Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9807A" ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 00:13:21 -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: madness in sf by black feminist writers In-Reply-To: <6897c59f.35998e68@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 30 Jun 1998, Vivian Lee wrote: > try Octavia Butler's Parable of the Sower. The main char's telepathy is > treated as madness by those around her.. and for a while she does think > she's nuts, but gets over that as she learns how to use her gift. > > > Vivian > Actually, the main character doesn't have telepathy or psychic empathy or whatever; she just thinks she does. She believes that she can actually feel the pain of someone else, but this isn't true. There are clues to this effect in the novel, but they're easy to miss. Butler, however, stated very clearly in an interview in the journal Science Fiction Studies a couple of years ago that it's a delusion, albeit a delusion so powerful that it can disable the protagonist. Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 09:09:15 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: SarahAnne Hazlewood Subject: Re: Hateful Old Women In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980630203126.009bd9f0@tezcat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Sturgeon wrote _The Lovebirds_ Also published as "A World Well Lost" (in case you're trying to locate it). A wonderful story. Definitely worth reading. I read this to my 4 year old when he started asking questions about family configurations AND why some around us aren't very receptive. I like it because the 'bad' human is loved by the 'good' human. Not as black and white as most kids books. - sash In Peace - SarahAnne - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Fear Not. - - What is not real never was and never will be. - - What is real always was and cannot be destroyed.- - - The Bhagavad Gita - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 15:19:42 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Kathleen M. Friello" Subject: Re: Hateful Old Women Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-06-30 21:34:06 EDT, you write: << I'm afraid I have to disagree about the author, though I don't mean to dispute your reactions to that particular story. Sturgeon wrote _The Lovebirds_ and _Some of Your Blood_ (which hasn't yet been equalled) and _The Man Who Learned Loving_ and _Syzygy_ and so many, many more that I hope you will persevere to the gold which I (and many others!) promise you is there. And didn't he do _Granny Won't Knit_? (I'm not certain it's a Sturgeon. It most definitely is an antidote to the Hateful Old Women which have been getting you down.) >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. Look, the question never was whether Sturgeon was a good writer or whether other people loved his writing, before there's a deluge of "my favorite Sturgeon" posts. I can appreciate him on a purely intellectual level--- even see, as John Clute puts it, "the green shoots rising" in the worst of the pulp-ish stories. As a reader, though, more often than not, he makes my gorge rise. (There is the possibility that I may be the person Sturgeon imagined writing to offend? An interesting idea.) But to go quickly beyond Sturgeon, the hateful old woman as a stereotype is what raised my interest, particularly when given in combination with the wounded girl, as a figure of power willfully witholding pleasure or something beneficial, and sometimes as a sexual predator. Except for the Denton example, I would almost have put this down as an outdated type: who knows any spinsters in mitts, ready to rap you over the knuckles with a ruler if you don't sit up straight, any more? Is she being kept alive in cartoons and stories only as a handy recognizable type, even if divorced from everyday experience, or does the type have a deeper significance and life beyond that? Before the 1800s? An antidote isn't what I'm looking for here, if such a thing exists--- although I did flash on Granny Weatherwax, as mentioned, and P.L. Travers's Mrs Noah--- wasn't she the one with the detachable candy fingers? But she wasn't a spinster, anyway. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 19:03:23 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Vivian Lee Subject: Happy Fourth! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Hope you have a grand Independence Day! Go rent ID4! :) Vivian ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 21:26:27 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Review: BROWN GIRL IN THE RING by Nalo Hopkinson Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" BROWN GIRL IN THE RING by Nalo Hopkinson Hopkinson's debut novel is the premier winner of the Warner Aspect First Novel Contest. Future winners have a high standard to match. BROWN GIRL IN THE RINGtells the story of Ti-Jeanne, a young woman of Caribbean heritage in a bleak near-future Toronto. Like the players in the game for which the novel is named, Ti-Jeanne must learn by observation of her grandmother's magic ritual in order to do battle for those she loves. Part of what makes this novel exceptional is the recognition of the often bitter and difficult nature of family relationships. Also, unlike many SF novels, it features both people of color (rather than peoples of exotic colors) and a main character actively immersed in her family. I very much enjoy genre- blending novels, as well as those which give me insights into other cultures, and BROWN GIRL IN THE RING does that and more. Part horror novel, part SF and part dark fantasy, it blends genres with a deftness which can escape more experienced hands. Warner Aspect trade paperback, $12.99. --MeH 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, 1 Jul 1998 21:29:49 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: THE BLUE PLACE review Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" THE BLUE PLACE by Nicola Griffith One cannot judge a book by its cover, but in the case of THE BLUE PLACE, both the cover and its contents are stunning. The cover depicts a cool Scandinavian woman at ease, but with an undercurrent of being able to spring from her seated position at any moment. Inside we discover Aud Torvingen, cool, collected and centered, even in the midst of the Atlanta heat, which withers many less hardy types. Retired from the police, Aud keeps mentally and physically fit (some of my favorite scenes involve her gardening to exercise or doing other constructive while athletic activities, a welcome antidote to the seemingly ubiquitous jogging female detective) and occasionally offers her protective and investigative services in the private sector. Her connection with her heritage goes beyond the superficial to an almost spiritual quality, somewhat remniscent of Thomas Perry's Jane Whitefield. In moments of danger or physical duress, she finds herself in the mystical "blue place" where time seems to slow and focus on the moment. Enter complications in the form of Julia, who *literally * runs into Aud one evening -- moments before the house she is exiting explodes. When she seeks more information than the police are willing to share, Julia turns to Aud for help. Soon, though, the relationship between the two moves beyond the professional into the romantic. Can Aud relax with her lover without worry or fear? A great change of pace from this Lambda Award winning author. Avon, $24.00. Signed copies available while supplies last. --MeH 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: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 00:40:33 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: Happy Fourth! Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >Hope you have a grand Independence Day! > >Go rent ID4! :) > >Vivian Actually, today, July 2, is Independence Day...it's a long story, but it basically ends up as the Congress (Congresf?) ratified the Declaration on July 2, and that was the day that all the celebrations, etc., went off. John Adams also wrote Abigail saying that July 2 would go down in history as a significant day. July 4 is just the day that everyone signed the ceremonial, error-free document - to no fanfare. And I suggest 1776 - IMHO, William Daniels and Howard de Silva are much better screen impressions than any of the fops in that THING that passed as a movie... ;) Happy Independence Day, all. - Geoffrey -- Macintosh users swear by their computers. Windows users swear at their computers. http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/8499 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 14:01:39 -0400 Reply-To: asaro@sff.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Catherine Asaro Subject: Re: The Moon and the Sun..a few more MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Kathleen M. Friello" wrote: > For all the oppressions of the church, the convent could function as a haven > for women disinclined to marry or unable to live independently. Pleasures of > the intellect could certainly be indulged-- I can only cite my patron saint, > Catherine of Padua, administrator of a convent, as an example, as well as her > faithful chronicler (lover?), who recorded her life and outspoken condemnation > of sexism within the church. In addition, meditation and spiritual instruction > encouraged intellectual exercise. Kathleen, you make good points. The problem I've always seen with convents, though, is that for them to serve as a haven presupposed a woman had only two choices: marriage or mind. Even for a woman who desired to give up marriage, or who was willing to forgo it, the convent allowed only a limited expression of her intellect. As the price for using her mind, she was constrained to yet another form of seclusion. The situation was complex. The protrayal of what happened to Marie-Joseph in MOON/SUN is also realistic. Remnants of that attitude still exist in this century, as I can attest to, having been brought up Catholic. > Above all, they lived in a community of women, free of the oppression of > enforced child bearing and rearing. This gets back to a problem I mentioned above, which is that for many women having a family was a good thing. Certainly not all; but at the same time, a woman who wanted a family didn't have the option of going into a convent unless she gave up something very dear to her heart. This is something I've been thinking on lately. Is building a community that includes only women the answer to sexism? I would say no, the reason being that it presupposes women can't achieve equality in a world with men. I do believe it is a good thing to build a sense of women's community; we benefit from the networking, the support, and modes of interaction we often lose when we adapt to a milieu that focuses more on male aspects of culture. However, at the same time, I think it is important for women to foster among one other the belief that we have the innate ability to make our way in the world, be successful, use our intellects, love and be loved, earn power, and be respected in our fields and for our accomplishments by both men and women, in the world as a whole, with men as part of our lives. To say otherwise strikes me as buying into the idea that women are inferior, and can only excell when men aren't around. Besides, men are our fathers, sons, brothers, uncles, friends, and colleagues, people we often love, not to mention that they are interesting in and of themselves for their differences from