From LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Tue Dec 29 16:05:35 1998 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 17:57:53 -0600 From: "L-Soft list server at University of Illinois at Chicago (1.8c)" To: lquilter@HOOKED.NET Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9812C" ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 04:32:08 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 4:13:47 PM Mountain Standard Time, donnaneely@EARTHLINK.NET writes: >as if this response has ever worked in _any_ interaction where one party alone makes the decision to pursue said engagement >> -- well, it's at least as realistic as the "Prime Directive" stuff SF is full of. Myself, I think that if interstellar travel ever became as cheap and easy as this sort of SF assumes, that the regular commercial/cultural/religious/military incentives and patterns of intercultural contact would operate, as they have here since the Neolithic and before. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:40:18 -0500 Reply-To: kp6185a@american.edu Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Krista Park Subject: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples Thank You, Krista Park kp6185a@american.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:02:11 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Bucci, Elizabeth" Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Krista! Yes, there was a short story which treats the jewish Golem story: it appeared in Asimov's SF magazine about two years ago, I think. I really enjoyed the story and will give you details once I get home (I'm at work right now): it ties in with some pretty interesting 1980's themes. I recommend that you consider it: it's a delightful read, especially for those of us not familiar with the Golem myth. Let me look it up and I will get back to you. (I hope that I am not getting it mixed up with something else...!) (Feel free to remind me if I take too long...!) --Elisabeth Bucci ebucci@foxboro.ca -----Original Message----- From: Krista Park [SMTP:kp6185a@american.edu] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:40 AM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: [*FSFFU*] [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples Thank You, Krista Park kp6185a@american.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:51:10 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Comments: To: Krista Park In-Reply-To: <367690EA.4104@american.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Krista Park wrote: > Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking > for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the > jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior > honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples > > Thank You, > Krista Park > kp6185a@american.edu > Does it have to be pure science fiction, as opposed to modern fantasy? Lisa Goldstein did a wonderful job of conflating the Golem legend with the Nazis in The Red Magician. Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:03:20 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Comments: To: Krista Park In-Reply-To: <367690EA.4104@american.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Krista Park wrote: > Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking > for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the > jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior > honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples > > Thank You, > Krista Park > kp6185a@american.edu > Also, I haven't read it, but Alfred Bester wrote a late novel with the word Golem in it; it was something like Golem 200 or some such. Does anyone remember the exact title? Mike ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:35:00 -0800 Reply-To: ltimmel@halcyon.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "L. Timmel Duchamp" Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Comments: To: kp6185a@american.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Krista Park wrote: > > Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking > for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the > jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior > honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples Cynthia Ozick tells a version of the Golem story (with both the Golem & the Golem's master as female) in one of the stories in her collection of stories titled _Levitation_. It's literary fantasy rather than true SF, but you might find it interesting for comparative purposes. Timmi Duchamp http://www.halcyon.com/ltimmel/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:05:48 -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 Meaning "any less technically advanced culture gets crushed in the path of the "progress" of the more advanced", right? Or am I just being too cyncial about humanity's track record with this one? -Sandy > -----Original Message----- > From: S.M. Stirling [SMTP:JoatSimeon@AOL.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 1:32 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: The Sparrow, discussion begins > > In a message dated 12/14/98 4:13:47 PM Mountain Standard Time, > donnaneely@EARTHLINK.NET writes: > > >as if this response has ever worked in _any_ interaction where one party > alone makes the decision to pursue said engagement >> > > -- well, it's at least as realistic as the "Prime Directive" stuff SF is > full > of. > > Myself, I think that if interstellar travel ever became as cheap and easy > as > this sort of SF assumes, that the regular > commercial/cultural/religious/military incentives and patterns of > intercultural contact would operate, as they have here since the Neolithic > and > before. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 01:05:01 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: immortality again Jessie said: >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 which S. M. Stirling replied: >-- *I* certainly would! In fact, I'd do almost anything to get that. So >would most people. We had this discussion during The Snow Queen. Marina and S. M. Stirling were whole heartedly for immortality, but I can't believe they speak for "most people". Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of grudges, growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be pushed. (See what happens on this list when those buttons get pushed and folk aren't able or willing to alter their usual posting style.) Most of us, I think, would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without being encumbered by the old hang ups. But here I am saying "most of us" with nothing but intuition to back that up. I guess we all assume "most of us" feel the same about the most important aspects of life. It's always quite a shock to find we're wrong. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 21:38:51 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: kelly boyle Subject: immortality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Someone - I recall seeing somewhere it was the founder of Kodak - stated on his 70th birthday that 'I have had just about all I can take of myself'... I don't recall ever seeing a positive treatment of eternal life in SF, with the possible exception of Heinlein's works; are there none or have I just missed them? Kristina Hildebrand >We had this discussion during The Snow Queen. Marina and S. M. Stirling >were whole heartedly for immortality, but I can't believe they speak for >"most people". Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing >to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of grudges, >growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be pushed. >(See what happens on this list when those buttons get pushed and folk aren't >able or willing to alter their usual posting style.) Most of us, I think, >would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without >being encumbered by the old hang ups. But here I am saying "most of us" >with nothing but intuition to back that up. I guess we all assume "most of >us" feel the same about the most important aspects of life. It's always >quite a shock to find we're wrong. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 16:59:26 -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: immortality Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Someone - I recall seeing somewhere it was the founder of Kodak - stated on > his 70th birthday that 'I have had just about all I can take of myself'... > I don't recall ever seeing a positive treatment of eternal life in SF, with > the possible exception of Heinlein's works; are there none or have I just > missed them? Slonczewski's _Daughters of Elysium_ does treat long life. It's a loose sequel to _A Door Into Ocean_. -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, 15 Dec 1998 23:19:34 +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: immortality In-Reply-To: <199812152039.OAA44242@piglet.cc.uic.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Nope, most of the one's I can remember are all very negative about the whole idea. Take for instance Kim Stanley Robinson in his Mars trilogy where the characters end up with prolonged lives and difficulties in remembering what really happened to them in the past based on ordinary observations on how memory works, forgetting their loved ones etc - how many do remember vividly and in detail all aspects of their childhood once they're past 30 for instance? or when you meet people after 10-15 years do you always recognize them or remember where you first met them? Without perfect recall even prolonged life would offer serious disadvantages. Another book dealing with immortality is Joe Haldeman's *The long habit of living*, also a dystopia partly about the consequences of long life, partly about the likelyhood of it being a very expensive process, and the attendant corruption it will foster. Elizabeth Moon deals with the social implications in her Heris Serrano suite with a more or less immortal upper class who cling on to power and influence and work, so that the room left for younger persons is virtually non-existant. The only one who has a more positive view is Frederick Pohl in the Gateway series where the person's memories are transferred to an advanced alien memory disc where they can continue some kind of a cyber existance. Most of the writers who find immortality not a bad idea seem to be the elderly who have aquired *the habit of living* and are definitely closer to death. Britt-Inger At 21:38 1998-12-15 +0100, you wrote: >Someone - I recall seeing somewhere it was the founder of Kodak - stated on >his 70th birthday that 'I have had just about all I can take of myself'... >I don't recall ever seeing a positive treatment of eternal life in SF, with >the possible exception of Heinlein's works; are there none or have I just >missed them? >Kristina Hildebrand > > > >>We had this discussion during The Snow Queen. Marina and S. M. Stirling >>were whole heartedly for immortality, but I can't believe they speak for >>"most people". Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing >>to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of >grudges, >>growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be >pushed. >>(See what happens on this list when those buttons get pushed and folk >aren't >>able or willing to alter their usual posting style.) Most of us, I >think, >>would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without >>being encumbered by the old hang ups. But here I am saying "most of us" >>with nothing but intuition to back that up. I guess we all assume "most >of >>us" feel the same about the most important aspects of life. It's always >>quite a shock to find we're wrong. > >Joyce > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 17:28:37 -0500 Reply-To: feldsipe@erols.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: suzanne feldman Organization: or lack thereof Subject: BDG The Sparrow--The Movie MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Below is a forwarded note from Mary Russell--whoever sent the post with the casting suggestions for the movie--? I sent her a copy of that post and she loved it. This his is her response. Suze/Severna Suze: You can post this, if it seems appropriate. The director for The Sparrow initially wanted Susan Sarandon and Tommy Lee Jones for Anne and George Edwards, but the way the script is going, it'll be Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell, and that's if we're lucky. I am in despair over what the studio has done to the story, and it gets worse every time they make Jason Rothenberg rewrite the script. The studio head began by telling Jason, "Well, he's gotta fuck 'er," with reference to Emilio and Sofia, and at that point the internal logic of my novel simply disappeared from the story. It is now The Thorn Birds Go To Mars, with elements of Casablanca and The English Patient mixed in, and a big Cowboys and Indians scene at the end. It's heartbreaking. Sofia is a Scientist, field unspecified, whose only role is to get Emilio to go to bed with her. Apart from that, she makes a scientific mistake and a man has to correct it. Jimmy Quinn turns into a sort of Lawrence of Rakhat with A Man Called Horse features. D.W. has been eliminated from the script--they decided the movie-going audience isn't ready for an ugly, gay Jesuit from Texas, I guess, although I think that would have been a grand role for Morgan Freeman. Much of D.W.'s personality has been given to George, which is okay, but Anne, as we knew her, is now basically gone. She has maybe a dozen lines, and none of the major league Attitude that made her a good strong female role. Sarandon will wonder why anyone thought of her. They've given the Father General's role to the pope from Children of God, and they'd like Samuel Jackson to play Gelasius III, which is cool. John Candotti is gone, and of the Jesuits on Rakhat, they kept Alan Pace, not Marc Robichaux. Brother Edward is still there, in a not too badly muddled version. I have no idea why the character Emilio Sandoz is still a Jesuit, apart from the fresh new startling concept of having a priest (pause here to gasp with surprise) betray his vows. They've removed all the religious issues, apart from "celibacy is a dumb idea that nobody could possibly take seriously." So it's pure exploitation to include the Church as a story element, but that's to be expected. Actors love to play dress-up, and