Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9807B" ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:32:41 +0930 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Karyn Black Subject: MOA MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Having read MOA at 17 and 3/4 thru at 25 I can perceive differences in how I have assimilated the characters actions. As a brash" nothing can harm me," "that will never happen to me" 17 year old, I skimmed through the anguish and torment of Morgaine's lower moments and absorbed and imprinted her fleeting moments of empowerement. I read it cover to cover in 2 days not stopping to eat or communicate with any others (difficult in a busy sharehouse). I read the last 100 or so pages in a daze, disbelieving it could end so tragically. It was the first book that addressed my as yet unformed ideals about the unfairness of a patriachal all-consuming religion. It spurned an interest in the deeper mysteries of life and added air to a young flicker of feminism flame. At the time I was aware of a womens alure to men and had already participated in acts of sexual curiosity that had left me feeling bare and less in control. It gave me comfort. Now as an old hag of 25 (tee hee) I re-read it with a different verve. I have found a mate (and a step-daughter), done countless stupid things along the way and learnt a little patience. (a little!) My opinion of Gwen has not changed. At 17 I already had no time for "girly girls" who remained as a children lifelong. Morguase I thought a baddie when younger, yet now she seems more in control of her lifes path than Morgaine who was my initial heroine! Bear in mind I have not yet finished. Morgaine even considers that perhaps she should do the same as Morguase (be the mistress of her own castle) but can never come to terms with her own sexual desires. All through reading, I kept screaming at Morgaine "Go back to Avalon" where I felt she would at least find some resolution. Vivianne remains true to herself up till her demise and seems at times the ony one (save Merlin) willing to fight for the old religion. I am no longer an overzealous advocate of MOA. One small gripe of mine is the constant overuse of "mankind" even by those of Avalon! I realise it is only in recent years that gender specific language is not on, yet I would have surely thought a priestess would not perceive the world as purely a mans domain. Indeed I can pull the book apart and find small criticisms here and there. I keep going back to the first time I read it and remember the flush of empowerement I felt as a burgeoning woman. I can admit freely in ways it was life-changing and developed personal manifesto's about feminism and religion. For that I am unsure my criticisms will be objective as it is like defending an old friend. Perhaps after I complete it my opionion will change. Hello all Karyn Black ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 23:19:23 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: BDG MOA Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This was one of my favorite comments: I had one major problem with Morgaine. She alternated between blind obed^? ience and blind rebellion, and in consequence, when careful thought and planning would have served her well, she went off like a bad^? ly made firecracker. Patricia (Pat) Mathews (By the way if this reads funny, my mailserver is having a "few" difficul^? ties. Hope this is somewhat legible) If an author is talented and works hard she can make consistent, reasonab^? le characters. I like those. I like consistent, reasonable people too. ^? Unfortunately, most people aren't consistent and are frequently unresona^? ble. Once I took a course on the Bible from a really neat, liberal intel^? ligent priest who actually made me like the book. One of the things I li^? ke best was those foolish hebrews following Moses around in the desert an^? d screwing up every chance they got. He'd tell them god wanted them to d^? o something, they'd agree and they'd do it for a while then do just the o^? pposite when they felt like it, not just once but over and over again. N^? ow that's a human portrayal. Theoretically we learn from our mistakes, b^? ut in my experience, it takes a lot more than one to get the message. ^? So Morgaine, Gwenhwyfar, the Merlin, Kevin, Arthur and Lancelet (who did ^? come off as a first class wimp) could have been following Viviane around ^? in the wilderness, making the same mistakes over and over and always thin^? king they had it right, but never quite getting it. So none of them got ^? to the promised land, but they made some of us want to try to find it our^? selves. Joyce Jones ^? ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N^? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:24:52 +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] Mists MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------4A3739EFBDBF9742CF37A683" --------------4A3739EFBDBF9742CF37A683 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jessie wrote: > 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? > I see this aspect of feminist "definition" mostly from the POV of youth. As a thirteen-year-old I was 'mind-blown' by seeing Suzi Quatro in her leather gear, playing bass guitar, strutting like a man on the stage etc... LOL.. I can honestly say, Suzi Q *changed my life* by challenging the passive, bland stereotype I had internalised on women singers, and by giving a young girl a 'role model' very different to most other women in the pop-world at that point in time:) At that point in time, I would have said Suzi Q represented to me the most powerful "feminist" figure:)) Not long after, at 14-15 or so, I discovered Jo Clayton's Diadem series of novels, - with the introduction of Aleytys who walks and fights and struggles her way across half a planet, aged 15 and pregnant. With her maturation into an adult, and becoming a powerful immortal with very human emotions and concerns, completely 'blowing my mind away':)). It amuses me now, as it wasn't until many years later when I had read books pertaining to Goddess religions, fact and fiction, that I realised the Goddess symbolism of all four main characters - with Aleytys representing the "Mother" figure of the Goddess, and the young Shadith imprisoned in the Diadem as a young maiden, and sole survivor, of her dead, dancing, artistic culture as the "Virgin" figure, and the aged, wise and queenly Haskari as the "Crone" image. And, the mercenary male warrior figure imprisoned in the Diadem in his prime, Q, with his humour and true friendship of all the women, as an independent equal, as the 'Consort' figure to the 3-faces of the Goddess:)). All the women retained power completely independent of him, and other men, even indeed of each other - yet their bonds of friendship, and alliance of their individual strengths compensating for each other's weaknesses, during times of necessity remained strong throughout. Nonetheless, the Diadem novels, are considered not much more than well-written galactic space-opera. However, these were the FIRST powerful, strong women characters I had ever "met" in my reading, and they stay with me still. Mists of Avalon, I suspect was/is most popular with younger or less-experienced readers, the first time they had been exposed to well-drawn images of strong, powerful women of any kind, and being a departure from the general reading material available, could very well be seen as a book 'that changes lives'. Morgaine and the other women characters would stick in their minds. For older readers of Mists however, many of whom could say, "been there, done that, bought that T-shirt", the book could be perceived differently, as just a soap-opera, a best-seller pulp fiction block-buster novel, more entertaining and better-written than most perhaps, but still not great literature, feminist or otherwise. This may also account, for several readers commenting how powerfully the book affected them when first they read it, but on second reading their perception changed. As for feminist definition, perhaps its more to do with "political " feminism. For example, Margaret Thatcher ( maybe, not the best example) could very well be seen as an icon of a strong, "powerful" woman, and may very well be a 'role model' and admired by many women. Yet, because of her right-wing politics, many feminists would deny her. I saw the women characters in Mists as right-wing, and because my "political feminism" leans toward the left-wing, I found it difficult to see most of the Mists women characters as anything other than right-wing men, who happened to have a different set of genitals. As for the Arthurian legends, and the history of that period, I would recommend readers take a look at Robert Graves scholarly book - "The White Goddess". A daunting book of life-long and painstaking research on Celtic, Welsh, Greek and Hebrew traditions of myth and legend, and is heavy going for any reader. Nonetheless, it is well worth the effort:)) One interesting quote: " The Norman-French troveres and Malory in his Morte d'Arthur who collected and collated their Arthurian romances had no knowledge of, or even interest in, the historical or religious meaning of the myths they handled - myths obtained from what was after all, a conquered nation, and history is written by the winners. They felt themselves entirely free to improve the narrative in accordance with their new gospel of chivalry inherited from the literary tradition of early medieval Provence - hence they broke up the old mythic patterns of Celtish lore, and taking liberties of every sort, that the Welsh minstrels in their strict oral tradition would never have dared to take." Julieanne --------------4A3739EFBDBF9742CF37A683 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jessie wrote: 
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?
I see this aspect of feminist "definition" mostly from the POV of youth. As a thirteen-year-old I was 'mind-blown' by seeing Suzi Quatro in her leather gear, playing bass guitar, strutting like a man on the stage etc... LOL..
I can honestly say, Suzi Q *changed my life* by challenging the passive, bland stereotype I had internalised on women singers, and by giving a young girl a 'role model' very different to most other women in the pop-world at that point in time:)  At that point in time, I would have said Suzi Q represented to me the most powerful "feminist" figure:))

Not long after, at 14-15 or so, I discovered Jo Clayton's Diadem series of novels,  - with the introduction of Aleytys who walks and fights and struggles her way across half a planet, aged 15 and pregnant. With her maturation into an adult, and becoming a powerful immortal with very human emotions and concerns, completely 'blowing my mind away':)).  It amuses me now, as it wasn't until many years later when I had read books pertaining to Goddess religions, fact and fiction, that I realised the Goddess symbolism of all four main characters - with Aleytys representing the "Mother" figure of the Goddess, and the young Shadith imprisoned in the Diadem as a young maiden, and sole survivor, of her dead, dancing, artistic culture as the "Virgin" figure, and the aged, wise and queenly Haskari as the "Crone" image.  And, the mercenary male warrior figure imprisoned in the Diadem in his prime, Q, with his humour and true friendship of all the women, as an independent equal,  as the 'Consort' figure to the 3-faces of the Goddess:)).  All the women retained power completely independent of him, and other men, even indeed of each other - yet their bonds of friendship, and alliance of their individual strengths compensating for each other's weaknesses, during times of necessity remained strong throughout. Nonetheless, the Diadem novels, are considered not much more than well-written galactic space-opera.  However, these were the FIRST powerful, strong women characters I had ever "met" in my reading, and they stay with me still.

Mists of Avalon, I suspect was/is most popular with younger or less-experienced readers, the first time they had been exposed to well-drawn images of strong, powerful women of any kind, and being a departure from the general reading material available, could very well be seen as a book 'that changes lives'. Morgaine and the other women characters would stick in their minds. For older readers of Mists however, many of whom could say,  "been there, done that, bought that T-shirt",  the book could be perceived differently, as just a soap-opera, a best-seller pulp fiction block-buster novel, more entertaining and better-written than most perhaps, but still not great literature, feminist or otherwise. This may also account, for several readers commenting  how powerfully the book affected them when first they read it, but on second reading their perception changed.

As for feminist definition, perhaps its more to do with "political " feminism. For example, Margaret Thatcher ( maybe, not the best example) could very well be seen as an icon of a strong, "powerful" woman, and may very well be a 'role model'  and admired by many women. Yet,  because of her right-wing politics, many feminists would deny her. I saw the women characters in Mists as right-wing, and because my "political feminism" leans toward the left-wing, I found it difficult to see most of the Mists women characters as anything other than right-wing men, who happened to have a different set of genitals.

As for the Arthurian legends, and the history of that period, I would recommend readers take a look at Robert Graves scholarly book - "The White Goddess". A daunting book of life-long and painstaking research on Celtic, Welsh, Greek and Hebrew traditions of myth and legend, and is heavy going for any reader. Nonetheless, it is well worth the effort:))

One interesting quote:

" The Norman-French troveres and Malory in his Morte d'Arthur who collected and collated their Arthurian romances had no knowledge of, or even interest in, the historical or religious meaning of the myths they handled - myths obtained from what was after all, a conquered nation, and history is written by the winners. They felt themselves entirely free to improve the narrative in accordance with their new gospel of chivalry inherited from the literary tradition of early medieval Provence - hence they broke up the old mythic patterns of Celtish lore, and taking liberties of every sort,  that the Welsh minstrels in their strict oral tradition would never have dared to take."
