From LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Fri Sep 10 19:36:56 1999 Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 20:48:18 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at University of Illinois at Chicago (1.8c)" To: Laura Quilter Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9907B" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 07:43:30 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mike Stanton Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Margery Kempe wrote: > Also what is "pointcounting"? It's an objective technique for determining the proportions of *visually identifiable* components in a mixture; it's used to calculate, say, the proportion of valuable minerals in a rock, of different minerals in a rock or women in a crowd. There are many methods, but in the latter case, we might take a photograph of the crowd and lay a clear film printed with gridlines over the photo. Then we'd look at every grid intersection and determine whether there was the face of a man or women at that point. If there were 100 intersections and 5 of them had women under them, then there would be 5% of women in the crowd. Because of the need to correct for sampling errors etc, it's not quite as simple as that but that's the general principle. There's a related technique used in, say, blood counts, where a thin layer of blod is spread evenly on a slide engraved with a grid and we count the proportions, say, of red and white blood cells in several grid squares and calculate an average. It's one of our most important techniques for determining things like human traffic patterns in a store or factory, for testing male/female responses to displays in stores and so on. > If so I know at least the first part is true. I often > see a crowd of brokers at a bid and sometimes it looks > as if half the crowd is bidding on stock but when you > count the bidders, only 5-10% of the crowd is really > involved. I think our eyes deceive us when it comes > to picking out numbers in a crowd. Politicians, activists etc use this particular way our eyes deceive us to sway crowds by exaggerating their own support. In a very famous case, the KGB used it to try and take over British trade unions during the 60s/70s and later. A few activists strategically placed in a crowd of unionists would cheer or boo vociferously for certain speakers etc and were thus able to intimidate much larger numbers of moderates. Because union leaders were elected by show of hands, the KGB came within a hair's breadth of winning and were defeated only when legislation requiring secret balloting was promulgated. Zaitsev, the notorious KGB man, claimed in his book that they managed to control unions when less than 1% of the membership were either KGB agents or in the pay of the KGB. Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 10:14:24 +0300 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: U Sanna Koulu Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 In-Reply-To: <19990708044910.55243.qmail@hotmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Claudia Lyndhurst wrote: > I think that [Mike] was trying to say, without offending anyone, is that > the research SMCharnas quoted was a lot of "hooey" because the > researchers made obvious errors of methodology. Not being a student of sociology, I have no idea of the methodology involved.. However, I thought the research SMCharnas quoted was at least interesting. If it's only a case of a small minority always attracting more attention than the majority, why doesn't group of, say, 10 % men and 90 % women also seem half-and-half? Wondering, - Sanna Koulu -Sanna Koulu -------------------------------------------------------- - ------------Naisen saa parahultaisen pehmeäksi------ -050-5849 617 ---------------kun sen laittaa ammeeseen kylpygeelin--- -Seanna @ irc --------------kanssa. Sitten sen voi kääriä huopaan--- -Viljo Sohkasen k. 3 E 38 ---ja syöttää sille suklaata.-------------- -01370 VANTAA ------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 00:39:44 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Suzanne Hartman Organization: ZDNet Mail (http://www.zdnetmail.com:80) Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike Stanton wrote: > Politicians, activists etc use this particular way > our eyes deceive us to sway crowds by exaggerating > their own support. I noticed that a lot when I was active in the women's movement at grad school where the activists would be so prominent that we all thought there were lots of them but when we thought about it we realised that there were hardly any. They won any way because most women just couldn't stand their continual troublemaking and left the movement. Margery Kempe Free web-based email, anytime, anywhere! ZDNet Mail - http://www.zdnetmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:45:30 HST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Margery Kempe Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Mike Stanton wrote: >Politicians, activists etc use this particular way >our eyes deceive us to sway crowds by exaggerating their own support. I noticed that a lot when I was active in the women's movement at grad school where the activists would be so prominent that we all thought there were lots of them but when we thought about it we realised that there