From LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Tue Dec 29 16:05:31 1998 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 17:57:51 -0600 From: "L-Soft list server at University of Illinois at Chicago (1.8c)" To: lquilter@HOOKED.NET Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9812B" ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 23:57:09 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: BDG The Sparrow I have so many difficulties with this book; I liked it very much, it gave a great deal of food for thought, also a great deal of fuel to the anti-organized religion fire. This was obviously a post-holocaust novel. I could see Sandoz thinking as Jews under Hitler did: finding faith in little things, finding more faith, thinking they knew which direction God had shown them, then facing complete devastation. I don't know how people can keep a faith in guardian angels or spiritual protection of some sort when they have had their lives so completely demolished. I guess many people have faith just because it's too painful not to, not because of an ultimate belief in divine guidance. Why was Sandoz ruined? Wouldn't you have thought that eating babies would have been more ultimately devastating to a person who truly believed in God's beneficence than being sexually assaulted? I think I would have been more devastated by the assault, but I'm not a saint. Do you see Mother Theresa eating babies? And if Sandoz had just refused to eat the babies, as did Marc, he wouldn't have lived long enough to have had his spirit broken by the assaults. Why weren't the Jesuits more sympathetic to Sandoz? I don't know. I have a hard time believing that the Catholic Church 60 years from now won't have revised its stand on priestly celibacy, not if they're going to keep on having priests. And look, all the priests were still male. This pope is going to die, celibacy will become optional and women will be ordained. I just don't see it happening any other way. But, if things don't change, then I guess I can see the animosity. The church is so screwed up about sexuality that they would rather know that one of their own had been raped than that he had enjoyed sex or even used his sexuality because he literally wouldn't have been able to feed himself without it. That idea, I guess, would be the present attitude carried to its most inane extreme. If that attitude is still in effect 20 years from now, then no, I don't think there would be women on the adventure, even an old one or a super intelligent one. Also, having the one married couple too old for childbearing wouldn't have made sense even if the church had revised its stand on the evils of sexuality. Lastly, I have to agree with Stacey, this group with its anthropological and interculteral intelligence would have realized the significance of gardens and would have realized that increasing the food base would have increased the Runa reproductive ability. They would have had some idea that this increase would effect the cultures of the intelligent species even if they weren't sure of the interrelationship of them all. But, in spite of all my disagreements with the book, I did like it. I could see people wanting to believe in something and convincing themselves that that something believed in them and their causes. I liked the fact that Sofia and Jimmy paired up, that she didn't have to pine away for Sandoz, but went on to lead a loving life with someone else. I loved Sandoz's statement that the beautiful, inspirational songs received on earth were pornography, not prayer. It seemed to me that they were both, as the Jana'ata might have understood it. I liked the many different views of relationships and ideas. This is essentially a very irritatingly fascinating book. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 15:10:37 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Agnes Imgart Subject: Alien Sexuality In-Reply-To: <199811292107.KAA240250912373675@mail.iconz.co.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT At Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:09:03 +1300, Jenny wrote: > To bring this back to FSS&F - the minimal amount of anthropological reading > I have done about expressions of human sexuality in different cultures > would provide plenty of ideas for depictions of how alien sexuality could > function on other worlds. Dipping into anthropological accounts of other > cultures also constantly undermines Western/European assumptions about what > is proper and normal for women and for men. Thought it might be worthwhile to pick this thread up again... What kind of ideas about different expressions of sexuality are around in SF? For me the most memorable and fascinating idea comes up in Naomi Mitchinson's "Memoirs of a Spacewoman" (a brilliant book anyway, especially if one is interested in communication): The Martians are a species, who communicate not through speech but through their highly educated tactile senses (it developed because they used to live in darkness). It's natural for them to communicate with their tongues, fingers, toes and their particularly sensitive sexual organs, because they can express fine shades of meaning. It's rather interesting and even funny to see how shocked the humans and Martians were about each other: each species considers the truly alien way of communication and the use of their sexual organs as repulsive ... And there is, of course, LeGuin's "Left Hand of Darkness". One of the aspects I like most about the book is the question, how a society might work, when there is no division of sex and gender. Does anybody know any other books, in which a world is created beyond our human distinction between male/female? Agnes (de-lurking briefly) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 09:48:58 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Some comments from the Tiptree judges re: The Sparrow are on-line at http://www.tiptree.org/1996/index.html. More information on the Tiptree award and past recipients may be found at http://www.tiptree.org/. I read The Sparrow after hearing the author read from it at ICFA two years ago (in March, 1997). If I recall correctly, she read in a session with Pat Murphy and Candas Jane Dorsey. I was there mainly to hear Pat Murphy, but enjoyed all three immensely. The Sparrow captivated me in the same way that Clarke's short story _The Star_ did. I think because it's imaginative "hard" science fiction, feminist, and it challenges my assumptions and preconceptions about religion and aliens (or alien portrayals). Incidentally, Russell said that she'd received a number of letters from Jesuits who loved the book and found some aspects of the Jesuit portrayals to be spot on. I found that to be interesting in light of the fact that the author isn't catholic... -allen -- Allen Briggs - briggs@ninthwonder.com Try free *nix: http://www.netbsd.org/, http://www.freebsd.org/, http://www.linux.org/, http://www.openbsd.org/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 09:56:10 -0500 Reply-To: feldsipe@erols.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: suzanne feldman Organization: or lack thereof Subject: Re: Alien Sexuality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agnes Imgart wrote: > And there is, of course, LeGuin's "Left Hand of Darkness". One of the > aspects I like most about the book is the question, how a society > might work, when there is no division of sex and gender. > Does anybody know any other books, in which a world is created > beyond our human distinction between male/female? Octavia Butler's DAWN is a prime example. There are three books in the series, I believe, in which humans become (sort of) a part what is normally a three-way alien reproduction/sex act which is 'core' to the Oankali society. More mundane and less effective; Alien Nation does something like this when their characters need to have a baby---there's some kind of neuter go-between for the male and female. I'm sure there are dozens of other examples. Sex, after all, is fascinating. Suze ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:55:17 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Candioglos, Sandy" Subject: Re: Alien Sexuality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Go here: http://www.tiptree.org/, and look at the winners, and look at the books that made the short list for each year. Read the comments by the judges, too. I found those to be really interesting! -Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Agnes Imgart [mailto:Agnes@HRZ1.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 7:11 AM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: [*FSFFU*] Alien Sexuality At Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:09:03 +1300, Jenny wrote: > To bring this back to FSS&F - the minimal amount of anthropological reading > I have done about expressions of human sexuality in different cultures > would provide plenty of ideas for depictions of how alien sexuality could > function on other worlds. Dipping into anthropological accounts of other > cultures also constantly undermines Western/European assumptions about what > is proper and normal for women and for men. Thought it might be worthwhile to pick this thread up again... What kind of ideas about different expressions of sexuality are around in SF? For me the most memorable and fascinating idea comes up in Naomi Mitchinson's "Memoirs of a Spacewoman" (a brilliant book anyway, especially if one is interested in communication): The Martians are a species, who communicate not through speech but through their highly educated tactile senses (it developed because they used to live in darkness). It's natural for them to communicate with their tongues, fingers, toes and their particularly sensitive sexual organs, because they can express fine shades of meaning. It's rather interesting and even funny to see how shocked the humans and Martians were about each other: each species considers the truly alien way of communication and the use of their sexual organs as repulsive ... And there is, of course, LeGuin's "Left Hand of Darkness". One of the aspects I like most about the book is the question, how a society might work, when there is no division of sex and gender. Does anybody know any other books, in which a world is created beyond our human distinction between male/female? Agnes (de-lurking briefly) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 10:00:36 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Dave Samuelson Subject: Re: Alien Sexuality Comments: To: feldsipe@EROLS.COM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------8765A6E02C4A99A29D407F10" --------------8765A6E02C4A99A29D407F10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There's a whole reference book devoted to alternate sexuality in sf (Urania's Children?), which I think concentrates mainly on homo- and bi-sexuality. I assume you don't mean simply societies in which one recognizably biological sex does not observe traditional Western gender roles (cf. anthropological writing). You might examine Venus Plus X by Theodore Sturgeon, a "utopia" with surgically created hermaphrodites. Consider also varieties of intelligent aliens that breed other than we do, e.g., The Gods Themselves (Asimov), "The Dance of the Changer Plus Three" (Terry Carr), "The Seven Sexes" ("William Tenn" [Philip Klass]). suzanne feldman wrote: > Agnes Imgart wrote: > > > And there is, of course, LeGuin's "Left Hand of Darkness". One of the > > aspects I like most about the book is the question, how a society > > might work, when there is no division of sex and gender. > > Does anybody know any other books, in which a world is created > > beyond our human distinction between male/female? > > Octavia Butler's DAWN is a prime example. There are three books in the > series, I believe, in which humans become (sort of) a part what is > normally a three-way alien reproduction/sex act which is 'core' to the > Oankali society. > > More mundane and less effective; Alien Nation does something like this > when their characters need to have a baby---there's some kind of neuter > go-between for the male and female. I'm sure there are dozens of other > examples. Sex, after all, is fascinating. > > Suze --------------8765A6E02C4A99A29D407F10 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There's a whole reference book devoted to alternate sexuality in sf (Urania's Children?), which I think concentrates mainly on homo- and bi-sexuality.  I assume you don't mean simply societies in which one recognizably biological sex does not observe traditional Western gender roles (cf. anthropological writing).  You might examine Venus Plus X by Theodore Sturgeon, a "utopia" with surgically created hermaphrodites.  Consider also varieties of intelligent aliens that breed other than we do, e.g., The Gods Themselves (Asimov), "The Dance of the Changer Plus Three" (Terry Carr), "The Seven Sexes" ("William Tenn" [Philip Klass]).

