agrees on the _meanings_ of words! How can we possibly communicate effectively if we rely on them alone?!?! The answer is we can't. (uhoh I'm ranting) Anyway, I was thrilled to see that particular fantasy of mine in a story - a society where communication is not dependent on words alone. What drew me to the book in the first place, however, was the concept of the women inventing their own language. I wish the book had touched on that more than it had, but then I've only read the first one. In fact, I don't even know the names of the next two. I'm just so thrilled that there ARE a next two! I keep this little "blank" book with me at all times (the quotations are there 'cuz it's not so blank anymore!) in which I've written down the names of all the books I want to read - every time I read an intriguing review, or it's discussed on this or another list, or a friend recommends it, I jot it down in this book. Then when I get down to my favorite used book store (I rarely feel it necessary to shell out the cash for a brand-new book), I'm armed with this little book. Now, in this book, I have separate sections for sci fi and alternate histories, but what usually happens is that I can only find one or two of those titles in any given trip. So, check this out. Last weekend, I managed to get the following all in one trip: Native Tongue by Suzette Haden Elgin, which I obviously adored! Star-Anchored, Star-Angered, also by Suzette Haden Elgin, which is the one I launched into immediately, having been so delighted with her other book. So far, so good! The Vampire Tapestry, by Suzy McKee Charnas, which is the first of the pile I read - I really enjoyed it - in fact, I wish I had read this one and never bothered with Anne Rice, 'cuz what I've enjoyed about the Rice books is merely the _concept_ of supernatural beings dealing with the modern world. Her writing is so beyond horrible that I become tongue-tied (finger-tied?) in the attempt. The only thing worse than Anne Rice's writing is her husband's poetry. The Proteus Operation, by James P. Hogan A Different Flesh, by Harry Turtledove Winter in Eden, and West of Eden by Harry Harrison In the Mother's Land, by Elisabeth Vonarburg The Crystal Empire, by L. Neil Smith (although I couldn't get through any of his other books) Faery!, edited by Terri Windling Bridge of Birds, by Barry Hughart (which I'd already read, but loved so much I wanted a copy) A Door Into Ocean, by Joan Slonczewski Raising the Stones, A Plague of Angels, and Sideshow, by Sheri Tepper And I got all of this for sixteen bucks! Am I in HEAVEN or what?!? Guess what I'll be doing this weekend...... :-} Anyway, this is way more information than anyone wants. I just had to gloat about my shopping success with people who would understand why I'm so thrilled! And PLEASE someone tell me the names of the remaining titles in the Native Tongue trilogy. I must have them I must have them I must have them. Laura Laura ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:25:28 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: Cadfael and medieval history I feel a shudder of sympathy with the medievalist who can't read Ellis Peters, as those of you who read my tirade about 'alternative' or 'future' Victorian societies may imagine! It's ironic, given that a taste for historical novels probably turned me into a historian in the first place, but there are few historical novels I can bear to read any more (especially the ones I enjoyed in my teens). Dorothy Dunnett is an exception, but that's probably because her books can almost be read as 'alternative history/fantasy' (which may be the explanation why somewhere in the Niccolo sequence the French king is said to be afflicted with the Pox, i.e. syphilis, several decades before it either a) arrived from the Americas with Columbus or b) suddenly became a virulent sexually transmitted epidemic after a long period of quiesence, depending on which theory one adheres to). I'm sure it is a question of how much one knows, since I am quite happy reading novels set in periods/cultures about which I only have a fairly general idea (though basic mistakes like the cotton underwear are a real turnoff). I also read a fantasy recently which was allegedly set in an alternative Oxford, shortly in the future, in which magic and sorcery were accepted and taught subjects. However, the author didn't seem to me to have done her (I think it was her) homework about Oxford as a university of long and eccentric tradition and had homogenised the idiosyncratic college system (which could have worked extremely well) into a standard competing university departments background. In fact I couldn't see why Oxford at all, except for the name alone. But it might have worked for others (though probably not anyone who'd read D Sayers 'Gaudy Night') Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 21:36:59 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Yvonne Rowse Subject: Re: Feminist Press reprinting Native Tongue MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Laura > And PLEASE someone tell me the names of the remaining titles in the Native > Tongue trilogy. I must have them I must have them I must have them. The Judas Rose & Earthsong. I generously gave my copy of Native Tongue to a friend in the US (I'm