were hardly any. They won any way because most women just couldn't stand their continual troublemaking and left the movement. I think that its the same in all movements because the activists have the time and more importantly the dedication to take on scut work and attend meetings at obscure times and so on. They get on because of this dedication but its unfortunate that it drives other women out. Margery Kempe _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 00:50:54 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Suzanne Hartman Organization: ZDNet Mail (http://www.zdnetmail.com:80) Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Margery Kempe wrote: > I noticed that a lot when I was active in > the women's movement at grad school where > the activists would be so prominent that we > all thought there were lots of them but when > we thought about it we realised that there > were hardly any. They won any way because > most women just couldn't stand their continual > troublemaking and left the movement. Margery It happens in a lot of other meetings seminars and conferences too. I notice it in product meetings like one I attended last week. The ones who shout the loudest are the ones all too often who win because nobody can be bothered to stand up to them. Sue Free web-based email, anytime, anywhere! ZDNet Mail - http://www.zdnetmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 10:15:38 CEST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Claudia Lyndhurst Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed On 8 Jul 99, at 10:14, U Sanna Koulu wrote: >Not being a student of sociology, I have no idea of the methodology >involved.. However, I thought the research SMCharnas quoted was at least >interesting. If it's only a case of a small minority always attracting more >attention than the majority, why doesn't group of, say, 10 % men and 90 % >women also seem half-and-half? The same thing happens with small groups of men in an audience of women. I saw some work recently on debates at a conference in Lusaka I attended last year which was concerned with AIDS and women and was attended by mainly by women but with a few men. A lot of women "activists" complained that men took over every debate but the men protested that this was untrue. When the transcripts and video tapes were examined, the men were found to have spoke*less* frequently than one would expect from their proportionality. I think it all boils down to a matter of perception. I hate to be the one whining but I think that the Cherryh "debaters" are beginning to drift off topic and break our agreement. I notice Sue was so keen to jump in that she just forwarded a note from Margery without adding anything to it ... always a bad sign possibly indicative of overindulgence in controlled substances . Seriously, folks, I suggest we drop this topic and get back to the Tully-Khym argument. Claudia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:32:47 +0000 Reply-To: mystgalaxy@ax.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Organization: Mysterious Galaxy Subject: Advertising for Butler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I believe Warner Aspect at the very least has run print ads for Octavia Butler's PARABLE books in their paperback editions in "Locus" and "Science Fiction Chronicle" and the like. I think PARABLE OF THE SOWER's ad may even have included one of the earlier repackaged titles, IIRC. Warner Aspect also made a lot of use of Butler and Cherryh's blurbing BROWN GIRL IN THE RING, seems like. Maryelizabeth -- *********************************************************************** Mysterious Galaxy Local Phone: 858.268.4747 3904 Convoy Street, #107 Fax: 858.268.4775 San Diego, CA 92111 Long Distance/Orders: 1.800.811.4747 http://www.mystgalaxy.com Email: mgbooks@ax.com *********************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 10:11:04 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lisa Hopkinson Subject: Re: _Pride of Chanur_ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Suzanne Hartman wrote: >If I were to guess at the time period for which she > modelled her trading blocs (NOT her universe) in Compact space, I'd have >guessed that she chose >the late 13th Century, the time when the Hanseatic League was at its >height. I don't know much about history but Im prepared to bet that you're all wrong. I think that Cherryh *adapted* her image of the "traders" from two science fiction sources, Isaac Asimov's Traders in the early part of the _Foundation_ series and *mostly* the Polesotechnic League of Poul Anderson. I know Anderson's League is modelled after the Hanseatic League so there is of course a connection there, but I think that Cherryh didn't go back to the source but she took her ideas from these two writers. When I look at the character of Nick van Rijn and strip away and the extravagances like the terrible Dutch accent, the manners and the apparent flab, I think you come with something not too far different from Pyanfar Chanur. Allowing for its much greater size, van Rijns Solar Spices & Liquors, too, specially in its way of trading is very similar to the way that the Chanur Group works. On a bigger scale, all the companies in the Polesotechnic League are rivals (some of the David Falkayn tales are based on this) but as in _Mirkheim_, they