suzanne feldman wrote:

Agnes Imgart wrote:

> And there is, of course, LeGuin's "Left Hand of Darkness". One of the
> aspects I like most about the book is the question, how a society
> might work, when there is no division of sex and gender.
> Does anybody know any other books,  in which a world is created
> beyond our human distinction between male/female?

Octavia Butler's DAWN is a prime example. There are three books in the
series, I believe, in which humans become (sort of) a part what is
normally a three-way alien reproduction/sex act which is 'core' to the
Oankali society.

More mundane and less effective; Alien Nation does something like this
when their characters need to have a baby---there's some kind of neuter
go-between for the male and female. I'm sure there are dozens of other
examples. Sex, after all, is fascinating. <g>

Suze

--------------8765A6E02C4A99A29D407F10-- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 06:57:44 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Britt-Inger Johansson Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Book of Job! Old Testament. If you haven't read it, do so. That's where I would begin to get at the cultural roots of Sparrow. It's the main biblical source on the topic of suffering, and very often poetically beautiful literature. Ripe with levels like a Russian doll the Sparrow. Religious or not, it is a historic fact that Christianity and its main books, Bible and others, are an important feature of the cultural heritage of the Western world. Though all the major world's religions have there own answer to the question the book states. Britt-Inger At 13:51 1998-12-07 -0500, you wrote: >> This book did not make me wish I were religious. I just admit defeat >> right >> up front at the question of being able to Understand It All. Plus all >> that >> abstinence stuff -- aren't there enough things to agonize about it the >> world without that? How about you -- did the spiritual stuff work for >> you? >Because of the Catholic/Jesuit focus, I would NEVER have picked this book up >if it hadn't been on our list. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. I >think that the religious 'stuff' worked remarkably well. I liked that we >got into Sandoz's head and could see his doubts and how he struggled to find >answers for his life. > >> The publisher thoughtfully included a bunch of discussion questions for us >> at the end of the book. Unfortunately, there was only one question I >> found >> interesting: >> >> - Why did the Jesuits treat Sandoz so harshly before they heard his whole >> story? >I dunno - I found myself falling into that trap also - even though we 'met' >him early on and could see how nice/bright/hard working etc. he was. I kept >reading to see how he 'went wrong' > >> Another of their questions was about the Star Trek "prime directive", >> implying that if the Stella Maris crew had somehow not interfered with the >> local cultures things might have turned out better. This seems a >> pointless >> question, since how could they have known what would have been >> interference >> without interfering? In fact I thought this was a strength of the Sparrow >> -- that it showed the messiness of trying to figure stuff out on your feet >> with no context whatsoever. Kinda hard to fit that into one-hour TV >> shows, >> though; hence the universal translators and sophisticated scanners. >> Reminds me of how when I played football (US-style) I saw how difficult it >> was to have any idea what was going on, while it seems so obvious when >> you're watching it from above. >I'm pretty uninformed about Jesuits, but it seems that the prime directive >was never part of their mission - rather the opposite, they sent out >missionaries to teach different groups about Jesus/Catholocism etc. - they >wanted to influence/change the groups. > > >> Finally, some questions most germane to this group: why did this win the >> Tiptree? Do you agree that it should have won? And was it a feminist >> book? Only two female characters (human), though they were clearly >> portrayed in a feminist way. Is that enough to make it feminist? >hhhmmmm. I think that it is a feminist book - the women are treated as >human. They are full members of the crew, valued for their opinions, we get >to know then as well as the men. I'm not sure I see why it won the Tiptree >- I don't really see it as gender bending or re-examining male/female roles >or relations. While the Runa have the roles reversed (males care for >children; females are the hunters) this isn't really discussed all that much >or analyzed - Sandoz just comments on it. > >sheryl > >> Dive in. Tell us what you really think. >> >> Jennifer >> jkrauel@actioneer.com >> > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:32:32 -0500 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: The Cost to Be Wise In-Reply-To: <002301be1d9b$201906c0$cfb11b26@donna> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 07:16:56 -0500, donna simone wrote: >I am struck at the multiple meanings of the title... at least what >I read as multiple. I've been pondering this for some time and I confess I can't come to any solid conclusions. What immediately came to my mind was that the "wise" were Ayudesh and Wanji and the original founders of the settlement, who made the conscious decision to avoid the economic upheavals that history led them to expect in first contact situations and the "cost" of the title was paid by the villagers of Sckarline when they died. So, in this interpretation, the wisdom led to the cost, indirectly, in the same way that passive resistance might be said to lead to the deaths of the resisters. But another possible meaning may be that Ayudesh and Wanji, by deviating from the expected course of history, were trying to avoid the cost that their own ancestors paid to be wise? And the outrunners were the debt coming due... In this interpretation, wisdom can *only* be achieved through direct experience, and attempting to avoid it will only lead to greater disaster. Not sure I like this take on it very much, but it's sounding more plausible (in terms of authorial intent) the more I think about it... On Thu, 3 Dec 1998 at 16:23:16 -0500 Jean Bocchino wrote: >Sckarline is one of the coldest places out there... weather-wise of >course, but people-wise too. Mam hits Janna; Janna may have >been sexually abused by her Da (her thoughts on Veronique's attack >make me think this); no one, including Tuuvin (who she lets kiss her >so she can "whisper" to him and walk with him) and Wanji (who coldly >lies to her about the implants) are especially nice to Janna. And donna simone replied: >I felt fairly certain that Janna very much enjoyed the kissing. She is >the one that argues with her mother that her and Tuuvin ought to be >able to go further. I found Janna's reactions to what we might view as feminist issues interesting. First we see her kissing with Tuuvin in the back of the distillery. I got the impression that she liked the kissing until he "slipped her the tongue", when she didn't know what to do -- but she tolerated it in return for Tuuvin's whispering. How many times have women said they will abide with men's sexuality in return for intimacy? This seemed like a more subtle version of that sentiment. (This reading is given more support in the novelization.) Clearly Janna is also hankering for the adult status of a married woman, quite apart from the concessions she will have to make to Tuuvin to achieve it. Sex and romance seem to be a lot less important to her than her family and her own status and eventual independence. We also hear Janna's thoughts as she impatiently watches Veronique struggle against the Scathalos outrunner. "Stop it, I kept thinking, just stop it, or he won't let you alone." It's hard to tell if this is panic thinking or a coherent world view. Janna has already revealed that her mother was beaten by her father when she was younger. Obviously, violence against women is not unknown in this world. Rather than being incensed, I appreciated the moral ambiguity of Janna's reactions. She seemed more real to me because she did not occupy the moral high ground. Several people have mentioned Mary Daly lately -- Janna might be an example of a young female collaborator in patriarchy. It's not easy to be in that position, at the crossroads, half-convinced you know what is good for the oppressed, but at the same time fiercely convinced you know what is good for yourself... As far as the ending, with Janna and Tuuvin standing in the snow with their gifts... I was also affected by it. It seemed such a bitter ending, speaking of the Terrans' ultimate heartlessness in the face of so much suffering. Who would leave two teenagers in the middle of their devastated village with nothing but a couple of blankets and some packets of food? I thought Wanji's indecision about "appropriateness" was ridiculous, but these folks in the skimmer beat her by a mile! On that depressing note, I will send this message... ----- Janice E. Dawley.....Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/jedhome.htm Listening to: Tori Amos -- From the Choirgirl Hotel "...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: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:35:05 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Janice E. Dawley" Subject: BDG: The Sparrow Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" It seems a bit like cheating, but I am reposting this message I wrote on 14 Dec 1997: Since this novel won the Tiptree Award for 1996, I expected to find something provocative regarding gender or sex roles, but I was disappointed. There is somewhat of a reversal in that the Runa females are the adventurous, roving sex and the males stay at home caring for the children, but this detail was fairly unimportant in the context of the novel. We never get into the heads of any of the Runa (except very briefly Supaari's secretary, near the end of the book -- I longed to learn more about her), even though the main characters spend the majority of their time with the Runa. In contrast, we learn quite a bit about the males of the Jana'ata (the females remain offstage). Now that I think about it, it almost feels like the two species play against one another in a stereotyped male/female way -- the communal, peaceful Runa as the females and the predacious, highly "cultural" Jana'ata as the males. By my count, there are only three actual females that play important roles in the book. 1) Anne Edwards, the middle-aged mother figure; 2) Sofia Mendes, the sexualized figure who tempts the main character to break his vow of celibacy; 3) Askama, the verbally facile, trusting Runa girl-child. Anne and Sofia are quite a bit more complex than that sounds. Anne is smart, outspoken & sexual. Sofia is a genius and writes the artificial intelligence routine that pilots Emilio home; she also changes history by teaching the Runa that they are many, while the Jana'ata are few. But... I felt troubled by the spin put on each character. Anne seemed to exist just to "fix" other people. The shoulder to cry on, the supportive wise one who always knew how to draw someone out & ease their pain. Sofia was the tough, ultra-competent professional with a painful past whose healing came in the form of a heterosexual relationship and pregnancy. Askama was the loyal innocent whose death was the final blow to Emilio's fading sanity. These all seem very familiar roles for females. Those who have read the book -- am I crazy? What did you think of the book and its characterizations of females? I'm inspired to write this message because I liked the book (could barely put it down), but felt a lingering discomfort with some of its elements. ----- Janice E. Dawley.....Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/jedhome.htm Listening to: Tori Amos -- From the Choirgirl Hotel "...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: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 18:24:13 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Keith Subject: Re: Alien Sexuality In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 8 Dec 1998, Candioglos, Sandy wrote: > > snip << > Thought it might be worthwhile to pick this thread up again... > What kind of ideas about different expressions of sexuality are > around in SF? >> snip << > And there is, of course, LeGuin's "Left Hand of Darkness". One of the > aspects I like most about the book is the question, how a society > might work, when there is no division of sex and gender. > Does anybody know any other books, in which a world is created > beyond our human distinction between male/female? > > Agnes (de-lurking briefly) > How about the aliens species in Tiptree's _Up the Walls of the World_? Though there are two sexes, male and female, the roles are reversed, to say the least, and the dynamics are wind currents and electrical fields. Thought this might qualify as alien, anywhere. Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 21:47:03 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jo Ann Rangel Subject: Butler Reading this coming Sunday Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hiya, This came through the grapevine on my Octavia Butler list 8) Jo Ann From: Art McGee Subject: Octavia Butler at Sisterhood Bookstore in Los Angeles To: OCTAVIA-L@MAILHOST.TCS.TULANE.EDU December 13 Sunday Octavia Butler This award winning writer of feminist science fiction will read and sign her new novel, Parable of the Talents. 2 PM. Sisterhood Bookstore, 1351 Westwood Blvd., Los Angeles. (310) 477-7300. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 03:34:04 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mary-Ellen Maynard Subject: Re: Alien Sexuality Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Dave wrote: <> Actually it's, "Uranian Worlds", by Eric Garber and Lyn Paleo. Quite comprehensive, primarily gay and lesbian focused, with bibliographies ranging from 200 AD to 1989 and intros by Delaney and Russ.When I saved my pennies (quite a few of them) and bought a copy several years ago - it was only available in hardback. I doubt that has changed. Quite a treasure, but many of the references are not, or not easily, available - even through interlibrary loan. Mary-Ellen Maynard Crystal Mist Glass Carving ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 11:25:11 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: No Name Available Subject: BDG: Sparrow Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Gotta say, right off, this is the first BDG book I've enjoyed reading in many months. I don't see this as a particularly feminist book, except in the broadest, vaguest terms. And I didn't think it deserved a Tiptree, eccentric as those awards and nominations have been. I read the judges' rationales, which were quasi-persuasive, but I still don't believe the handling of male sexuality or male rape were unique enough to merit the award. It's not even terribly good sf. But I'm grateful I was pushed to read the book--- I bought this nearly a year ago, along with several other books that included Tepper's Gibbon's Decline and Fall. I was so utterly disgusted with the Tepper that I shelved Sparrow, unread: I couldn't pick up another book dealing with religion, expecting the same crude, knee-jerk bashing that seems de rigeur in fsf. The thing is, it's possible to be raised Catholic and reject Catholicism for its attitudes on women [or other reasons] and still not be ignorant of or hostile to all other aspects of that religion, its system of thought, the women and men of its history, or its metaphysical underpinnings. And its sensual, mental, and emotional appeal. The catalytic phrase for me in this book was "culturally Catholic." I've got to talk about this book in little memos, I'm so short on time these next two months. But more to come Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 14:07:26 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Georgelle Subject: Just joined MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Just introducing myself. Have been writing a science fiction novel for about two years, and have put it away for a year now, just at the last few denoument (sp.) chapters! Got distracted by life, and by the fact that the middle of it pleased and interested me more than the way i started it. But, I like the people that got *born* in the writing, and have been slightly nudged to continue with their life. I am hoping this list and the communication therein inspires a huge nudge in that direction! Science Fiction is what I read, but not what I've written in the past, which has ranged from journalism -- story of the prison riot in new mexico in 1980 (The Hate Factory, Dell 1982) and philosophy (Dear WRiter in the Window, Penguin 1992). Octavia Butler is the Archangel of Science Fiction writing by women -- IMHO. :-) I look forward to meeting each and all of you. Georgelle georgelle@nets.com Every Wall is a Door http://www.writerinthewindow.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 15:09:00 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Subject: BDG: The Sparrow & The Tiptree Award In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981208203505.00757f64@together.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 08:35 PM 12/08/98 -0500, Janice wrote: >Since this novel won the Tiptree Award for 1996, I expected to find >something provocative regarding gender or sex roles, but I was >disappointed. Plus Janice wrote all kinds of other excellent points I completely agree with. Jana'ata as male, Runa as female (interesting hand mutilation/foot binding parallel here). The three female characters as predictable female roles, albeit with interesting spins. Seems like a big stretch for me that exploring celibacy and male rape is Tiptree award material, but I have too much respect for the Tiptree awards gang to make a serious complaint. It was a well-written, engaging story with great characters and lots to think about. But feminism and gender exploration are not its strong suits. Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 19:43:39 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jeri Wright Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I also enjoyed the book more than I expected to. I was originally put off by reviews mentioning religion, Jesuits, and the search for God. Also, because knowing from the beginning that everyone except Sandoz dies puts a certain distance to my relationship with the characters. (I disagree, BTW, that the cover is a spoiler, since you learn that pretty close to the beginning of the book anyway.) The distance did exist, and I also found the back-and-forth between the beginning of the mission and Sandoz's return a bit annoying. But the discussions about religion and God were made palatable because the whole book is in the form of a question, not an answer. I wasn't all that interested in the idea of God, but I was interested in how it affected the characters. I couldn't help getting interested in the characters, yet not fully involved; so much so that even the deaths did not have the emotional impact they may otherwise have had. Probably because I spent the entire book anticipating even worse ends for them than what really did happen. OTOH, the distance did make the grimness and gloom easier to deal with. I did have a hard time believing that the expedition sets off in 2019, since 20 years from now doesn't seem like enough lead time for being ready for a trip to another star. Sometimes it seems like we'll be lucky to be to Mars by then, given budget constraints and so on. As to whether it's a feminist book, I guess that depends on your definition. It doesn't particularly explore female vs. male issues, but it does show female characters in roles of strength and equality. -- Jeri Wright destrier@richmond.infi.net ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 17:45:17 -0800 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: The Sparrow, discussion begins In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Dec 1998 19:43:39 EST." <366F193B.8BD5A151@richmond.infi.net> I really enjoyed reading this book, but I had two major problems with it, both of which have been gently touched upon. First: the author says that she wrote the book to show that smart, educated people making good choices could still cause total destruction of a foreign culture. (Apparently the protests of the 500th anniversary of Columbus's trip inspired her.) But I spotted a huge number of damaging influences before the actual damage was played out. Just the presence of aliens seemed the sort of thing to make tremendous changes in a culture; and as someone else has pointed out, the shift from hunter-gatherer to agricultural is a profound change. So our heroes were basically a bunch of excited people without the brains to tell that Star Trek's Prime Directive is not actually upheld in the series. This grated on me more and more as time went by. Not to mention the intrinsic ridiculousness of sending a bunch of missionaries off to make contact without changing the culture. Second: the ending came as a total anticlimax to me. I waited and waited and waited to hear what was going to me the mindbendingly hideous trauma, worse than having his hands destroyed (for long term damage, that has got to be the worst thing I can imagine), and then-rape? What the hell? The Jesuit administration puts its best men on psych detail for weeks, months, because one of their boys was raped? And we are supposed to sympathize, to feel that this is just about the worst thing we've ever heard of? Especially with all that Sonia (do I have the name right?) went through as a twelve-year-old, it left a really really bad taste in my mouth. I understood, eventually, that the point was supposed to be that it was some cosmic violation by god and therefore worse (still kinda makes me itch), but I only ever figured it out in a very intellectual kind of way. I think Russell may have counted on more of an understanding, which I think was a flaw. Don't get me wrong-I don't mean to downplay the devastating effects that rape has on many, many people. On the contrary, that's exactly why this portrayal bothered me. I felt we were supposed to feel like it counted more, like somehow this was a really different thing than, say, all the other rapes we've heard about. As I said, I eventually understood what she was trying to use as the distinction; but it just left me cold. This really bums me out, because I had such a good time reading the book. *sigh* jessie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 22:41:16 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins In-Reply-To: <366F193B.8BD5A151@richmond.infi.