us. The problem is not those differences, but that they have been used to create an imblanace in our culture that hurts everyone, women and men alike. It seems to me the challenge for feminist literature, one that MOON/SUN tackles, is not only to portray with accuracy the strictures women live under, but also to show two other things: 1) that women have it within them to overcome those strictures, and 2) to portray the difficulties it in a manner such that male as well as female readers can appreciate and get something out of the story. Lucien is a nonthreatening character, for example, and can be reaffirming for male readers in much the same way as the Miles character in Lois MacMaster Bujold's books, that is, you don't have to be a strapping Adonis to succeed in life or have a beautiful, talented woman love you. I would say 1) is necessary because if literature only focuses on the negative, it can begin to reinforce the very practices it seeks to comment on. Reason 2) is, IMHO, one of the more neglected aspects of feminism. Men aren't the enemy, nor do I think most feminists feel that way, despite the way feminists are portrayed in popular literature and viewed by some of the general public. To my mind, the most effective social commentary is that which can reach, and positively affect, the very audience most likely to overlook the conditions that cause the issues the literature seeks to comment on in the first place. In other words, social commentary does more good if a reader thinks, "You know, I see this author's point, and I didn't before," than if the reader thinks, "This author despises me. I'm not going to read this." The former offers a win-win situation. Everybody benefits. > It's a romantic literary convention to send (or threaten to send) a lively > heroine off to the convent for the suppression of her sexuality, independence, > or "self-expression," and to posit the convent as an institution expressly > designed to crush the female soul. Actually, that is opposed to the way most convents are portrayed in romantic literature. Most modern romances depict convents in a more positive light than literature as a whole. See THE DAMASK ROSE, for example (I can't speak for older romantic literature, having only read more recent works). In fact, an entire class of romantic literature focuses on women's spirituality and how love develops from that, including positive portayals of convents. The idea of a convent being a haven for intellectual women has a solid basis. But focusing exclusively on that aspect and ignoring the very real issues portrayed in THE MOON AND THE SUN strikes me as a romantization too. That said, though, I do think you bring up excellent points in regards to the outlets that convents did offer, particularly when women had so few other options. Best regards Catherine Asaro http://www.sff.net/people/asaro ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 14:58:05 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Kathleen M. Friello" Subject: BDG: Additional writings Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit MISTS OF AVALON ADDITIONAL WRITINGS Part I: Internet publications ONLINE REVIEWS: Tons of them out there, mostly short and gushing; a sampler: Review by "Jenn" http://www.trail.com/~finnian/avalon.htm Review by Althea Morin http://www.sf-fantasy.com/br16.htm Reviews by readers, some of them young http://www.octonet.com/~avalon/misava.htm http://www.asd.k12.ak.us/Schools/West/Reviews/~Avalon/AvalonReview.html http://www.pleiades-net.com/choice/books/TMA.1.html LISTS: Two lists heavily discuss MOA: the Mercedes Lackey list and Arthurnet part of the Mercedes Lackey list archives: http://www.herald.co.uk/pub/lists/lackey-archives/960423-496 Arthurnet has a greater concentration of historians and academicians Arthurnet description: http://dcwww.mediasvcs.smu.edu/Arthuriana/Arthurnet.html A typical thread dealing with Bradley/MOA: http://www.mun.ca/lists/arthurnet/arthurnet.log9404b On Women in Arthurian legend: http://www.mun.ca/lists/arthurnet/arthurnet.log9709b An excerpted discussion on Arthurian Sexualities: http://dcwww.mediasvcs.smu.edu/Arthuriana/sexuality.html ESSAYS: Arthurian Fantasy, 1980-1989: An analytical and bibliographical survey. By John J. Doherty [Highly recommended 5-part survey of Arthurian fiction, focusing on 80s works; extensively annotated] http://dc.smu.edu/Arthuriana/BIBLIO-PROJECT/DOHERTY/doherty.html part II: The Influence of Mary Stewart on the Early Eighties [Contains comparison with MOA] http://dc.smu.edu/Arthuriana/BIBLIO-PROJECT/DOHERTY/partii.html "Unthreading the Banner" by Matthew Kilburn (from website of Oxford Arthurian Society) [on pop-fic on Arthurian legend; comparison of Helen Hollick's The Kingmaking to MOA] http://users.ox.ac.uk/~arthsoc/Cauldron/hollick.html MZB's MOA and interpretation of the Chivalric Codes; a section of Chivalry through the Eyes of Arthurian Legend Authors, by Ty Carss [includes a bibliography and link to a page of Arthurian-topic paintings] http://coyote.csusm.edu/public/carss001/chivalry/bradley.html Index: http://coyote.csusm.edu/public/carss001/chivalry/index.htm Women in the Arthurian Legend: A growing trend in fantasy literature by Allison Barrett, age 15 http://bcn.boulder.co.us/library/bpl/child/booklook/women.html MISC: private Avalon appreciation page: http://www.fortunecity.com/campus/physics/152/mist.html scan of the German cover: http://unet.univie.ac.at/~a9600697/lady.htm and a surprising number of courses (University and other) that give MOA as required reading. A sample course discription: The Arthurian Legends as the Central Myth of Our Culture and the Process of Individuation; John Giannini, C. G. Jung Institute, Chicago http://chicago.jung.nidus.net/w98_17.htm ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 17:16:08 -0400 Reply-To: asaro@sff.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Catherine Asaro Subject: Re: White Raven MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I love the cover for THE WHITE RAVEN so much I have a print of it signed by > Thomas Canty and Diane Paxson. A That must be gorgeous. I just finished reading the book. It is certainly well written, with some excellent portrayal of the characters. Such a heartbreaking story! I'm glad Paxson chose to show it through Brawen's viewpoint rather than that of the doomed lovers. It gave in effective contrast to the legend of Isoulet (please forgive my spelling!) and Tristan. Best regards Catherine http://www.sff.net/people/asaro/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 16:46:48 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Subject: BDG info page available Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thanks to Petra and Laura we have the basic book discussion group info posted on Laura's main web site: http://www.wenet.net/~lquilter/femsf/bdg/ This includes the discussion schedule for the rest of the year. Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 20:53:56 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Kathleen M. Friello" Subject: Re: The Moon and the Sun..a few more Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-07-02 13:54:05 EDT, you write: << > It's a romantic literary convention to send (or threaten to send) a lively > heroine off to the convent for the suppression of her sexuality, independence, > or "self-expression," and to posit the convent as an institution expressly > designed to crush the female soul. Actually, that is opposed to the way most convents are portrayed in romantic literature. Most modern romances depict convents in a more positive light than literature as a whole. See THE DAMASK ROSE, for example (I can't speak for older romantic literature, having only read more recent works). In fact, an entire class of romantic literature focuses on women's spirituality and how love develops from that, including positive portayals of convents. >> Sorry, that was sloppy: I should have said Romantic literary convention, as in Romanticism, not romance novels; I don't read them so I don't know anything about them or their current conventions. I don't want to drag this on and on, and this point has been ably made by almost everyone else, but I really don't think and never claimed the convent is/was an ideal haven for everyone. Or that all convents were alike. I certainly resisted the Call when I was being educated in a convent school. (Poverty and Chastity I could probably deal with, but Obedience? Hah!) And I didn't mean to slight McIntyre's use of this device--- in fact, my response wasn't about McIntyre's book at all; I just wanted to point out that it's simplistic to see the convent only as a punitive mind and spirit deadening repository for the outspoken, or to base that view on a work of fiction when there's so much factual evidence to the contrary. And men and baby-duty aren't equally enchanting to all women. I did see what Marina Warner had to say about it: "[B]ecause it could secure a degree of independence and equality, the ascetic life exercised a tremendous attraction over women from its earliest days, and the history of the Church is illuminated by saints of genius, who were able, once they had capitulated to the conditions the Church demanded, to assert their ideas and their authority as independent and active women. [examples given]... It would be impossible to list the innumerable foundations and orders started by purposful women who understood that the virginal state gave them a special claim on Christian society, and therefore exploited it to raise the condition of their sex. As an answer to the problem of female equality, the nun's vocation is similar to the lesbianism some members of the contemporary women's movement in America have chosen. By cutting themselves off from the traditional role of women, and by abjuring all relations with men, consecrated virgins established a certain freedom and autonomy that permitted them to lead lives of greater distinction than their married sisters. Satisfaction at such a state obviously varies from individual to individual, but at a general level, the solution is completely inadequate. For the foundations of the ethic of sexual chastity are laid in fear and loathing fo the female body's functions, in identification of evil with the flesh and flesh with woman. ...Paradoxically, the veil, and the surrender to a certain system of values that the veil implies, could procure a woman an education, a certain freedom of manoeuvre, and a certain exercise of influence unattainable for other women, with the exception of princesses, queens, and heiresses." (from Alone of All Her Sex: The Myth and the Cult of the Virgin Mary, NY, 1976, pp.76-77) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 09:36:10 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: N Clowder Subject: Another Dynamic Book Cover - THE FURIES Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" The TOR edition of Suzy McKee Charnas' _THE FURIES_ is the most dynamic book cover I have ever seen, and the only piece of cover art I have ever wanted to hang on a wall. One of Charnas' "riding women" is riding right out of the cover, right at you. She is scantily clad - but this both fits the story and does not come across as sexual. The rider is leaning over to shoot an arrow past the horse's head (right over the viewer's left shoulder.) Her hair is flying back in the wind, her nose is sunburned, and I have little doubt that she needs a bath. I was really stunned when I saw this cover. The