have an armed force in common and they cooperate in times of need. Finally, the Polesotechnic League grew out of the need for the traders to stand together in the face of the incompetence and corruption of the government and its inability to face externals enemies exactly as the Merchanters had to form the Alliance because of the incompetence, isolationism and corruption of the government of Earth as shown in Book 1 of _Downbelow Station_. The most obvious difference is part of the characters of the 2 authors and is the way that Anderson is so pessimistic and Cherryh is so very optimistic about the future of mankind. The comments AJ made about the cyclic theory of history where "empires" rise and fall so that civilisation builds to a peak and then crashes by to barbarity is the way that Anderson thinks. Cherryh sees the future, barring a setback or 2, as nothing but the yellow brick road to Utopia or as close to it as humans can get. Lisa _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 10:13:15 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lisa Hopkinson Subject: Re: OT Schooling Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Suzanne Hartman wrote: >It's just as bad in the US. Schools are turning out >students with high school diplomas who can't read or write and a lot of >pressure is put on teachers to pass students who've flunked or even ones >who havent attended school for more than a few days a month. We're desperate for people to do for jobs that dont need college English and math but do need people who can read labels, fill in forms and add up figures. We get a lot of applications from people who cant read or write at all and some applicants who are functionally illiterate have high school and equivalency diplomas from community colleges. You might think that the diplomas are faked, but we always check on them at the issuing school and I don't think we've had a fake one yet. We used to run training courses to bring illiterates into reading and writing but the dropout rate was huge and very few illiterates were interested or able to stick out the courses until they were able to read let alone write. Women lasted longer than men but we noticed that if a man dropped out, his girlfriend would usually drop out at the same time. The courses used to run from our offices and crime became a major problem while they were on. Anything left lying around unattended even for a minute would vanish and muggings in the streets nearby shot up. I think it was easier to get money through crime than to sweat away at a minimum wage job. Lisa _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 18:37:35 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In the interests of historical as well as scientific rigour, please could we have a source for the > very famous case, [when] the KGB used it >to try and take over British trade unions during the 60s/70s and later. A few >activists strategically placed in a crowd of unionists would cheer or boo >vociferously for certain speakers etc and were thus able to intimidate much >larger numbers of moderates. The SWP I could more readily believe... Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 18:34:55 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: 'hard' vs 'soft' (value-laden descriptions) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >What you don't know, Margery, is that there's >been many arguments on this list on the value of "soft science" compared to >"hard science" And also, I think, some querying of the whole concept of 'hard' vs 'soft' as definitions of science, science fiction, etc. The idea that 'hard' (whatever that means) scientists are somehow purer, more rigorous, etc (and that 'purity' and 'rigour' are goods in themselves), than 'soft' scientists is one that as a historian I find, perhaps, somewhat dubious. Are we talking anyway about 'social science' re '(?real) science'? Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 21:21:01 CEST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Claudia Lyndhurst Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Lesley Hall wrote: >And also, I think, some querying of the whole concept >of 'hard' vs 'soft' as definitions of science, science fiction, etc. The >idea that 'hard' (whatever that means) scientists are somehow purer, more >rigorous ... and again: >In the interests of historical as well as scientific rigour, please could >we have a source for the ... Lesley Please do me the courtesy of leaving me and my comments out of a discussion which I have specifically said I do not wish to participate in. In saying this, I am speaking also on behalf of all the "core" Cherryh debaters. As far as the second quote is concerned: Mike was very wrong in not censoring out all possibly provocative statements out of this and others of his comments. I suggest all of us ignore it so that we can avoid a repetition of last month's unpleasantness. For goodness' sake let's continue the discussion of _The Pride of Chanur_. Claudia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 09:23:00 HST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Margery Kempe Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Lesley Hall wrote: >In the interests of historical as well as scientific >rigour, please could we have a source for the I hope we're not moving into