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 9 Dec 1998, Jeri Wright wrote: (snip) > (I disagree, BTW, that the cover is a spoiler, since you learn that > pretty close to the beginning of the book anyway.) I guess I should mention that I wasn't too thrilled with the dire foreshadowing from the very first page any more than I liked having the plot laid out on the back cover. Too much foreshadowing lead me to believe that something horrific was going to happen to all of the characters and when it finally did it was almost anticlimactic. In fact, so much of the book was spent with a "something terrible is going to happen" feeling that when the characters finally do bite the dust the scenes are practically skimmed over. Also, I think the back cover should be tantalizing and entice a potential customer into buying the book. If it weren't for the fact that I like participating in the BDG, I would have put *The Sparrow* back on the shelf. Between the spoiler on the back cover and the heavy foreshadowing, my enjoyment of TS was somewhat reduced. In spite of my complaints, though, I really did enjoy this book and I am glad I read it. > I couldn't help getting interested in the characters, yet not fully > involved; so much so that even the deaths did not have the emotional > impact they may otherwise have had. Probably because I spent the entire > book anticipating even worse ends for them than what really did happen. > OTOH, the distance did make the grimness and gloom easier to deal with. I wish the author hadn't pulled her punches and let the deaths of the characters happen "on screen" instead of being told by Sandoz. Being told about their slaughter gave their deaths (and the deaths of the Runa babies) less of an impact. > Jeri Wright > destrier@richmond.infi.net Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 23:42:03 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Melissa Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow In-Reply-To: <366F193B.8BD5A151@richmond.infi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Delurking with some thoughts about whether The Sparrow is a feminist novel. First, the shortage of female characters isn't really an issue in this debate - a novel with no female characters could still be feminist depending on the plot and themes of the book. Second, I think the criticism that the female characters are somewhat steretypical is justified, although for me the complexity of the characters compensates for this. On one level, Sofia is a traditional ingenue/love interest type heroine, but her past as a prostitute complicates this characterization considerably. All the characters initially appear to be familiar types, but Russell invites us to re-examine those types by fleshing them out with some unexpected details (another example of this is D. W.'s homosexuality). Just when you think you are on familiar ground, she yanks the rug out from under you. . . . I found this to be a profoundly feminist novel, primarily due to the themes of autonomy and ownership that are prominent in the story. The rape of a man, in and of itself, doesn't make this a feminist novel, but this is connected to a much larger issue about control and possession of your body, mind and soul. As a child, Sofia sold her body to survive; as an adult her intellectual talents are brokered by the man who "rescued" her from her "plight". She is still selling herself to survive. When her contract is bought out, it takes years for her to adjust to the idea that she is free to do as she chooses. Until his conversion experience on Rakhat, Emilio is struggling to give up control of both his body and his mind to the church and, by extension, to God. Once he has surrendered this control, he trusts that God will protect him, or at the very least, give his suffering meaning. Instead he is not only raped, but raped repeatedly in circumstances which literally reduce him to the status of an animal or an object, denied even speach (these metaphors are frequently used by rape survivors to describe their responses to their experiences, but in Emilio's case the metaphor is actualized). In this context, his rape is more disturbing than the devastation of his hands, because it is a mockery of both the sacrifice Emilio made of his autonomy and of the trust that he placed in God. As Giuliani says, "I'm sitting here trying to understand why it seemed less awful when I thought it was prostitution. It's the same physical act. . . .I suppose a prostitute has at least an illusion of control. It's a transaction. There is some element of consent." Melissa ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 08:30:28 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Britt-Inger Johansson Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins In-Reply-To: <199812100145.AA22818@nsl-too.pa.dec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >Don't get me wrong-I don't mean to downplay the devastating effects >that rape has on many, many people. On the contrary, that's exactly >why this portrayal bothered me. I felt we were supposed to feel like >it counted more, like somehow this was a really different thing than, >say, all the other rapes we've heard about. As I said, I eventually >understood what she was trying to use as the distinction; but it just >left me cold. > >This really bums me out, because I had such a good time reading the >book. *sigh* > >jessie > She just might have wanted to give an image to men of how devastating rape is so that they may be able to empathise more with women. Many men do not understand the havoc it creates in the victim and the life long trauma. As to the psychological credibility, men being raped by other men have in studies been seen to be extremely traumatised due to the rampant homophobia that many still harbour. Britt-Inger ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 06:55:24 -0700 Reply-To: camiller@gte.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cathie Miller Subject: Sparrow MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jessie wrote: > Don't get me wrong-I don't mean to downplay the devastating effects > that rape has on many, many people. On the contrary, that's exactly > why this portrayal bothered me. I felt we were supposed to feel like > it counted more, like somehow this was a really different thing than, > say, all the other rapes we've heard about. As I said, I eventually > understood what she was trying to use as the distinction; but it just > left me cold. > This is exactly right-on, and that's why I don't feel this book was particularly feminist (not that the author set out to write a 'feminist' story, but just a curiosity re: the Tiptree award--but that's because of the gender exploration). I didn't see where, as someone mentioned, women were in a place of equality, either. The power figures were male. But it continually amazes me when I read about a man being raped and I know the author expects to elicit a particularly horrorified response. What, is it extra-offensive because of the orifice? Like, women don't get it there? Or, is it the thought of man vs man, the same-sex thing, that's supposed to make this more devastating? It just seems to me that we are expected to (and what the hell, maybe we do) feel that a man being degraded and having his power taken from him is more disgusting than when this happens to a woman. I enjoyed this book. But it would have been nice to see this book written in this way: in the same future wherein we can reasonably be taking such a trip, there are now female Jesuits, and Emilio's character is female. Chris ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:00:25 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sharon Hill Subject: Re: Sparrow MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Chris wrote: . But it continually amazes me when I read about a man being raped >and I know the author expects to elicit a particularly horrorified >response. What, is it extra-offensive because of the orifice? Like, >women don't get it there? Or, is it the thought of man vs man, the >same-sex thing, that's supposed to make this more devastating? It just >seems to me that we are expected to (and what the hell, maybe we do) >feel that a man being degraded and having his power taken from him is >more disgusting than when this happens to a woman. > >I enjoyed this book. But it would have been nice to see this book >written in >this way: in the same future wherein we can reasonably be taking such a >trip, there are now female Jesuits, and Emilio's character is female. > >Chris > The rape of Emilio is horrible, I think, not because he's a man, but because he had surrendered to God's will completely. He had finally opened himself up to God and then this happened. Emilio's body was violated, but even worse, his soul was violated. I really enjoyed this book, but it's really about faith, not gender issues... delurking briefly, Sharon ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 19:58:00 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cynthia Gonsalves Subject: Re: Sparrow In-Reply-To: <000c01be24b2$a80f34a0$2ce3ffcc@rhill> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:00 PM 12/10/98 -0500, Sharon wrote: >The rape of Emilio is horrible, I think, not because he's a man, but because >he had surrendered to God's will completely. He had finally opened himself >up to God and then this happened. Emilio's body was violated, but even >worse, his soul was violated. > >I really enjoyed this book, but it's really about faith, not gender >issues... The crisis of faith is what made this book memorable and worth my efforts for me. I must admit that the second book is in the To Be Read pile and probably won't be unearthed soon. It isn't because I hated the first book, it's just that Sparrow was exhausting to read, and I can't do that all the time. I must be going through a mini-crisis of faith as well. Cynthia -- "I had to be a bitch, they wouldn't let me be a Jesuit." -Matt Ruff in Sewer, Gas, and Electric Sharks Bite!!! http://members.home.net/cynthia1960/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 15:54:43 GMT+1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Katherine Dall Organization: ELM Macquarie University Subject: BDG: The Sparrow I liked this book a lot. Not only did it make me think about a heap of issues I might never otherwise have thought of, it also got me thinking about familiar issues from a very different perspective. And it had wonderfully likable characters to boot. I do think, though, that experiences of this novel will vary quite widely according to the positioning of different readers. For me, raised as a