art is by Rick Berry. This is my first post. I'm a computer programmer and unpublished author living in Austin, Texas. I've been lurking for only a week or two, have enjoyed the dialogue a lot, and look forward to the upcoming book discussion. Thanks, Nell Nell Clowder (aka Manycats) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 11:12:37 +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: Hateful Old Women MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----Original Message----- From: Kathleen M. Friello To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Date: 01 July 1998 20:27 Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Hateful Old Women Hi Katherine wrote, in part: >But to go quickly beyond Sturgeon, the hateful old woman as a stereotype is >what raised my interest, particularly when given in combination with the >wounded girl, as a figure of power willfully witholding pleasure or something >beneficial, and sometimes as a sexual predator. Except for the Denton example, >I would almost have put this down as an outdated type: who knows any spinsters >in mitts, ready to rap you over the knuckles with a ruler if you don't sit up >straight, any more? Is she being kept alive in cartoons and stories only as a >handy recognizable type, even if divorced from everyday experience, or does >the type have a deeper significance and life beyond that? Before the 1800s? What makes you think the hateful old woman is outdated? I know (and very much like) at least two 'sexually predatory' middle-aged women who could be looked on in just the same way as Sturgeon's. Also, the girl's mother in 'The Graduate'. The process can happen as follows. The young man wants a young woman. The young woman is not interested in callow youth but is looking for an older, more experienced man. The young man engages the older woman in discussion about what is wrong with him. The older woman finds him attractive for the very reason the younger woman doesn't, his tentativeness, his innocence, his naivity. The older woman and the young man seduce each other. The young woman becomes interested in the young man. The young man is ashamed of the older woman who does not have all the required virtues of youth, beauty and general acceptability in this society. He drops her for the young woman and they collaborate in the fiction that it was all the wicked older woman's fault. Lovely. Whilst the sexuality of older women is seen as dangerous and/or threatening, this stereotype will continue. Personally I prefer to be invisible to younger men than to be vulnerable, and indeed I am invisible. Yvonne To subscibe to the Taking Children Seriously list, send an e-mail to listserv@listserv.aol.com containing; SUBSCRIBE TCS-DIGEST your-first-name your-last-name. TCS information; http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~tcs/index.html > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 13:41:42 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: Hateful Old Women Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I recall reading an anthropological study of a group of people who had a different view: young men were considered to be in need of training to be sexually competent, and it was the job of older women to do this. Makes a lot of sense to me. I'm going to have to see if I can find that monograph... Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 16:17:37 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: Hateful Old Women In-Reply-To: <675a5857.359e6957@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I personally like younger guys a lot more than the ones older than me or even of the same age. Older men too often turn out to be self-centered control freaks who act like they are smarter than you just because they are older and tend to imagine that it somehow gives them a right to tell you what to do. Which is extremely irritating, to say the least. Plus, older men are usually ugly and boring, and no amount of the mushy "romantic" stuff they know how to do makes up for that. Men who are the same age as you also like to act that way. Being the same age, having as much (or even less) life experience and knowledge, they still often expect you to look up to them and do what they say just because they are "men". Comparing to older men, people of the same age can at least be more entertaining, but their patronizing ("I am the man, hear me speak the truth") can be very annoying too. Besides, it usually provokes me into making fun of them and they don't like it too much. On the contrary to all this, younger guys never try to tell you what to do, what to think, or how to live. They look at you as if you are the queen of their dreams or something, a gift that fell on them from the sky, that they still can't believe they've got. They don't act like they are smarter than you, they listen to everything you say, and even when they try to impress you it's very obviously meant to please you rather than to humble you to show "who's the man here". Finally, the younger is the guy, the easier he is to talk to and to get along with. For some reason, they make a lot more sense (I don't know what happens to it later). Not to mention the fact that guys below 20 have the hottest bodies and are simply easier on eyes. Of course, you can rarely count on them in serious issues, but what man you can count on, anyway? At least, they can be a nicer alternative to a teddy bear, and sometimes it's all you need to feel better before going back into the fight for those damned serious issues. I don't know if I qualify as a mean old woman (I am 24), but nevertheless. Marina http://members.aol.com/Lotaryn/index.html "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society is selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 17:24:15 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Vivian Lee Subject: Re: Hateful Old Women Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I appreciate Marina's well thought out and articulate POV. I cannot relate, but I found it to be interesting. I was curious about those who have had not so positive experiences with younger men simply because they were younger and for some reason their mental/emotional age hadn't caught up with their chronological age. Or the inverse, those who have had not so positive experiences with older men who still hadn't matured, simply grown older. Vivian ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 19:55:05 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Elaine Kushmaul Subject: young vs. older men Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I think men are much more individual than Marina suggests with her view that what you see is what you get (and what you see is pretty good) with young men vs. older men who are control freaks. I married when I was 20 to a man 21 who was definitely into control and full of the belief that he was smarter, etc. That marriage didn't last. Now I am 48 and have been married for the last 10 yrs. to a man nine years older than I am. He is very giving, supportive of what I want to do, in good shape (runs and plays tennis), and liked by everybody. In my case, older is definitely much better. Two experiences do not make a rule. Each situation, and person, has to be taken on its own. Elaine ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 20:49:46 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: young vs. older men In-Reply-To: <68a13bd4.35a0125b@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, Elaine Kushmaul wrote: > I think men are much more individual than Marina suggests with her view that > what you see is what you get (and what you see is pretty good) No way! I did not say that. Good looks don't always mean good personality (actually the only relation is that people who are confident about their appearance are usually more confident in general. Which makes them easier to communicate with). The point I was making is that younger men are somehow more likely to respect a woman as a person (at least an older woman), while older men are usually too full of themselves to accept disagreement from a woman, especially if she's younger. with young men > vs. older men who are control freaks. > > Each situation, and person, has to be > taken on its own. I absolutely agree. Generalizing is never entirely correct. I'm sure there are some pretty cool older men, I just have not met them. And just because I find it easier to get along with younger guys, it does not mean everyone should. However, the pairing of an older man with a younger woman is more common in modern culture, which I personally can never understand. Take movies like _As Good as it gets_ or all those films made by that guy who recently married his adopted stepdaughter (his name escapes me but I'm sure you all know him). All those movies are about some obnoxious old man, with looks even worse than his personality, who by some magic has all those smart, beautiful women falling all over him, while he is treating them like shit which makes them like him even more. And people actually watch that crap and find it realistic. You never see something the other way around -- a romantic film about relatinship between a mature woman and a young man, with a happy end and everything. That just does not happen. Or when it does, it's always something sick and tragic and with no future, implying that there was something wrong with both the younger man and the older woman to end up in such relatinship in the first place. I might not be old enough yet to take it personally but this still bugs me. Or think about Lolita. The fact that people find that situation erotic simply turns my stomach. Imagine being 13 and stuck with some nasty old creep who has legal custody over you, with nowhere to escape -- this is a horror story, IMHO, not an erotic one. Of course, this is just my opinion, and not many people share it. However, since I cannot avoid dealing with the predominant social fascination with the "father figure relationships" -- in books, movies, and everywhere else -- I can at least make a rule of going out only with people I find attractive. And not just by their looks. While I was writing this, it just crossed my mind why this deal about older men grosses me out so much. Everywhere I go -- school, job, convenience store, car repair place -- I often have to deal with some disgusting creeps who are older than my parents and about as attractive as yesterday vomit, who always feel entitled to make a pass at me, just because they are in charge. They ignore women of their age because, apparently, they don't consider them "pretty enough"; they make fun of younger girls if they have 40 extra pounds; but the thought of evaluating their own attractiveness never crosses their mind. They don't have any self-doubts. They don't feel obliged to be healthy, clean, smart, or funny -- hey, they are men and they are in charge. Old men rule the world, and they say that "power is the best aphrodisiac". Not for me, it's not. I often think about throwing up on the next professor (or a boss, or a cop, or any other idiot who thinks he is a God-given gift to any woman just because he has some power over her) who asks me what I am doing over the weekend. Or show him a mirror and explain that women also have feelings and his nice office and big paycheck is not much of a turn-on by itself. Well, anyway. Young guys at least don't act like you owe them anything just because they are men. Which is what I like about them. Which