Banderas will look smashing in a black soutane. On the bright side, Universal Studios is on the verge of bankruptcy. They were hoping that Babe II and the Psycho remake would save them, but both films tanked, and the studio hasn't had a hit in three or four years. Heads have rolled, although not that of the man who wants to do The Sparrow, which was not among the projects that were recently cancelled. Now, in my view, the best case is as follows: in a flurry of publicity that sparks sales of the books, they roll the cameras for first day of principal photography, which is when the studio sends me the Big Check. The check clears the bank, and then Universal goes belly-up. The film option is sold to a small British studio, which dumps the bastardized script and rewrites it on the assumption that the audience will have triple-digit IQs. The special effects take a backseat to the characters and plot, and the movie is a sleeper that becomes a cult classic. Only a novelist could believe in this scenario, I suppose, but we can dream... Mary ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:44:55 -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: immortality In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 15 Dec 98 23:19:34 GMT." <19981215222332Z159768-9390+7@uria.its.uu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Elizabeth Moon deals with the social implications in her Heris Serrano suite > with a more or less immortal upper class who cling on to power and influence > and work, so that the room left for younger persons is virtually non-existant. That's exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of when I said I wouldn't want to be given eternal life from above. The phenomenon that Moon describes is already in existence in many universities; I have several grad students friends who are desperately hoping that their senior professor will become so ill that he has to retire (he's about 80 but still runs the lab with an iron fist and a senile mind), because he's choking the forward motion of their research. And especially in small scientific fields (may be true in the humanities, I don't know), one person can dominate the field to such an extent that his (usually his, because of who was in science 50 years ago) ideas can only be challenged once he dies. Literally. Leaving out the personal implications to each recipient of eternal life, our societies aren't set up for it. We're not ready. It would become completely unbalanced and the repercussions are probably incalculably large and strange. Another very interesting take on the subject is Bruce Sterling's _Holy Fire_. The extension of lifespan has wholly altered the economy; old people have investments, which are "real money", and young people can only get cash, with which you can't buy anything significant. The "real money" can only be moved very slowly. It's not dystopian, but it definitely shows some of the problems. jessie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:18:31 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: immortality Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/15/98 2:03:26 PM Pacific Standard Time, briggs@CANOLOG.NINTHWONDER.COM writes: << Someone - I recall seeing somewhere it was the founder of Kodak - stated on > his 70th birthday that 'I have had just about all I can take of myself'... >> I believe he committed suicide. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:22:59 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/15/98 5:51:01 PM Pacific Standard Time, hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM writes: << Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of grudges, growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be pushed. >> Gee. I'd love to go on forever. The problem I see is that there is a limited amount of materials. If there was no death, and recycling of carbon and nitrogen, life on this planet would come to a halt in about 20-30 years. All the available carbon and nitrogen would be locked up in living things with none left even for growth or the natural repair of cells and tissues. So if we don't take our turn and then gracefully return to the cauldron, others won't get a chance at life. Madrone, wistfully ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 01:12:38 -0500 Reply-To: kamholse@fuse.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sally Kamholtz Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking > for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the > jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior > honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples The X-files had an episode entitled "Kaddish," which used the Golem story. Sally Kamholtz ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:33:11 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Rebecca Subject: Re: "ugly" women and love In-Reply-To: <2177356@flc.flink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Speaking of ugly women and love: Donna Murphy plays Captain Picard's love interest in the new STNG Insurrection. (Don't hurt yourself rushing to the theater. If you don't see it at the dollar movie theater, you are probably paying too much for a ticket.) She played the homely spinster in Steven Sondheim's musical _Passion_. She is NOT a conventionally pretty woman, but her character glows with health, hard work and peace of mind--at least till the Federation shows up. If you don't know, members of the Federation decide to deep six the Prime Directive when the secret of eternal youth is discovered on a back-water planet. Picard vows that he has always been partial to older women. Sigh. . . Rebecca ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 02:11:34 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: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Krista wrote: <> Not sure if it's exactly a golem story, but I read one a while back that might fit. I think it was called "The Dyke and The Dybbuk", maybe by Ellen Galford?? Happy hunting! Mary-Ellen Maynard Crystal Mist Glass ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 03:27:36 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: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/15/98 6:51:01 PM Mountain Standard Time, hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM writes: >Many people fear death -- considering what most people do when _threatened_ with death, I think there's strong evidence for ammending that to "virtually everybody". Eg., consider how many people who are in acute pain and have no prospect of recovery still cling desperately to life. >Most of us, I think, would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without being encumbered by the old hang ups. -- well, sure, but I don't believe in any form of afterlife. Death is oblivion; the entire universe ends when I die, and that's it. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 05:01:56 -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: immortality again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Most of us, I think, would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without being encumbered by the old hang ups.> -- well, sure, but I don't believe in any form of afterlife. Death is oblivion; the entire universe ends when I die, and that's it.-- I suspect that the universe will continue on quite nicely, regardless. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 04:54:12 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Melissa Subject: Honor Harrington books In-Reply-To: <001001be28db$1df1fe60$e2b11b26@donna> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I few weeks ago there was some discussion about the Weber's Honor Harrington books. I've never read any of these and would like to begin the series, but cannot figure out which one to start with. I would greatly appreciate it if someone could share this information. . . . Thanks! Melissa ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 09:01:08 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Bucci, Elizabeth" Subject: FW: [*FSFFU*] [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Krista: Found it: Asimov's April 1996 issue, pages 38-47, "Mortal Clay" by S. N. Dyer. It's a 1960s/1980s story that incorporates the Golem myth. Like I said, great story, which is why I remembered it, even though I had no previous notion of who Golem was... Happy reading! -----Original Message----- From: Bucci, Elizabeth [SMTP:ebucci@FOXBORO.CA] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 12:02 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Hi Krista! Yes, there was a short story which treats the jewish Golem story: it appeared in Asimov's SF magazine about two years ago, I think. I really enjoyed the story and will give you details once I get home (I'm at work right now): it ties in with some pretty interesting 1980's themes. I recommend that you consider it: it's a delightful read, especially for those of us not familiar with the Golem myth. Let me look it up and I will get back to you. (I hope that I am not getting it mixed up with something else...!) (Feel free to remind me if I take too long...!) --Elisabeth Bucci ebucci@foxboro.ca -----Original Message----- From: Krista Park [SMTP:kp6185a@american.edu] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:40 AM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: [*FSFFU*] [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples Thank You, Krista Park kp6185a@american.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 09:04:24 -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: immortality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" And even Heinlein's characters weren't actually immortal, were they? Just extremely long-lived (or am I mis-remembering? It has been quite a while). -Sandy -----Original Message----- From: kelly boyle [mailto:boyle@ALGONET.SE] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 12:39 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: [*FSFFU*] immortality Someone - I recall seeing somewhere it was the founder of Kodak - stated on his 70th birthday that 'I have had just about all I can take of myself'... I don't recall ever seeing a positive treatment of eternal life in SF, with the possible exception of Heinlein's works; are there none or have I just missed them? Kristina Hildebrand >We had this discussion during The Snow Queen. Marina and S. M. Stirling >were whole heartedly for immortality, but I can't believe they speak for >"most people". Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing >to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of grudges, >growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be pushed. >(See what happens on this list when those buttons get pushed and folk aren't >able or willing to alter their usual posting style.) Most of us, I think, >would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without >being encumbered by the old hang ups. But here I am saying "most of us" >with nothing but intuition to back that up. I guess we all assume "most of >us" feel the same about the most important aspects of life. It's always >quite a shock to find we're wrong. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 12:31:36 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Barbera Radford Subject: Re: Honor Harrington books Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Melissa, I've just started reading this series myself and while feeling ambivalent about it, still think it's worth the read. The first of the series is On Baselisk Station (or something like that). Have not found that one yet, so started with The Queen's Honor. Weber does a very thorough job of exposition in each novel, so you won't miss information if you start there. My ambivalence about the series has been that the real stars are the ships. I prefer reading about beings and their conflicts, but these are mostly the story of the battle(s). Ripping good adventure stories, for all that. And it's nice to see the woman in charge, although I really wonder how her being a woman makes a bit of difference. And maybe that's the point. Sigh. Like I said, ambivalent. Barbera Enjoy!! Barbera ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 12:24:56 -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: immortality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The closest approaches I can think of to (apparently "real") immortality are various concepts of bodiless minds from Clarke and Stapledon to "AIs" in Gibson and Pohl (the Heechee series). None of these specifies, of course, that change/death can never occur. How could they in the face of entropy? Is immortality another case of a definition with no examples? "Candioglos, Sandy" wrote: > And even Heinlein's characters weren't actually immortal, were they? Just > extremely long-lived (or am I mis-remembering? It has been quite a while). > > -Sandy > > -----Original Message----- > From: kelly boyle [mailto:boyle@ALGONET.SE] > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 12:39 PM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: [*FSFFU*] immortality > > Someone - I recall seeing somewhere it was the founder of Kodak - stated on > his 70th birthday that 'I have had just about all I can take of myself'... > I don't recall ever seeing a positive treatment of eternal life in SF, with > the possible exception of Heinlein's works; are there none or have I just > missed them? > Kristina Hildebrand > > >We had this discussion during The Snow Queen. Marina and S. M. Stirling > >were whole heartedly for immortality, but I can't believe they speak for > >"most people". Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing > >to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of > grudges, > >growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be > pushed. > >(See what happens on this list when those buttons get pushed and folk > aren't > >able or willing to alter their usual posting style.) Most of us, I > think, > >would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without > >being encumbered by the old hang ups. But here I am saying "most of us" > >with nothing but intuition to back that up. I guess we all assume "most > of > >us" feel the same about the most important aspects of life. It's always > >quite a shock to find we're wrong. > > Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 12:50:27 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: immortality again Madrone wistfully wrote: >Gee. I'd love to go on forever. The problem I see is that there is a limited >amount of materials. If there was no death, and recycling of carbon and >nitrogen, life on this planet would come to a halt in about 20-30 years. All >the available carbon and nitrogen would be locked up in living things with >none left even for growth or the natural repair of cells and tissues. So if >we don't take our turn and then gracefully return to the cauldron, others >won't get a chance at life. The scientific view of immortality, I never thought of that. The idea that we all need to accept our mortality for altruistic reasons reminds me of Logan's Run and Soylent Green. Now, if we had the option, I don't think people would voluntarily "gracefully return to the cauldron". Even if this existence becomes oppressive, humans seem averse to that kind of ultimate altruism. It's hard enough to get some of us to recycle old clothes through Good Will, much less relinquish our carbon to the great Goddess of Organic Chemistry. It's kind of like childbirth. We want to reproduce, women joyfully await the birth of their babies, but I've heard way too many in transition say "I don't want to do this anymore", knowing that, given the choice, they would just stop labor. It's fortunate for the human race that we don't always have a choice in reality. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:01:52 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Frances Green Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Terry Pratchett: "Feet of Clay." Not exactly the classic golem, and fantasy rather than science fiction, but .... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 12:59:04 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: The Thorn Birds Go To Mars Mary Russell writes: >It is now The Thorn Birds Go To Mars, with elements of >Casablanca and The English Patient mixed in, and a big Cowboys and >Indians scene at the end. It's heartbreaking. Yup, that's about what I expected. Now where's Salma Hayek? The fantasy about the way things could be sounds great. Get me two tickets for that movie. >The check clears the bank, and then Universal goes belly-up. The film option is sold to a small British studio, which dumps the >bastardized script and rewrites it on the assumption that the audience will have triple-digit IQs. The special effects take a >backseat to the characters and plot, and the movie is a sleeper that becomes a cult classic. Only a novelist could believe in this >scenario, >I suppose, but we can dream... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:18:41 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: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/98 3:02:05 AM Mountain Standard Time, donnaneely@EARTHLINK.NET writes: >I suspect that the universe will continue on quite nicely, regardless. -- not from my point of view... 8-). ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:25:05 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: immortality Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/98 1:13:54 PM Mountain Standard Time, sandy.candioglos@INTEL.COM writes: >And even Heinlein's characters weren't actually immortal, were they? Just extremely long-lived (or am I mis-remembering? It has been quite a while). -- they lived as long as they wanted to (if something didn't kill them), with periodic rejuvination treatments. I'll settle for that. Those who want to shuffle off this mortal coil can do so, and the rest of us will do our best to outlive the universe. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 19:31:18 -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: BDG: The Sparrow In-Reply-To: <199812100145.AA22818@nsl-too.pa.dec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit At 05:45 PM 12/9/98 -0800, Jessie Stickgold-Sarah 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 gets at my one of my big beefs with the book. Sandoz is persistently characterized as being "closer to God" than other people, as if there is something more noble than usual about his quest to understand and fulfill God's plan. Russell states in the back-of-the-book interview that "the risks [of religion] have to do with believing that God micromanages the world, and with seeing what may be simply coincidence as significant and indicative of divine providence. It's very easy then to go out on a limb spiritually, expect more from God than you have a right to expect, and set yourself up for bitter disappointment in His silence and lack of action." There seems to be an implied critique here, but from the text I get the sense that Russell feels that an aspiring mystic like Emilio really IS closer to God than more pragmatic folks like Candotti (who says at one point that he does not experience God directly, but rather through serving His children). Rather than being awed by and sympathetic to Sandoz, the end effect for me was the elevation of yet another self-absorbed sensitive guy to the level of "saintliness". In secular terms, sort of like a romantic unbalanced artist whose life is presumably interesting and worthy because he *feels* things so much more intensely than the rest of us. I just couldn't buy into it. Sandoz's specialness extends to his treatment by the Jesuits when he returns from the mission. They act as if what he has been through is simply unprecedented and never seem to think of approaches that are obvious to me, such as bringing in a counselor experienced with post-traumatic stress disorder. The closest thing to a treatment paradigm we see is Giuliani's brutal quasi-Freudian approach to making Emilio tell his story. In front of a hostile audience no less. And (this was the part that really got me) IT WORKS! Deafening in its absence was a parallel to the all-too-common rape of women. It would seem so easy to connect the dots. At one point Anne even draws an analogy between Emilio's growing faith in God to being in love with another person. Later, after his "betrayal", it would seem obvious to compare his rape to the much more common rape of women, whose faith in romance or the goodness of men has been shattered so often. Sofia's past history seems amazingly ā propos. But Russell never makes the connection. Though it's obvious that the Jesuits operate missions around the world, in war-torn and variously deprived places (Emilio is posted to some of them), I felt a strange discontinuity in the novel between human belief in God and political awareness. For anyone who has read the second book or has a tolerance for spoilers, I recommend reading L. Timmel Duchamp's very perceptive essay about it which can be found at http://www.halcyon.com/ltimmel/cog.html. She really gets at what I am trying clumsily to express. All this being said, one thing I really liked about the book is that the characters are so vocal and generally intelligent that I find it easy to imagine debating issues with them and feel like I've been rambling on and on! (This message was originally a lot longer and less coherent.) It's an interesting book to discuss, particularly for an atheist like me. ----- Janice E. Dawley.....Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/jedhome.htm Listening to: Sunny Day Real Estate -- How It Feels to Be Something On "...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: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 00:32:48 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Seren Subject: Re: immortality again In-Reply-To: <000701be280a$005e0be0$b04b2599@default> from "Joyce Jones" at Dec 15, 98 01:05:01 am Content-Type: text Joyce Jones wrote: > We had this discussion during The Snow Queen. Marina and S. M. Stirling > were whole heartedly for immortality, but I can't believe they speak for > "most people". Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing > to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of grudges, > growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be pushed. Hmmm. So you don't trade in your old buttons when ya get the new ones installed then? I can only take so many buttons/grudges at a time - when I get overloaded, it's meltdown time, and I start afresh. Ok, so that's rather a glib description, but do you see my point? Someone mentioned Kim Stanley Robinson's description of immortality/ longevity in the Red Mars trilogy - I'm not so sure that it was a negative thing that people started forgetting stuff after a while - in fact, for people like Ann it was a good thing. seren ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 23:37:26 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: kelly boyle Subject: literary canon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I thought this might interest those of us who feel that sf and fantasy gets unfair treatment in the academic world: I applied for research money, which I didn't get (this did not surprise me - the application was done in a hurry). The researcher doing the evaluation stated, with no hesitation, that the writers I listed were unknown to him/her. The writers in question were Gael Baudino, Mercedes Lackey, and Marion Zimmer Bradley... Isn't it amazing that there are genres that it is rather a disadvantage to know anything about, if you want to be taken seriously in the academic world? Even those taking a feminist approach to literature are very indifferent to sf, despite the vast and interesting amounts of feminist sf... Kristina Hildebrand ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 21:23:32 -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: Honor Harrington books In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19981216045412.007e26a0@www27.web2010.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Basilisk Station has just been rereleased in a $1.99 edition, so you should have some better luck finding it. Read in order *if at all possible*, although starting with #2 Honor of the Queen isn't too distracting. You don't have too much backstory missed. But, I would seriously advise against starting with anything later than #2. 1) On Basilisk Station 2) Honor of the Queen 3) The Short Victorious War 4) Field of Dishonor 5) Flag in Exile 6) Honor Among Enemies 7) In Enemy Hands 8) Echoes of Honor All but #8 are available in paper. There is also one anthology out in paper (More Than Honor), that I would probably read after #7, since one of the stories has spoilage for events mentioned in #7. Another anthology is due out next month or so, but it will be in HB. I wouldn't worry about that too much, if you get hooked, you'll be busy with all of the other stuff until it gets a pb release. Happy immersion in mind candy! I do love this series even with its faults (and I'm not so doting a fangirl that I don't recognize them). 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: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 21:31:40 -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: Honor Harrington books In-Reply-To: <444a3e45.3677ee78@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 12:31 PM 12/16/98 -0500, Barbara wrote: > > My ambivalence about the series has been that the real stars are the ships. I >prefer reading about beings and their conflicts, but these are mostly the >story of the battle(s). Ripping good adventure stories, for all that. And >it's nice to see the woman in charge, although I really wonder how her being a >woman makes a bit of difference. And maybe that's the point. Sigh. Like I >said, ambivalent. I understand your ambivalence, since I tend more to enjoy the character driven kind of stories myself, but as the series progresses, I'm beginning to see Weber pay a bit more attention to the character development rather than just inundating us with tech for tech sakes. I figure that if you get past the first hundred or so pages of the first book and haven't gotten turned off by all the jargon, you'll probably stick around for the wild rides. And you're right about the gender of the main character on a whole not making too much of a difference in the adventure, although gender does factor more strongly into some of the events in the later books and is one of the major factors in the conflict in the second book. It was rather refreshing to see female characters in command not being singled out as an anomaly in the two major navies; of course, I go all the way back to Classic Trek where they made it painfully clear that women weren't in charge of the starships ("Turnabout Intruder"). 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: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 03:45:27 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: Re: immortality again S. M. Stirling wrote: >>Many people fear death >-- considering what most people do when _threatened_ with death, I think >there's strong evidence for ammending that to "virtually everybody". Eg., >consider how many people who are in acute pain and have no prospect of >recovery still cling desperately to life. As a nurse I've seen people facing death, their own or that of a loved one. Some truly would do anything, suffer anything, to avoid it. But many come to an acceptance and see it as a better alternative than the life they're facing. Even eternal oblivion is, for some, more acceptable than unendurable suffering. Whether or not individual consciousness or a soul is eternal, as Madrone stated, our bodies are the stuff of the universe. We go on in some form, and the thought of that form can be more comforting than the acceptance of a life some judge not worth living. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:56:23 +0100 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: immortality again In-Reply-To: <001001be28db$1df1fe60$e2b11b26@donna> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>Most of us, I think, would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new >viewpoint on life without being encumbered by the old hang ups.> > >-- well, sure, but I don't believe in any form of afterlife. Death is >oblivion; the entire universe ends when I die, and that's it.