good little liberal-scientific atheist, the elaborate theological and intellectual structures of the Catholic Church have always been fascinatingly alien - a source of awe and wonder [mainly at the sheer amount of intelligence, erudition and genuine emotion that goes into justifying belief in something I can only regard as absolute tripe]. Since my only previous encounter with Jesuits has been in valiantly trying to understand the world-view behind Gerald Manley Hopkins' stunningly gorgeous poetry as an undergrad, I was quite prepared to attempt the intellectual leap again. For me, the Jesuits were the real aliens in this novel. As has already been pointed out, the Runa were nothing unusual - the peaceful, vegetarian society complete with gender role reversal is pretty familiar to anyone who has read much SF over the past 20 years or so. And the Jana'ata seemed like your average economic rationalist capitalist ruling class, though that could just be my paranoia talking. The social structure of the predator-prey relation was pretty interesting, but more on that later. The only way of thinking I had any difficulty in understanding was Emilio's. And it was the clash of his world view with Anne's [and my] liberal democratic feminist viewpoint that was the real "contact" drama in the novel, IMO. It's pretty easy to see, however, that anyone who was raised a Catholic is unlikely to read the novel in this way, and is probably going to get pissed off at the undemandingness of the more obvious contact drama, or, in some cases, with Russell's projected portrayal of the structures of the church. For this outsider though, the recognition that an institution that thinks and acts in completely different ways to those I would consider logical and practical still has the money and the power to act in whatever completely screwball manner it sees fit is worth putting serious thought into. I saw the whole problem of the financing and staffing of the mission from this perspective. To all those who have complained that the capitalist pigs would never finance such a mission, that better qualified people would have been sent, that directives for first contact would have been set, etc, well yes, of course that's how those who currently have the power to run space programmes would do it. The point is, however, that there are plenty of other people around who could get hold of necessary resources given sufficient motivation, and who have completely different sets of priorities. The Jesuits have plenty of money and an honoured tradition of missionary work. They HAD directives for contact - to go meet God's other children, and presumably, to save their souls. And they sent a group of pals because they believed in Emilio's conviction that God had chosen those particular people. Scientific and religious qualification was incidental, though the fact that the group was qualified no doubt helped them believe that God was working in a reasonably sensible way on this occasion. Within its own logic, it makes perfect sense. This also raises the question of who else might want to mount a similar mission and for what reasons. I have lots more to say on this fascinating novel, but this is plenty long enough, so it will have to wait for another day. But just one aside on the gratuitous Aussie jokes: "There's no such thing as beer too warm to drink." This is outrageous slander. We have refrigeration and we know how to use it. Kate. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 03:22:25 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "S.M. Stirling" Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/6/98 11:07:35 PM Mountain Standard Time, jkrauel@ACTIONEER.COM writes: >Another of their questions was about the Star Trek "prime directive", implying that if the Stella Maris crew had somehow not interfered with the local cultures things might have turned out better. >> -- personally, I've always profoundly disapproved of this "Game Parks for Natives" approach, which assumes that the locals have to be kept poor, ignorant and powerless so they'll make quaint pots and do authentic traditional dancing. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:30:06 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Britt-Inger Johansson Subject: Re: Sparrow In-Reply-To: <4.1.19981210195424.00c3ca70@mail> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" For those who are interested in the faith issues of the Sparrow I would recommend to read the autobiography of St John of the Cross, a 17th century carmelite monk who established the concept of *the soul's dark night*. There are interesting links that may add a depth and furthering understanding of the spiritual aspects of TS. BTW the follow up on The Sparrow is nowhere near as grim, even the author was depressed by her book and claims she had to write about how Sandoz' return to life as well. Britt-Inger At 19:58 1998-12-10 -0800, you wrote: >At 10:00 PM 12/10/98 -0500, Sharon wrote: > >>The rape of Emilio is horrible, I think, not because he's a man, but because >>he had surrendered to God's will completely. He had finally opened himself >>up to God and then this happened. Emilio's body was violated, but even >>worse, his soul was violated. >> >>I really enjoyed this book, but it's really about faith, not gender >>issues... > >The crisis of faith is what made this book memorable and worth my efforts >for me. I must admit that the second book is in the To Be Read pile and >probably won't be unearthed soon. It isn't because I hated the first book, >it's just that Sparrow was exhausting to read, and I can't do that all the >time. I must be going through a mini-crisis of faith as well. > >Cynthia >-- >"I had to be a bitch, they wouldn't let me be a Jesuit." >-Matt Ruff in Sewer, Gas, and Electric >Sharks Bite!!! http://members.home.net/cynthia1960/ > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 13:21:24 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joe Sutliff Sanders Subject: Leave of absence Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Howdy comrades, I've got to take an FFSFFU break for a little while. Talk to you in January. Joe ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:18:37 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allyson Shaw Subject: Re: BDG Sparrow Comments: To: camiller@GTE.NET MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I feel like a crab when I say this, but I was very glad to be done with this book, as it annoyed me. I liked the question of spirituality, but I didn't like the way the book was crafted. As others have said, the flashbacks were gimicky-- I felt they were designed to keep me reading. And as the story progressed it seemed a bit sadistic-- I was waiting to see how she'd kill the crew off, and, because I was really annoyed with some of the characters, I was imagining how I would like to see them killed off. (that sounds harsher than I mean it-- but the reader is put in this position) The character of Anne was based on the author. (She tells us this in the "handy" interview at the end of the book) And I have to echo Chris and say that she seemed a bit too clever and good to be likeable. Also, (I know I'm on a rant-- forgive me) there were many references to pop culture-- Father Guido Sarducci, (old) Star Trek, the guy on the old American Express Commercials, etc. All these references are from the pop culture of the baby boomers. But the characters would be about 30 or younger at the turn of the century, too young to really have all this pop. culture be fodder for humor. Where are the Beavis and Butthead jokes? (my attempt at humor here) But to make this worse, I just thought all the jokes the characters made were unfunny, corny and tedious. Ugh. This prevented me for "going along for the ride" as I would have liked to do. Cathie Miller wrote > > What I enjoyed most, however, was the exploration of the nature o God > and His involvement in our lives. Does He really care what happens to > us now that He's made us? Do our prayers have any effect? Although the author seems to have very strong beliefs about God, > she doesn't really say much for His influence in our lives. She seems > to be saying, bottom line, we're on our own. In the end she Sandoz realizes that one can't ask God for anything, not even meaning or reason-- but he is reassured that God does witness and he does not forget. I actually find this a satisfying conclusion, and given the author's conversion to Judaism, it's meaningful-- as someone else said on the list, this is definitely a post-holocaust book. But I felt that she knew this conclusion all along (another unfortunate consequence of the flashbacks) and that there was no surprise for her as a writer, and little surprise for us as readers. --Allyson ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:27:51 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allyson Shaw Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Stacey Holbrook wrote: And out of all the well educated and intelligent people, not one even > considered that growing a garden might be a bad idea. Hello? Isn't > agriculture one of the defining moments in human development--- right up > there with using fire and inventing the wheel? When I got to this part I > -knew- that the gardens would be the pivotal moment that would cause the > final tragic events of the book. > > > In fact I thought this was a strength of the Sparrow -- that it showed > > the messiness of trying to figure stuff out on your feet with no > > context whatsoever. I would have found this a strength if the book wasn't so set on realism, and things could have been taken more metaphorically. But as it is, we are forced to consider why the crew totally disreguarded all the studies that we have now which show how anthropological, colonial contact and radically alter indiginous cultures and environments. Although the crew went with "good intentions", wanting to hear songs and exchanged knowledge, I was left with the feeling that the crew assumed these people were there for them to study, They cared about them, and tried to help, but it seemed odd that this was never a dilemma. I also saw the garden as a big "oops" and wondered why there was no forshadowing, why no one protested, particularly Anne. I thought it might work well symbollically, as a reference to Eden and the Fall. But the book is not really working on that level, so I didn't know what to make of it. --Allyson ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:38:49 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allyson Shaw Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Britt-Inger Johansson wrote: > > Book of Job! Old Testament. If you haven't read it, do so. That's where I > would begin to get at the cultural roots of Sparrow. It's the main biblical > source on the topic of suffering, and very often poetically beautiful > literature. Yes! I think the Book of Job is even mentioned in The Sparrow. But in the Book of Job, Job complains to his peers and to God of God's (in)justice. He's lost all his property and family, and his peers beg him to be humble. Then finally God speaks to him