is, again, just my opinion that no one has to share. Marina http://members.aol.com/Lotaryn/index.html "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society is selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 12:15:09 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Julieanne Subject: Re: Young/Old Men: WAS: Hateful Old Women In-Reply-To: <68a13bd4.35a0125b@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 07:55 PM 7/5/98 EDT, Elaine wrote: >I think men are much more individual than Marina suggests with her view that >what you see is what you get (and what you see is pretty good) with young men >vs. older men who are control freaks. > (snip)> >Two experiences do not make a rule. Each situation, and person, has to be >taken on its own. I agree Elaine, but without generalisations, we souldnt be able to discuss much in general terms:) As with all generalisations, there are always exceptions, but enough comply with the general rule for it to be generally accepted:)) [ Apologies for the bad puns!] I suspect that there is a far larger *power* element, in reverse with the age & sexes than is usually acknowledged. I suspect that younger men have much less power in the world at large, than older men, who have established careers, households, assets etc. This _relative_ lack of power of younger men, may at least partly explain their greater participation in left-wing political movements, environmentalism etc. Older men, are much less visible in these movements. As men grow older, their power-base in the world INCREASES. However, its in reverse with women, young women do have some power-base, or at least access to a "bargaining-chip" - with their sexuality, reproductive potential and relative youth adding to their attractiveness, and hence their ability to be more upwardly socially mobile by allying themselves with older men. However, as women grow older, this sort of power-in-the-world DECREASES. Maybe, the 'powerless' are attracted to the 'powerless' - and younger men may very well be attracted to older women, until in turn they grow older themselves and gaining more power in the world, can turn their attentions to younger women. Regarding sexuality however, it may be possible that there is some truth in the idea that women's sexuality *peaks* at a later age than men's, and this may account for the practice in some cultures, and in some periods of history, for older women to be the first lovers of young adolescent men, and vice-versa with older men and young women. Marriage and long-term committed relationships, I suspect are a different matter entirely as much more than just sexuality is at stake in marriage-like alliances. As for the hateful older women - my perception of the stereotype, is also related to concepts of 'power'. The most hateful older women in books, films etc are the ones who have retained some form of 'power-base' which is resented by others. She is a teacher for example, or an ageing mother-in-law with power over her adult sons, or even the woman who has by luck or heredity, retained youthful good looks/body and sexuality longer than most women etc. She is the one who hasn't become "invisible" slowly as her age increases. She insists on remaining "visible" and exercising whatever little is left of her 'power' - such as it is. Julieanne ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 23:40:01 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: Hateful Old Women In-Reply-To: <4a06cb96.359fef00@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, Vivian Lee wrote: > > I was curious about those who have had not so positive experiences with > younger men simply because they were younger and for some reason their > mental/emotional age hadn't caught up with their chronological age. Or the > inverse, those who have had not so positive experiences with older men who > still hadn't matured, simply grown older. > > Vivian Part of it is a generational thing. I noticed long ago that men my own age or more - up to a certain point - shared certain faults and virtues. They could be very nice guys, and unlike their fathers they didn't scream the house down when displeased, but (see the old Cosby show where he was Dr. Huxtable), they sniped in a very sly and catty manner, and got incredably arch about sex. Men of my father's generation were more direct and more dictatorial. And had foul tempers and what us younger folks saw as dreadful public manners (see a certain scene in FEAR & LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS) Boomers are a lot easier to get along with & talk to and have a better attitude for the most part, but I find them incerdibly opinionated and given to a mysticism I cannot share, having never had the experiences they seem to have had as readily as walking down the sidewalk. I can't saw anything about men younger than than qua men - only as chance-met human beings, but admit I either love them or hate them or stand back & say "Huh?!?!?" Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 09:30:04 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Alison Page Subject: Re: young vs. older men MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Marina - spot on. I wish more women would stand up and say this. > All those movies are about some > obnoxious old man, with looks even worse than his personality, who by some > magic has all those smart, beautiful women falling all over him, while he > is treating them like shit which makes them like him even more. And people > actually watch that crap and find it realistic. The number of times I have shouted at the TV about this :-) but it never gives me a reasonable reply. > Or think about Lolita. The fact that people find that situation erotic > simply turns my stomach. Imagine being 13 and stuck with some nasty old > creep who has legal custody over you, with nowhere to escape -- this is a > horror story, IMHO, not an erotic one. Couldn't agree more > Of course, this is just my opinion, and not many people share it. I wonder if it isn't more common than you might think. To put this back a bit more in focus. I have thought about this issue quite a lot and I wonder if women in 'the media' are on average rather unrepresentative of the female population as a whole. I notice - for example - that a lot of female journalists burble on about how women love 'powerful older men' hrrumph. A lot of them cite Henry Kissinger as an example (???). Whereas I think he isn't exactly a pin-up among women in general. I think 'the media' is a much more flashy and superficial world than literature (in which I include SF).I think that books - as compared to virtually any other format - are less heavily controlled by a narrow elite dominated by rich older men. What do you (all) think? Is there more freedom from 'old man' values in books. I write non-fiction, and I do have to deal a lot with middle-aged men, and they do attempt to impose their values. So perhaps I'm arguing against myself. So I'll leave it at that I think. Alison ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 01:37:39 -0700 Reply-To: "Donna." Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Donna." Subject: Young/Old Wo/Men In-Reply-To: <199807060505.AAA18404@piglet.cc.uic.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I hope this will be all right as an introductory post. I think it's interesting to see the ages attached to those who've offered experiences regarding younger/older men: Marina at 24 prefers younger men, while Elaine at 48 offers her two data points leading toward older men. Their respective "preferred age of men" are roughly 40 years apart, which is two generations' worth, and I'm pretty sure I've read more than one sociological treatise on the tendency of societal norms to flip-flop from generation to generation. From the long view of history, it would almost seem as if Marina and Elaine are actually preferring the same men. >wink< (Generationally speaking, I mean.) Having dated heterosexually across more decades in this century than I care to admit to (sadly, only in the USA), I also much prefer men who came of age (approximately) during the even-numbered decades and who are, to use sexually predatory language, are "ripe for picking" by the following, odd-numered decade. In the 1970s, when I first actually considered dating a really young man, males in their late teens and early 20s were quite cognizant of films such as "Summer of '42" and "The Graduate", and tended to be rather in awe of older women. The last time I thought about it, it was the 1980s, and most of the young men I met then -- having rebelled against the permissive 1970s, I guess -- were cocky, arrogant, and eager to have a woman who would cater to their needs. Regarding Julieanne's paragraph on women's sexuality possibly peaking in later years, my personal take on the question is that it takes most of us that long to get with the program. First our upbringing tends to convince us that our sexual feelings are "wrong", then for most of us the onset of children makes us too tired to enjoy those feelings, and by the time the kids have flown the coop we've tended to figure out that succumbing to peer pressure doesn't really bring the happiness it promises, so we finally start taking matters into our own hands. So to speak. And let's not forget the power of realizing our own mortality, which for most of us in youth-worshipping cultures seems to happen around middle age. But that's just the take from a people-watching technogeek, so my own observational datapoints may be terribly skewed. Skewed though it may be, that perception leads me to the reason I thought this might make a good introductory leap into the list. I subscribed back when Laura first announced creating it, only apparently my subscription never made it past her manual processing, and like the newbie to SF that I am I naively assumed no mail from the list meant the list hadn't gone anywhere. Thank deity I found her site on the web! Unfortunately, on the "Theme Bibliographies" page, there were only two listings under "Crones, Hags and Old Wimmin": * Leonora Carrington's The Hearing Trumpet * Elizabeth Moon's Remnant Population I also notice, however, that the page says it hasn't been updated since June 1996, so I'm hoping there are more by now. Any suggestions? While I agree with Julieanne's description of the stereotype of hateful older women, I rather tend to believe that mostly we're talking about older women who have retained personal empowerment, who refuse to go invisible simply because their internal power is so great. That we're misunderstood and had our character and motivations distorted by the mainstream stereotypes isn't surprising, but I'm hoping that we're finally getting writers who are getting it right. Donna. Cybrarian, NiEstu donna.s@niestu.