-- > >I suspect that the universe will continue on quite nicely, regardless. Hmm, my theory is that we get what we expect, I hope you'll enjoy oblivion, I intend to achieve something better... Has anyone in this discussion read Melvin Morse's studies on near-death-experience? Personally, I don't see why it should be more laudable to believe in death as extinction, as to death as a new beginning. Since, no ordinary human being has returned (excepting possibly the near deather's who all appear to loose there fear of death) claiming absolute knowledge one way or the other is a great example of hubris. One just has to accept the fact that there are diverse thinking on the subject. Since it won't hurt anyone, least of all me, to be convinced of a continued form of existence I don't see why I shouldn't be just as entitled to that opinion as Stirling is to Stirling's. Britt-Inger Britt-Inger.Johansson@konstvet.uu.se Ph.D. Dept. of Art History Uppsala slott, Soedra tornet H:0 752 37 Uppsala Uppsala University ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:03:38 +0100 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: immortality again In-Reply-To: <199812170032.AAA27623@yon-net.demon.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >Someone mentioned Kim Stanley Robinson's description of immortality/ >longevity in the Red Mars trilogy - I'm not so sure that it was a >negative thing that people started forgetting stuff after a while >- in fact, for people like Ann it was a good thing. > >seren Maybe in some cases, but for most the experience was portrayed as traumatic. Britt-Inger Britt-Inger.Johansson@konstvet.uu.se Ph.D. Dept. of Art History Uppsala slott, Soedra tornet H:0 752 37 Uppsala Uppsala University ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 13:51:33 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/17/98 7:36:05 AM Pacific Standard Time, Britt- Inger.Johansson@KONSTVET.UU.SE writes: << Since it won't hurt anyone, least of all me, to be convinced of a continued form of existence I >> You know, I always feel that a diversity of ideas is a good thing...but I have sometimes found that (I know this is NOT TRUE of Britt or the people on this list...true of some of the people I work with) people who believe in a 'life' after this one are sometimes careless of this one, or, especially if they think this is a trial run or test, are careless of the planet because its only purpose is as a stage for the first step of a more important drama. I actually had one person get angry with me about my concern with environmental problems, because this world was not important. Another would occasionally tell me she hated this life and wished it were over so she could move on to the next one (she also had no patience with environmental concerns). Yeeee. I'm sure there is no harm in a belief in 'life' after this one if the person so believing is connected to life and the world. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:40:47 +1300 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jenny Subject: Honor Harrington MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I started reading Weber's series following recommendations from this list. Like Barbera, I am ambivalent. s p o i l e r He uses CS Forester's formula from the Hornblower books - a combination of warring technologies, described in loving detail, a flawed but heroic protagonist, and a context of hihg level political manipulation and gameplaying. He's a good story teller, loving the battles the best, I think. What I dislike is the sentimentality in the way Honor is rewarded for doing her duty at the end of the books, but always appears surprised and overcome. It feels to me like that part of her mind has had a lobotomy - the part that can't help but think about how other people are going to perceive her behaviour. That honouring-in-front-of-everybody scenario is a standard feature of a certain type of American movies, which also make me cringe. However, knowing that this is likely doesn't stop me reading the books. But definitely ambivalent. Sentimentality - bah humbug! Jenny R ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:02:59 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: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/17/98 4:50:28 AM Mountain Standard Time, hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM writes: >Even eternal oblivion is, for some, more acceptable than unendurable suffering.> -- true enough, but the fact that anyone would prefer extreme suffering is a testimonial to our DNA's realism. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:04:35 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: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/17/98 8:36:05 AM Mountain Standard Time, Britt- Inger.Johansson@KONSTVET.UU.SE writes: >Personally, I don't see why it should be more laudable to believe in death as extinction, as to death as a new beginning.> -- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or logically necessary. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:11:18 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: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Afterlives of various sorts (the most diabolical being karma/dharma) are the world's longest-running and most successful plot to keep the lower classes and other marginalized groups stupified and obedient, focused on another (imaginary) world while they get taken to the cleaners in this (real) one, or thinking about future lives they're not actually going to have while they're exploited in this one-and-only existance. The IWW (International Workers of the World) union songbook had a number that dealt with the phenomenon, to the tune of "In The Sweet Bye and Bye": "Long-haired preacher come down one night Tried to tell us what's wrong and what's right But when we asked about something to eat He just said in a voice so sweet: 'You shall eat, bye and bye In that glorious land beyond the sky Work and pray Live on hay You'll get pie in the sky when you die'." ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:11:44 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Tara Tieso Subject: Re: immortality again and again and. . . Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >>Most of us, I think, would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new >viewpoint on life without being encumbered by the old hang ups.> > >-- well, sure, but I don't believe in any form of afterlife. Death is >oblivion; the entire universe ends when I die, and that's it.-- > >I suspect that the universe will continue on quite nicely, regardless. > > Hmm, my theory is that we get what we expect, I hope you'll enjoy oblivion, I intend to achieve something better... I have read some of Morse's work Britt-Inger, good to bring him up in this discussion. To add to our diversity here, I offer my take on the cycle of our existence. I see myself as a student, and integral agent in the dynamic shifts of the whole. I am confident that when I have gained the full measure of my experience and wisdom here, and contributed sufficiently, I will have the opportunity to see what and who else is out there amid all that lovely, dark, bright vastness. (This is obviously a much bigger discussion). But. . . I've got things to do here, and way beyond here. tara Que e la migliore strada per. . . ? (Hey! It snowed in Minnesota!) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:17:49 -0700 Reply-To: camiller@gte.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cathie Miller Subject: immortality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, my view may be the strangest one, but this isn't a contest. I believe in God. But I'm willing to accept, after all my time in church, in bible study, in sunday school, that my belief is merely that: a belief. It is not much more defensible than anyone else's on this topic. I think the sense of justice or order or logic of the Christian faith is attractive to me. But, help my unbelief, I don't think I will be surprised if I find I'm worm food after death. Of course, I won't know it, if that's the case. And that, I think is what frightens people most of all: the end of consciousness. But the thing that really gets to me about many people who believe in a God, higher power, cosmic energy, what-have-you, is the fact that we (just as those who don't believe) tend to be unhappy, regardless. There is always a great portion of our lives that we complain about, that we don't deserve, that didn't turn out the way we thought it would. We almost know what we want, but when we get it, it isn't as good as we'd imagined. So, I think for many the belief in something else (after, better, etc.) is simply another Christmas gift list which, once fulfilled, isn't all it was cracked up to be (in our minds). Maybe I'm just being a cynic, but I don't think most of us appreciate what we have on a daily, lasting, basis, and wanting more is just our nature. What we haven't gotten yet, and what's a mystery, is always more appealing than what we have. Chris ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:01:46 +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: Alien Sexuality and Mitchison MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agnes Imgart wrote: > > I have done about expressions of human sexuality in different > > 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) I was reading this book just as you posted your message! It was an amazing book-- profoundly feminist and very convincing in its philosophies-- also virtually plotless and wonderfully strange. Has anyone read the anthology Alien Sex, ed. Ellen Datlow? --Allyson ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 00:41:04 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: kelly boyle Subject: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > -- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or logically > necessary. Well, total extinction of consciuosness after death is by its very nature not empirically demonstrable, so I don't believe it. Kristina Hildebrand ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:52:37 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: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/17/98 4:47:31 PM Mountain Standard Time, boyle@ALGONET.SE writes: >Well, total extinction of consciuosness after death is by its very nature not empirically demonstrable, so I don't believe it.> -- it is, unless you're going to require me to prove a negative, which is generally considered a suspect train of argument... 8-). Like, try to prove that I'm not God in disguise. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:14:12 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/17/98 12:12:01 PM Pacific Standard Time, JoatSimeon@AOL.COM writes: << believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or logically necessary. >> Remain skeptical but close one's mind to no idea. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:20:46 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/17/98 4:55:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, JoatSimeon@AOL.COM writes: << Like, try to prove that I'm not God in disguise. >> Well...the way some peoples did this ( I forget who) when they saw the first white folks off the sailing ships was to drown them. If they stayed drowned, they were human. If they came back to life, they were gods. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:46:35 -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: immortality again In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:04:35 EST." >-- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or >logically necessary. That someone actually posted this on a list of people who read feminist science fiction and fantasy cracks me up. No, no, don't explain how you reconcile this; I'm happy enough just sitting here and chuckling to myself. j ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:02:55 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Melissa Subject: Re: Honor Harrington books In-Reply-To: <444a3e45.3677ee78@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thanks to all who replied with the info on the Honor Harrington books. I'm intrigued by some of the responses. . . .I generally prefer more character driven novels, so I can't wait to see if I also feel somewhat ambivalent about this series. . . . Melissa ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:30:27 -0700 Reply-To: camiller@gte.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cathie Miller Subject: immortality again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit S.M. Stirling wrote: > >-- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or > >logically necessary. > to which Jessie responded: > That someone actually posted this on a list of people who read > feminist science fiction and fantasy cracks me up. No, no, don't > explain how you reconcile this; I'm happy enough just sitting here and > chuckling to myself. This raised again my belief (perhaps based upon nothing :-D ) that what we like to read and/or write may have nothing much to do with how we order our reality. I wish I could remember the names of all the writers who have said they don't believe a thing that they write. Others write fantasies but fantasy doesn't comprise a marked percentage of their reading. And to give a personal example, my closest friend is drawn to science, analytical, relies on her intellect over her emotions, is an atheist, and loves to debunk people's myths (as she labels them)--and her favorite writers are MZ Bradley, Barbara Hambly, and Anne Rice. Go figure. Chris ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 13:58:43 -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: immortality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Some more that kinda deal with this are: 1) Julian May's intervention/metaconcert/pliocene epoch books - the Limenicks (are they the ones?) are non-bodied (unless they want to be) and essentially immortal, and most of the Remillard clan has the "immortality gene". Rejuvination is also very common, and gives "normal" humans greatly epanded lifespans. The physical problems with this situation are dealt with by the fact that humans have lots of colonies on other worlds, and there was also mention of a "zero population growth" policy in place on earth (it wasn't called that exactly, but that was the idea). 2) a short story I just read in "Don't forget your spacesuit dear" by Anne McCaffrey called "the golden years" (or something close to that), about a woman over 100 whose only physical problem is arthritis, and they fix it and put her in a home - it's more of a comment on a "social state" than on immortality, but she definitely doesn't want to stay old in that reality! 