and shows him the universe-- (the most beautiful part of the book) the wonder and complexity. He humbles Job. In The Sparrow, Sandoz is Job, as well as a Christ-figure (yeah, high-school English coming in handy). In a way, Sandoz does see the universe, and he never reconciles it spiritually. (at least in an interesting way-- we are left seeing him from the outside-- DW calls him a saint, etc. but we never see this spiritual process, which is too bad-- it would have been a more daring novel. But I may be asking too much.) But he is also like Jesus (especially the way the story is told-- we know the end at the beginning, just like the story of Jesus' life) Jesus knows he must die, and in the Garden of Getheseme (sp?) he must reconcile God's will. How does he do it? I don't know-- but I wondered why Sandoz saw God's will as just black and white-- either God cares or he doesn't. How could this be? There are infinite possiblities in between, (Jesus' death is an example of this) and I didn't believe Sandoz could be so simplistic. His character (the only one I liked) seemed more complicated than that. --Allyson ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 23:16:12 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sharon Clark Subject: "ugly" women and love MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A while back we were discussing the improbability of an "ugly" woman finding romantic happiness with an attractive man in fiction. Have any of you read M.M. Kaye's THE ORDINARY PRINCESS? The princess in the story is not considered beautiful, but an attractive king falls in love with her and marries her. -Sharon ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 02:59:05 PST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kate Willshaw Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Finally, some questions most germane to this group: why did this win the > Tiptree? Do you agree that it should have won? And was it a feminist > book? Only two female characters (human), though they were clearly > portrayed in a feminist way. Is that enough to make it feminist? I heard that the reason it was chosen to win the Tiptree award was because of the way it investigated sexuality (ie both homo- and heterosexuality) and also investigated the choice of becoming celibate when the participants in celibacy were sexual beings and how that choice affected the way the people involved lived their lives. As far as the book is a feminist text - would you not say that all the male characters on the expedition exhibited what are seen as female traits (sensitivity, love, deep feelings). The male protagonists had female charateristics and the female characters were as strong as, if not stronger than, the male characters. I would say that makes it a feminist text. Kate Kate Willshaw Geography department University College Chester Cheyney Road Chester UK ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 14:17:57 -0800 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: The Sparrow, discussion begins In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 11 Dec 1998 03:22:25 EST." >-- personally, I've always profoundly disapproved of this "Game Parks >for Natives" approach, which assumes that the locals have to be kept >poor, ignorant and powerless so they'll make quaint pots and do >authentic traditional dancing. Seems to me that once you're watching the dancing and buying the pots, you've failed at non-interference. "Keeping natives poor, ignorant and powerless" assumes a relationship between the natives and the non-natives, right? "Poor" is relative, so is "powerless". The presence of aliens, no matter what they do, is going to have a profound impact on almost any community. (And by "aliens" I mean any group meeting another group which had previously believed itself to be alone.) I felt that Russell really dodged this issue by making the Runa so non-introspective. She says several times that she wanted to show how hard it is to guess what will cause problems; but it didn't seem she'd thought it through at all. Maybe the problem is that we are all science fiction readers, and she is not really a science fiction writer. So we're able to immediately see flaws, obvious stereotypes, things like that. I can come up with a dozen problems with their contact plan off the top of my head. What if the appearance of angels from the sky signifies the time of worldwide suicide to ascend to heaven? What if the Runa had been violent, or had thought them animals, or had been smart enough to reverse-engineer the lander, or... With a really alien mindset, if you want to do the smart thing, that can't possibly harm the aliens -- you stay away. Sure, that's boring. jessie ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 18:16:29 -0500 Reply-To: feldsipe@erols.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: suzanne feldman Organization: or lack thereof Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jessie Stickgold-Sarah wrote: > Maybe the problem is that we are all science fiction readers, and she > is not really a science fiction writer. So we're able to immediately > see flaws, obvious stereotypes, things like that. I can come up with a > dozen problems with their contact plan off the top of my head. I'm so torn about this. On the one hand, Mary Russell extricated herself from what can be a morass of stereotyped lit--namely SF. This unusual, thoughtful book with a lot of SF conventions was marketed as a mainstream novel and has been incredibly successful. It either gives you hope for the whole genre (that we may rise, RISE, RISE!) or makes you want to wring your hands for the non-SF readers who loved it, but will never EVER pick up a book from the SF section of the bookstore. I have to insert here that I know Mary personally and traveled to Italy this past fall with her and my family. Her next book (not SF) has to do with the Jewish refugees in Northern Italy during WWII, and my father is a survivor of just that situation. Through bizarre karma and STRANGE luck, we all hooked up together and spent 2 weeks together in Cuneo and Genoa. She's one of the most interesting, firmly Feminist, intelligent and honest women I've ever met. THE SPARROW may not be the best book ever written, but in my opinion, it is definitely a firmly Feminist, intelligent, and deeply honest work. Suze/Severna ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 15:25:24 -0700 Reply-To: camiller@gte.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cathie Miller Subject: feminist MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been a member of this group for only a few months. Undoubtedly, I missed any discussion there may have been about the definition of a work's being 'feminist'. I'm a product not of a university education, but of years of independent research, (formerly) working in a woman's bookstore, and volunteering time toward various feminist causes. I don't see The Sparrow as a feminist work, although others have said that it is. I see as feminist a work which not only honors women's sensibilities - relational thinking, cooperation, nurturing, community, but which (especially in the SF genre) shows women as self-actualized, active, not exclusively victims, less than perfect-looking, non-objectified, and, occasionally, saviors. In other words, works in which the females are in non-stereotypical roles (stereotypical roles in the Sparrow: Anne as mother-figure, Sophia as prostitute in need of the love of a good man). I do not see as feminist works where the focus is upon the internal or external conflict of a male main character, and whose theme is the satisfaction of a male character's quest/resolution of conflict. Whatever 'concessions' to feminism The Sparrow may make (accidentally or on purpose), it is not a feminist work, IMO. I would be interested in others' thoughts. Chris ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 15:32:11 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cynthia Gonsalves Subject: Re: "ugly" women and love In-Reply-To: <367199AC.75AC607@cas.et.tudelft.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:16 PM 12/11/98 +0100, Sharon wrote: >A while back we were discussing the improbability of an "ugly" woman >finding romantic happiness with an attractive man in fiction. Have any >of you read M.M. Kaye's THE ORDINARY PRINCESS? The princess in the >story is not considered beautiful, but an attractive king falls in love >with her and marries her. That is a terrific story, and I have added it to my library for more positive influences on my nieces and nephews. And Amaryllis/Amy was smart as well. Now, I'll have to unearth it from my shelves. Thanks for the reminder, Cynthia -- "I had to be a bitch, they wouldn't let me be a Jesuit." -Matt Ruff in Sewer, Gas, and Electric Sharks Bite!!! http://members.home.net/cynthia1960/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 22:07:23 PST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Karen Kirschling Subject: Re: feminist MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain In other words, works in >which the females are in non-stereotypical roles (stereotypical roles in >the Sparrow: Anne as mother-figure, Sophia as prostitute in need of the >love of a good man). to dismiss the characters of anne & sofia as stereotypical females is to trivialize their roles in the group and in the story. as well as mother figure, anne was elder, doctor, and, in her relations with supaari, a leader. sofia, in addition to ex-prostitute, was a determined survivor, a researcher, computer expert, pilot, and sower of the seeds of revolution ("we are many. they are few.") feminism may not have been the focus of this story (the jesuits being patriarchal, after all), but it was a definite presence. k.k. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 09:29:43 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Melissa Subject: Re: feminist Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I see as feminist a work which not only honors women's >sensibilities - relational thinking, cooperation, nurturing, community, >but which (especially in the SF genre) shows women as self-actualized, >active, not exclusively victims, less than perfect-looking, >non-objectified, and, occasionally, saviors. In other words, works in >which the females are in non-stereotypical roles (stereotypical roles >in the Sparrow: Anne as mother-figure, Sophia as prostitute in need of >the love of a good man). Your description seems to me to be tied to a very specific definition of feminism and to exclude many works that I would consider feminist (both SF and non). Don't get me wrong - I think a novel that met your description would be fascinating; I'm just not willing to limit feminist fiction to such a narrow definition. Of course, like any discussion of genre, this debate always comes perilously close to "I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it," so I appreciate your attempt to articulate what the genre means to you. I think I take a more "chinese menu" approach: depending on the ideas and themes behind a novel, if it met one or more of the characteristics on your list, I might describe it as having a feminist perspective. Actually, I think TS meets many of your qualifications - certainly the more general list ("relation thinking," etc.). And, has been pointed out, Ann and Sofie are only stereotypical if you reduce them down to one or two elements of their characterization. I especially disagree with your characterization of Sofie - IMHO her story is about gaining independence and autonomy and learning how to balance independence with being part of a community. She is not saved "by the love of a good man" but by the love and friendship of many good people and by her own stubborn persistence. In fact, I would use many of the words in your second list (self-actualized, etc.) to describe these two women (ok, maybe not "less than perfect looking"). . . . Melissa ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 07:55:16 -0700 Reply-To: camiller@gte.