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 07:31:02 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: Young/Old Wo/Men Comments: To: "Donna." In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Donna. wrote: > > I think it's interesting to see the ages attached to those who've offered > experiences regarding younger/older men: Marina at 24 prefers younger men, > while Elaine at 48 offers her two data points leading toward older men. > Their respective "preferred age of men" are roughly 40 years apart, which > is two generations' worth, and I'm pretty sure I've read more than one > sociological treatise on the tendency of societal norms to flip-flop from > generation to generation. From the long view of history, it would almost > seem as if Marina and Elaine are actually preferring the same men. >wink< > (Generationally speaking, I mean.) Having dated heterosexually across > more decades in this century than I care to admit to (sadly, only in the > USA), I also much prefer men who came of age (approximately) during the > even-numbered decades and who are, to use sexually predatory language, are > "ripe for picking" by the following, odd-numered decade. > If I read this right, Elaine prefers Silent Generation men and Marina is looking down the are ladder to the little Millenials. Both of them have in common a connection to 'decency" and the old Civic values: the Millenials are rediscovering them and one huge faction of the Silents never lost them. (the other huge faction went with the Boomers.) > In the 1970s, when I first actually considered dating a really young man, > males in their late teens and early 20s were quite cognizant of films such > as "Summer of '42" and "The Graduate", and tended to be rather in awe of > older women. The last time I thought about it, it was the 1980s, and most > of the young men I met then -- having rebelled against the permissive > 1970s, I guess -- were cocky, arrogant, and eager to have a woman who > would cater to their needs. Yes. The notorious GenX. Oddly enough GenX women - like my two daughters - are very strong indeed. > > Regarding Julieanne's paragraph on women's sexuality possibly peaking in > later years, my personal take on the question is that it takes most of us > that long to get with the program. First our upbringing tends to convince > us that our sexual feelings are "wrong", then for most of us the onset of > children makes us too tired to enjoy those feelings, and by the time the > kids have flown the coop we've tended to figure out that succumbing to > peer pressure doesn't really bring the happiness it promises, so we > finally start taking matters into our own hands. So to speak. And let's > not forget the power of realizing our own mortality, which for most of us > in youth-worshipping cultures seems to happen around middle age. But > that's just the take from a people-watching technogeek, so my own > observational datapoints may be terribly skewed. > Amen! > Skewed though it may be, that perception leads me to the reason I thought > this might make a good introductory leap into the list. I subscribed back > when Laura first announced creating it, only apparently my subscription > never made it past her manual processing, and like the newbie to SF that I > am I naively assumed no mail from the list meant the list hadn't gone > anywhere. Thank deity I found her site on the web! Unfortunately, on the > "Theme Bibliographies" page, there were only two listings under "Crones, > Hags and Old Wimmin": > > * Leonora Carrington's The Hearing Trumpet > * Elizabeth Moon's Remnant Population > > I also notice, however, that the page says it hasn't been updated since > June 1996, so I'm hoping there are more by now. Any suggestions? > Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 09:48:12 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Kathleen M. Friello" Subject: Re: The Moon and the Sun..a few more Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit n a message dated 98-07-02 13:54:05 EDT, you write: << Lucien is a nonthreatening character, for example, and can be reaffirming for male readers in much the same way as the Miles character in Lois MacMaster Bujold's books, that is, you don't have to be a strapping Adonis to succeed in life or have a beautiful, talented woman love you. >> I was speechless for days after reading THIS set of bromides---- and honestly waiting for someone else to comment on it. A related post at least hit one of the central points: > All those movies are about some > obnoxious old man, with looks even worse than his personality, who by some > magic has all those smart, beautiful women falling all over him, while he > is treating them like shit which makes them like him even more. And people > actually watch that crap and find it realistic. NOT an attack on Lucien's personality, but on the fact that men have had their egos petted constantly by mainstream fiction, tv, movies, comix, in this regard, while the "trophy woman" cliche remains firmly in place. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 12:16:55 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Kathleen M. Friello" Subject: BDG additional reading, addendum Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit A couple of things I left out: Amazon book page has 119 reader reviews Bradley homepage, in connection with MZB Fantasy Magazine http://www.mzbfm.com/ Bradley tribute page: (from the Darkover site) http://www.ceremade.dauphine.fr/~rossi/darkover/mzb.uk.html I've been scraping together references for hardcopy reviews and critical writings, but this takes a little longer. I have found that MOA made a great impression on German readers, and has inspired at least one critical book in that language. If anyone has any suggestions or citations for the hardcopy additional reading list, please send them to me. Thanks, Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 09:02:46 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Subject: BDG: Mists of Avalon discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" It's finally time to start our discussion of Marion Zimmer Bradley's epic _Mists of Avalon_. This book has been out for quite some time, and even spent time I believe on the NY Time's bestseller list (correct me if I'm wrong, please) or some other bastion of the mainstream, which is surely not the norm for books that our group discusses. As Kathleen's lovely on-line bibliography demonstrates, there is no lack of material out there already if you haven't already formed some opinions of your own. Dive in! Remember the rules: 1. Opinions are fine, negative or positive, just try to give examples and avoid vague personal attacks on the book or the author. At this point I don't know that Bradley's joined our list, but so far we've had all authors present for our discussions. 2. Try to avoid re-posting entire messages, especially if you're just adding something like "Yeah, what she said". Just include the relevant parts you're responding to. Here are some questions to get you started, although I doubt this will be necessary: - Why do you think this book was so popular and had so much crossover appeal? - Do you think the length was justified? Why or why not? - What did you particularly like about this book? - Feel free to compare/contrast this with other renditions of the story. Historians among us, please point out any discrepancies or contested points so the rest of us know how much of this counts as education. Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 09:38:28 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Re: older women/younger men thread Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Everyone interested in this thread is likely to find the new Sheri Tepper book, SIX MOON DANCE, of interest, in which women are rewarded for their "superior" hormonal cycles and involvement in the community by having their husbands supplemented by young "hunks" for their pleasure. 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: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:43:10 -0700 Reply-To: lynnx@mc.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Heather Law Organization: Interstellar Trading Company Subject: Mists of Avalon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello I'm new to the list, so I'm glad you're doing a book I've read and enjoyed. I'd like to think that one reason this book was so popular was that it was so well-written, although the subject matter along would have guaranteed an audience and the author's name a core group of fans. It was one of the few fantasy works I've read in the last few years where I actually curious to find out how it would end. Quite an accomplishment, given that the outline of the story is so well-known, but of course there was a lot going on besides the traditional story. On the other hand the traditional story is a blending from a lot of sources, and I'm not sure how much of this was from yet another tradition and how much the author's imagination. As for the historical accuracy, well-take behavior from several centuries and add in magic. Why assume any historical veracity at all? Carol Mitchell President Chicagoland Costumer's Guild ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 13:07:04 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Kathleen M. Friello" Subject: BDG: Additional Reading, Part IIa Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Part IIa: Printed publications Monkia Essl. _Die Rezeption des Artusstoffes in der englischen und amerikanischen Literatur des 20. Jahrhunderts bei Thomas Berger, Marion Zimmer Bradley, E.A. Robinson, Mary Stewart und T.H. White_. Lewiston, NY : E. Mellen, 1995. Richard Kimpel. "The Mists of Avalon / Die Niebel von Avalon: Marion Zimmer Bradley's German Bestseller." _Journal of American Culture_ 9 (Fall 1986): 25-28. Susan Morrison. "Inscribing Feminine Desire: Malory's Gender Politics Refashioned in The Mists of Avalon." _Forum: Materialien und Beitrage zur Mittelalter- Rezeption_. Vol. 3. Rudiger Krohn, ed. Goppingen: Kummerle Verlag, 1992: 189-201. Mention/entries in: Thomas D. Clareson. "Star Cuts." _Extrapolation_ 24 (1983). John Clute and John Grant, ed. _The Encyclopedia of Fantasy_. London: Orbit, 1997. Thelma Fenster, ed. _Arthurian Women: A Casebook_. New York: Garland, 199? [cited on Arthurnet] Maureen Fries. "Trends in the Modern Arthurian Novel." _King Arthur Through the Ages_. Valerie M. Lagorio and Mildred Leake Day, ed. 2 vols. New York: Garland, 1990. Norris J. Lacy, ed. _The Arthurian Encyclopedia_. New York: Peter Bedrick Books, 1986 [pb: NY: Garland, 1987] Charlotte Spivack. _Merlin's Daughters: Contemporary Women Writers of Fantasy_. London: Greenwood, 1987. Raymond H. Thompson. _The Return from Avalon: The Arthurian Legend in Modern Fiction_. Westport, Conn., 1985. More to come, I hope, in Part IIb, including reviews. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 21:04:35 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: BDG: Mists of Avalon discussion begins In-Reply-To: <19980706162508257.AAA176@jennifer.actioneer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII First of all, I must admit that I had no idea about the "original story" behind this book before I read it, and I still don't. The only story involving King Arthur and the gang I have ever read was Mark Twain's "Yankee at King Arthur's Court", which was pretty much a parody if I remember well. That was the main "point of reference" I had in my mind while reading The Mists. In fact, I used to think that "Avalon" was something from the Bible. I also remember the article about a theory that the Round Table became "round" as a result of a bad translation either to or from Latin, and that originally it was simply "guest table" or something else irrelevant to its physical shape. Having the fact of growing up in another culture as an excuse to my complete ignorance about the Arthurian world, I hoped that it might help me to perceive this book by itself rather than a new variation on a centuries-old literary tradition. I think one of the reasons the book became popular is the fact that it uses the "soap opera" format -- which is not necessarily bad. It has several basic characters that are completely entangled with each other, through the relations of blood, romance, or both, they conspire against each other, make alliances, fight over property -- very much like everyone's life. Even though it's a fantasy, it very realistic. It's also interesting to see powerful people who shape the history as simple mortals with disfunctional families. Another reason it's popular, to me, is the fact that it describes "the end of the world as we know it" -- the death of old social order and it's replacement by a new one, like in Gone with the Wind, or the stories about the fall of Rome. An end of the world is always fascinating, especially when you don't have to live through it. I personally liked the book because of the character of Morgaine. She is a strong woman at her best, even though her blind following the "needs" of her religious institution, IMHO, did not do her a whole lot of good. In fact, I think (and a lot of people probably won't like this) that the Avalon rulers in this story did not act that much different than any other leaders of a state religion that would be losing its priviledged position. After all, when the government of a country is based on religion (or any certain ideology), there can never be more than one of it. It seems to me, this was what did Avalon in -- the fact that they tried to mingle in the affairs of the state when they no longer had the influence to do so. And the burden that Vivian put on Morgaine and others for the sake of keeping that power simply crushed them all. I found The Mists of Avalon a very sad and tragic book, even though very beautiful. The characters pretty much failed in everything they were trying to do, and for which they sacrificed so much. I think that "keeping Saxons away for the few decades till they became civilized" was a pretty lame consolation. The tradition of Celts, the religion of Druids, the history of their kings -- all that still got completely wiped out. There was so little left other than the legends that no one really knows what happened there and the modern theories all conflict with each other. Which is pretty sad, IMHO. It seemed to be a beautiful world. Marina http://members.aol.com/Lotaryn/index.html "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society is selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 14:40:51 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Julieanne Subject: Re: BDG: [*FSFFU*] Mists of Avalon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Some thoughts on Mists: - A refreshing twist of *focus* to the women characters' perspective with a feminine, rather than feminist writing style, in the context of a traditionally masculine heroic saga. And I suspect the popularity of the book, particularly with young women readers, is at least partly due to the excellent characterisation. Many of the women characters tend to spend much time and angst, mourning love betrayals or losses, similar to teenage romantic novels. I suspect this may also account for its popularity:)) However, unlike most B-grade 'romance', or even historical pulp fiction novels, _Mists of Avalon_ is far better written. - pleasing departure from the classical "good vs evil" formula. Personally, I am not a great fan of the fantasy genre, rarely read it and find the good-guys-vs-bad-guys (or girls) formulae boring. MZB's characters display the entire spectrum of good, bad, warm, cold, beautiful and ugly. - the theme of the conflict between the Old Goddess-based Religion and the newly emerging Christianity, MZB to her credit again, did not use a standard "good-vs-evil" conflict vehicle. Both religions are painted as far less than perfect, although the Old Faith is probably presented as the more spiritually rich and complex of the two. Some of the religious/spiritual scenes, are moving examples of a complex faith rich in female symbolism. For example, descriptions of the Grail, ritual blessings and Arthur's initiation in the King-making rites etc. These scenes may also account for much of the book's popularity with women readers, particularly for those who may have difficulty relating to the primarily masculine symbolism of Judaeo-Christian-Islamic religions. If not taken as 'fact', the novel can serve as a useful starting point for further reading/enquiry into Goddess-based religious experience. Unfortunately, most of these scenes are minor scenes in the novel. - historical innaccuracies, some of which are glaring, I find to be a minor criticism of Mists. When all is said and done, the book is a work of fiction, the events and even the religions of the novel, are just as much a product of the author's imagination as are the characterisation and much of the plot development. - length of the novel: again I see this as a minor criticism. Overly long descriptions of cold, drafty castles, and umpteen paragraphs describing every detail of forest leaves, whilst irritating, can easily be skimmed through. It could have been improved by better editing, perhaps. As with any long, complex story there are times when the plot appears disjointed, interrupting the "flow" etc - but again this is minor, although it may disturb some readers more than others. - A *feminist* novel? I don't think so. For a start all the women characters can only achieve power through men. They use mostly traditional feminine ways of trying to achieve power: their sexuality and/or emotional manipulation. Morgaine spends much time mourning her inability to overcome incest taboos, which prevent her from becoming the 'power behind the throne'. And she needs Accolon to fight for Avalon - Damsel in Distress? When Accolon fails to win power for the Lady of the Lake, Morgaine mourns the loss of her lover, far more than the downfall of her religion, which is supposedly her main work/purpose in life, for which she was born. Niniane is presented as weak, passive and ineffectual in her relationship with Mordred. She finally asserts herself, and just as I as a reader start thinking, "Go, Girl, Go!" - she is killed. Gwynifir is presented as the stereotype of the beautiful but shallow woman, whining and bitchy and piously guilty over her sinful lusting for Lancelet. The only character I really liked, was Morgause - but even she comes to a bad end, becoming somewhat insane and twisted. - From a feminist POV then, I was often disappointed. Despite the portrayal of the women not as victims, but as strong women with the power to play large parts in the course of events, the women always lose. Not passive victimised losers perhaps, but still losers. They lose their lives, their children, their battles - (for good or evil), their sanity, their status, and at the end, even their own spirituality and religion. Maybe this is why I cried at the end. Even the Goddess & Avalon "fade away" as proud, tragic defeated figures at the end. I found Morgaine's testimony at the end attesting to peace, acceptance and tolerance of Christianity, a little annoying as well as tragic. Not only must women always lose, they must "lose with good Grace". Nonetheless, it is to MZB's credit as a writer, that I was able to feel the tragedy so keenly. In summary though, I thoroughly enjoyed the novel for its vivid descriptive language, its refreshing *twist* of focus to the feminine viewpoint of a classic masculine legend, and most particularly its complex characterisation which is usually lacking in the fantasy genre. Many of Bradley's characters in Mists were exceptionally well-drawn, and I found myself being able to laugh, cry, lust, hate and love right along with many of them, and enjoy the story as a wonderful, imaginative romantic adventure. Julieanne ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 07:28:42 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Mists of Avalon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I had one major problem with Morgaine. She alternated between blind obedience and blind rebellion, and in consequence, when careful thought and planning would have served her well, she went off like a badly made firecracker. Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 09:35:51 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Subject: BDG: Mists Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Here are some of my initial comments: 1. I wish it had been shorter, but I think what made it long (the stuff about the religions) also made it worth reading. 2. I take back what I said about Halfway Human being too sad or depressing. At least Tedla had a reasonable chance at some happiness. These poor people in Mists never had a chance, and the reader never had a chance to think it might end happily either. It was just one long depressing descent into oblivion or hell, depending on the character. 3. I agree with Julianne that the most interesting character was Morgause, but I think Bradley tried to make her the "bad" character instead of pursuing those aspects that made her the most independent. I had trouble believing that Morgaine could persist in being so unhappy, given her priviledge and education and talents. Although in the end, would it have made that much difference if she had achieved her potential? Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 13:27:46 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Phoebe Wray Subject: MOA Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit To my mind, one of the important virtues of MZB's lovely book is the fact that it has added a dimension to Arthurian studies. Once having read MOA it is impossible to consider the Arthurian saga without thinking of the women -- not just Guinevere. By extension, it leads one to consider other heroes and wonder about the women in their stories as well. No mean achievement. I love this book: the taste of it and the imagery in it, and the tragedy of it. (Enjoy MZB's other ones as well. Recently pulled out all the old Darkover novels and read them in sequence. Quite satisfying.) I've had several students (junior level, college) tell me that MOA made them think differently and more positively about themselves as women and also made them ask questions about patriarchal religions. It was enriching for them. Best Phoebe Wray zozie@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 10:49:16 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jessie Stickgold-Sarah Subject: BDG: Mists In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 07 Jul 98 09:35:51 PDT." <19980707164554576.AAA253@jennifer.actioneer.