in the UK) thinking I could get another copy. When I ordered it through the local bookshop they said it was out of print. Horrors! I trawled through second hand bookshops for a year (i first found it in a second hand bookshop in Scarborough, North Yorks) and finally found it in the 'first hand' section in the SF bookshop in Birmingham. I just *loved* the first two books. Earthsong I'm less sure about. Perhaps I've been damaged for appreciating it by the world's constant requirement that I should eat less although I'm thrilled by the idea that listening to music is the cause of my generous shape rather than chocolate and wine. I wrote off for the dictionary at one time, inspired (and amused) by the appendix at the end of Native Tongue. However, provincial as I am, I didn't know how to pay for something in the US and I somehow never got round to following it up. Anyway, I'm useless at languages. Still, does anyone know, is it still available? Yvonne > Laura ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 15:07:25 -0900 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: Feminist Press reprinting Native Tongue In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Yvonne Rowse wrote: > > I wrote off for the dictionary at one time, inspired (and amused) by the > appendix at the end of Native Tongue. However, provincial as I am, I didn't > know how to pay for something in the US and I somehow never got round to > following it up. Anyway, I'm useless at languages. Still, does anyone know, > is it still available? > You can email Suzette at ocls@ipa.net and find out. I think she'd be overjoyed! She also has a newsletter which is marvelous.> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 17:34:58 -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: LeGuin Mailing List In-Reply-To: <971024020538_1656617760@emout07.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 02:05 AM 10/24/97 -0400, you wrote: >Please excuse a second request, but if anyone had the address >for the LeGuin mailing list and assumed that someone else had sent >it along to me, he or she didn't...or at least hasn't yet. :) > >A number of others have e-mailed me asking me to pass on this >information to them also...so if we could prevail upon you, we would >appreciate it. If there is no LeGuin mailing list, there appears to be >enough interest to start one... I've heard requests in several forums for a Le Guin mailing list, but never any proof that one exists. We could always talk about Le Guin in THIS list, since much of her work falls under the heading of "feminist science fiction". I would love to get more in depth about individual authors, and Le Guin is one of my favorites! -- Janice ----- Janice E. Dawley.....Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/jedhome.htm Listening to: Radiohead, OK Computer; Tricky, Pre-Millennium Tension "...the public and the private worlds are inseparably connected; the tyrannies and servilities of the one are the tyrannies and servilities of the other." Virginia Woolf, Three Guineas ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:54:22 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sally Kamholtz Subject: Re: Feminist Press reprinting Native Tongue Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I would love to have Native Tongue reprinted. I used it for several years in my women & science fiction class and was horrified when it went out of print. Joan Slonczewski's Door into Ocean is out of print too. Sometimes it feels like a conspiracy. Sally Kamholtz ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:16:26 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: BJBenesch Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Subject: Re: bios, Indigo, Native Tongue Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit First, thanks to all who reminded me that I can get bios off the archive which I was told about in my welcome message. I haven't deleted it (heavens *No!*), but I didn't think to consult it, so thank you all for patience with a newbie. Next: Erin Laur said: > I haven't read a whole lot of Sci-Fi novels, but my grandfather have me > a bunch of books in the Indigo series by Louise Cooper. I have read the Indigo series, but ages ago. Actually I was just clearing some stuff out of my father's basement (yes, I'm at that "making egregious use of the storage space of others" stage of life) and found my copies of the Indigo series. I started to read the first one again, but then got yanked off course by finding some other books that I hadn't read in forever. > Interesting aspects both feminist and sort of anti as well. The warrior > hero is a woman (and her only lasting companion is a female wolf), there > is the idea of a loving but powerful Earth Mother. But Indigo (as she > names herself) is also constantly spurred on by the fact that her > lover/fiancee is still alive in limbo and may be released once she > finishes her quest. I agree. I think when I read them initially, the feminist and anti-feminist aspects of it kind of confused me. I don't think I have the whole series because I got into them when the first book came out and as each new one came out I would have to go back and re-read the whole thing, which got aggravating to 16-year-old me. When I started the first