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cathie Miller Subject: The Sparrow...feminist? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Melissa wrote: > Your description seems to me to be tied to a very specific definition of > feminism and to exclude many works that I would consider feminist (both SF > and non). Don't get me wrong - I think a novel that met your description > would be fascinating; I'm just not willing to limit feminist fiction to > such a narrow definition. Of course, like any discussion of genre, this > debate always comes perilously close to "I can't describe it, but I know it > when I see it," so I appreciate your attempt to articulate what the genre > means to you. I think I take a more "chinese menu" approach: depending on > the ideas and themes behind a novel, if it met one or more of the > characteristics on your list, I might describe it as having a feminist > perspective. > > Actually, I think TS meets many of your qualifications - certainly the more > general list ("relation thinking," etc.). And, has been pointed out, Ann > and Sofie are only stereotypical if you reduce them down to one or two > elements of their characterization. I especially disagree with your > characterization of Sofie - IMHO her story is about gaining independence > and autonomy and learning how to balance independence with being part of a > community. She is not saved "by the love of a good man" but by the love > and friendship of many good people and by her own stubborn persistence. In > fact, I would use many of the words in your second list (self-actualized, > etc.) to describe these two women (ok, maybe not "less than perfect > looking"). . . . > > Melissa > Melissa, thank you for your thoughts. I can see your point about my reducing the two main female characters to stereotypes, when they weren't necessarily (well, maybe except for the perfect looking part). I suppose because I liked this book, I was sorry it wasn't more on the edge. But my perspective is probably more (radical, to the left, etc.) toward limiting the term feminist so that it retains some sort of meaning apart from 'humanist' or 'liberal'. It's true, there are not many works which are feminist by my definition. (btw, Harriet the Spy was such a work!) But I think it's less important to include simply humanist works as feminist than it is to determine (for each of us) what we will accept as feminist or not, and use that aesthetic before calling something feminist. Maybe I'm just a snob. Or maybe my former separatism is showing. I don't know... Chris ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 14:02:31 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "S.M. Stirling" Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/12/98 3:19:04 PM Mountain Standard Time, jss@PA.DEC.COM writes: >"Keeping natives poor, ignorant and powerless" assumes a relationship between the natives and the non-natives, right? -- yes, and arrogating to yourself the right to control the degree and nature of contact is certainly a power relationship, I'd say. Why not let _them_ pick what they'd like? Ie., the subtext is: "We won't give you X or Y or Z, poor dears, because we understand better than you what your interests are. Now, run along and play!" Not making contact is also an expression of the power relationship, too, of course. >Maybe the problem is that we are all science fiction readers, and she is not really a science fiction writer. So we're able to immediately see flaws, obvious stereotypes, things like that. -- oh, certainly. The problem with non-genre writers is that they come up with things that have been done and redone for 60 years, and think they're being original when they 'reinvent the wheel'... 8-). Margaret Atwood had the same problem with the (quite good) "Handmaid's Tale". ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 20:35:53 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: FW: Science Fiction or Fantasy (5/1; 10/29-10/31) Forwarded for the possible interest of list members Lesley -----Original Message----- From: James Whitlark To: CFP@english.upenn.edu Date: Wednesday, December 09, 1998 8:45 PM Subject: CFP: Science Fiction or Fantasy (5/1; 10/29-10/31) >Call For Papers > >on > >Science Fiction or Fantasy > >for the Literary Symposium > >at Hubcon III > >October 29th-31st, 1999 > >Holiday Inn Lubbock Plaza, Lubbock, Texas > > >Send a one-page abstract >by May 1, 1999 > >to > >James Whitlark >Professor of English >Texas Tech University >Box 43091 >Lubbock, Texas 79409-3091 >DITJW@TTACS.TTU.EDU > > =============================================== > From the Literary Calls for Papers Mailing List > CFP@english.upenn.edu > Full Information at > http://www.english.upenn.edu/CFP/ > or write Erika Lin: elin@english.upenn.edu > =============================================== > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 06:51:50 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: marie Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Maybe the problem is that we are all science fiction readers, and she is not really a science fiction writer. So we're able to immediately see flaws, obvious stereotypes, things like that. -- oh, certainly. The problem with non-genre writers is that they come up with things that have been done and redone for 60 years, and think they're being original when they 'reinvent the wheel'... 8-). Margaret Atwood had the same problem with the (quite good) "Handmaid's Tale". Could you please be a little more specific about where Attwood reinvented in 'Handmaid's Tale'? I have been given it as a SF classic, but certainly the studies I've come across have been written mainly by non SF people. Marie ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 01:18:19 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: BDG The Sparrow When reading one of the background pages for the novel I was surprised to see that The Sparrow is going to be made into a movie starring Antonio Banderas as Emilio. (I can't really see him as the ravaged, depressed, haunted Jesuit, but he'll be a great draw). So I was thinking about who else could star. Anthony Hopkins would be perfect as George, Kathy Bates as Anne, because she can play anything and should be in all movies; that Latin lover guy from Suddenly Susan is just cute enough to be Marc; and Randy Quaid is the only goofy enough looking Texan I could think of to play D. W.. How about Kevin Spacey as the weasely inquisitor? Jimmy and Sofia are the hard ones. Well, who could be big and clumsy and sweet enough for Jimmy? Maybe Edward Norton but he'd have to bulk up again, big is the operative word here. I can see Hollywood and Antonio Banderas casting Salma Hayek as the ravishingly lovely Sofia--saved from prostitution by males who are able to see past her sexuality to her strength, determination and intelligence. All the men would fall in love with her heaving bosom, flashing eyes, tousled hair. But a heaving-bosomed Sofia just doesn't make it. She should have that same severe, bland persona presented by Uma Thurman in Gatica but shorter and darker. Then it came to me -- Janeane Garofalo. She could keep her tough New Yorker attitude, black T-shirts, black finger nails and chunky black watch, but she'd need careful direction to make sure that radiant smile of hers didn't creep through and make her look the ingenue. Cute wouldn't cut it any better than heaving bosoms. I do think the book is feminist. As has been said Christ-like figures (Emilio) present feminine characteristics. I see the men and women (aside from the Jesuit hierarchy back home) as feminists. But then I do see humanists as feminists, I don't think a distinction needs to be made. To me the essence of feminism is to see women as whole people with self determination, choice, competence, and social conscience. But I'm thinking this movie is going to fall far from that ideal. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 07:03:44 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: Sparrow -Tangent MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <..... And I didn't think it deserved a Tiptree, eccentric as those awards and nominations have been......> Just wanted to offer this bit on Tiptree nominations (clipped from the SF3 site), it seems any of us is eligible to nominate books and stories. Perhaps we FSFFU members could really focus on this one year (1999?)and see what "influence" we could bring to bear? "How to Support the Tiptree Award" "1. Make recommendations to the Tiptree judges from your reading. If you find an SF/F story or a novel that you think bends gender in an interesting way, suggest the title to the judges. (Mail all recommendations to Karen Joy Fowler, 3404 Monte Vista, Davis, CA 95616 or email to kjfowler@aol.com)" peaceful holidays to all, donna ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:12:20 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins In-Reply-To: <3674EDC6.692AA510@bigfoot.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, marie wrote: > Could you please be a little more specific about > where Attwood reinvented in 'Handmaid's Tale'? I > have been given it as a SF classic, but certainly > the studies I've come across have been written > mainly by non SF people. > Marie For one thing, it's a near-perfect prequel to Heinlein's REVOLT IN 2100. Same culture different ends of the arc. Heinlein wrote REVOLT 50 years ago. > Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:21:16 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robin Reid Subject: a brief absence Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Just wanted to let you all know I have to go on hiatus (I access email at school, and I'll be out of town/away for ten days soon, so cannot access it which means my mailbox will explods) for a few weeks--back after the New Year! Remember: if you're interested in participating in the FEMSF meeting at ICFA in March, drop me a line with your email address. I'm putting together a list and we'll arrange a meeting when the program comes out. Blessed Be! Robin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:16:32 -0800 Reply-To: dr_newton@bigfoot.