another round of nastiness. Margery Kempe _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 12:25:58 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Suzanne Hartman Organization: ZDNet Mail (http://www.zdnetmail.com:80) Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lesley Hall wrote: > In the interests of historical as well as scientific > rigour, please could we have a source for the > > very famous case, [when] the KGB used it > >to try and take over British trade unions during the > 60s/70s and later. A few I see now why we have to discuss controversial topics offlist. Please let's get back to Cherryh. I'm not interested in this pettiness. Sue Free web-based email, anytime, anywhere! ZDNet Mail - http://www.zdnetmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 20:21:26 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Claudia: In the interests of non-provocation, I refrain from the responses I could make to your highhanded comments. Though I do now recollect why (apart from having been very busy with other matters) I have not been posting of late... Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 14:35:09 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Pettiness query MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Is there something petty in asking for documentation? The similarity in tone in all these calls to return to the discussion of Cherryh's work is also interesting. -----Original Message----- From: Suzanne Hartman [mailto:suzhartman@ZDNETMAIL.COM] Lesley Hall wrote: > In the interests of historical as well as scientific > rigour, please could we have a source for the > > very famous case, [when] the KGB used it > >to try and take over British trade unions during the > 60s/70s and later. A few I see now why we have to discuss controversial topics offlist. Please let's get back to Cherryh. I'm not interested in this pettiness. Sue ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 20:26:30 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 5 Jul 1999 to 6 Jul 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If I were going to be nasty, I would be much nastier than making a mild query! I'm also interested that I get the flak for querying something tendentious someone else brought up. I can assure recent joiners of the list that all this is mild indeed compared to some of the debacles I recall. Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 11:29:36 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michelle Warner Subject: Re: OT Schooling MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii -- > Sorry, been out of town and missed most of discussion. If its not too much trouble, could someone privatly foward past postings on this topic? Thanks so much, Michelle > >It's just as bad in the US. Schools are turning out > >students with high school diplomas who can't read > or write and a lot of > >pressure is put on teachers to pass students who've > flunked or even ones > >who havent attended school for more than a few days > a month. > > We're desperate for people to do for jobs that dont > need college English and > math but do need people who can read labels, fill in > forms and add up > figures. We get a lot of applications from people > who cant read or write at > all and some applicants who are functionally > illiterate have high school and > equivalency diplomas from community colleges. You > might think that the > diplomas are faked, but we always check on them at > the issuing school and I > don't think we've had a fake one yet. > > We used to run training courses to bring illiterates > into reading and > writing but the dropout rate was huge and very few > illiterates were > interested or able to stick out the courses until > they were able to read let > alone write. Women lasted longer than men but we > noticed that if a man > dropped out, his girlfriend would usually drop out > at the same time. The > courses used to run from our offices and crime > became a major problem while > they were on. Anything left lying around unattended > even for a minute would > vanish and muggings in the streets nearby shot up. I > think it was easier to > get money through crime than to sweat away at a > minimum wage job. > > > > > Lisa > > > _______________________________________________________________ > Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit > http://www.msn.com > === Ah, Lesbians. Yummmy. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 14:31:43 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Daniel Krashin Subject: Re: Clarion Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Mike Stanton [mailto:m_stanton@POSTMASTER.CO.UK] >On 7 Jul 99, at 10:33, Todd Mason wrote: >I've heard of this "Clarion" but can you expand a bit? Famous SF workshops, held in Michigan and Washington State every summer. I highly recommend it to any aspiring serious SF/Fantasy writer. I will also note that my attendance back in the late 80's gave me a bad case of writer's block that is only recently starting to go away. There are several Clarion diaries on the web that will give you an idea of the ecstasy and madness that is Clarion, if anyone is interested let me know and I'll dig them up. Danny` _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 16:36:25 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Locus