 

Julieanne
 
  --------------4A3739EFBDBF9742CF37A683-- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 05:54:34 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Women innn Avalon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII The one book I read which treated Guinevere, Morgaine, and Morgause with respect, each for being what she is, is an obscure murder mystery by Phyllis Ann Karr called IDylls of the Queen. It's based on an incident in Mallory in which Guinevere is, on very flimsy evidence, accused of murder by an irate knight (literally irate: guess his nationality!). Sir Kay is the detective; Mordred is his Watson; and the mystery of who killed Sir Lamorak is cleared up, though it had to be hushed up. Mass market paperback; I've read it to shreds. Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 05:57:50 -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: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 7 Jul 1998, Mary-Ellen Maynard wrote: > 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. > Same difference. I have a friend who calls her the Wicked Witch of the West. (The Wicked Witch of the Southwest "All right, my pretty, just for that there'll be no green chili on your enchiladas!")> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 08:51:31 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: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1998 to 6 Jul 1998 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I sent the following response to asario.sff.com (minus some comments on my affection for the court of Versailles & Dumas's Vicomte de Bragellone): There were also many things about the book I liked; but what I have written about on the list did not refer to the book. And again, what I have written about on the list did not refer to the book. I did not object to McIntyre's use of the convent in the book; I have to say, it didn't even stick in my mind. What I did deeply object to, as I have said, was a reader's simplistic deduction about the convent in reality, based on a work of fiction (with its own axe to grind). This did not strike me as a carefully thought-out analysis, but just a personal, half-baked prejudice bolstered by a minor plot element in one book she read. My comment that this was a Romantic literary convention was not meant to denigrate the book in which this convention was employed, as I have also said. I also deeply regret saying that the reader's deduction was "crap" ..., particularly when I saw it repeated over and over, excerpted in replies; I have also apologized for this. But enough! The stereotypes you were reinforcing (even if highly specific to Lucien, and within an argument for luring males to the trough) are still offensive. Were still flabbergasting to me. Men constantly, over and over again, in every outlet of mass media, have their poor fragile egos reinforced by seeing the average, the homely, the less-than-perfect, the grotesque, the aged, the offensive man Get the Girl. The beautiful, intelligent Girl. This is what the post I excerpted was referring to. Marina's post had nothing to do with Lucien but with that exact cliche. I clearly said, again, that the response had nothing to do with Lucien's character, just with the promulgation of an invidious cliche, whatever the motivation. The lack of "tact" was rooted in utter exasperation. As to my lack of tact: a little jab can on occasion elicit an interesting response. And I am not alone in expressing outrage at certain ideas. You have eloquently expressed the tactics and desirability of seducing men to feminist writing. I sincerely don't give a damn whether they read it or not. Good cop, bad cop? Two points of view, anyway. I received the response: >>I'm afraid I just don't find your arguments well thought out. Sorry. -- Catherine You can judge for yourself. I apologize again if anyone is sincerely offended, but I can't do anything about misinterpretations of what I've said or arguments I haven't made. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 09:57:17 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: N Clowder Subject: BDG: Mists of Avalon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I am about a third of the way through MOA. I read it many years ago and loved it. Thanks to those of you who have reminded me what it was like to read this book for the first time. I remember being caught up by the characters, the romance, but most of all by the depiction of a goddess-centered, woman-centered religion. I agree that it was quite a valuable achievement for MZB to bring this subject area into the mainstream. I also remember attempting to re-read the book and being unable to get through it. I feel it is too long. If MZB weren't such a good writer, it would be a disaster. It's a tribute to her that she keeps me reading when, plot-wise, there really isn't a thing going on for paragraphs on end. If you are reading for escape, if the world of this book is a place you want to stay as long as possible, then it's not too long at all. But at this stage in my life, I have a better vision of a world inhabited by strong women who worship a goddess, and MOA no longer serves me as a haven from the contemporary world. The other thing that stopped me dead in my tracks on the last attempted re-read was Gwenhwyfar. I couldn't STAND her - so much so that I put the book down. I haven't encountered her yet on this re-read, but my teeth are clenched already in anticipation. Pertaining to recent discussions on the list concerning liaisons between older men/younger women, ugly men/desirable women, I thought MZB gave a very sensitive portrayal of Igraine's relationship with Gorlois. Igraine's vacillation between loathing and gratitude seemed very realistic to me. She was trying so hard to convince herself that her lot in life was bearable, to have the "proper" feelings. Then Gorlois would do something that she couldn't overlook and her feelings of frustration and loathing would overwhelm her. I've been there. In fact, I'm often still there - except that my idea of what constitutes "proper" feeling has changed! I also thought MZB did a good job of depicting Igraine's maturity/immaturity - the responsibilities thrust upon her at an early age (she married Gorlois at 15, and is only 19 when the book opens, if I remember correctly) - contrasted with her girlish whims, desires, and, not least of all, the discovery of her sexuality as desire rather than duty. Is it a feminist book? I was toying with the definition of feminism as anything written with an awareness of the sexual politics involved. In this sense, yes. This definition sidesteps the issue of whether a book presents a desirable feminist outcome, and allows us to speak of feminists writing works that do nothing beyond depicting, accurately, situations which are expressive of the patriarchal mentality. On the other hand, recently I heard someone use the term "masculinist" with reference to literature, and I knew immediately what this meant (for me) and felt like a big hole in my vocabulary and suddenly been filled, a hole I hadn't realized was there. In this sense, feminist and masculinist would refer to literature which advances a particular agenda. It's much harder to argue for MOA as advancing a feminist agenda, though I think some of the posts on the lists have made good points in this regard. One more thing - I was astonished on this re-read that a book that is so hostile towards Christianity could have been on a best-seller list in this country. Particularly in the opening, there was some really harsh stuff. It makes me think that many of those readers who contributed to making MOA a best-seller were reading it truly as fantasy, as not-real and hence of no "real" import, and that those readers perceived the goddess-worshippers in the book (all of 'em) as the bad guys who got their due in the end. What do you think folks - is it possible to read MOA this way? It may or may not be a feminist book to those of us subscribing to a feminist list, but is it possible to read MOA and remain indifferent/unaware of the feminist issues raised? How does tying the issue of feminism to the worship of a goddess affect the message of the book, the viability of the book...dang, if I had more time, I'd figure out how to ask that question better. Enough! Thanks everyone for your posts. I'm new, and enjoying the discussion very much. Nell ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 13:32:28 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: ME Hunter Subject: Re: BDG: Mists of Avalon In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19980708145717.00918040@mail.utexas.edu> (message from N Clowder on Wed, 8 Jul 1998 09:57:17 -0500) Nell wrote: >The other thing that stopped me dead in my tracks on the last attempted >re-read was Gwenhwyfar. I couldn't STAND her - so much so that I put the >book down. I haven't encountered her yet on this re-read, but my teeth are >clenched already in anticipation. Amen! I have *never* found a portrayal of the Guinevere character that I liked. This once made her more human, provided some motivations for her behavior, at least, but she remains completely unlikeable to me. There were so many easy solutions, if only she hadn't been so busy finding excuses and wallowing in misery and self-pity. Ugh. I've always seen her as the "bad guy" in the Arthurian legends. I really love MOA. Sure it has flaws, but I love the rich detail and somehow even the lovelorn moaning has a weight and poetry it generally lacks in the soap operas people have compared it to. The one "problem" I really have with the book is that having read it, I find it impossible to get through other versions of the Arthurian legends (do NOT get me started on Lawhead!) because they so lack the character development of MOA that I find myself thinking "but that's not how it happened!" (I'm fully aware MOA is not "how it happened" either, but it just seems so plausible to me in many ways that other versions never achieve.) Have other people read the companion volumes _The Forest House_ and _Lady of the Lake_? I was really disappointed in them and found them dreadfully simplistic in comparison. E. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:07:09 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Phoebe Wray Subject: Re: BDG: Mists of Avalon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/8/98 6:20:13 PM, E wrote: <> Only one I've ever liked was Vanessa Redgrave's performance in Camelot... phoebe Phoebe Wray ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:34:54 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Fed up (was Moon and Sun) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thrice I have had to endure a public post in which someone excuses away blatant rudeness by blaming my ignorant thinking. Ignorant I am, but I know that brilliance proclaimed from the elevated position of my back is tarnished indeed. Continued and repeated ridicule and condescension woven amidst proffered apology and self-effacement does not fool this old crone. "The masters tools will never dismantle the masters house" A. Lorde ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:27:48 -0400 Reply-To: anneh@eecs.mit.edu Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anne Hunter Subject: Delurking to talk about Gwynhwyfar and Morgaine I've been lurking for several months since my youngest sister recommended I join this list. She's been on it for some time, I believe. First, my comments: Does it seem to others that MZB intended to portray Gwynhwyfar as suffering from a panic disorder including agoraphobia? I have friends who've suffered from anxiety attacks, and it sounds like that's what Gwyn has. She recalls at one point that as a child she enjoyed playing outside, when she was taken to visit the ruins at Camelot, but knows that now she would just panic. It seems as if the problem may have started from her time at the convent, and perhaps even from the incident when she met Lancelot and Morgaine, or else from the sense of guilt that the priests instilled. So she's not just a pale "girly girl", all prim and pious -- she's a deeply troubled person. I'm not sure why MZB chose to show her this way. I haven't quite finished rereading the book, so perhaps this is made more of later. But it seemed odd that we were mentioning her personality without acknowledging what seems to me to be her most notable characteristic. On Igraine, whose characterization I otherwise enjoyed, I couldn't understand her reported conversion to Christianity when she married Uther, whom we were told was not strongly on the Christian side. It seemed that the Goddess religion had brought her happiness, but then she turned away from it. In her deathscene she recanted a bit, I think. Second, about me: I've been reading science fiction since I was a child, and I've been a feminist since my teens, when the second wave started. I read all kinds of science fiction, and most of my favorite writers are women. I'm not generally wild about fantasy, as there seems to be an amazing amount of derivative, imitative stuff out there. It's not at all unrelated to my love of SF that I majored in philosophy and history in college. I don't know if I would have majored in Women's Studies if it had existed, but I'm sure I would have taken classes. I'm a p.k. (preacher's kid) of the rebellious, atheistic type, nevertheless obsessed with religions. I'm a zenophiliac; attracted to, not afraid of, the exotic and different. The only spark of spirituality I retain is a deep appreciation for nature. In a lot of parallel universes I'm a writer, but in this one I work at MIT, where I run our largest academic programs, the undergrad and combined bachelors/masters programs in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. This involves too much paper and database work, but is mostly email, and counseling students, of whom I have roughly 1,375, and almost 100 faculty advisors. Although I'm happy to have a job that uses my heart as much as my head, I do get 'way peopled out, and find email a relatively tranquil alternative. Apart from being a workaholic, I swim every day, love to travel, enjoy renting foreign and indie movies, and love food far too much. For over 20 years I've been happily in a relationship with a wonderful gentle man, with whom I live in our luxury condo on the Charles. If I believed in previous lives I'd think I'd done something pretty wonderful in my last one. I try not to be smug or scared that I'll have to pay for it all later. Anne ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:22:21 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: BDG MOA Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit It's strange how the same scene can effect people so differently. The se^? duction and capture of Kevin by Nimue is one of my favorite stories in th^? e book. Any author could have written of the ease with which a beautiful^? woman could seduce an ugly man and then betray him. But Bradley showed ^? the power of sex by having the seduction work as well on Nimue as on Kevi^? n. Sex as a fundamental expression of nature is shown to be very strong,^? even holy in this book producing a great tie between the partners. This^? is why a positive view of sexuality is a part of goddess honoring spiri^? tuality. Contrast that idea with the expression of sex in the movie Kids^? in which intercourse involves as much emotion as washing your face. The^? spirituality of sex is one of the major factors making it a strong human^? drive. ^? Joyce Jones ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N^? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:57:33 -0400 Reply-To: asaro@sff.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Catherine Asaro Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 6 Jul 1998 to 7 Jul 1998 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kathleen, are you sure it is the people on this digest that you are really angry at? We aren't your enemies. In fact, many of us share your views on stereotypes and imbalanced representations of women in our culture. My first impulse, when several friends sent me a copy of your last post, was to put up the lengthy portions of your letter to me that you deleted when you posted it to the listserve. After I stopped feeling hurt, I realized I wouldn't do it, in part because of the copyright questions I mention below. But even without that, I still would have decided against it, one reason being because I think you were wise not to post some of your comments in public, but also because my impression is that your anger isn't really directed at me. I get the sense that someone or something hurt you, and for some reason you've focused your anger about it on me and some of the other posters. I'm not sure why you are angry, particularly in a case like this, when we are exactly the people you could be getting support from. In the past decades, many of us went through a lot to open new doors for women. I won't deny that it hurts to have someone who knows nothing about me or the battles I've fought claim that I am supporting the very injustices I have worked for most of my life to set right. However, I also realize that those same injustices can create anger, and part of the women's movement is about women supporting each other in times of need. And yes, it is true that I do speak of moderation, and women and men working together to make a better world for all of us. Idealistic? Well, perhaps. But still my ideals. Perhaps there has been more discussion on this; since I get the digest, which hasn't come out yet, I only know of the one post, so I can't comment on anything else. One note, however; although the legal situation with copyrights and the web is still in the process of being hammered out by the legal community, the present consensus in regards to private email is that it is copyrighted in the name of the person who sent it. Posting to a listserve, particularly one that is archived, is generally considered publication. So the publication of private email in a public forum without the consent of the writer may be illegal. Best regards Catherine Asaro ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:41:44 -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 MOA -- Kevin and Nimue In-Reply-To: <19980708212222.29238.qmail@www0a.netaddress.usa.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit You might be right, Joyce, but I still think the idea of sacrificing a 14-year-old girl's sexuality -- and in fact her life -- for the sake of some political revenge (and after all that talk how more humane and non-violent was Avalon comparing to Christianity) was extremely disgusting. I just imagined myself in Nimue's place, and I can say that I'd have a few choice words for Morgaine or anyone else who'd order me to do this for the sake of some "higher goal". This was what I did not like about the Avalon the way it's portrayed in this book the most. It bothered me that its priestesses -- both Vivian and Morgaine -- seemed to care very little about anyone's lives or feelings. Power is a very nice thing, but the price one os willing to pay for it should have some limits. And the more I think about it, the more I feel that the rulers of Avalon brought their fall on themselves. Which was probably better for everyone, anyway. I would hate to see that people who treat others like worthless pawns would prevail. Maybe the main thing that grosses me out about Nimue-Kevin affair is that once again, there is a beautiful young girl throwing her life away for some ugly old traitor, and moreover, she does it by the order of _other women_. And that it's presented as something heroic. This might be a stretch, but I also felt that the main reason Morgaine send Nimue to do this was to get rid of her only possible rival for the throne of High Priestess. The same as Vivian much earlier in the book was wondering whether she had thrown Igraine into the marriage to Gorlois siply to send away her little sister who was a lot prettier that she was (I'm not making this up -- it's in the book). Margause was prettier too, besides Vivian could not control her, so out she went as well. The same as Vivian later put Morgaine to bed with her brother, without telling either of them and knowing perfectly well that something like that can make anyone's head cave in, Christian or not. The later "explanation" that Morgaine was intended to be the "behind-the-throne-counsel" to Arthur because they had sex seems kind of cheesy to me. Because back when it happened, Vivian did not even want either of them to know who they slept with, they only discovered it by accident. So how their affair would make some kind of a "sacred tie" between them if they would not even know who they slept with? I think, Vivian simply wanted to destroy Morgaine and royally mess up Arthur's head in the prosess, so she could totally control them. The first part of the plan worked pretty well, but it hardly did any good to anyone. Sometimes, it seemed that women in this book were just as hateful to each other as they are in the most traditional novels. And just like in those stories about "hateful old women", they seem to have a particular knack on destroying the ones who depends on them... I think it's sad that the strong female characters in the book were expressing their strength like this. No matter what anyone says, I don't think that sacrificing the ones who love you makes one a strong woman. It just makes one an asshole, regardless of gender, IMHO. In regards to the Goddess honoring spirituality through sex, it seems to me that Avalon traditions did not go that far from the patriarchial point of view. There are many places in the novel when Vivian condemns Margause's "promiscuity" by pointing out, that she, Vivane, only had sex when she had to -- for a "sacred marriage", or by a Beltane fire, or to secure a political alliance. She did not go around sleeping with people she liked, like Margause did, just for fun. So basically, it was the same old idea of "as long as you don't enjoy it, it's not a sin". How was it better than the Christian obsession with marriage? It simply means instead of sleeping with one person you do not choose, you have to do it with many that you may not even like. Just another variation of "sex as a social duty", IMHO. I think it's better when sex is like washing one's face than when it becomes some kind of currency for a higher cause, which ruins you life on the top of that. But that's just my opinion. Marina On Wed, 8 Jul 1998, Joyce Jones wrote: > It's strange how the same scene can effect people so differently. The > se^? > duction and capture of Kevin by Nimue is one of my favorite stories in > th^? > e book. Any author could have written of the ease with which a > beautiful^? > woman could seduce an ugly man and then betray him. But Bradley > showed ^? > the power of sex by having the seduction work as well on Nimue as on > Kevi^? > n. Sex as a fundamental expression of nature is shown to be very > strong,^? > even holy in this book producing a great tie between the partners. > This^? > is why a positive view of sexuality is a part of goddess honoring > spiri^? > tuality. Contrast that idea with the expression of sex in the movie > Kids^? > in which intercourse involves as much emotion as washing your face. > The^? > spirituality of sex is one of the major factors making it a strong > human^? > drive. ^? > > Joyce Jones > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N^? > http://members.aol.com/Lotaryn/index.html "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society is selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:13:23 -0700 Reply-To: Kieth Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kieth Subject: Re: Female/male attractiveness (was Moon and Sun) In-Reply-To: <007401bdaaa7$7cb8fb40$20ae2499@default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hello, all, I have to agree with Kathleen Friell's remarks about the quote from the Moon and the Sun. I don't know how many fairy tales I've read, movies I've seen, male friends who've complained about their datelessness, that assumed every man had a right to want a beautiful woman to love him for himself alone. The inequity behind this idea is never examined, much less questioned. I think it has a lot to do with who has the power to define whom. If you hog the microphone, you can define yourself as subject in the subject/object duality that can be part of any human relationship and make the other person always and only an object - a thing that isn't valued by its own internal standards, the way a subject is, but by the standards imposed on it according to the use a subject has for it. An object by definition cannot define a subject. Men define women's most important quality as desirability, and that desirability is defined by transitory, external characteristics that women have no control over. Men consider attractiveness to women to be irrelevant to a man's value as a human being, but still expect that attractiveness to be contigent on human qualities such as integrity, courage, creativity, etc - qualities humans aren't born with so much as achieve. Can you imagine waiting at a supermarket line, and seeing face after insipid interchangable young male face on the covers of magazines devoted to helping men achieve that interchangable youthfullness, while the only women shown were middle-aged and older, on the covers of news magazines, as policy makers? The above is, of course, not true of every man, but I think it is true of Western, and particularly U.S. culture as a whole. And I have to say that I really liked _The Moon and the Sun_. One novel can't interrogate every aspect of a culture, and this disparity is so imbedded in my own background that I found the ending comforting and romantic. Besides, Lucien was described as having a beautiful face and hands, and the heroine seemed to be loved as much for her honesty and courage as for her looks. But I do have to agree with Kathleen Friell's objection to the idea behind the quote about the novel. The Other Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 01:59:48 -0400 Reply-To: asaro@sff.