one again, I think part of why it was so easy for me to get diverted to something else was because I somehow didn't have as much... connection? empathy? (I can't think of the right word) for Indigo as I did way back when. But I think as a function of the story she starts out as kind of spoiled, and so I was kind of annoyed with Indigo from the start. I'm not especially reading anything right now, so I'll go try to read them again if you're real interested in discussing them. I think they're a good subject for the list, because now I'm remember the weird "evil being" who looked like a child with silver eyes. Kind of interesting: a woman releases all the horrors of the world, a child is her nemesis, and she is spurred on in her quest to capture the horros by thoughts of her male lover. Whew!!! > I would love some comment from others who have read this series (but > don't spoil the ending, I'm not through all the books yet.) > Erin I promise I won't spoil the ending because I think I'll have to go out and find the last couple of books in order to finish the series myself. -------- And finally, from the response about "Native Tongue" and from what I've gathered about it from other people's responses, I would vote for it to be reprinted if only so I could have the chance to see it (would it help if I *promise* to buy it?? :) I too am very interested in linguistics and have marveled for some time at how really rotten a method of communication language is. (Please pardon my backward grammar there.) Anyway, please count my vote for reprinting Native Tongue, before I go off about women trying to explain their experience using male words. Barbara Benesch BJBenesch@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:35:37 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Re: Feminist Press reprinting Native Tongue Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I think a reissue of _Native Tongue_ in a trade paperback format, making it available to both SF readers inside and outside the academic world, would be a good thing, IMO. Maryelizabeth Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX http://www.mystgalaxy.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 22:30:52 -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: Octavia Butler In-Reply-To: <19971024100809.62712@puma.macbsd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" New potential thread, although I've probably asked this before: what is it about Butler's work that makes is so important, so literary and so readable all at the same time? I.E. Opinions on what makes her so good? I'm not trying to dissect her writing. I just like talking about her. -Sean Death has its own honor. To refuse to live is the height of dishonor. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 15:12:10 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cheryl Hall Subject: Feminist Press reprinting Native Tongue In-Reply-To: <199710250500.AAA41678@piglet.cc.uic.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > If you have > any comments on whether the Feminist Press should reissue Native Tongue, > and why, please let me know and I'll make sure Susan hears about it-- > > Thanks, > Beth For feminist sci fi readers, I think this question is, as some people I know say, a "no-brainer." But I thought I'd try to contribute some help on the "why" question. First, I personally consider Native Tongue to be one of the "classics" of feminist science fiction. I realize classic is a loaded term, and of course open to contention, but what I mean by the term is that Native Tongue was one of the early works that helped define the genre, and is rich and substantial enough to bear many re-readings. I found and continue to find it very thought-provoking. Along the same lines, I have no evidence for this, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's on most syllabi for courses in feminist science fiction in the U.S. -- or would be if it were in print! Perhaps this will help with the question of the market for the book(s). Third, despite helping to define the genre, Native Tongue (and its sequels) is really quite unique among feminist science fiction novels. There are many themes and issues that are explored over and over again in femscifi (not necessarily a bad thing, of course) -- but Native Tongue is the only book that I'm aware of that takes on the issue of the relationship between gender systems, language, and the construction of "reality" in any depth. (Samuel Delaney might be the only other contender, but he deals with such things in a radically different way.) Finally, I think one of the great strengths of the first book in particular is that it conveys pretty sophisticated ideas in linguistics in a very accessible way. The one time (so far) that I was lucky enough to be able to teach a course in feminist science fiction, my students -- who to my disappointment were not very receptive to a number of other books I asked them to read -- responded quite well to Native Tongue. It made them think, but also got them interested and involved enough to not resent the effort of doing so! Hope this helps. --- Cheryl Hall Department of Government & International Affairs University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, 33620 ph:(813) 974-0819 fax:(813) 974-0832 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 15:38:34 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Susan Armstrong Subject: Re: Indigo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I haven't read a whole lot of Sci-Fi novels, but my grandfather have me >a bunch of books in the Indigo series by Louise Cooper. The story is a >sort of Pandora's box plot. [snip] >I would love some comment from others who have read this series What are the titles, please? (I'll read anything that has a wolf as a major character! A quadrupedal wolf, that is) -- Susan A. Susan Armstrong * Vancouver, Canada * anariska@mortimer.