3) Q on ST:TNG; they're essentially immortal, right? -Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Dave Samuelson [mailto:dnsmlsn@CSULB.EDU] Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 1998 12:25 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] immortality The closest approaches I can think of to (apparently "real") immortality are various concepts of bodiless minds from Clarke and Stapledon to "AIs" in Gibson and Pohl (the Heechee series). None of these specifies, of course, that change/death can never occur. How could they in the face of entropy? Is immortality another case of a definition with no examples? "Candioglos, Sandy" wrote: > And even Heinlein's characters weren't actually immortal, were they? Just > extremely long-lived (or am I mis-remembering? It has been quite a while). > > -Sandy > > -----Original Message----- > From: kelly boyle [mailto:boyle@ALGONET.SE] > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 12:39 PM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: [*FSFFU*] immortality > > Someone - I recall seeing somewhere it was the founder of Kodak - stated on > his 70th birthday that 'I have had just about all I can take of myself'... > I don't recall ever seeing a positive treatment of eternal life in SF, with > the possible exception of Heinlein's works; are there none or have I just > missed them? > Kristina Hildebrand > > >We had this discussion during The Snow Queen. Marina and S. M. Stirling > >were whole heartedly for immortality, but I can't believe they speak for > >"most people". Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing > >to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of > grudges, > >growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be > pushed. > >(See what happens on this list when those buttons get pushed and folk > aren't > >able or willing to alter their usual posting style.) Most of us, I > think, > >would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new viewpoint on life without > >being encumbered by the old hang ups. But here I am saying "most of us" > >with nothing but intuition to back that up. I guess we all assume "most > of > >us" feel the same about the most important aspects of life. It's always > >quite a shock to find we're wrong. > > Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 02:55:21 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: Just the facts, ma'am. >-- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or >logically necessary. What a limited existence that would be. Even a great intellect's knowledge is so meager when confronted with the reality of the universe, if she didn't allow supposition, hunches, and intuition to color her beliefs it seems she'd restrict the potential for learning. The idea that something doesn't exist unless proven by linear logic leaves humans quite 2 dimensional beings and life incomprehensible. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 12:28:43 +0100 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: immortality again and again and. . . In-Reply-To: <3d88291a.36796580@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>>Most of us, I think, would rather start fresh occasionally, get a new >>viewpoint on life without being encumbered by the old hang ups.> >> >>-- well, sure, but I don't believe in any form of afterlife. Death is >>oblivion; the entire universe ends when I die, and that's it.-- >> >>I suspect that the universe will continue on quite nicely, regardless. >> >> Hmm, my theory is that we get what we expect, I hope you'll enjoy oblivion, >I intend to achieve something better... > > >I have read some of Morse's work Britt-Inger, good to bring him up in this >discussion. > >To add to our diversity here, I offer my take on the cycle of our existence. >I see myself as a student, and integral agent in the dynamic shifts of the >whole. >I am confident that when I have gained the full measure of my experience and >wisdom here, >and contributed sufficiently, I will have >the opportunity to see what and who else is out there amid all >that lovely, dark, bright vastness. > >(This is obviously a much bigger discussion). > >But. . . I've got things to do here, and way beyond here. > > >tara Tara, you put it beautifully. My belief incompasses the concepts: stewardship and accountability both for what I do to myself and what I do to others or what I do to this planet. A phase for growing. Britt-Inger Britt-Inger.Johansson@konstvet.uu.se Ph.D. Dept. of Art History Uppsala slott, Soedra tornet H:0 752 37 Uppsala Uppsala University ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:34:42 +0100 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: immortality In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hmm, more novels on immortality with critique are Tanith Lee's Don't bite the sun and Drinking Sapphire Wine. Both of them among the most fascinating reads I've encountered. Also Clarke wrote a novel on this topic, I don't remember the title, might it have been The stars like dust? or Night something? He first wrote a short story which he then developed into a novel. Good reading. Britt-Inger Britt-Inger.Johansson@konstvet.uu.se Ph.D. Dept. of Art History Uppsala slott, Soedra tornet H:0 752 37 Uppsala Uppsala University ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:37:05 +0100 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: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >In a message dated 12/17/98 4:55:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, >JoatSimeon@AOL.COM writes: > ><< Like, try to prove that I'm not God in disguise. > >> > >Well...the way some peoples did this ( I forget who) when they saw the first >white folks off the sailing ships was to drown them. If they stayed drowned, >they were human. If they came back to life, they were gods. > >Madrone Shall we try the method empirically, we seem to have a willing subject .....? Britt-Inger Britt-Inger.Johansson@konstvet.uu.se Ph.D. Dept. of Art History Uppsala slott, Soedra tornet H:0 752 37 Uppsala Uppsala University ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:23:26 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Bertina Miller Subject: Re: Just the facts, ma'am. In-Reply-To: <000701be2a74$e94d9020$914b2599@default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Well, let me be the first to say as an atheist I find that life is incomprehensible, but that doesnt mean that I would not want proof of the supernatural before believing in it. Bertina bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Joyce Jones wrote: > >-- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or > >logically necessary. > > What a limited existence that would be. Even a great intellect's knowledge > is so meager when confronted with the reality of the universe, if she didn't > allow supposition, hunches, and intuition to color her beliefs it seems > she'd restrict the potential for learning. The idea that something doesn't > exist unless proven by linear logic leaves humans quite 2 dimensional beings > and life incomprehensible. > > Joyce > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:38:06 +0100 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: Just the facts, ma'am. In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Let's pursue this further. If I state that I believe in God as a result of a personal encounter, would you take my word for it or disregard my testimonial as a sign of mental aberration? Britt-Inger >Well, let me be the first to say as an atheist I find that life is >incomprehensible, but that doesnt mean that I would not want proof of the >supernatural before believing in it. > >Bertina >bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu > >On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Joyce Jones wrote: > >> >-- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or >> >logically necessary. >> >> What a limited existence that would be. Even a great intellect's knowledge >> is so meager when confronted with the reality of the universe, if she didn't >> allow supposition, hunches, and intuition to color her beliefs it seems >> she'd restrict the potential for learning. The idea that something doesn't >> exist unless proven by linear logic leaves humans quite 2 dimensional beings >> and life incomprehensible. >> >> Joyce >> Britt-Inger.Johansson@konstvet.uu.se Ph.D. Dept. of Art History Uppsala slott, Soedra tornet H:0 752 37 Uppsala Uppsala University ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:54:50 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Bertina Miller Subject: Re: Just the facts, ma'am. In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Neither.:) I wouldnt register it one way or another-what you believe in has no effect on me whatsoever. Bertina bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Britt-Inger Johansson wrote: > Let's pursue this further. If I state that I believe in God as a result of > a personal encounter, would you take my word for it or disregard my > testimonial as a sign of mental aberration? > > Britt-Inger > > >Well, let me be the first to say as an atheist I find that life is > >incomprehensible, but that doesnt mean that I would not want proof of the > >supernatural before believing in it. > > > >Bertina > >bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu > > > >On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Joyce Jones wrote: > > > >> >-- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or > >> >logically necessary. > >> > >> What a limited existence that would be. Even a great intellect's knowledge > >> is so meager when confronted with the reality of the universe, if she didn't > >> allow supposition, hunches, and intuition to color her beliefs it seems > >> she'd restrict the potential for learning. The idea that something doesn't > >> exist unless proven by linear logic leaves humans quite 2 dimensional beings > >> and life incomprehensible. > >> > >> Joyce > >> > > > Britt-Inger.Johansson@konstvet.uu.se > Ph.D. > Dept. of Art History > Uppsala slott, Soedra tornet H:0 > 752 37 Uppsala > Uppsala University > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:01:12 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: kelly boyle Subject: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Believing something means holding it for true without having proof. If you have proof, you do not believe, you know. Kristina Hildebrand ---------- > Från: Bertina Miller > Till: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Ämne: Re: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. > Datum: den 18 december 1998 14:23 > > Well, let me be the first to say as an atheist I find that life is > incomprehensible, but that doesnt mean that I would not want proof of the > supernatural before believing in it. > > Bertina > bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 19:12:26 +0300 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Maijan H. Al-Ruwaili" Organization: KSU Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Please pardon my intrusion: Do not you think that your beliefs, how you feel, how you read, how you understand, what you know, and what you don't know, are always already set for you by the culture within which you are living. Nothing is "freely chosen," whether to be non-bliever or believer. kelly boyle wrote: > Believing something means holding it for true without having proof. If you > have proof, you do not believe, you know. > Kristina Hildebrand > > ---------- > > Från: Bertina Miller > > Till: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > > Ämne: Re: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. > > Datum: den 18 december 1998 14:23 > > > > Well, let me be the first to say as an atheist I find that life is > > incomprehensible, but that doesnt mean that I would not want proof of the > > supernatural before believing in it. > > > > Bertina > > bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:38:38 -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: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Huh? It may just be my own cultural influence, but that seems really fatalistic to me. It does seem to hinge on this word "culture", though. What do you mean by that? -Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Maijan H. Al-Ruwaili [mailto:ruwaili@KSU.EDU.SA] Sent: Friday, December 18, 1998 8:12 AM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. Please pardon my intrusion: Do not you think that your beliefs, how you feel, how you read, how you understand, what you know, and what you don't know, are always already set for you by the culture within which you are living. Nothing is "freely chosen," whether to be non-bliever or believer. kelly boyle wrote: > Believing something means holding it for true without having proof. If you > have proof, you do not believe, you know. > Kristina Hildebrand > > ---------- > > Från: Bertina Miller > > Till: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > > Ämne: Re: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. > > Datum: den 18 december 1998 14:23 > > > > Well, let me be the first to say as an atheist I find that life is > > incomprehensible, but that doesnt mean that I would not want proof of the > > supernatural before believing in it. > > > > Bertina > > bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:46:13 -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: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:01:12 +0100." <199812181600.KAA88290@piglet.cc.uic.edu> >Believing something means holding it for true without having proof. >If you have proof, you do not believe, you know. That's not how I've ever used the word; what you describe sounds more like "faith" (a la Douglas Adams: "I refuse to prove that I exist," said God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing").* Since I love word roots and looking up a spread of varying definitions (YMMV), I checked Webster's, which offers "to have a firm religious faith" and "THINK, SUPPOSE: to take as true or honest". Otherwise, what word do we use for the things that we believe in because we have proof? * I do know that Douglas Adams did not originate the concept. But he's the only one I can quote. jessie ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:19:20 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anne Vespry Subject: Believing [Was Re: immortality again] Comments: To: Cathie Miller In-Reply-To: <3679DA5E.5F42@gte.