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Catherine Asaro Subject: MML essay MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After pondering for a while, I've decided to post an excerpt from an essay written by a member of the listserv that relates to a discusison we had a few months ago. Normally I wouldn't post something that refers to my own work, but I have been disconcerted by the idea expressed here that I am unaware, indeed even supporting, of some of the very stereotypes I've spoken about as needing to be changed. I've known myself to put my foot down my throat and tickle my tonsils with my toes, so I hesitated to speak up. Besides, I very much understand the anger expressed over the imbalance in much of our literature and media with regards to the portrayal of male and female love, sexuality, and relationships. But I have to confess, it does bother me to have my own views on the subject so mistaken, particularly in this of all areas. Well anyway, let me give this a try (if my cat would quit walking across the keyboard). One aspect of this subject I've spoken about at cons is the "male gaze" and the "female gaze." It is common to find the "male gaze" in literature extolling female beauty, sexuality, and so on in a way that appeals to men, but the "female gaze" extolling male desirability is looked on with distrust, to say the least, except in the romance genre, where it is celebrated. The excerpt below comes from an essay on my book THE LAST HAWK that appeared in THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF SCIENCE FICTION. The author makes some fascinating points about how a man feels when he encounters a woman's perspective on sex and love. I thought it took guts for him to analyze his own reaction the way that he did. I should note here that here since the essay has come out, a number of readers have contacted me to ask about it. Because the author noted that he had read this listserv and interviewed me, it gives an impression that I agree with certain points made in the essay that I don't actually agree on, and that the agreement took place on this listserv, which it didn't. So before I give the excerpt, I will remark on a few of those points. However, I do want to make it clear that I much appreciated the author (Mike Levy) interviewing me and that I thoroughly enjoyed talking to him about it. The characters in HAWK don't want their conquerors on their planet because they don't like being conquered, not because they wish to hide being a matriarchy. They are quite happy with their form of government, and in fact, many of them assume their conquerors also have that form (after all, from their point of view, how else would you do it?). Another point germane to the present discussion is the description of both the male lead and his first wife as drop-dead gorgeous. I specifically didn't make the woman gorgeous for exactly the reasons discussed here. She is described as attractive in a diginified way, a powerful ruler in her prime, approaching fifty. The man (Kelric) is much younger, and he =is= drop-dead gorgeous (a fact that has caused a bit of grumbling from some male reviewers ). One point of that story, in fact, was to reverse the "trophy-wife" stereotype discussed here, and in doing so provide commentary on it (oh heck, I admit it, reversing the roles was fun too ). Also, I didn't deliberately set out to use or violate romance conventions in any of my books. When I first started writing, I had never read a romance novel, so at first I didn't understand why the word "romance" kept cropping up in relation to my sf, which is hard-as-nails space adventure, particularly the first two books. When all the commotion started about how my books broke the rules by mixing "women's" and "men's" fiction, I started to read romance novels, to see what the to-do was about. I realized then that I was writing with a perspective that values a woman's take on life and love in a way that is rarely found in literature, except romance, precisely for the reasons discussed here in the past few days. Romance readers tell me they don't consider HAWK romance, but that it does, through the role reversal, make explicit the challenge in romance to the idea that the male perspective in literature is the one with value. Anyway, those are some of the points most germane to this listserv. In any case, Michael wrote an intriguing essay, which I excerpt here: ------- >From THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF SCIENCE FICTION, from the essay by Michael M. Levy on THE LAST HAWK, by Catherine Asaro. Copyright 1998 Michael M. Levy. ... In her discussion of romantic fiction on the feminist SF listserv mentioned above, Catherine Asaro wrote "By their very nature, romance novels question the cultural view and imperatives [of society] in a major way. Romance loves female sexuality. It challenges so many assumptions about women, sex, and men that it would take an entire essay to discuss them." By reversing the sexual roles on Coba, Asaro, I believe, is similarly challenging our preconceptions. ... As I read THE LAST HAWK, I found the novel making me uncomfortable, particularly its sex scenes. Asaro says that several other male readers of the book have had a similar reaction and she asked me why I felt this way. Her question, of course, forced me to analyze my gut-level reaction. In part, as Asaro herself suggests, I think it's a matter of passion. Her characters are intensely passionate, something science fiction characters are not notable for, and they thus violate SF genre expectations. After considering the matter further, however, I think that it has something to do with Kelric's (and one other male character's) enforced sexual passivity, their being the object of desire rather than the ones actively doing the desiring, and particularly their having little choice as to when they will participate in sexual encounters. In the real world, of course, I expect that most men enjoy being done to rather than doing on occasion, but it's still disconcerting to see such a situation portrayed so extensively. Men are so used to seeing themselves as in control, as the choosers, rather than the chosen, as the ones actively making love rather than passively having love made to them. A man can believe fully on an intellectual level in equality between the sexes, but still, I think, be disconcerted on a gut level when a woman takes the lead in a sexual encounter. I want to emphasize that this is not an adverse criticism of THE LAST HAWK--in fact, it's just the reverse. I know from long experience that when a book makes me uncomfortable, it's probably stepping on some deeply buried assumption, something that I need to take a look at. Although I've read other role-reversal SF novels in the past, this is the first one, I believe, that has ever worked so hard at getting to the center of things, to those deep-seated sexual matters that people (or straight men at least) rarely want to consider too closely. Perhaps this ties into a basic reason why so few men are interested in reading romance fiction and, in fact, often feel the need to ridicule it. Although such books seem to be, in Asaro's words "innocuously clothed in the garb of tradition," on a very basic level they imply an intense disagreement with the dominant male viewpoint of the world. And this may be doubly true of THE LAST HAWK, combining as it does not only the conventions of the romance novel, but also those of that most traditional of all science-fiction sub-genres, the space opera. My God! What have we got here? A cybernetically-enhanced, genius-level superhero who, although seemingly capable of giving Kimball Kinnison or Arnold Schwarzenegger a run for their money, ends up spending most of his time half-naked in a harem, playing dice. What a hoot! Speaking of male attitudes towards the romance, Asaro notes that "the establishment pooh-poohs `women's literature' as fluff, while the fluff goes on quietly breaking all the rules." I think that it's safe to say that Catherine Asaro is doing much the same thing in her science fiction. ======= That's it! Best regards Catherine Asaro http://www.sff.net/people/asaro/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 01:55:49 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: Female/male attractiveness (was Moon and Sun) Comments: cc: "Vonda N. McIntyre" , asaro@sff.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For the record: - women all over the world DO chose men who have power, money, status, etc despite the fact that they me be horrendously unattractive/undesirable. - men all over the world ASSUME that the world is here to please them to include them getting their every wish in a female partner and some do. - every corollary of both of these truths is also true. - these truths and corollaries are portrayed in all media forms. - these truths, corollaries and the portrayal of such angers a great many women (and some men as well I suspect). - mailing lists, usenet, etc are convenient places to blow off steam about these truths. None of this justifies cherrypicking and wholesale trashing of McIntyres book. Especially trashing that is by way of items gleaned from third party commentary on the text posted in good faith to this list for our thoughtful consideration. The book Moon and Sun deserves thorough reading and patient analysis for the compassion with which it examines human life and its frailties. No one writing today has a body of work that is more extensive, thorough, and fully successful in portraying realistic, humane, and equitable relationships between men and women in all possible variations then Vonda McIntyre. Why oh why do we continue to do the greatest damage to our most dedicated sisters? And for the sake of the list members who are not interested, please respond to me privately if my comments have displeased in any way. donna donnaneely@earthlink.net ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 07:58:04 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Phoebe Wray Subject: Re: Female/male attractiveness (was Moon and Sun) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit What an image! Hadn't thought of that! The "Other Kathleen" wrote... >>Can you imagine waiting at a supermarket line, and seeing face after insipid interchangable young male face on the covers of magazines devoted to helping men achieve that interchangable youthfullness, while the only women shown were middle-aged and older, on the covers of news magazines, as policy makers? wow. phoebe ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 09:57:15 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jim Hollomon Subject: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit My son is now 12, and is an inveterate reader. He's like a _Little_Man_Tate_. He spontaneously began reading road signs to us when he had just turned two. He hasn't quit reading since. By the time he was eight, he could curl up with a user's manual for a new piece of computer software, read the thing in an afternoon, and from that moment on know how to run the program. That's something I can't do or even conceive of doing. So he's a pretty good reader with great comprehension and retention. For fun, he loves to read Sci-Fi, mainly Star Trek novels and Star Wars. He has also collected and read the 11 book C.A.D.S. series about a mechanized, futuristic war dystopia. Ditto everything written by J. R. R. Tolkein. Before he grows so old he's totally set in his ways, I'd like to introduce him to some stories that will stimulate him to think about feminist issues, about unreasonable expectations in our society, and the like. If anyone has some good suggestions--stories that are both thought provoking and engaging enough to hold a preteen's interest--please pass them on. Thanks Jim Hollomon ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 10:07:26 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: OT: 2 art events Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Two things, both of feminist interest, 1 sf-related: This week at the Museum of Modern Art, an exhibition on Yayoi Kusama (Kusama Yayoi in Japan): Kusama is a feminist artist (although there's been a certain amount of debate on that). She lived in NYC in the sixties-seventies and produced very early performance art and installations; she's produced art in a variety of media to the present. Much of her work is rooted in her self- admitted insanity (she currently resides in a mental institution in Tokyo, maintaining her studio and art-world contacts). One of her interesting series involves stuffed phallic shapes of fabric obsessively covering objects including an armchair, rowboat, ladder, high-heels (not sure yet what's in the show). She's here in NY for the opening; an interview with her (with my bus. partner Reiko Tomii as interpreter) will be aired over NPR sometime in the next couple of days. And, of course, there's more info on MOMA's web page (www.moma.org, I think). The second is the publication this month (after 11 years!) of a major work by Linda Dalrymple Henderson: Duchamp in Context: Science and Technology in the Large Glass and Related Works (Princeton University Press). Okay, may sound deadly, but it's glorious reading, especially if you have any interest in spiritualism, the occult, turn of the century technology and popular culture, charicterization of sexual roles or sexual interaction, or early sf--- they all tie in to elements of the Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (the Large Glass) and Duchamp's great production of notes and drawings for it. This work, the mechanical (sexual, chemical, electrical, telepathic...) interaction of the Bachelors and the Bride, is pure science fiction in art. It's expensive for the private pocket, but it should hit University & other libraries-- if it sounds at all interesting, give it a try. There's info on the Glass and Duchamp all over the internet, but one page is Tony Smith's: http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/Duch.html If you want to see a picture of the Large Glass, there's one at: http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/LGL.gif Enjoy. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 07:12:33 +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: scattershot stray thoughts Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" RE: Positive protrayals of Guinevere in her many spellings/incarnations. THE CHILD QUEEN from Del REy came out a few years ago and I thought it was a good read of G's life BEFORE Arthur. Did not read the sequel, THE HIGH QUEEN, because I figured, "been there, done that..." RE: MOA as a feminist novel/not. If not, is it really a good text to have in a number of feminist lit classes? At least it was back in my day... things may have moved on. Does it serve as some kind of "transition" novel for the younger/less-well-read reader, who may embrace the positive aspects as many here have spoken of without being challenged by something more distinctly feminist in agenda? RE: Jo Clayton. I miss her terribly. Recommend she be read. Warning: her brain seems to operate in trilogy mode, but they are most often three novel which make up a story, rather than one story in three books, if that distinction is clear... 