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I agree with what a lot of people have said about MoA being a tragedy; but what's interesting about this to me is that I didn't see it that way the first time I read it. I found it exciting and inspiring: all these women running around and doing stuff, right there in the middle of a legend I'd read or seen or heard about dozens of times. The Arthurian legends are so deeply entrenched in our culture (and here I mean the US, so I imagine it's even more so in Britain), and I was so into them at the time I first read this book, that it seemed like a whole second cast had just showed up on the stage of a play I knew very well. But this time, it was a cast of people like me. I loved that. Also the depiction of Avalon's religion fascinated me, and I think I just ignored the fact that every main character lost in the end. I don't even remember the last hundred and fifty pages; maybe I didn't read them. I'm curious as to whether people find it less depressing the first time they read it, or if it's just that I was too young (thirteen or so) to be paying a lot of attention. Is it feminist? Several people have said no, but I think maybe the definition of "feminist", as used here, is a moving target. It's been said that it's not feminist "enough" because it doesn't push against sexist stereotypes and because all power in the story is gotten through men; but thirty years ago, if someone had taken a classically male myth about men and rewritten it so that the important people were women, I bet we would all have called it feminist. I can't read T.H. White's series now -- I'm still fond of The Sword In The Stone, but in the later ones Morgan le Fay appears as a really hideous creature and I can't stand it. So my perception of a cultural icon has been wholly changed, and it's changed what I do and what I think. Isn't that what feminism is all about? And wasn't the passing of women from direct to, at best, indirect power part of Avalon's decline? I didn't see that as Bradley's failure to give her women independance, but as the symptom of The New Age. Our recent discussions of convents notwithstanding, the Christian Church of that era was pretty repressive to women (especially when compared to Bradley's proposed previous religion). jessie ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 11:26:54 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: MOA BDG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit What is a feminist novel? Is it one which expounds a feminist agenda usi^? ng feminist style and characterization or is it one that ecourages female^? s to feel their worth and power? Using the latter definition I call Mist^? of Avalon a feminist novel. Did you read any of the email reviews writt^? en by girls and women who read the book as young as age 12 or after they ^? had already had children of their own? They said the book changed their ^? lives. How many well known legends are there that show women as whole pe^? ople with thoughts and actions and a spirituality of their own? Bradley ^? took a very well known legend and turned it around to show women's lives,^? and women are liberated just to have had their stories told. ^? She could have written a truly feminist book in which Morgaine and the la^? dies of Avolon win, Christianity is pushed out of the isles and Morgaine ^? becomes Queen of all Britain. Or she could have written a book set in Am^? erica or Argentina and had powerful women ruling kingdoms there. Those w^? ould have all been interesting. But those aren't the stories she wanted ^? to tell. In order to tell the women's part of the Arthurian legend she h^? ad to write under certain constraints. Britain is after all a Christian ^? nation, she had to get to that end. Christian countries are patriarchies^? , rule is passed father to son, women rule only if there's no male altern^? ative, those are the rules she had to work around. What's interesting to me is that even though Avalon receded into the mist^? s, even though the goddess based religion didn't prevail, women are inspi^? red just from the idea that there could be a religion in which they held ^? spiritual authority, they directed their own lives, chose their own lover^? s, went where they wanted and men were not to presume to direct them. Th^? is idea changes the lives of females who read the book. This idea has be^? en the force directing women toward goddess based religions. It's a big ^? fat book, and it's had a big fat influence on women's lives. Joyce Jones ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N^? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 15:17:13 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mary-Ellen Maynard Subject: Re: BDG: [*FSFFU*] Mists of Avalon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit <<- A *feminist* novel?>> IMHO, there is one thing to keep in mind here. According to introductions that MZB has written to short stories in the Sword and Sorceress anthologies, she does not consider herself a feminist. In fact, she has expressed some hostility toward feminists and feminism as a movement. Something in the nature of, "where were they when I needed them?" and "I made it without any movement, any *good* woman writer should be able to do the same" Perhaps an extension of our earlier discussion about the need for minority writers (women, lesbians, people of color, etc.) to be exceptional, never mediocre? BTW, these are *not* accurate quotes, just my impressions from things I've read over the years. In spite of that, I think that MZB does a good job of raising the "feminist consciousness" bar for a mass audience. Maybe things that we were exposed to long ago; women choosing their own lovers, having absorbing careers and commitments, their own spirituality, still need to be mythically reinforced within our society as a whole. It's certainly not cutting edge feminist theory or spirituality, but everyone needs to start their feminst odyssey somewhere. Mary-Ellen Crystal Mist Glass Carving Guffey, CO ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:52:03 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: BDG: [*FSFFU*] Mists of Avalon In-Reply-To: <40414bd3.35a2743a@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 7 Jul 1998, Mary-Ellen Maynard wrote: > > IMHO, there is one thing to keep in mind here. According to introductions that > MZB has written to short stories in the Sword and Sorceress anthologies, she > does not consider herself a feminist. In fact, she has expressed some > hostility toward feminists and feminism as a movement. Something in the nature > of, "where were they when I needed them?" And as I wrote to her, whenever the young people ask "Where are all the....?", the answer is usually: In places with names like Sunset Acres and) It will be thejob of YOUR generation to rekindle the torch. This did not please her at all. and "I made it without any movement, > any *good* woman writer should be able to do the same" Isn't THAT a pure Queen Bee statement?> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 13:54:55 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Subject: BDG: Mists Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" If reading MOA could change even one girl or woman's life for the better, and cause them to question patriarchal religions, then all my criticisms seem petty and I salute Bradley in her achievement. There's room for this as well as versions with more radical (and less mainstream) feminist revisions. Thank you already for this discussion. I've been putting off reading this book for years, and then when I read it, my suspicions were confirmed. But the comments so far have taken me outside of my little world and shown me the greater subversive potential of this book, and now I'm glad I read it. Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 16:13:07 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: BDG: Mists In-Reply-To: <19980707164554576.AAA253@jennifer.actioneer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII It's funny, but everyone who complains about Mists being too long, do it for different reasons: 1) too much nature description, i.e. leaves, woods, etc; 2) too much religious stuff; and so on. To me, the most irritating "long" stuff were the perpetual "romantic" scenes: Morgaine obsessing over Lancelet while he is whining about his unhappy love life, queen Gwen obsessing about Lancelet and her religious duties, Lancelet obsessing about Gwen and Arthur, Igrain obsessing over Uther, etc.-- the same tearjerking stuff, over and over and over again. That was the part that most reminded me of soap operas. Like Santa Barbara that I watched as a teenager -- there was this couple, Cruz and Eden, that got together in each episode and whined about impossibility of their happiness, on and on. Used to make me wish that someone showed up and shot them so there would be a reason to be so upset. Marina http://members.aol.com/Lotaryn/index.html "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society is selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 14:33:15 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jessie Stickgold-Sarah Subject: Re: BDG: MoA In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 07 Jul 98 15:17:13 EDT." <40414bd3.35a2743a@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >IMHO, there is one thing to keep in mind here. According to introductions that >MZB has written to short stories in the Sword and Sorceress anthologies, she >does not consider herself a feminist. In fact, she has expressed some >hostility toward feminists and feminism as a movement. Something in the nature >of, "where were they when I needed them?" You can find a million women in the US who'll say, "I'm definitely not a feminist. I just think I should get equal pay and equal respect and my sex life is no one else's business and I don't plan to get married until I have a good career and if I have kids we'll put them in daycare/alternate staying home/my husband will stay home because I have work to do." So...does that make all of those things not "feminist"? No. All of those women have so fully integrated certain goals of feminism that they believe them to be "normal". They make me crazy, but to some degree they are the proof of feminism's success. Likewise this book, and this author. "I made it without any movement" is a nice theory, but there ain't no one who lived in the 60s and 70s "without any movement". It was going on all around. It was filing lawsuits and marching in the towns where the publishers worked and passing laws and inspiring hundreds of thousands of women to read and write SF. There is no "without". jessie ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 17:08:29 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: BDG: Mists In-Reply-To: <19980707210604112.AAB198@jennifer.actioneer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII It's probably a bad sign, but my favorite character in the Mists, besides Morgaine, was her son, Mordred. I think he was the only one who was usually thinking for himself and did not let either religous dogma mess with his head. His only problem, IMHO, was the fact that he was so heavily influenced by Margause, who did not care about anyone or anything but power. I disagree that Margause was the strongest character there. The strongest, I think, was Vivian. If Vivian was not so desperate to keep her power at any cost, she might have actually kept it. After all, she kept betraying everyone who trusted her for the sake of her political goals that she saw as "universal good". I think in the end, that was what made her fail. Margause, on the other hand, did not even have any nice cover-ups for her ambitions. I was kind of glad she never got the power, it scares me to think what she would do with it. I think, my favorite part involving her was when her youngest son got slaughtered because of her conspiracy against Gwen, and all she thought was: "Oh well, he was not on my side anyway". I thought it was kind of funny, but I do not see this as strength. What I found interesting about Margause was her sexual assertiveness. Comparing with everyone else, including Morgaine, who is bouncing between "a woman can choose her lovers, it's her Goddess-given right" and "Marguuse is sleeping with everyone, what a slut!" (or all this freaking out about the threesome of Arthur, Lancelet, and Gwen) at least Margause has one certain set of rules and does not mess with her