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > S.M. Stirling wrote: > > >-- believe nothing that is not either empirically demonstrable or > > >logically necessary. > > to which Jessie responded: > > That someone actually posted this on a list of people who read > > feminist science fiction and fantasy cracks me up. No, no, don't > > explain how you reconcile this; I'm happy enough just sitting here and > > chuckling to myself. Interesting... as a reader of science fiction and (especially) fantasy, I always thought that part of what made a good story good was that it made suspending one's *dis*belief effortless. Part of the reason I don't tend to read mainstream lit is that it tends to be both believable and depressing -- and if I wish to experience those sensations I can just watch the evening news. If I believed the SF&F tales, I'd spend far too much time worrying about the socio-economic standing of the peasants (or the part of the starship crew who aren't on the bridge) and the ecological impact of unicorns on their local ecosystems (if they purify water by touching it with their horns, then what happens to all the little water beasties who might have eaten the algae -- and then what happens to the bigger beasties who would have eaten the little water beasties, and...). Anne Anne Vespry ******* http://www.vex.net/~maverick After Stonewall Bookshop ***** never forget avespry(at) *** only dead fish ollisdotuottawadotca * swim WITH the stream ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 10:50:49 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: ALIEN SEX Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" An interesting collection. Think "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" is probably the best known of the bunch. There was a second collection, but the titles escapes me at present. Pax, Maryelizabeth Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX http://www.mystgalaxy.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:48:06 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: Believing [Was Re: immortality again] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/18/98 11:30:15 AM Mountain Standard Time, avespry@OLLIS.UOTTAWA.CA writes: >If I believed the SF&F tales, I'd spend far too much time worrying about the socio-economic standing of the peasants (or the part of the starship crew who aren't on the bridge)> -- Precisely. I write this stuff, but I try to keep a clear sense of what's fantasy and what isn't. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:20:37 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: kelly boyle Subject: SV: [*FSFFU*] SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Well, total extinction of consciuosness after death is by its very nature not > empirically demonstrable, so I don't believe it.> > > -- it is, unless you're going to require me to prove a negative, which is > generally considered a suspect train of argument... 8-). > > Like, try to prove that I'm not God in disguise. So, how do you prove that someone's consciuosness is extinguished, rather than gone on elsewhere? That would indeed be proving a negative. And of course, if you succeed in proving that your own is gone after death, I shall be mildly suspicious... Kristina Hildebrand ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 19:56:16 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: immortality >Hmm, more novels on immortality with critique are Tanith Lee's Don't bite >the sun and Drinking Sapphire Wine. A number of Lee's other works deal with immortality or prolonged life (one day, when I have time and the to-be-read pile of unread books diminishes, I must have a rereading Tanith Lee binge) Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 19:48:43 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: Just the facts, ma'am. >Even a great intellect's knowledge >is so meager when confronted with the reality of the universe, if she didn't >allow supposition, hunches, and intuition to color her beliefs it seems >she'd restrict the potential for learning 'The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we _can_ imagine' JBS Haldane, well-known early C20th biologist, brother of Naomi Mitchison. He also made the comment that if you could deduce anything about the character of a Deity-creator from nature, it was that he was inordinately fond of beetles. As an influence on his sister, I guess this just squeaks by as on topic... And, further re Mitchison, her wonderful Arthurian fantasy - _To the Chapel Perilous_ - is being republished and can be ordered via Amazon.com. And _The Corn King and the Spring Queen_ is also reprinted, at least in the UK. Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:06:37 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/18/98 11:15:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, boyle@ALGONET.SE writes: << So, how do you prove that someone's consciuosness is extinguished >> Well, there is the problem of how consciousness arises. For instance, if you if you close an electrical switch current will flow through a circuit, creating a strong enough magnetic field to deflect the pointer on a compass. When you open the switch, current stops flowing, the magnetic field ceases to exist, and the compass arrow goes back to normal. We don't imagine that, when the current stops, the magnetic field goes on to a higher level of existence. We pretty much figure it does what it looks like it does: it stops. Consciousness and awareness are not generated out of nothing: they arise from the interaction of mind and body: a wondrous and complex generator of electromagnetic fields. When the mind and body aren't here any more, consciousness...like the magnetic field...stops. There is nothing left to generate it, nor to contain all the memories that make the personality what it is. I certainly sympathize with the desire to go on forever, and/or to meet again with our dead. And if believing such things makes you feel better...well, along with Paracelsus, what can it hurt? But so often the idea of a 'life' after this one is braided in with ideas of "higher plane", or "higher learning experience" or "heaven": Ideas that suggest there is something better about death than life. And I think sometimes that such ideas cheat us of the real wonder, value, and fragility of this life and interfere with our focus on Life itself. I also wonder sometimes if we might fight a lot harder for our present lives and the lives of our loved ones if we couldn't think, oh, well, once I'm dead things will be better, or, justice will be meeted out, or, I'll get another chance, or Jesus will heal my hurts... Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 20:11:02 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Dagmar Fink Organization: Black*Box - http://www.blackbox.at/ Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ltimmel@HALCYON.COM,E-Mail schrieb am 12/15/98 um 20:35 Uhr an Dagmar Fink zum Thema "Re: [*FSFFU*] [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories": ----------------------------- >Krista Park wrote: >> >> Other than Marge Piercy's _He, She, and It_ and N. Lee Wood's _Looking >> for the Mahdi_, does anyone know of science fictional treatments of the >> jewish Golem story? I'm trying to include the concept in a senior >> honors thesis and I'd like a few more examples > > >Cynthia Ozick tells a version of the Golem story (with both the Golem & >the Golem's master as female) in one of the stories in her collection of >stories titled _Levitation_. It's literary fantasy rather than true SF, >but you might find it interesting for comparative purposes. > >there is another one in cynthia oazick's (ozick's, is she the same?) "puttermesser" dagmar fink --- OffRoad 1.9r unregistered -- ............................... black*box ............................ .. Online Community ............................... Vienna, Austria .. .. Modem: +43-1-4073132 ........... TCP/IP: blackbox.at (Port 3000) .. ....................... http://www.blackbox.at/ ...................... ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 23:50:36 +0300 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Maijan H. Al-Ruwaili" Organization: KSU Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Candioglos, Sandy wrote: > Huh? It may just be my own cultural influence, but that seems really > fatalistic to me. It does seem to hinge on this word "culture", though. > What do you mean by that? > > -Sandy Culture means the declared and hidden codes by which we live and perceive things, if we ever perceive anything. Fatalism itself is a cultural code; the death thread earlier discussed is another. Just because we tend to polarize nature and culture, we tend to forget that our choices (free will, if you will) are made by "a self" that exists prior to culture. Empirical reality and so too idealistic reality are both cultural constructs whose codes are concealed so that they are (or any of them) taken as the "ultimate" conclusion. Now what counts as a proof? In every age, the status of the proof itself changes, otherwise science (whatever that may mean) would not have advanced. What is proof today would not be tomorrow. And when I said "culture" it did not mean "your" culture in particular. I meant culture in general (wherever a "person" is defined as person and subject: that is, the codes by which we force the distinction between animals and humans in order to kill in the name of humanity). Even atheists believe, assume, and take for granted. They are not hard core empiricists. (Empiricism itself has its own assumptions: unverified axioms). I think the cultural codes of being an atheist worth analysis rather than asking for proof before you believe. Belief itself would a cultural code, or else it would have created such a thread. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Maijan H. Al-Ruwaili [mailto:ruwaili@KSU.EDU.SA] > Sent: Friday, December 18, 1998 8:12 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. > > Please pardon my intrusion: > > Do not you think that your beliefs, how you feel, how you read, how you > understand, what you know, and what you don't know, are always already set > for > you by the culture within which you are living. Nothing is "freely chosen," > whether to be non-bliever or believer. > > kelly boyle wrote: > > > Believing something means holding it for true without having proof. If you > > have proof, you do not believe, you know. > > Kristina Hildebrand > > > > ---------- > > > Från: Bertina Miller > > > Till: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > > > Ämne: Re: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. > > > Datum: den 18 december 1998 14:23 > > > > > > Well, let me be the first to say as an atheist I find that life is > > > incomprehensible, but that doesnt mean that I would not want proof of > the > > > supernatural before believing in it. > > > > > > Bertina > > > bmiller@medmail.mcg.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 19:39:00 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/18/98 3:04:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, ruwaili@KSU.EDU.SA writes: << cultural influence, >> I don't know if this will help, but the way one of my fisheries instructors put it is: "The last thing an ocean fish would discover is salt water." The last thing we often see is how much of what we feel to be true is an artifact of the time and place where we happened to be born. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 03:49:42 +0300 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Maijan H. Al-Ruwaili" Organization: KSU Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks for that wonderful line. [Is it your instructor's or you just made up] Spenoza said something like: if you ask a falling stone why are you going down, its answer will be something like: "because I like it." Demetria M. Shew wrote: > In a message dated 12/18/98 3:04:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, > ruwaili@KSU.EDU.SA writes: > > << cultural influence, >> > I don't know if this will help, but the way one of my fisheries instructors > put it is: > > "The last thing an ocean fish would discover is salt water." > > The last thing we often see is how much of what we feel to be true is an > artifact of the time and place where we happened to be born. > > Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:23:52 -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: Honor Harrington books MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit << Thanks to all who replied with the info on the Honor Harrington books. I'm intrigued by some of the responses. . . .I generally prefer more character driven novels, so I can't wait to see if I also feel somewhat ambivalent about this series. . . . >> I was kind of surprised at the people who expressed the opinion that this series is -not- character driven. I think Weber has managed a good mix of techno/action and character building, thereby managing to please a fairly diverse audience. I know I tend to skim over the loving descriptions of weapons technology and actually skip the (to me) boring political maneuvering among the Peeps, but am riveted by Honor and her crew. BTW, was anyone disappointed with the most recent book? I was, mainly because the book spends long periods of time on the "meanwhile, back at the ranch stuff", and I just wasn't that interested. I prefer to follow a limited number of threads or points-of-view ... Jeri, just finishing THE LAST HAWK by Catherine Asaro, which is wonderful -- Jeri Wright destrier@richmond.infi.net ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 20:29:49 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Nina M. Osier" Subject: Re: Honor Harrington books MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeri Wright wrote: > I was kind of surprised at the people who expressed the opinion that > this series is -not- character driven. I think Weber has managed a good > mix of techno/action and character building, thereby managing to please > a fairly diverse audience. I know I tend to skim over the loving > descriptions of weapons technology and actually skip the (to me) boring > political maneuvering among the Peeps, but am riveted by Honor and her > crew. > > BTW, was anyone disappointed with the most recent book? I was, mainly > because the book spends long periods of time on the "meanwhile, back at > the ranch stuff", and I just wasn't that interested. I prefer to follow > a limited number of threads or points-of-view ... > > I, too, was surprised that the books did not seem character-driven to some readers. I also was surprised that some felt Honor's gender was not important, considering her troubles with Pavel Young and her interactions with the Graysons. Personally I loved the technology parts - most of the time; once in awhile they did bog down for me, but not often. I'm curious, Jeri. Is the latest book for you the paperback edition of "In Enemy Hands"? Or is the hardback, "Echoes of Honor" (for which I haven't persuaded myself to shell out the money)? Nina Osier ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 22:07:31 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Tanya M. Bouwman-Wozencraft" Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] Just the facts, ma'am. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-12-18 11:50:36 EST, you write: << * I do know that Douglas Adams did not originate the concept. But he's the only one I can quote. >> The Bible, Hebrews 11:1--"Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of them not seen." Tanya ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 22:07:29 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Tanya M. Bouwman-Wozencraft" Subject: Re: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-12-17 15:20:51 EST, you write: << Afterlives of various sorts (the most diabolical being karma/dharma) are the world's longest-running and most successful plot to keep the lower classes and other marginalized groups stupified and obedient, focused on another (imaginary) world while they get taken to the cleaners in this (real) one, or thinking about future lives they're not actually going to have while they're exploited in this one-and-only existance. The IWW (International Workers of the World) union songbook had a number that dealt with the phenomenon, to the tune of "In The Sweet Bye and Bye": "Long-haired preacher come down one night Tried to tell us what's wrong and what's right But when we asked about something to eat He just said in a voice so sweet: 'You shall eat, bye and bye In that glorious land beyond the sky Work and pray Live on hay You'll get pie in the sky when you die'." >> This is OT, but.....I know many ministers (my mother being one) and I do not know of one who would tell starving people that they would eat when they get to heaven! The ones I know would get those people some food! And most of them would work to get them jobs, or better paying jobs, or whatever might be necessary for them to live and prosper in this life. I resent your pronouncement that my belief, and the beliefs of millions of other people, is only a tool of rich scum to keep poor people "in their place". My belief is a faith that enriches my life and keeps me from fearing death. (I don't seek death either because I do enjoy this life and my belief is that this life is itself a gift to be enjoyed to the fullest.) Tanya ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 22:10:52 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: Honor Harrington books Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/18/98 6:11:49 PM Mountain Standard Time, destrier@RICHMOND.INFI.NET writes: >I was, mainly because the book spends long periods of time on the "meanwhile, back at the ranch stuff", and I just wasn't that interested. >> -- when you're writing a long series, particularly with a "broad canvas" effect, it gets harder and harder not to spend too much time recapitulating. Keeping all those eggs in the air at the same time is difficult! I do think Dave spends too much time on description; if he economized a little there, he'd have more room elsewhere. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 22:12:11 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: Honor Harrington books Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit One think I like about the "Honor Harrington" series is that it points out that much behavior is "positional/functional". Ie., a competent admiral doesn't act "male" or "female" -- he/she acts like an admiral. This emphasizes the weakness of essentialist arguments. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 20:43:39 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cynthia Gonsalves Subject: Re: Honor Harrington books In-Reply-To: <367AC7E8.6212F5A@richmond.infi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 04:23 PM 12/18/98 -0500, Jeri wrote: (Spoilage for Echoes of Honor in my comments) x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x > >BTW, was anyone disappointed with the most recent book? I was, mainly >because the book spends long periods of time on the "meanwhile, back at >the ranch stuff", and I just wasn't that interested. I prefer to follow >a limited number of threads or points-of-view ... > I have a fondness for one of the POWs we meet in Book 6 of Echoes. The back and forth structure of Echoes where we spent the odd numbered books off in the Alliance and the even numbered books on Hades with Honor and her comrades caused me some frustration. I'm glad that David is taking the time to show us events going on in the conflict that don't have anything to do with Honor; it helps to convey the idea of how really *big* this fight is going to get. However, this new emphasis on other points of view than Honor's is a marked divergence from the structure used in all of the previous books and takes a bit of getting used to. Also, I found the timeline of events less clearly set up in the non-Honorcentric sections and was a bit confused as to when certain events happened (When was Hancock attacked? When was Basilisk attacked?). Things got a bit frenzied there and I got muddled as a result. > >Jeri, just finishing THE LAST HAWK by Catherine Asaro, which is >wonderful Yup, agreed! And I've got The Radiant Seas on order so I can get a bigger Skolian fix. Has anyone read the recent related Asaro story that was in Analog? I couldn't find it around here. Looking forward to Catherine's return and more stuff... 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, 18 Dec 1998 20:50:38 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cynthia Gonsalves Subject: Re: Honor Harrington books In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:10 PM 12/18/98 -0500, S.M. Stirling wrote: >-- when you're writing a long series, particularly with a "broad canvas" >effect, it gets harder and harder not to spend too much time recapitulating. >Keeping all those eggs in the air at the same time is difficult! Especially when the omelette preparation is so frenzied! Those eggs are on a true death ride on the way to the frying pan. > >I do think Dave spends too much time on description; if he economized a little >there, he'd have more room elsewhere. The books are getting *big*...I'm not sure David has found a happy medium between description (including recaps of events) and characterization quite yet, but I will say that some of his best characterization took place in In Enemy Hands and that he's starting to try different ways of setting up the stories' overall structure. And Steve...thanks for the story in More Than Honor, your contribution fit in well with the overall tone of the saga, and I find the Peeps rather fascinating in and of themselves. 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, 19 Dec 1998 00:58:40 -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: Honor Harrington books In-Reply-To: <4.1.19981218203101.00bb2dd0@mail> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Cynthia Gonsalves wrote: (snip) > Yup, agreed! And I've got The Radiant Seas on order so I can get a bigger > Skolian fix. Has anyone read the recent related Asaro story that was in > Analog? I couldn't find it around here. It's well worth going to the trouble of finding. Very tightly written and a good addition to the Skolian series. > Looking forward to Catherine's return and more stuff... Me too. > Cynthia Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 06:08:26 -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: Honor Harrington books MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nina asked: << I'm curious, Jeri. Is the latest book for you the paperback edition of "In Enemy Hands"? Or is the hardback, "Echoes of Honor" (for which I haven't persuaded myself to shell out the money)? >> I was talking about ECHOES OF HONOR. I'm always worried when a sf/f series starts becoming less personal and more global in scope, such as following a larger number of characters instead of one or a handful. It's a trend I've seen a lot in series, and has never failed to disappoint me. (Not that I'm giving up on Honor yet; I can always hope that he'll get back on track with the next book. But I won't be buying it in hardback until I've read it from the library first.) Cynthia wrote: << However, this new emphasis on other points of view than Honor's is a marked divergence from the structure used in all of the previous books and takes a bit of getting used to. >> For me, it's not a matter of getting used to it. I'm interested in the individual characters. I'm not that interested in the "big" story EXCEPT for how it affects the individual characters. -- Jeri Wright destrier@richmond.infi.net ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 07:23:55 -0700 Reply-To: camiller@gte.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cathie Miller Subject: more immortality MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Anne wrote: > Interesting... as a reader of science fiction and (especially) fantasy, I > always thought that part of what made a good story good was that it made > suspending one's *dis*belief effortless. Part of the reason I don't tend > to read mainstream lit is that it tends to be both believable and > depressing -- and if I wish to experience those sensations I can just > watch the evening news. This is a good point, and sometimes I shy from mainstream, or realistic, fiction for the same reason (and I am afraid to watch the news--all those half-truths and their compressed views of events). However, I think in some ways fantasy and some SF keep me emotionally more distant from the story than I would be if I were reading, for instance, Angela's Ashes. Don't get me wrong, I love SF and it comprises most of my reading. However, I know from the git-go that it is not likely to make me as uncomfortable as reading about, say, Ethiopia of the past 100 years or so. And this need I have, sometimes, for less discomforting fiction seems to me to parallel my need to believe (not KNOW) certain ideas, be they reincarnation, heaven, UFO's, etc. (and I know I may get some lashing for putting heaven int here with UFO's, but if we go to the bottom line, what do we KNOW about either?) Many people's impetus toward God is not much more than a flight from the incomprehensible: LACK OF CONSCIOUSNESS. How can we abide that? It's ultimately unimaginable, as well as utterly humbling. Chris ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 09:14:59 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Richard Holmes Subject: Re: Immortality again On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, "Demetria M. Shew" writes: > In a message dated 12/15/98 5:51:01 PM Pacific Standard Time, > hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM writes: > > << Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing > to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of grudges, > growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be pushed. > >> > > Gee. I'd love to go on forever. The problem I see is that there is a limited > amount of materials. If there was no death, and recycling of carbon and > nitrogen, life on this planet would come to a halt in about 20-30 years. All > the available carbon and nitrogen would be locked up in living things with > none left even for growth or the natural repair of cells and tissues. So if > we don't take our turn and then gracefully return to the cauldron, others > won't get a chance at life. > > Madrone, wistfully I agree with Madrone that I'd love to go on learning and living -- not the least of which I'd like to know is whether this human species learns to build a reasonable, nurturing environment for us and other creatures. We do have the capabilities, IMHO, in the intellectual arena -- I just don't know if the motivation is strong enough in sufficient number of us to succeed. If we do succeed, it will be as a result of us as a group, rather than one "great individual". I do think I'd like to reserve the right to "jump species" (or even out of the carbon-based life form group altogether)... I do think 700 to 2000 years of human existence might be about right - especially if the species doesn't evolve towards a "better" society but goes towards the "worse". Of course, granting this type of lifespan to us with our current society and mindset would be absolute disaster - we can't even manage what meager parcels we've been granted to any degree of competence, it seems. Alas... -Richard. @ \@/ Richard A. Holmes (rholmes@ccrma.stanford.edu) @ | @ \|/ "In the name of Annah the Allmaziful, the @ | Everliving, the Bringer of Plurabilities, haloed @ , , | , , be her eve, her singtime sung, her rill be run, @ ' ' ' ' ' unhemmed as it is uneven!" - J. J. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 11:45:13 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Linda Quinlan Comments: To: feministsf@uic.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I will be out of town from Dec. 25th until Jan 3, please stop all emails to me for that time period. Thanks. Linda Later, Linda ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 10:26:55 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Catherine Asaro reminder Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Catherine will be at Mysterious Galaxy at 2 PM on Saturday, December 26, signing copies of RADIANT SEAS and visiting with folks and generally contributing to my post-holiday enjoyment of life. If you are able to attend, please join us. If not, and you are interested in a signed copy of Catherine's book(s), please contact the store at mgbooks@ax.com. We regret we are sold out of the December "Analog" with her story. Pax, Maryelizabeth Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX http://www.mystgalaxy.