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, 9 Jul 1998 08:49:22 -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 -- Gwen and ugly men In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 08 Jul 98 19:41:44 CDT." >I have *never* found a portrayal of the Guinevere character that I >liked. Jane Yolen has a collection of short stories entitled _Merlin's Booke_, about what you 'd expect, featuring a Guenevere who dresses as a boy, comes to court to challenge the man who dishonored her sister, and tricks the sword out of the stone and sticks a different one in before Arthur gets to it. Ugly men getting the beautiful woman -- there is a difference between an author saying to herself, "Hmm, how can I make this basically feminist novel also appeal to non-feminist men, oh, I'll give the girl to this ugly guy"; and looking at a book and saying, "Hey, non-feminist men might read this novel and get into it enough that they start to think about the feminist issues too." In the same way that Kmfriello said that her objection wasn't to Lucien's character in particular, it seems a misrepresentation to take Catherine's statement as simply promoting a sop to men's pride. Your mileage may vary. Kmfriello said that she doesn't care whether men read feminist SF or, if I extrapolate correctly, get into feminism at all. But I went to a heavily male school and now work in a field that is overwhelmingly male, and I can't possibly afford to reject all the non-feminists around me. There wouldn't be enough people left. Given that, I'd rather make an effort to convert 'em. Nor does that have to mean compromising my feminism. jessie ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 09:31:08 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Subject: Re: MML essay In-Reply-To: <35A45BE3.7FBE@sff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 01:59 AM 7/9/98 -0400, you wrote: >After pondering for a while, I've decided to post an excerpt from an >essay written by a member of the listserv that relates to a discusison >we had a few months ago. Catherine, I was pleased to see you post Michael's essay to the list. I really enjoyed reading it in the NYRSF, especially after reading your posts to this list on the subject. I think he did a nice job writing it and since our discussion inspired it, the group should get a chance to read it. Thanks! Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:11:45 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: * * Subject: Re: Female/male attractiveness (was Moon and Sun) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit They had the results of a rather interesting poll on a television program the other day(sorry, can't remember which show it was) where they asked people if they thought they were better than average looking. Something like 60% of the men, and only 20% of the women, said "yes". I was a little surprised actually, as I thought the percentage of men would be higher and the percentage of women lower. --Marie ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:30:56 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: Female/male attractiveness (was Moon and Sun) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On the discussion whether it is good or bad to cater to male egos by inserting "conventional" features (like, beautiful women falling for pathetic ugly losers) into feminist novels, my opinion is the following: I do believe that men should be included into the equal-rights society feminists are trying to build. For those of us who are heterosexual, including myself, a world without guys won't be that great. So we've gotta keep them, at least for one thing. Some of them might even be good for more than that. Since they (males) are going to be around, it will be probably in everyone's interest that they won't be too alienated (so it will be a truly equal society, not a female dominance instead of the male one). Which means that men and their feelings should be respected as much as everyone else's. However, there is a difference between _respect_ and _catering to one's ego_. I do not believe that the only way to make men feel "comfortable" is to present them with a "loser getting the girl" situation. After all, not all of them associate themselves with losers (although lots of them really do, which frustrates me beyond belief. The worst part about it is the fact that when a guy thinks he is worthless, he thinks that if you love him, you must be worthless, too. Which I have not figured out yet how to deal with). Moreover, perpetuating this kind of "woman as a gift item / consolation prize" attitude does not do men any good, either. I think one would only benefit from learning that relationship can be between equals, and that if one wants a great woman, he might want to evolve from being a loser for starters. And that men do not have to have a young pretty girl as a proof of status, since there can be great women of all ages, plus the ones of the same generation might see them as more than an upleasant supplement to the high social position and the fat bank account. I agree with Catherine that it's important for women to be integrated in the big world instead of creating a little ghetto one "for women only". After all, a big part of the reason why lots of women do not accept feminism is because they think it means being "against men". Which can be too much of a price if one is not homosexual. There might also be things in the "men's" world that women do not want to give up. Besides, separate is never equal, as the history proves again and again. However, making peace with men does not have to mean luring them into accepting feminism through dressing it up into "gentle pretty nice woman" clothes. It's the same as hoping to do away with segregation by trying to prove to bigots that people of other races are not gonna hurt them just by sitting in the front of the bus. I think that the whole point of feminism is to achieve acceptance of women the way they are. And those men who can only accept a woman if she is "non-threatening" are not really worth fighting for. After all, they need us as much as we need them. If we don't keep reinforcing the "good woman = nice, pretty woman" stereotypes ourselves, they'll have to be happy with whatever they can get. Mind you, I do not have anything against Vonda McIntire's novel. I have not even read it yet. But I agree that saying that "having a non-threatening female character in it will help getting through to men" (or whatever was the exact quote) was hardly a compliment. After all, if getting through to men _at any cost_ was that important, why not make pro-feminist porn movies, with women shouting equal-rights slogans while scratching someone's back? I bet that would attract attention of the most anti-feminist men. And it would work, too, by getting those slogans into their subconsiousness and associating them with the most pleasant sensations. Like Pavlov's dogs, you know. Next thing you see, all those fraternity / construction worker / government official types will be mumbling "equal pay and legal abortions" and "stop sexual harrassment" in their sleep. As I want to repeat, all this semi-flame war discussion was not about Vonda's book but about the idea accidentally presented in someone's comment on it. And by the way, I think that Catherine and Kathleen are pretty much saying the same thing from different angles, so they could as well stop bashing each other. We _don't_ have to always agree just because we all are feminists -- this is not Southern Baptist church, or something else with the One Possible Truth. But when both people are right, agreement can make sense. Marina P.S. I still stand by my opinion that power makes old men not attractive but obnoxious. "Young women are attracted to rich/powerful old men" is a myth (perpetuated by the older men, I suspect), because it implies "_all_ young women". Maybe there are young women who are, but they are not the majority. Not all of us have the Monica Lewinsky's yucky preferences, believe it or not. That is simply a deviation, just like the Aedipus's complex for guys. http://members.aol.com/Lotaryn/index.html "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society is selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 01:21:30 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jan Bandrofchak Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I'd suggest Ursula LeGuin - she has written so many wonderful books. I'm sure others on this list will have additional suggestions. Good luck... Jan ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 23:48:53 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kieth Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 9 Jul 1998, Jim Hollomon wrote: > My son is now 12, and is an inveterate reader. >> snip << > Before he grows so old he's totally set in his ways, I'd like to introduce him > to some stories that will stimulate him to think about feminist issues, about > unreasonable expectations in our society, and the like. If anyone has some > good suggestions--stories that are both thought provoking and engaging enough > to hold a preteen's interest--please pass them on. What about Alexei Panshin's _Rite of Passage_? I believe it's out of print now, but turns up frequently in used bookstores. It is a "classic", but since its subject is the coming into adulthood of a young starship traveller, and it's pretty action oriented, it may not be too old for your son. The story is told in the first person, from the point of view of a young girl and begins when she is twelve. A lot of the book is concerned with the child's developing abilities and her learning to get along with different children, including those less gifted or courageous than she, but I don't think it's didactic. It has some great passages about the high-tech ship culture's encounters with planet-bound fundamentalists and also contains two great little modern fairy tales. It does deals briefly with the beginning of sexuality for the protaganist. That's my vote - you may enjoy reading it yourself, if you haven't already! Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 17:24:08 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Julieanne Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim Hollomon wrote: > My son is now 12, and is an inveterate reader. He's like a _Little_Man_Tate_. > He spontaneously began reading road signs to us when he had just turned two. > He hasn't quit reading since. By the time he was eight, he could curl up with > a user's manual for a new piece of computer software, read the thing in an > afternoon, and from that moment on know how to run the program. That's > something I can't do or even conceive of doing. So he's a pretty good reader > with great comprehension and retention. > I would recommend a number of Anne McCaffrey's books - particularly Sassinak, and related books in that series, and the BrainShip series of books - The Ship Who Sang, PartnerShip, The City Who Fought and I think there are one or two more in that series. Also, the first book in McCaffrey's 'Talents of Earth' series - The Rowan - my 13 year-old daughter was besotted with that book and there's plenty in it to appeal to both genders. Julieanne ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 14:28:30 0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Petra Mayerhofer Subject: BDG MOA - misc. In-Reply-To: <5d5aca7a.35a0f878@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT It is the second time I read _Mists of Avalon_ and contrary to the first time when I've read the book through in a few days, this time every time I stop it takes some days till I go back to it because it is really sad and tragic and I know how it ends. I am only at Arthur's wedding at the moment. I agree with many of the posts so far. Especially with Marina's assessment on sex and sexual assertiveness of women in the book. On 8 Jul 98 Anne Hunter wrote: > Does it seem to others that MZB intended to portray Gwynhwyfar as > suffering from a panic disorder including agoraphobia? ... I'm not > sure why MZB chose to show her this way. I wondered too. > On Igraine, whose characterization I otherwise enjoyed, I couldn't > understand her reported conversion to Christianity when she married > Uther, whom we were told was not strongly on the Christian side. It > seemed that the Goddess religion had brought her happiness, but then > she turned away from it. That left me completely baffled the first and the second time I came to that point in the book. For me that switch is completely unmotivated. From what happened to Igraine before I expected that Igraine develops her abilities further. There was some discussion on it that there are several parts in the book which can be criticised from a feminist perspective. Julieanne listed several relevant points: > 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 ... > needs Accolon > to fight for Avalon - Damsel in Distress? etc. What I missed was a description of the everyday life in a household of the goddess believers. The different concepts would have an impact on that (or the different concepts would be the result of it). Lot is described as an old believer (if for opportunistic reasons), as far as I remember Morgaine's husband more or less too, but still the only picture presented is that of the man as provider, defender and decision-maker, the woman as the chatelaine. The only everyday life aspect of the goddess religion mentioned is the Beltane festival. Perhaps the idea is that everything is already changed by the influence of the Christian religion but still there should be a remainder of the ways before. Or the priestesses