head over sex. But I guess that was the reason Bradley made her so evil at the end. Remember, at the beginning, Vivian says that "Goddess has a fourth face (besides Virgin/Mother/Wisewoman), and I hope that Margause will never wear this face". For what I understand, in the end it was implied that Margause ended up wearing that fourth face, the 4th main role of a woman, besides virgin/mother/old crone -- the whore. In fact, the approach to female sexuality was the most confusing part of the book. All those numerous references to the sacred right of women to choose a father to their children -- and at the same all those worries that the "bitch-puppy" Margause would "bring the shame on the family". I just could not get it -- did it mean that sleeping around for a priestess was a sacred duty, but for a regular teenage girl -- an ugly sin? Moreover, that story with Nemue and Kevin I found completely disgusting. I think it is better (or a least less evil) to completely deny female sexuality like Christians did, than to make it a tool for religious service or political games. Because that plan of luring Kevin-the-traitor back to Avalon using sex with a virgin made me think of the methods used by KGB and such. Pretty ugly for a "woman-friendly religion", I think. Going back to Margause, it seems to me that her loose sexuality was the main reason she was chosen for one of the very few totally "bad guys" in the book. It was as if her unrestrained interest in men from early age was supposed to prepare the reader to see her turning into a throat-slashing monster later in the book. Which I think was not only non-feminist, but pretty much mysogenistic. At least, that's what I think. Marina http://members.aol.com/Lotaryn/index.html "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society is selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 19:19:33 +0100 Reply-To: terriergraphics@cybertours.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Terri Wakefield Organization: Terrier Graphic Design Subject: Re: BDG: Mists of Avalon discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > - Why do you think this book was so popular and had so much crossover appeal? The Arthurian Legend has been a part of many cultures for hundreds of years. It is about pride, and justice, and chivalry. It is about a sense of belonging centered around a moral code of leadership and loyalty. Let's face it however, it was a boys and mens fraternity.... MISTS OF AVALON changed all that..... MZB, whether she meant to or not, gave us a Feminine Arthurian Legend. Now we could play this game with the big boys... No more shadowy, weak figures in the background. Now *we* could make things happen, and I was thrilled!! Had I read MOA as a youngster I probably would have been riding my imaginary white horse around like character from Monty Pythons Holy Grail ! Wooohooo... That's what MOA was for me sixteen years ago..... This time around I more aware of its many flaws, not the least of which are the insipid Gwenhwyfar, and the self righteous Morgaine. I found myself liking Igraine, who was fortunate enough to die early on, and Morgause, who was at least honest with herself, better than either of the main characters. Morgaine and Gwenhyfar seemed to be constantly plotting to manipulate the lives of others, and having their efforts always to end tragically. The Tales of Arthur generally end in tragedy, but it is at least a glorious shining defeat, not a slow agonizing fade into nothing. Many thanks to Kathleen. I visited almost every one of those sites and even joined the Arthurnet mailing list. One of my favorite sites is The Enchanted Forest at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2769/arthur.htm Be prepared to spend some time down loading as a lot of lovely art work is part of this site. Some related books which I have enjoyed are BELOVED EXILE by Parke Godwin, a very different portrayal of Guenevere, Fay Sampson's DAUGHTER OF TINTAGEL about Morgaine Le Feye, and RETURN TO AVALON an anthology dedicated to Marian Zimmer Bradley. For films I recommend John Boorman's visually stunning EXCALIBUR and the irrepressible Monty Pythons Quest for the Holy Grail. Terri ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 20:14:13 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mary-Ellen Maynard Subject: Re: BDG: [*FSFFU*] Mists of Avalon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/7/98 8:52:06 PM, you wrote: << And as I wrote to her, whenever the young people ask "Where are all the....?", the answer is usually: In places with names like Sunset Acres and) It will be thejob of YOUR generation to rekindle the torch. This did not please her at all.>> The answer I always thought of in this case was; "In the same boat you were, or not born yet." Don't think that would please her either. Mary-Ellen Crystal Mist Glass Carving Guffey, CO ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 21:51:21 -0400 Reply-To: asaro@sff.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Catherine Asaro Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1998 to 6 Jul 1998 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kmfriello@aol.com, the point is that some men find the character Lucien nonthreatening, and that such a character may make them more open to the other messages of feminism in the book. This is one aspect of feminism, among many, that is useful, and worth pursuing. I have seen a great deal of literature by women underrated, dismissed, or overlooked because the people who would most benefit from it, don't read it, or else they simply Don't Get It. Preaching to the choir is fine, and serves a valuable purpose, but ultimately it won't change the world. That said, though, I do agree that first and foremost, a person should write what is truest to her vision. If it turns off some readers, so be it. There are some men who simply won't read my books because of the strong female characters. I won't stop writing strong female characters because of that. However, I do think that fiction which can do both, that is, reach a diverse audience while remaining true to its vision, has a great value. This is one of many reasons why I admire what Vonda has done with THE MOON AND THE SUN. Otherwise, we play into the stereotypes that what women value isn't as important as what men value. Is the point of feminism and feminist literature to vent anger among ourselves or to make the world a better, more egalitarian place for all people? Or both? I would say both; women have a right to their anger, and it can drive a movement. But I hope that in the long run we can achieve something that benefits the entire human race. In regards to stereotypes concerning male and female sexualizations: A great many good points have been made here about the presentation of male and female roles in the media and literature, as well as the how power and age affect the way people interact. I have been writing and speaking on the subject for decades, before some of the people on this list were born, in fact. I understand your anger in regards to such portrayals. I am both saddened and encouraged that the comments being made today are so similar to those from twenty to thirty years ago; saddened because it suggests that in thirty years we haven't made as much progress as we would have liked, but encouraged because people continue to discuss it. I must confess, I'm baffled by your juxaposition of my comments regarding the character Lucien in THE MOON AND THE SUN with "an obnoxious old man, with looks even worse than his personality, who by some magic has all those smart, beautiful women falling all over him, while he is treating them like shit which makes them like him even more." Have you read the book? Vonda was trying to do something subtle with Lucien, and although the fact that he is unusually short could be viewed as playing into stereotypes, I found the characterization a beautifully done portrayal of someone who has been dealt a difficult situation and handled the resulting predjudice well. THE MOON AND THE SUN deals with issues important to feminism, but in a broader sense it deals with predjudice in general, in its many forms, including but not restricted to sexism. I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish by comments such as "THIS set of bromides" or "This is, excuse me, crap." What is the point of alienating people who would otherwise have been sympathetic to your views? All it does is play into the old sexist adage, "Those women will never accomplish anything useful; they are too busy clawing at each other." I thought feminism had moved beyond that stage. Kmfriello@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 98-07-02 13:54:05 EDT, you write: > > << Lucien is a nonthreatening character, > for example, and can be reaffirming for male readers in much the same > way as the Miles character in Lois MacMaster Bujold's books, that is, > you don't have to be a strapping Adonis to succeed in life or have a > beautiful, talented woman love you. >> > > I was speechless for days after reading THIS set of bromides---- and honestly > waiting for someone else to comment on it. A related post at least hit one of > the central points: > > > All those movies are about some > > obnoxious old man, with looks even worse than his personality, who by > some > > magic has all those smart, beautiful women falling all over him, while he > > is treating them like shit which makes them like him even more. And > people > > actually watch that crap and find it realistic. > > NOT an attack on Lucien's personality, but on the fact that men have had their > egos petted constantly by mainstream fiction, tv, movies, comix, in this > regard, while the > "trophy woman" cliche remains firmly in place. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 19:44:28 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stephanie Jackson Subject: Mists of Avalon. In-Reply-To: <19980706162508257.AAA176@jennifer.actioneer.com> from "Jennifer Krauel" at Jul 6, 98 09:02:46 am Content-Type: text > - Why do you think this book was so popular and had so much crossover > appeal? Because, whether or not it was about women in the past, present, or future, it discussed something central to every human being: Power, and how one deals with it. Either power in the form of government, power in the form of religion, power in the form o f sexuality. MZB looks at how nearly mythical characters deal with the power dealt them, from those forced into their power to those who embrace it and try to ride the wave. > > - Do you think the length was justified? Why or why not? After reading a long book, I tend to think back upon what I've read and ask myself two questions: 1) Was there any part that was completely unnecessary, overblown, or contained length for the sole purpose of being long? and 2) Did I feel that it was too long-winded or drawn out? I'd say no to both of these. MZB created a novel with a lot of description, but it only helped to set the scene for the exceptional characters she created. > > - What did you particularly like about this book? > The character portrayals, and the ending. I loved the characters, they felt /real/ after getting half-way through the book. And the ending showed what I think MZB's true purpose was -- Showing how one woman dealt with power. It wasn't a tragedy -- Morg aine realized that the power she wielded wasn't used completely for bad, and that she did all she could. A newcomer to the list, Stephanie Jackson