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 14:26:56 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: Honor Harrington books Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/18/98 9:49:34 PM Mountain Standard Time, cynthia1960@HOME.COM writes: >And Steve...thanks for the story in More Than Honor, your contribution fit in well with the overall tone of the saga, and I find the Peeps rather fascinating in and of themselves. -- thanks! I wish I'd had time to do a story for the 2nd anthology. It says something about our educational system that a fan once asked Dave if there were any historical analogues for the action in the books. This where the primary villain is Rob. S. Pierre, head of the Committee of Public Safety, headquartered in Nouveau Paris... sheeesh! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 16:59:23 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Claudia Mastroianni Subject: Re: [FSFFU] Help w/ Golem stories Alfred Bester, better known for _The Demolished Man_ and _The Stars My Destination_ wrote a book called Golem^100 (that is, Golem to the 100th power). I read it too long ago to recall how like a traditional golem the one in the book was, but it's probably worth a look if you can find it (I'm pretty sure it's long out of print--published in 1980). Good luck! Claudia ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 23:49:42 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: immortality again In-Reply-To: <411596f.367b1871@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Tanya M. Bouwman-Wozencraft wrote: (snip)r > thinking about future lives they're not actually going to have while they're > exploited in this one-and-only existance. > > The IWW (International Workers of the World) union songbook had a number that > dealt with the phenomenon, to the tune of "In The Sweet Bye and Bye": > > "Long-haired preacher come down one night > Tried to tell us what's wrong and what's right > But when we asked about something to eat > He just said in a voice so sweet: > 'You shall eat, bye and bye > In that glorious land beyond the sky > Work and pray > Live on hay > You'll get pie in the sky when you die'." > >> > > This is OT, but.....I know many ministers (my mother being one) and I do not > know of one who would tell starving people that they would eat when they get > to heaven! The ones I know would get those people some food! And most of > them would work to get them jobs, or better paying jobs, or whatever might be > necessary for them to live and prosper in this life. I resent your > pronouncement that my belief, and the beliefs of millions of other people, is > only a tool of rich scum to keep poor people "in their place". My belief is a > faith that enriches my life and keeps me from fearing death. (I don't seek > death either because I do enjoy this life and my belief is that this life is > itself a gift to be enjoyed to the fullest.) > > Tanya > True, Tanya. But the likes of Elmer Gantry have also always been around, and I've always figured they were who the song was aimed at. G-d knows there are several on the radio & TV today. Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 10:11:49 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Linda Quinlan Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I will be out of town from Dec. 25th until Jan 3, please stop all emails to me for that time period. Thanks. Linda Later, Linda Later, Linda ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 13:33:39 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/19/98 10:42:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, mathews@UNM.EDU writes: << and keeps me from fearing death >> But...maybe we SHOULD fear death. Maybe we should pour it down our spines and freeze it with terror so we will have the backbone to stand up for Life. Maybe we should file our teeth and sharpen our fingernails and fight anyone...absolutely anyone, including fathers and lovers...anyone who acts against life, whether that is bombing Iraq or work first or leaking over- crowded classrooms or pesticides in our food or telling us not to cry because it will be better in the sweet by-and-by. Maybe we should be like the bear, with our back up against death and our hair wild and eyes flaming and jaws dripping bite-anticipatory saliva in protection of our cubs, in protection of life present and life to come. Madrone, afraid of death and proud of it. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 14:01:28 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: marcie begleiter Subject: Re: unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <9579923b.367d4303@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi all, Have enjoyed lurking and occasionally posting here. Other projects demanding much attention and I need a break from the conversation thanks, marcie ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 00:18:01 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: immortality again Madrone wrote so eloquently: >Maybe we should be like the bear, with our back up against death and our hair >wild and eyes flaming and jaws dripping bite-anticipatory saliva in protection >of our cubs, in protection of life present and life to come. Beautifully written. I'm not afraid of death. I don't think fear of death is what makes us fight for a better life because no matter how much we love life, how hard we fight to make it bearable or even joyous, we all still will die. The fight is to make this life worthwhile whether it's our only or our thousandth one, it's still the only one we have right now. Yes there's something to be said for the sweet bye and bye. Perhaps it would be lovely if all the poor, downtrodden folk would one day float in the clouds and play golden harps. It's good to have that hope in mind. But it's even better to make this life the best you can. Harps are for later, now is for now. Believing we have a later doesn't make now any less important. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 10:29:00 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: kelly boyle Subject: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have never quite understood why it is assumed that it is a comfort to believe in an afterlife. In my case, believing in a life after death means that I have to take a much longer view of my actions than I really want to, and that I have to make moral decisions that I could otherwise have avoided. I also occasionally doubt my ultimate destination, and eternity in hell is not a very comfortable subject of contemplation. In most religions I have come across, an afterlife - or reincarnation - is not a belief which induces comfort for the believer, but a moral and ethical guidance. This is true regardless of whether you are worried about going to hell or about being reborn as a frog. The pie in the sky when you die attitude seems to be a much later invention, presumably introduced when people started asking for social changes. I feel that the moral effects of a belief in an afterlife is often subtly addressed in sf, too; the issue is not just what it would be like for society if everyone lived for ever, but also what effect it has on the individual's moral choices. Incidentally, I rather enjoy this little medieval anecdote and thought you might, too: Two monks agreed that the one who died first would come back and tell the other what heaven was like. One of them died, and the other eagerly anticipated the visit. One night, he is woken by the ghost appearing to him, sits up in bed, and says, 'Qualiter?' (How?). The other monk's ghost looks at him, says, 'Totaliter aliter' (Completely different), and disappears. Kristina Hildebrand ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 12:18:03 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: CMUNSON Subject: Re[2]: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Comments: To: "Tanya M. Bouwman-Wozencraft" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Author: "Tanya M. Bouwman-Wozencraft" at Internet Date: 12/18/98 10:07 PM The IWW (International Workers of the World) union songbook had a number that dealt with the phenomenon, to the tune of "In The Sweet Bye and Bye": Just a quick note: The IWW is the INDUSTRIAL Workers of the World. "International would be redundant. Nice to see IWW songs quoted here though. Chuck0 Ground Zero GMB IWW DC ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:03:14 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: immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/98 11:34:40 AM Mountain Standard Time, DMadrone@AOL.COM writes: >But...maybe we SHOULD fear death. -- very true. Death is (a) a loathsome horror, and (b) inevitable. It's impossible not to fear death; denial does no good, and the genes are strong. On the other hand, one should not let fear determine one's actions. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:03:07 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: Re[2]: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/21/98 9:10:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, CMUNSON@AAAS.ORG writes: << The IWW is the INDUSTRIAL Workers of the World. >> I talked to a member of the inland boatmans union awhile back, and he told me two interesting things: the first was that after the Wobblies it became illegal to do international unions (?) and the second is that international unions are coming back anyway. I keep thinking how different things would be if the IWW had had more success. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:12:18 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: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/21/98 3:03:36 AM Mountain Standard Time, boyle@ALGONET.SE writes: >In most religions I have come across, an afterlife - or reincarnation - is not a belief which induces comfort for the believer, but a moral and ethical guidance.> -- carrot and stick. "Big JuJu is watching you all the time!" Or, if you don't grovel before the Brahmins and accept your lot as untouchable pariah scum, you get to do 1000 lives as a newt. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:07:09 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Stahl, Sheryl" Subject: Re: Immortality again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > > << Many people fear death, but I don't think most are willing > > to keep up with this ol' existence, building up year after year of > grudges, > > growing more and more jaded, developing more and more buttons to be > pushed. > > >> > > > > Gee. I'd love to go on forever. The problem I see is that there is a > limited > > amount of materials. If there was no death, and recycling of carbon and > > nitrogen, life on this planet would come to a halt in about 20-30 years. > All > > the available carbon and nitrogen would be locked up in living things > with > > none left even for growth or the natural repair of cells and tissues. > So if > > we don't take our turn and then gracefully return to the cauldron, > others > > won't get a chance at life. > > > > Madrone, wistfully > I read a book somewhat recently which addressed this - I kept meaning to check at home for the title - I think it was _Tech Heaven_ (by Nagata?!) A woman signed up her husband (without his knowledge) for a cryo program in which he would be frozen when he died and then 'revived' once a cure for whatever killed him was found. After he was killed in a forest fire (no spoiler - it happens at the beginning), he is frozen and she lobbies and works for the organization looking for these cures for death. There are some dream like sequences that the (frozen) husband experiences which relate to his relationship to the earth. It was a good read - really a character study of the wife and how she tries on one hand to go forward with her life ... new relationships etc, but also tries to hold on to the old, working to revive her husband. sheryl ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:46:10 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Demetria M. Shew" Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/21/98 12:14:13 PM Pacific Standard Time, JoatSimeon@AOL.COM writes: << In most religions I have come across, an afterlife - or reincarnation - is not a belief which induces comfort for the believer, but a moral and ethical guidance. >> I have never understood this. Could you please explain? Thanks. Madrone ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:40:48 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kathleen Subject: Re: SV: [*FSFFU*] immortality again In-Reply-To: <199812211003.EAA24974@piglet.cc.uic.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, kelly boyle wrote: > Two monks agreed that the one who died first would come back and tell the > other what heaven was like. One of them died, and the other eagerly > anticipated the visit. One night, he is woken by the ghost appearing to > him, sits up in bed, and says, 'Qualiter?' (How?). The other monk's ghost > looks at him, says, 'Totaliter aliter' (Completely different), and > disappears. > > Kristina Hildebrand > Great anecdote! Much more erudite, but it reminds me of my favorite grafitti - "The truth shall make you laugh". Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:07:37 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Barbara E. Roma" Subject: Re: immortality again >Madrone wrote: > >>Maybe we should be like the bear, with our back up against death and >our hair >wild and eyes flaming and jaws dripping bite-anticipatory saliva in >protection of our cubs, in protection of life present and life to come. Why? I don't fear *being* dead -- I fear dying. I fear being old and infirm, helpless. I fear having a stroke and being immobile, unable to communicate, yet still capable of thinking and feeling. I fear getting Alzheimers. I fear being in a nursing home, tied to my bed, sitting in my own waste for days with festering bedsores with maggots in them. I fear having a painful disease and not getting enough medication to keep me comfortable. I fear turning stupid (like my parents). They hobble around and refuse to use wheelchairs and walkers. So they fall and break bones. I fear losing my eyesight and not seeing the ants crawling around my house. Or the disgusting mess in the bathroom. I fear the process of dying. Is it painful? Will I have nightmares? Will those few seconds of dying seem endless? Will I get that sick scared feeling in my stomach like when I'm on a scary roller-coaster? I don't fear BEING dead. I hope to be strong and smart enough to know when my time on earth is over. I would like to be strong enough to CHOOSE when and how I die. I have it all planned, but I suspect I will chicken out. BTW, fighting death is one of the many reasons for skyrocketing medical costs. Barb, not planning to delurk, but I couldn't take it any more......