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 15:56:44 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Laur, Erin M." Subject: Re: Indigo MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>I haven't read a whole lot of Sci-Fi novels, but my grandfather have me >>a bunch of books in the Indigo series by Louise Cooper. The story is a >>sort of Pandora's box plot. >[snip] >>I would love some comment from others who have read this series > >What are the titles, please? >(I'll read anything that has a wolf as a major character! A quadrupedal >wolf, that is) > It's a long series, so get settled. Nemesis: Book One of Indigo Inferno: Book Two of Indigo Then ( you get the idea) Infanta, Nocturne, Troika, Avatar, and Revenant. There should also be one more book, but I haven't been able to find that one yet. The wolf (Grimya) in this series is wonderful. She was born a mutant, because she has the ability to form human words. Because of this "deformity" she was cast out of her pack and abandoned. She chose to remain loyal to Indigo and help her in her quest rather than be changed into a normal wolf and to live a normal life. Indigo and Grimya communicate both through spoken word and telepathy. Erin ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:18:26 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Beth Thayer Subject: Re: Indigo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 01:12 PM 10/24/97 -0400, you wrote: >I haven't read a whole lot of Sci-Fi novels, but my grandfather have me >a bunch of books in the Indigo series by Louise Cooper. The story is a >sort of Pandora's box plot . . . . (snip) >I would love some comment from others who have read this series (but >don't spoil the ending, I'm not through all the books yet.) >Erin > Erin. I enjoyed the series. It is one of two sci-fi/fantasy series -- Ursula K. Le Guin being the other -- that were my first serious reads. I have lost one or two books in the past few years, as I have had to make several moves. Luckly, I was able to find any new addition to the series through out my travels and finished reading this work of a cherished author. Just wondering are there any other titles that Louise Cooper has written? I would like to read some more of her work. Thanks. Beth A. Thayer ==============:\\\\\:==== Seek freedom and you become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and you find your liberty. --- Frank Herbert, Dune Series. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 13:52:23 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robin Reid Subject: Elgin's sequels Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Laura asked: "And PLEASE someone tell me the names of the remaining titles in the NativeTongue trilogy. I must have them I must have them I must have them." They are _The Judas Rose_ and _Earthsong: Native Tongue III_. Both published by DAW. She has a number of other earlier SF novels though they may be out of print--let me know if you'd like an entire listing of her work. She's wonderful! Robin Robin_Reid@tamu-commerce.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 16:40:48 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robin Reid Subject: vampire recommendations Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Laura was mentioning the difference between Charnas' Vampire Tapestry and the Rice vampire novels (other than the first one, which presented an interesting twist on vampirism, specifically the homoerotic nature of male vampire/male victim, I think Rice's are pretty bad--though I admit I read most of them because I am a completist. I gave up at _Queen of the Damned_ because of its incredibly misogynistic perspective). I do more SF than vampires, but enjoy some of the recent vampire novels--especially by women--did a presentation a few years ago that basically argued that contemporary vampires by women writers were the ideal lovers for a feminist (hey, they sleep all day so who cares if you have a day job, etc). The writers I particularly like and would even argue are feminist are: Chelsea Quinn Yarbro (she invented a whole new vampire view as far as I'm concerned), both the Count St. Germain ones, and the Olivia ones (all set in major historical periods,though some of the recent ones tend to be a bit formulaic, it's a good formjla). Tanya Huff (an ex policewoman is really the protagonist--very action oriented but feminist as far as I'm concerned, plus fun stuff on werewolves, zombies, etc. all set in contemporary Canada). Jewelle Gomez (the only one publishing in small press format, only one book so far, but I hope she writes MORE): _The Gilda Stories_, the only African American and lesbian vampire that I know of. Gilda lives from pre-Civil War to the future (past our time). There may be a few others, but my brain has gone dead, and my sf stuff is all at home (I do my internetting at lunch or before/after work). Robin Robin_Reid@tamu-commerce.