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Belinda L. Newton" Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow & The Tiptree Award MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please remove me from the list. I've enjoyed it a lot, but I can no longer keep up with it at this time. Thanks. Belinda Newton ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:37:09 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Candioglos, Sandy" Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Yes, but if there's enough of an inherent power imbalance to begin with (due to technology), it's possible that the more advanced culture could bring the less advanced one ideas and things completely beyond their comprehension; how is the less advanced culture supposed to pick what they want, when even knowing what the options are will affect them irrevocably? And if aliens had brought humans atomic weapons during WWI, and we'd destroyed the planet because we didn't understand the consequences, would we blame ourselves for asking them for "the ultimate weapon", or would we blame them for giving it to us? How about if they didn't tell us what the consequences would be? How about if they had, but we didn't believe them? The less advanced culture is GOING to be at the mercy of the more advanced one; there's really no way around that, that I can see. I could be wrong, though; anybody got any other ideas? -Sandy -----Original Message----- From: S.M. Stirling [mailto:JoatSimeon@AOL.COM] Sent: Sunday, December 13, 1998 11:03 AM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins In a message dated 12/12/98 3:19:04 PM Mountain Standard Time, jss@PA.DEC.COM writes: >"Keeping natives poor, ignorant and powerless" assumes a relationship between the natives and the non-natives, right? -- yes, and arrogating to yourself the right to control the degree and nature of contact is certainly a power relationship, I'd say. Why not let _them_ pick what they'd like? Ie., the subtext is: "We won't give you X or Y or Z, poor dears, because we understand better than you what your interests are. Now, run along and play!" Not making contact is also an expression of the power relationship, too, of course. >Maybe the problem is that we are all science fiction readers, and she is not really a science fiction writer. So we're able to immediately see flaws, obvious stereotypes, things like that. -- oh, certainly. The problem with non-genre writers is that they come up with things that have been done and redone for 60 years, and think they're being original when they 'reinvent the wheel'... 8-). Margaret Atwood had the same problem with the (quite good) "Handmaid's Tale". ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:51:04 -0800 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: The Sparrow, discussion begins In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 13 Dec 98 14:02:31 EST." <7c4bfd76.36740f47@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >>"Keeping natives poor, ignorant and powerless" assumes a relationship >>between the natives and the non-natives, right? > >-- yes, and arrogating to yourself the right to control the degree and nature >of contact is certainly a power relationship, I'd say. Why not let _them_ >pick what they'd like? > >Ie., the subtext is: "We won't give you X or Y or Z, poor dears, because we >understand better than you what your interests are. Now, run along and play!" No, that's absolutely not what I said. I said, since we have no understanding of their culture and *don't* understand what their interests are, we cannot choose an interaction that is harmless. Therefore, it seems that the responsible thing to do is to stay out of in until we/they are smart enough to actually know what a given action will do. Can we find counterexamples, such as small communities which are about to be destroyed by some natural disaster, from which only we can save them? Sure. But gosh, it would be embarassing if that group had voluntarily sacrificed itself as part of, I don't know, the sealing of a peace treaty. We'd feel so bad when the rest of the continent erupted in genocidal war, eradicating millenia of alien culture and reducing the population to a non-viable level. Particularly with a truly alien culture, we have *no idea* what our actions would do. This was my original point about what I saw as the flaws in Russell's idea of a "non-interventionist contact". >Not making contact is also an expression of the power relationship, too, of >course. But if you look at it that way, then making contact is also an expression of the power relationship. It assumes that we have something to give them, and that it's something that they want. I wouldn't want some alien looking at us and saying, "Gosh, they die so fast. Let's give them all eternal life." To reduce the idea of "the power relationship" to "a situation in which one group can make a choice that another group cannot make" doesn't leave much room to manuever, does it? Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I don't see how this view can add information to the system. jessie ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:55:09 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "S.M. Stirling" Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/13/98 10:56:23 PM Mountain Standard Time, hable@BIGFOOT.COM writes: >Could you please be a little more specific about where Attwood reinvented in 'Handmaid's Tale'? I have been given it as a SF classic, but certainly the studies I've come across have been written mainly by non SF people. -- the religious dictatorship idea has a long history in SF (Heinlein springs to mind); so does the misogynist dystopia, etc. In fact, "Revolt in 2100" even anticipated the "handmaids", sort of. Of course, Atwood is a wonderful stylist, and her treatment of character is full of depth and complexity -- things which the pulp-era SF writers generally weren't... 8-). Soon after "Handmaid's Tale" came out, Atwood's agent wandered into Bakka, Toronto's speciality SF store. She saw it on the shelf there and exclaimed: "What's this doing here? This isn't science fiction!" Sigh. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:57:48 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "S.M. Stirling" Subject: Re: BDG The Sparrow Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/14/98 2:23:34 AM Mountain Standard Time, hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM writes: >The Sparrow is going to be made into a movie starring Antonio Banderas as Emilio. -- on the one hand, it would be nice to see a first-rate SF novel made into a high-powered movie. On the other hand, a number of my friends work in Hollywood, and they've reinforced my conviction that the turkeys running the place could ruin anything. (I once asked one of the friends, a woman who wrote for Star Trek for some years, what Hollywood's problem was. She paused, thought, and said: "They're all such a bunch of chicken***ts.") ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:02:24 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "S.M. Stirling" Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/14/98 10:39:28 AM Mountain Standard Time, sandy.candioglos@INTEL.COM writes: >how is the less advanced culture supposed to pick what they want, when even knowing what the options are will affect them irrevocably? -- well, when one of the tribes of central New Guinea was first contacted (by air) by outsiders, they took a long look at the aircraft and then immediately started trying to persuade the pilot to fly them over their neighbors, so they could drop rocks on them... Contact with strangers, and the changes this introduces, are the common lot of human kind. You only stop changing when you're dead. >How about if they had, but we didn't believe them? -- well, that would be our problem. OTOH, how about: "Well, we can cure all your diseases, but we don't think you're ready for that yet. Sorry." ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:05:16 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "S.M. Stirling" Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/14/98 10:55:29 AM Mountain Standard Time, jss@PA.DEC.COM writes: << But if you look at it that way, then making contact is also an expression of the power relationship. It assumes that we have something to give them, and that it's something that they want. -- not really; they can always say "Not interested, please leave,", no? >I wouldn't want some alien looking at us and saying, "Gosh, they die so fast. Let's give them all eternal life." -- *I* certainly would! In fact, I'd do almost anything to get that. So would most people. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:13:44 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit << But if you look at it that way, then making contact is also an expression of the power relationship. It assumes that we have something to give them, and that it's something that they want.>> -- not really; they can always say "Not interested, please leave,", no?-- ~~~~ as if this response has ever worked in _any_ interaction where one party alone makes the decision to pursue said engagement >I wouldn't want some alien looking at us and saying, "Gosh, they die so fast. Let's give them all eternal life." -- *I* certainly would! In fact, I'd do almost anything to get that. So would most people. ~~~~~~ummm, so when the aliens get here, is there going to be a screening process on this "benie"? donna ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:18:22 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: BDG The Sparrow MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >The Sparrow is going to be made into a movie starring Antonio Banderas as Emilio.> --......(I once asked one of the friends, a woman who wrote for Star Trek for some years, what Hollywood's problem was. She paused, thought, and said: "They're all such a bunch of chicken***ts.")-- Umm, would this be Melinda? I suspect most regular ole folks could tell us Hollywood is full of chickensh*ts without ever going there much less working there. donna ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 21:52:34 EST 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: The Sparrow, discussion begins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/14/98 11:13:47 PM, you wrote: << So would most people.>> Well, really? Not so sure. Personally, no. But then., I'd like to come back. phoebe ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 21:55:31 EST 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 The Sparrow Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/14/98 11:18:34 PM, you wrote: <<..(I once asked one of the friends, a woman who wrote for Star Trek for some years, what Hollywood's problem was. She paused, thought, and said: "They're all such a bunch of chicken***ts.")-->> One of my times in LA I *took a meeting* with a producer to discuss my screenplay. After a longish discussion of the script. she said: The only thing wrong with this business is that it has no guts and no integrity. Well, yeah -- Guess that's why I got all that option money and it never saw the light of day. HMMMMMM. lightly, phoebe