should note that they have lost already. Or have I forgotten or overlooked something? On 7 Jul 98 Julieanne wrote: > - historical innaccuracies, some of which are glaring, I find to be > a minor criticism of Mists. Uh, I always thought the legend about Arthur is more or less a myth, that there was no historical Arthur. I hardly know the British history before 1066 (and only the highlights after that). I am curious: Was there really a king called Arthur? And what are the historical inaccuracies (the more important ones)? On 6 Jul 98 Kathleen M. Friello wrote: > 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. I know that MOA has been widely read in Germany (at least all my (female) friends have). It was one of the books one hands to a friend with the recommendation to READ it. But is that different to other European countries besides the UK? Or even different to the UK and North America? Petra P.S.: In case somebody noticed, I have a new email address as I have changed to a new job. I live part time in Kassel now (the city of the Documenta, however, the next one is only in 2002). *** Petra Mayerhofer **** mayerhofer@usf.uni-kassel.de *** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 08:53:38 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jim Hollomon Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/10/98 2:49:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kmhouse@HALCYON.COM writes: << What about Alexei Panshin's _Rite of Passage_? >> Kathleen, Thanks so much for your thoughtful suggestion. I knew I could count on my FSFFU friends for some great ideas. I really love the intellectual stimulation of this list. I also love used bookstore hunting. I'll make it a point to find _Rite of Passage_ and when I do, I'll be sure to read it along with Conrad. If you like, I'll let you know our impressions. Thanks again, Jim ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 08:53:37 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jim Hollomon Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/10/98 3:30:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jalc@OZEMAIL.COM.AU writes: << I would recommend a number of Anne McCaffrey's books >> Julieanne, Thanks so much for taking the time to write. I knew I could count on the FSFFU list readers. I really enjoy being on this list. I'll get some of Anne's work, and see how Conrad takes to her writing. Sounds like it might be just the ticket. If you like, I'll let you know how it goes. Jim ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:06:18 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jim Hollomon Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/10/98 1:32:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time, JanBan@AOL.COM writes: << I'd suggest Ursula LeGuin - she has written so many wonderful books. I'm sure others on this list will have additional suggestions. Good luck... >> Thanks Jan, I knew I could count on my FSFFU friends for some good ideas. As fortune would have it, I found a copy of _Techanu_, the last of Ursula's _Earthsea_ series, in the thrift store the other day. It's now sitting right at the top of our to-be-read stack. Thanks for the pointer. If you'd like, I'll give you a report on Conrad's reaction to it. Jim ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 00:12:54 +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 MOA - misc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Petra Mayerhofer wrote: > On 7 Jul 98 Julieanne wrote: > > - historical innaccuracies, some of which are glaring, I find to be > > a minor criticism of Mists. > > Uh, I always thought the legend about Arthur is more or less a myth, > that there was no historical Arthur. I hardly know the British > history before 1066 (and only the highlights after that). I am > curious: Was there really a king called Arthur? And what are the > historical inaccuracies (the more important ones)? The main ones I saw, was mostly juxtaposing historical events/characters in one lifetime ( ie. several decades in the book), for events which actually occurred over a period of centuries. For example, a Bishop that is a contemporary of Saint Patrick, the invasions of the "Saxons," in Britain and the invasion of Spain by the Islamic Moors. As for Arthur's existence, at that point in time, most of the British Isles were a relatively loose conglomeration of peoples. There had been several waves of invasion by various European peoples - including Danaanites, who gave the name to both Denmark and Dublin in Ireland - variously colonised/conquered different parts. The least invaded/conquered were the northern Pictish/Scottish peoples and the Welsh. There is evidence that several Kings/Princes, named Arthur existed. It is known, that it was common practice for centuries to rename kings/princes etc after the local variant of the 'God', after they had become King - some of the more common names were Bran in southern Britain, Ardur ( Arrdu, Artuu, Artrut - other spellings) in Scotland, and in Welsh, Vron. Gwion is another common one, probably Irish. Much as many Roman Emperors were often called Caesar. As for the Tale of King Arthur as most people recognise it, its based on the Malory's Mort d'Arthur, which according to most scholars is a mythical/legendary or "fantasy" story that may have been embellished from earlier tales told by the Druidic priests and minstrels. How much is true, or even how much was based on the original Druid tales, and how much Malory invented for the sake of a good story, will probably never be known. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 07:28:21 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: eva Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 10 Jul 1998, Jim Hollomon wrote: > > I knew I could count on my FSFFU friends for some good ideas. As fortune would > have it, I found a copy of _Techanu_, the last of Ursula's _Earthsea_ series, > in the thrift store the other day. It's now sitting right at the top of our > to-be-read stack. Thanks for the pointer. > If you'd like, I'll give you a report on Conrad's reaction to it. hi jim, just my opinion, but i think a 12-year-old might appreciate the first three earthsea books more than "tehanu." they're all good, but "tehanu" was written some time after the original trilogy, and is really more...introspective?...than the others, at least as i remember it. i read anne mccaffrey's "dragonriders of pern" trilogy when i was about that age, along with another pern trilogy that was aimed more at young readers...dragonsong/dragonsinger/dragondrums, iirc. -> eva ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:03:52 -0400 Reply-To: asaro@sff.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Catherine Asaro Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 8 Jul 1998 to 9 Jul 1998 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have to leave for Readercon, but there is something that needs to be made clear, least there be doubt. I do not believe the things that are being ascribed either directly or obliquely to me below. Since this is a public forum, and I am being attributed with things that I neither said nor believe, the following needs to go on the record: I have always supported, spoken out for, and written about women's right to be accepted as they are, for what they are, on their own terms, in an egalitarian society. I have always spoken out against the imbalance of the roles of women, men, and sexuality, in both literature and real life, and I have been willing to do it in a lot more hostile environments than this. I've been on the front lines for the past thirty years, standing up for exactly the types of things that are being supported here. And here is something to think about: creating an argument "among ourselves" that =doesn't exist= plays right into the stereotypes that women can't get together and form a movement. Why? Because it wastes energy sniping at each other that could be used to better purpose elsewhere. For the record: my comment was an observation on how men react to certain types of male characters. It was in no way a comment in support of the social causes that go into that, and whether or not those causes are valid. > On the discussion whether it is good or bad to cater to male egos by > inserting "conventional" features (like, beautiful women falling for > pathetic ugly losers) into feminist novels,: No one here suggested that this should be done. I DO NOT believe it. > However, making peace with men does not have to mean luring them into > accepting feminism through dressing it up into "gentle pretty nice woman" > clothes. No one here suggested that it did. I DO NOT believe this. > If we don't keep reinforcing the "good woman = nice, pretty woman" > stereotypes ourselves, they'll have to be happy with whatever they can get. No one here suggested that it should be reinforced. I DO NOT believe it should. > But I agree that saying that "having a non-threatening female character in it will help > getting through to men" (or whatever was the exact quote) was hardly a compliment. I DID NOT say this. I DO NOT believe it. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:14:49 -0700 Reply-To: lynnx@mc.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Heather Law Organization: Interstellar Trading Company Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi I passed on your request to the Wiscon people. They sent me a very long list. Not all of these are fantasy, and some might be of limited appeal to a boy, but one never knows. Carol Mitchell At 07:22 AM 7/10/98 , you wrote: >I received the following message from someone who'd come across the SF Book >Discussion page on the SF Web page. Anyone want to take a crack at replying? >>To: sf3@sf3.org >>Subject: SF3 Book Discussion: >>Can anyone give me some advice? Can you recommend some books for a >>12-year-old boy, an avid reader, whose father wants him to read some >>books with a feminist slant? Alcott, Louisa May: LITTLE WOMEN Alexander, Lloyd: PRYDAIN CHRONICLES Asimov, Isaac: THE FOUNDATION trilogy Austen Alexander, Lloyd: PRYDAIN series *Austen, Jane Baldry, Cherith *Beagle, Peter S.: THE LAST UNICORN Beagle, Peter S.: A FINE AND PRIVATE PLACE Bell, Clare Block, Francesca Lia: WITCH BABY Brackett, Leigh Bradbury, Ray Brust: THE PHOENIX GUARDS Brust: FIVE HUNDRED YEARS AFTER Bujold, Lois McMaster Burnett, Frances Hodgson: THE SECRET GARDEN Burnett: THE LITTLE PRINCESS Busby, F.M. Canfield-Fisher, Dorothy: UNDERSTOOD BETSY *Carroll, Lewis: ALICE IN WONDERLAND Charnas, Suzy McKee: THE BRONZE KING Charnas, Suzy McKee: THE SILVER GLOVE Charnas, Suzy McKee: THE GOLDEN THREAD Charnas, Suzy McKee: THE KINGDOM OF KEVIN MALONE Christie, Agatha Clarke, Arthur C.: good short stories Clarke, Arthur: RENDEZVOUS WITH RAMA Clayton, Jo Clement, Hal: MISSION OF GRAVITY Clement, Hal: NEEDLE Cooper, Susan: OVER SEA, UNDER STONE Cooper, Susan: REDWALL Dalkey, Kara Dean, Pamela: THE SECRET COUNTRY Dean, Pamela: THE HIDDEN LAND Dean, Pamela: THE WHIM OF THE DRAGON DeLint, Charles: RIDDLE OF THE WREN Dickens Dickinson, Peter: THE CHANGES books Downer, Ann *Duane, Diane: SO YOU WANT TO BE A WIZARD Dumas, Alexandre Dunsany, Lord: BEYOND THE FIELDS THAT WE KNOW Durrell, Gerald: MY FAMILY AND OTHER ANIMALS Durrell, Gerald: ROSY IS MY RELATIVE Eager, Edward: HALF MAGIC Elgin, Suzette Haden: OZARK trilogy Elliott, George: THE KISSING MAN Ellison, Harlan Engdahl, Sylvia Louise Fitzhugh, Louise: HARRIET THE SPY Ford, John M: GROWING UP WEIGHTLESS Forester, C.S.: HORNBLOWER books *Furlong, Monica: WISE CHILD *Furlong, Monica: JUNIPER Gallico, Paul: THE MAN WHO WAS MAGIC Garner, Alan: ELIDOR Garner, Alan: THE OWL SERVICE Garner, Alan: THE WEIRDSTONE OF BRISINGHAMEN Gentle, Mary: A HAWK IN SILVER Godden, Rumer: AN EPISODE OF SPARROWS Goldman, William: THE PRINCESS BRIDE Grey, Nicholas Stuart: GRIMBOLD'S OTHER WORLD Halam, Ann: DAYBREAKER trilogy (it's EARTHSEA for girls) Heinlein, Robert: THE STAR BEAST *Henderson, Zenna: People stories Hoffman, Nina Kirikki: THE SILENT STRENGTH OF STONES Hoover, H.M.: CHILDREN OF MORROW Hoover, H.M.: WINDS OF MARS Kerguelen, Rissa Jaques, Brian: Redwall books Jones, Diana Wynne Kagan, Janet: Mirable stories Kendall, Carol: THE GAMMAGE CUP Kress, Nancy: BEGGARS IN SPAIN series Lee, Harper: TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD *L'Engle, Madeleine: A WRINKLE IN TIME LeGuin, Ursula: EARTHSEA trilogy, starts with A WIZARD OF EARTHSEA *Lewis, C.S.: THE LION, THE WITCH, AND THE WARDROBE/Narnia books Lewis, C.S.: OUT OF THE SILENT PLANET trilogy Linklater, Eric: THE WIND ON THE MOON Mac Avoy, Roberta: THE THIRD EAGLE Mac Avoy, Roberta: TEA WITH THE BLACK DRAGON Mac Avoy, Roberta: DAMIANO trilogy MacDonald, John D: THE GIRL, THE GOLD WATCH, AND EVERYTHING MacDonald, George: THE LIGHT PRINCESS Maguire, Greg: I FELL LIKE THE MORNING STAR Maguire, Greg: OASIS Maguire, Greg: MISSING SISTERS Maguire, Greg: SEVEN SPIDERS SPINNING Malot, Henri Hector: NOBODY'S GIRL Marsh, Ngaio: mystery books May, Julian: MANY-COLOURED LAND series McIntyre, Vonda: BARBARY McKillip, Patricia McKinley, Robin: THE HERO AND THE CROWN McKinley, Robin: THE BLUE SWORD McKinley, Robin: anything except Deerskin Moon, Elizabeth Moore, C.L. Mowat, Farley: THE DOG WHO WOULDN'T BE M'Tana, Zelde Nesbit, A.E. Nesbit, E.: FIVE CHILDREN AND IT *Norton, Andre: good juveniles O'Dell, Scott: ISLAND OF THE BLUE DOLPHONS Panshin, Alexei: RITE OF PASSAGE (a feminist rebuttal to Heinlein's sexist girl-hero book, Podkayne of Mars) Panshin, Alexei: THE STAR WELL Panshin, Alexei: THE THURB REVOLUTION Panshin, Alexei: MASQUE WORLD Peters, Ellis: CADFAEL BOOKS Pierce, Tamora: ALANNA AND DAIN series Pierce, Tamora: LIONESS RAMPANT series Pinkwater, Daniel: THE SNARKOUT BOYS Pinkwater, Daniel: THE AVOCADO OF DEATH Pinkwater, Daniel: ALAN MENDELSOHN, THE BOY FROM MARS Platt, Kin: THE BOY WHO COULD MAKE HIMSELF DISAPPEAR Pullman: GOLDEN COMPASS Queen, Ellery: mysteries Ransome, Arthur: SWALLOWS AND AMAZONS Sawyer, Ruth: ROLLER SKATES Schmitz, James H: THE WITCHES OF KARRES Sherman, Delia: THROUGH A BRAZEN MIRROR Smith, Cordwainer Smith, Dodie: I CAPTURE THE CASTLE * Smith, Sherwood: good juveniles Snyder, Zilpha Keatley Springer, Nancy: THE HEX WITCH OF SELDOM STAR WARS YOUNG ADULT books Stevermer, Caroline: RIVER RATS Sturgeon, Theodore Thurbur, James: FABLES FOR OUR TIME Thurbur, James: FURTHER FABLES FOR OUR TIME Thurbur, James: THE NIGHT THE BED FELL ON FATHER Thurbur, James: THE THIRTEEN CLOCKS Thurbur, James: THE WHITE DEER Tolkien, J. R. R.: THE HOBBIT Tripod, John Christopher *White, T.H: MISTRESS MASHAM'S REPOSE (one of the best kid's books ever written) White, T.H.: THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING White, T.H.: THE SWORD AND THE STONE Wilder, Cherry: A PRINCESS OF THE CHAMELN Wilder, Cherry: YORATH THE WOLF Wilder, Cherry: THE SUMMER'S KING Wilder, Cherry: THE LUCK OF BRIN'S FIVE Windling, Terri and Mark Arnold (eds):BORDERLAND/BORDERTOWN anthology *Wrede, Patricia: TALKING TO DRAGONS Yolen, Jane THE (RED, GREEN, BLUE FAIRY TALE BOOKS ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 12:34:11 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robert Barrett Subject: Re: BDG MOA - misc. In-Reply-To: <35A62166.FDDF754B@ozemail.com.au> from "Julieanne" at Jul 11, 98 00:12:54 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sic scribit Julieanne: > > were often called Caesar. As for the Tale of King Arthur as most people > recognise it, its based on the Malory's Mort d'Arthur, which according to > most scholars is a mythical/legendary or "fantasy" story that may have > been embellished from earlier tales told by the Druidic priests and > minstrels. How much is true, or even how much was based on the original > Druid tales, and how much Malory invented for the sake of a good story, > will probably never be known. > Actually, Malory's direct translations and original inventions are very well known; look at the work of Eugune Vinaver and other Arthurian scholars. In addition, "Druid tales" have little or nothing to do with the Arthurian tales, at least in any sense we can recover. The historical Arthur is mostly wishful thinking (with a little history of post-Roman Britain thrown in); the literary Arthur is the joint creation of Geoffrey of Monmouth and Chretien de Troyes in the 1150s-1170s. Geoffrey and Chretien were working off of older legends and folk sources, but it's rare for such material to survive due to its oral nature. The Welsh Mabinogion is probably the closest we'll ever get to such tales ("Culhwch and Olwen" has been called a ninth or tenth century story), but even that text exists only in late medieval manuscripts. Ob *Mists of Avalon*. Not my favorite Arthurian re-vision, but it definitely seems to have been a powerful text for young women readers, particularly teenagers. When I teach my Arthurian Lit. class, I almost always have at least one woman in the room who's read it and loves it. I myself find it to be a text that introduces (or makes popular) a number of new tropes in the Arthurian tradition: the pagan/Christian conflict and retelling the Matter of Britain from a woman's perspective being the two most important. I do admit to finding Bradley's portrait of Guenevere disturbing and a bit offensive, esp. in the scene in which Arthur and Lancelot bed her together and end up using her as a conduit for their own unrealized passions for each other. That one had me reaching for my copy of Gayle Rubin's "Traffic in Women." I have an ambiguous relation to Bradley. In putting together my women's sf course, I considered using some of her work, but decided against it in part after reading several of her bitter arguments against feminist women writers in the sf field (the main reason for excluding her was the limited schedule and the presence of a good many authors I prefer: Moore, Le Guin, Murphy, Shelley, Russ, Wilhelm, Tiptree/Sheldon, Moffett, Tuttle, Dorman Hess, Emshwiller, Scott, Cadigan, and Dorsey). Ob women and Arthur: I would like to recommend what I think is a more interesting text on gender issues and women's role in a quasi-Arthurian setting, Heldris of Cornwall's *Roman de Silence* (ca. 1275). It's available in a good English translation, and I really got a kick out of teaching it. Silence is a young woman trained as a boy/squire in order to keep the family lands (the king has ordered that no women shall inherit); she grows up to be the mightiest knight in the land, gets caught up in cross-dressing intrique at the King's court (the King has these "feelings" about his young protege, and the Queen attempts to seduce the "lad" behind his back), goes out on a quest to find Merlin, and is finally revealed to be a woman (the Queen has become evil at this point, dies, and Silence takes her place). The ending is more ambiguous than it sounds in this summary; Heldris is noticeably evasive about whether this is a happy ending for his/her (we're not sure who Heldris was) hero, and the allegorical personifications of Nature and Nurture (yes!) have held a running argument about gender roles throughout the romance. And then there's Chretien's *Erec and Enide* . . . but that's a romance for another day. Best, Rob Barrett -- Robert W. Barrett, Jr. * E-mail: rbarrett@dept.english.upenn.edu * World Wide Web: http://www.english.upenn.edu/~rbarrett/index.html * Garden shrugged. "I see no reason to give the Heroes priority. The world is a One Twist Ring: we affect the Mist, the Mist affects the real world. Stories from one get told in the other." - Sean Stewart, _Clouds End_ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 17:51:00 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "M.J.Norman" Subject: Re: BDG: MOA Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Anne said: > >Does it seem to others that MZB intended to portray Gwynhwyfar as >suffering from a panic disorder including agoraphobia? I have friends >who've suffered from anxiety attacks, and it sounds like that's what >Gwyn has. She recalls at one point that as a child she enjoyed >playing outside, when she was taken to visit the ruins at Camelot, but >knows that now she would just panic. It seems as if the problem may >have started from her time at the convent, and perhaps even from the >incident when she met Lancelot and Morgaine, or else from the sense of >guilt that the priests instilled. So she's not just a pale "girly >girl", all prim and pious -- she's a deeply troubled person. Yes! I didn't notice it years ago when I read MOA the first time, but this time it was crystal clear to me from the beginning. >I'm not sure why MZB chose to show her this way. Like you, I'm not sure either. I kept looking for some kind of 'pay-off', some reason tied to the original legend, or perhaps some kind of experience after which Gwen. finds herself 'cured' and therefore able to make a more positive contribution to events, but none of that seemed to materialise. Comments, anyone? I have to admit I was not looking forward to re-reading this book. The first time I read it, back when it came out, I was really anticipating enjoying its female viewpoint on my favourite legend. But I found myself left at the end with a very depressing, negative feeling. The women were depressingly manipulative and flawed, and the attitude towards men seemed overwhelmingly negative. I'd never read the Darkover novels and the one time I went to an SF convention where MZB was one of the guests, I had a rather negative experience with her in a discussion group. So no, I was not looking forward to this book. Thank goodness I was pleasantly surprised for the most part, even though I did get somewhat impatient with _some_ of the long-winded description. Although I will never like MZB's Gwynhwyfar, I do like her complex characters and the tolerant attitude towards religious diversity that Merlyn and the older characters kept reminding others of (even though so few listened). I have enjoyed reading all of the thoughtful posts others have written. I recognise my own thoughts in some of them, but as usual, I got too caught up in the story to analyse it well afterwards. :) The one thing that kept popping into my head all through the book was that there seemed to be all sorts of personal (authorial) issues woven into the characters and story, which made me curious about MZB's own life and what led her to re-write this legend the way she did. I suppose this means I should take a look at the bibliography posted previously (sigh). Does anyone have any insights? Monica ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 13:05:01 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: N Clowder Subject: Moon & Sun - ugly man gets the girl Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I'm going to comment on the theme of the "ugly man gets the pretty girl." My focus is not on the theme in the media/literature in general but in its connection to THE MOON & THE SUN. There's been some discussion of the character Lucien as an exemplar of the ugly man. I scanned the text pretty carefully up through page 128. Nowhere is Lucien described as ugly or as having any kind of disfigurement. When he first appears, Marie-Josephe, seeing him on horseback, mistakes him for a boy or a page. He is VERY short. That is the ONLY piece of information we are given to indicate that his appearances are out of the ordinary. For the rest, he dresses well (though does not slavishly follow court fashion), rides a wonderful horse, and performs various gallantries. It isn't until page 128 that we learn that he is a dwarf: "Mlle de la Croix, it was years ago that I noticed I'm a dwarf. It's common knowledge. You needn't be embarrassed to notice it yourself." "May I draw you?" Marie-Josephe asked. "For a gallery of oddities? Shall my likeness hang among ape-men and sea monsters?" "No! Oh no! Your face is beautiful. Your hands are beautiful. I would like to draw you." My point is, I wish to question an assumption which I suspect has insinuated itself into the discussion, namely: dwarf = ugly When I read the book, I had a hard time getting it into my head that Lucien was a dwarf. Lucien struck me as the 17th century equivalent of a sensitive new age guy. How did he acquire his sensitivity? The fact that he was not automatically a member of the big-boys club has much to do with it. If I understand correctly, Lucien is a fictional character, not an historical one. How could McIntyre create a character at Louis' court and have him be, believably, as different in his ideas/character as Lucien is? He had to have experienced life as an "outsider" in some way to have his eyes opened (I don't say they're open all the way). McIntyre could have created other problems for Lucien to achieve the same end of characterization - I would be interested in knowing why she chose this one. I realized in the course of reading the book that my mind was not able to hold the image of the dashing, gallant dwarf. I responded to Lucien's courage, his wit, cheered when he sassed the pope, but I repeatedly glossed over references to his size. Regardless of his height, he is a person of great presence. Every time McIntyre held up to me an un-ignorable reference to his dwarf-ness, it was a shock. Clearly, I was ripe for some consciousness-raising. So now I am beginning to make room in my head for a very short person in a gallant role. As the romantic interest developed, I was uncomfortable because Marie-Josephe so easily - so blithely? - responded to Lucien's character, not to his physical appearance. Whereas, were I in her shoes, even though I liked Lucien and found him the true bright light at the court of the Sun King - I knew I would not be able to get past the issue of his height. Is Marie-Josephe more "politically correct" than I am? Is she gullible? Does her choice of Lucien represent some kind of failing? Should she reject the only man remotely worthy of her because he's half her height? Of course, appearances are of great importance in attraction, whether real-world or fictional. I'm not trying to minimize that. But I think that the Marie-Josephe/Lucien romance also serves purposes other than, and better than, catering to male egos. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:14:05 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kendra Smith Subject: Re: BDG MOA - misc. In-Reply-To: <199807101228.OAA24595@cserv.usf.uni-kassel.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Uh, I always thought the legend about Arthur is more or less a myth, > that there was no historical Arthur. I hardly know the British > history before 1066 (and only the highlights after that). I am > curious: Was there really a king called Arthur? And what are the > historical inaccuracies (the more important ones)? I am a Medieval Studies major, and if my memory serves me correctly, the Arthurian cycle began as a body of stories told orally by the Britons which were centered around the legendary King who fought valiantly against the Anglo-Saxon invaders. These stories became associated with and co-opted by other peoples in Britian and eventually the name Arthur became associated with the King. Hence, these cycles of tales were widely known and circulated when Chretien de Troyes and (later) Malory wrote their poetic compilations. Maybe this will help, and again: I am going from sketchy memory. I need to go back and read my texts on the actual historocity of these tales. Kendra O'Neal Smith echo1@imap3.asu.edu tristesse7@aol.com http://members.aol.com/tristesse7/dystopia/index.html ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 14:40:48 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Erik Tsao Subject: _Brown Girl in the Ring_ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Nalo, I just picked up a copy of your book. I'm looking forward to reading it. One quick question: Are you planning to attend the Black Writers' conference at Chicago State this year? Sincerely, Erik Erik Tsao Wayne State University Department of English ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 13:45:05 -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: dashing, gallant dwarves In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 10 Jul 98 13:05:01 CDT." <1.5.4.32.19980710180501.008d9ff4@mail.utexas.