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:51:16 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: vampire recommendations I will probably be one among 1000s to mention Laurel Hamilton's Anita Blake series and Nancy Collins' Sonya Blue. There are also 2 historical (Edwardian Britain) vampire novels by Barbara Hambly, Immortal Blood and Those who hunt the Night. Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ---------- From: For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature on behalf of Robin Reid Sent: 27 October 1997 16:40 To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: [*FSFFU*] vampire recommendations Laura was mentioning the difference between Charnas' Vampire Tapestry and the Rice vampire novels (other than the first one, which presented an interesting twist on vampirism, specifically the homoerotic nature of male vampire/male victim, I think Rice's are pretty bad--though I admit I read most of them because I am a completist. I gave up at _Queen of the Damned_ because of its incredibly misogynistic perspective). I do more SF than vampires, but enjoy some of the recent vampire novels--especially by women--did a presentation a few years ago that basically argued that contemporary vampires by women writers were the ideal lovers for a feminist (hey, they sleep all day so who cares if you have a day job, etc). The writers I particularly like and would even argue are feminist are: Chelsea Quinn Yarbro (she invented a whole new vampire view as far as I'm concerned), both the Count St. Germain ones, and the Olivia ones (all set in major historical periods,though some of the recent ones tend to be a bit formulaic, it's a good formjla). Tanya Huff (an ex policewoman is really the protagonist--very action oriented but feminist as far as I'm concerned, plus fun stuff on werewolves, zombies, etc. all set in contemporary Canada). Jewelle Gomez (the only one publishing in small press format, only one book so far, but I hope she writes MORE): _The Gilda Stories_, the only African American and lesbian vampire that I know of. Gilda lives from pre-Civil War to the future (past our time). There may be a few others, but my brain has gone dead, and my sf stuff is all at home (I do my internetting at lunch or before/after work). Robin Robin_Reid@tamu-commerce.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 14:17:11 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Erik Tsao Subject: Guy Gavriel Kay Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On October 21, 1997, Yvonne Rowse wrote: >Talking about the reality of war etc, have you read _The Lions of >Al-Rassan_ by Guy Gavriel Kay? I cultivate a poor memory so I can read >things again and be (relatively) surprised and it's been a year since I >read it but I remember it being streets ahead of Tolkein on the reality in >fantasy front. I think I'll read it again and bring it up for discussion. Dear Yvonne (and other Feminist SF'ers), I have to agree with you on Kay. In general, I think that a lot of contemporary fantasy has surpassed Tolkien in creativity. That doesn't mean I don't admire Lord of The Rings as a classic. In actuality, I tend to feel that Tolkien's lesser known contemporaries (Mervyn Peake and E. R. Eddison) are just as interesting, if not moreso, in their own ways. I stopped reading Tolkien a long time ago, but I have to thank him posthumously for getting me interested in fantasy and reading in general. I probably wouldn't be a graduate student in an English program, if I hadn't been exposed to Tolkien, and become a fan of him and many others. Anyway, enough testimony. I like _Lions_, but IMHO, his first speculative historical fantasy, _Tigana_, was the one which resonated the most with me. Speaking as a literary critic and scholar, I have to say that I was really impressed by the way he worked the whole question of imperialism, nationalism, and nationalist liberation into the story. There's a real depth and power to _Tigana_ which I haven't found in the other two speculative histories he has written. Comments? Responses? Erik Erik Tsao Department of English Wayne State University Detroit, MI "Ah! to return to life! To stare at our deformities. And this poison, this eternally accursèd embrace! My weakness, and the world's cruelty! My God, have pity, hide me, I can't control myself at all! I am hidden, and I am not. And as the Damned soul rises, so does the fire." -- From Arthur Rimbaud, "Night in Hell," _The Complete Works_. Tr. Paul Schmidt. New York: Harper, 1975. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 11:31:25 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pamela Bedore Subject: LEGUIN LIST In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hello, If there are several people interested in having a LeGuin list, I'd be happy to set one up. If you're interested, please mail me personally at . pamela bedore department of english simon fraser university But play, you must, A tune beyond us, yet ourselves, A tune upon the blue guitar Of things exactly as they are -Wallace Stevens ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 12:10:28 -0800 Reply-To: Pamela Bedore Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pamela Bedore Subject: Re: Octavia Butler In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Sean Johnston wrote: > New potential thread, although I've probably asked this before: what is it > about Butler's work that makes is so important, so literary and so readable > all at the same time? I.E. Opinions on what makes her so good? I'm not > trying to dissect her writing. I just like talking about her. > > -Sean > I too love Butler's writing. I think part of her appeal is that she's coming at interesting issues from a post-colonial as well as a feminist perspective. For example, in the Xenogenesis series (my favourite of her works) she sets up a situation that is really similar to the colonization model, except that it is humans as a race that are being colonized. In "Bloodchild" she sets up a male as having to bear an incredible burden of labour - again, the humans are the oppressed, as a race. I like the way she turns things on their heads. And of course, her characters are wonderful. I haven't been able to find many of her earlier novels. I'd love some tips... pamela bedore department of english simon fraser university But play, you must, A tune beyond us, yet ourselves, A tune upon the blue guitar Of things exactly as they are -Wallace Stevens ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:47:43 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Janice M Bogstad Subject: Re: Guy Gavriel Kay Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi- I just wanted to correct a misconception: Tigana was not Kay's first fanatsy novel - it was The Summer Tree and two more books in a series. I am very fond of all of his books, Tigana among them, but so far my favorite is A Song for Arbonne, on a number of levels, from his use of both Old Provencal culture and literary forms to his transformation of the ethos of courtly love. I have read " The Lions" but not connected so intimately with it... Jan BOgstad bogstajm At 14:17 10/27/97 -0500, you wrote: >On October 21, 1997, Yvonne Rowse wrote: >>Talking about the reality of war etc, have you read _The Lions of >>Al-Rassan_ by Guy Gavriel Kay? I cultivate a poor memory so I can read >>things again and be (relatively) surprised and it's been a year since I >>read it but I remember it being streets ahead of Tolkein on the reality in >>fantasy front. I think I'll read it again and bring it up for discussion. > >Dear Yvonne (and other Feminist SF'ers), > >I have to agree with you on Kay. In general, I think that a lot of >contemporary fantasy has surpassed Tolkien in creativity. That doesn't >mean I don't admire Lord of The Rings as a classic. In actuality, I tend >to feel that Tolkien's lesser known contemporaries (Mervyn Peake and E. R. >Eddison) are just as interesting, if not moreso, in their own ways. I >stopped reading Tolkien a long time ago, but I have to thank him >posthumously for getting me interested in fantasy and reading in general. >I probably wouldn't be a graduate student in an English program, if I >hadn't been exposed to Tolkien, and become a fan of him and many others. >Anyway, enough testimony. > >I like _Lions_, but IMHO, his first speculative historical fantasy, >_Tigana_, was the one which resonated the most with me. Speaking as a >literary critic and scholar, I have to say that I was really impressed by >the way he worked the whole question of imperialism, nationalism, and >nationalist liberation into the story. There's a real depth and power to >_Tigana_ which I haven't found in the other two speculative histories he >has written. Comments? Responses? > >Erik > >Erik Tsao >Department of English >Wayne State University >Detroit, MI > >"Ah! to return to life! To stare at our deformities. And this poison, this >eternally accursèd embrace! My weakness, and the world's cruelty! My God, >have pity, hide me, I can't control myself at all! I am hidden, and I am >not. > And as the Damned soul rises, so does the fire." > >-- From Arthur Rimbaud, "Night in Hell," _The Complete Works_. Tr. Paul >Schmidt. New York: Harper, 1975. > > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:49:15 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Erik Tsao Subject: Re: Guy Gavriel Kay Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >Hi- I just wanted to correct a misconception: Tigana was >not Kay's first fanatsy novel - it was The Summer Tree and >two more books in a series. >I am very fond of all of his books, Tigana among them, but >so far my favorite is A Song for Arbonne, on a number >of levels, from his use of both Old Provencal culture and >literary forms to his transformation of the ethos of >courtly love. I have read " The Lions" but not connected >so intimately with it... >Jan BOgstad bogstajm > I was aware of the older trilogy. I meant to say that it was the first novel which he based on a historical nation (Renaissance Italy). The rest have been based on the France of the Troubadours, and Spain during the Crusades. Erik Erik Tsao Department of English Wayne State University Detroit, MI "Ah! to return to life! To stare at our deformities. And this poison, this e