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >I realized in the course of reading the book that my mind was not able to >hold the image of the dashing, gallant dwarf. I recommend the works of Lois McMaster Bujold, featuring the very short, slightly hunchbacked Miles Vorkosigan (given earlier as an example of non-traditionally-attractive men). There's no way to get around the fact that he's a dwarf; it's a massive part of his identity, and he is "a person of great presence" (as you described Lucien) in part through his attempts to overcome that. One character describes him as "not short...he's just concentrated". He's gallant, he's dashing, he's hyperactive. He's also much more of a nutcase than Lucien, but I'm very fond of him. (These books also have wonderful gender politics, insightful and painful themes of honor and integrity, and a writing style that makes a lot of people inhale them like candy. Mmm.) jessie ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 16:27:18 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robin Reid Subject: attractiveness and gender stereotypes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Although I have been totally swamped of late (teaching a technical writing course to 19 students in a 5-week summer session during which we met two hours a day, Monday-Thursday meant that I had papers every day, aieeee), I have been following the discussion about attractiveness, gender expectations, etc. It's wound through a discussion of a number of things, and I was just thinking about one of my favorite writers Barbara Hambly (OK, I didn't like her vampire novel, and I cannot stand the _Star War_ novel though I bought it because I'm a completist, and the Nazi one is a little shaky, but.....). A common thread throughout her works is that conventionally unattractive men and women fall in love under some pretty stressful circumstances. I'm thinking especially of her woman historian/scholar in the _Dark_ series. As usual, I cannot remember her name off the top of my head, and my good books are all home, and I'm at work. Also the computer expert in the alternate world in another trilogy....hmm. I am getting OLD and cannot remember names. But though I cannot remember names, I still resonate to the descriptions of gawky, smart women and homely smart men who are comrades first and rescue each other and are looked upon as weird by their contemporaries (the women coming from our contemporary culture and the men from the alternate universe in the two trilogies I've mentioned) in both worlds and then, wow, love. Not necessarily happy endings--Hambly's universes tend to be pretty gritty and violent *(I'm not sure everyone would look on her work as feminist, but I do--if for nothing else than her female characters who are)* Amyway, highly recommended non-stereotypical fantasies with well drawn and created female and male characters. Robin in Texas where's it's reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyHOT ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 18:11:40 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: ME Hunter Subject: Re: Female/male attractiveness (was Moon and Sun) In-Reply-To: (message from * * on Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:11:45 EDT) Marie wrote: >They had the results of a rather interesting poll on a television program >the other day(sorry, can't remember which show it was) where they asked >people if they thought they were better than average looking. Something like >60% of the men, and only 20% of the women, said "yes". >I was a little surprised actually, as I thought the percentage of men would >be higher and the percentage of women lower. On Survey Central ( a make-your-own survey site at http://www.apocalypse.org/pub/u/bill/bin.cgi/survey.cgi) there's a survey asking respondents to rate their appearance on a scale of 1-10. It's a small pool and fairly self-selected, but I was still impressed to find that most people rated themselves a 7, regardless of sex, and that several people (evenly split by sex) rated themselves a 10. Maybe at least some of us are getting a little better about this? E. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 15:42:20 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kieth Subject: Re: Help: Need Reading Suggestions for a Young Male Comments: To: Heather Law In-Reply-To: <35A64C09.74AF@mc.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 10 Jul 1998, Heather Law wrote: > Hi > I passed on your request to the Wiscon people. They sent me a very long > list. Not all of these are fantasy, and some might be of limited appeal > to a boy, but one never knows. > Carol Mitchell > >> A memorable list snipped but saved << Heather & all, I don't know about the resta youse guys, but I know how I'm going to spend the next few weeks. What a list! There was Rite of Passage, along with those two terrific froggy/fencing courtier stories (the lister had the good taste to leave out the third, where Panshin ran out of steam and had the sense to stop), *and* the Witches of Karres (what? No Telzy tales?!). And Suzy McKee Charanass writes children's stories?? Oh, happy day. I just got something out the door I've been trying to wrap up for six months - I know just how I'm going to take my brain out to lunch and let it graze. Thanks for posting the list to the List. Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 19:57:14 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Janice E. Dawley" Subject: Re: Reading Suggestions for a Young Male / McCaffrey In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09:57 AM 7/9/98 EDT, you wrote: >My son is now 12, and is an inveterate reader. >Before he grows so old he's totally set in his ways, I'd like to introduce him >to some stories that will stimulate him to think about feminist issues, about >unreasonable expectations in our society, and the like. If anyone has some >good suggestions--stories that are both thought provoking and engaging enough >to hold a preteen's interest--please pass them on. I highly recommend the books of H.M. Hoover. Just a few weeks ago I took a couple of them (*The Bell Tree* and *The Winds of Mars*) out of the library and was pleasantly surprised that I liked them as well as or better than I did as a teenager. All of her books that I have read are far future science fiction and all feature central, strong female characters as well as an array of sympathetic male characters. I find her work stylistically pleasing (it's spare and focused) and I love the fact that she pays attention to psychological detail and is not falsely cheery as some young adult and children's writers are. Re: Julieanne's recommendation of McCaffrey's work: it may seem hypocritical for me to say this, as I read McCaffrey's Dragon books as a teenager and credit them at least partially for making me a science fiction fan... but I would not wholeheartedly advance these books as works that will stimulate your son to think about feminist issues. I posted a message about McCaffrey's Dragonrider series (as distinct from the Harper Hall series) a few months ago with only some vague details about my discomfort with their sexism. Since then I have retrieved my well worn copies from my parents' house and have been able to track down some passages. Dragonflight, p. 152 (F'lar and Lessa meet in a corridor): "He caught her arm and felt her body tense. He set his teeth, wishing, as he had a hundred times since Ramoth rose in her first mating flight, that Lessa had not been virgin too. He had not thought to control his dragon-incited emotions and Lessa's first sexual experience had been violent. <...> He had been a considerate and gentle bedmate ever since, but, unless Ramoth and Mnementh were involved, he might as well call it rape. Yet he knew someday, somehow, he would coax her into responding wholeheartedly to his lovemaking. He had a certain pride in his skill, and he was in a position to persevere." Dragonquest, p. 167 (F'nor and Brekke): "Her body was soft and pliable, her arms went around him, pressing him to her with a total surrender to his virility that he had never before experienced. No matter how eager others had seemed, how gratified, there had never been such a total commitment to him. Such an innocence of... Abruptly F'nor raised his head, looking deep into her eyes. 'You've never slept with T'bor.' He stated it as a fact. 'You've never slept with any man.' " <...> p. 169 (F'nor decides Brekke needs some sex to feel better): He wanted to be gentle but, unaccountably, Brekke fought him. She pleaded with him, crying out wildly that they'd rouse the sleeping Wirenth. He wasn't gentle, but he was thorough, and, in the end, Brekke astounded him with a surrender as passionate as if her dragon had been involved." The White Dragon, p. 212 (Jaxom arrives at Corana's Hold): "Ruth achieved a landing on the narrow margin between grain and wall. Corana, recovering from surprise at his unexpected arrival, waved a welcome. Instead of rushing toward him as she usually did, she smoothed back her hair and blotted the perspiration beading her face. 'Jaxom,' she began, as he strode toward her, the urgency in his loins increasing at the sight of her. 'I wish you wouldn't --' He silenced her half-teasing scold with a kiss, felt something hard clout him along his side. Pinning her against him with his right arm, he found the offending hoe with his left hand. Wrenching it from her grasp, he spun it away from them. Corana wriggled to get free, as unprepared for this mood in him as he was. He held her closer, trying to temper the pressures rising within him until she could respond." In all of these passages male sexuality is portrayed as dominating and remorseless. The men have the power to force sex and they don't hesitate to use that power. In the end, it is implied, this is what the women really want after all. I want to point out, for those who have not read these books, that F'lar, F'nor and Jaxom are three of the most important characters in the Dragonrider series. They are protagonists -- not perfect, but very positively viewed by the author. Clearly McCaffrey doesn't have any problem with this rapist mentality, at least in fiction. Where sex is not involved, McCaffrey does better. In Dragonflight, Lessa successfully challenges the convention that queen dragons don't fly and saves all of Pern by flying back in time and convincing the Oldtimers to help fight Thread. The main character of the Harper Hall Trilogy, Menolly, fights against the tradition that "women can't be harpers" and wins. (This trilogy was also written for younger readers and omits sex almost entirely.) But the treatment of sexuality in most of McCaffrey's work (The Rowan included -- I haven't read Sassinak) is so problematic that I would not recommend it for adolescent readers unless you're prepared to discuss it. ----- Janice E. Dawley.....Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/jedhome.htm Listening to: XTC's English Settlement; Bran Van 3000's Glee "...the public and the private worlds are inseparably connected; the tyrannies and servilities of the one are the tyrannies and servilities of the other." Virginia Woolf, Three Guineas ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 20:23:00 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Janice E. Dawley" Subject: Re: attractiveness and gender stereotypes In-Reply-To: <199807102127.QAA23794@etsuodt.tamu-commerce.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 04:27 PM 7/10/98 -0500, you wrote: >... I was just thinking about one of my favorite writers Barbara Hambly >A common thread throughout her works is that conventionally unattractive men >and women fall in love under some pretty stressful circumstances. >... though I cannot remember names, I still resonate to the >descriptions of gawky, smart women and homely smart men who are comrades >first and rescue each other and are looked upon as weird by their >contemporaries (the women coming from our contemporary culture and the men >from the alternate universe in the two trilogies I've mentioned) in both >worlds and then, wow, love. Relating to Marina's earlier point about age disparities in couples... isn't it weird that Hambly's women consistently fall for men who are QUITE a bit older than they are? I've read a number of her books (Darwath, Windrose and Sun Wolf/Starhawk series as well as *Stranger at the Wedding* and *Dragonsbane*) and after a while I could just tell, "Well, the protagonist has met this guy, he's eccentric and he's not conventionally attractive and he's 15 years older than she is... they're going to be an item pretty soon." It seemed downright strange. Of course it's been a while since I read any of them and there may have been some books that broke the mold. I do remember being frustrated in the Windrose series when I wanted Joanna and Caris to get together, but he was too young and good looking. Nope, she was carrying a torch for crazy, bespectacled Antryg who was more like twice her age. There is much to recommend Hambly's work, don't get me wrong. I LOVED *The Ladies of Mandrigyn* (mercenary is kidnapped by a group of