Awards (courtesy DARKECHO@aol.com) or see em on the LOCUS W ebsite Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU, "horror@listserv.indiana.edu" , Multiple recipients of list SF-LIT , sf in film and literature Comments: cc: Fred Ollinger , Virginia Ely , Frederic Bush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Best Science Fiction Novel To Say Nothing of the Dog, Connie Willis Best Horror Novel Bag of Bones, Stephen King Best Fantasy Novel A Clash of Kings, George R.R. Martin Best First Novel Brown Girl in the Ring, Nalo Hopkinson Best Novella ''Oceanic'', Greg Egan (Asimov's Aug 1998) Best Novelette [tie] ''The Planck Dive'', Greg Egan (Asimov's Feb 1998) ''Taklamakan'', Bruce Sterling (Asimov's Oct/Nov 1998) Best Short Story ''Maneki Neko'', Bruce Sterling (F&SF May 1998) Best Non-fiction The Dreams Our Stuff Is Made Of: How Science Fiction Conquered the World, Thomas M. Disch Best Art Book Spectrum 5: The Best in Contemporary Fantastic Art, Arnie & Cathy Fenner, eds. Best Collection The Avram Davidson Treasury, Avram Davidson; Robert Silverberg & Grania Davis, eds. Best Anthology Legends, Robert Silverberg, ed. Best Artist Michael Whelan Best Editor Gardner Dozois Best Magazine Asimov's Best Book Publisher Tor Best '90s Author Connie Willis ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 18:05:20 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: SMCharnas Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 6 Jul 1999 to 7 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >This year, "classic" Clarion has had Mike >Resnick, Michaela Roessner, and Scott Edelman (in his SCIENCE FICTION >AGE-editor avatar) among the instructors; the only C West instructor I can >remember at the moment is editor Gordon Van Gelder. I think Karen Joy >Fowler is scheduled for West. (Sorry, header lost -- I don't remember who posted the above) I've taught at both Clarions, loved it. CWest was devised specifically, as I remember, to encourage the participation of city folks and people who might not have the bucks to pick up and spend most of the summer in a university dorm in Michigan (single moms, people with jobs they have to keep putting some time in, etc.). Both are splendid; I recently recommended a young man from my city for Clarion West, and he came home completely jazzed and has sold two stories and is polishing his novel for what looks like a sale, too. If you go at the right moment for you (which of course cannot be predicted), this intensive, small-group experience can really give you your initial lift-off, as well as a cohort of fast friends who started out with you. It ain't cheap, but from what I've heard and seen, it's mostly well worth it. Suzy Charnas (purveyor, it seems, of scientific "hooey." Sorry about that, but I don't see why the experiment mentioned by Barbara (?) and commented on by me can be dismissed as invalid on the basis of the admittedly scanty information presented here. Maybe somebody could elucidate in an e-mail to me? I cer- tainly do *not* want to provoke a re-hash of an acrimonious debate on this list, but the explanatory comments presented just now don't seem to me to address the point that to the viewers of the pictures, male = norm and fe- male = anomoly, hence the inflation of the proportion of female presence.) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:00:13 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Ianthe Subject: Re: 'hard' vs 'soft' (value-laden descriptions) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" You'll probbaly hate me for this, because I'm 24 hours behind in my posts, and you want this resolved, but I think that it is relevant.. and 'mild' Lesely wrote: >And also, I think, some querying of the whole concept of 'hard' vs 'soft' as >definitions of science, science fiction, etc. The idea that 'hard' (whatever >that means) scientists are somehow purer, more rigorous, etc (and that >'purity' and 'rigour' are goods in themselves), than 'soft' scientists is >one that as a historian I find, perhaps, somewhat dubious. >Are we talking anyway about 'social science' re '(?real) science'? I've always called social sciences fuzzy sciences. Rather than Hard and Soft. I find it dubious too Lesely, to box sf into categories of hard and soft, and the idea of a more rigorous, pure examintation being the better. I see science fiction as a medium, simply, in which to view and examine ourselves, and that human nature is so ambiguous, that the idea of one being better than the other is ridiculous. Jenn ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:00:15 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Ianthe Subject: Re: Locus Awards - Willis Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Locus Winners: >Best Science Fiction Novel >*To Say Nothing of the Dog* Connie Willis I'm very happy about this. I don't know how many of you have read this book, but I loved it, it's a semi-sequel to The Doomsday Book, and it was the wittiest cleverest science fiction novel that I read over the summer. I believe that it is feminist science fiction too, the difference between Verity, (from near-future Oxford) and her 19th century companions is so sharp, it's hilarious, she's a strongly grounded independant woman, but in the Victorian Era, she is seen as a stoic spinster-to-be cousin from the wap waps. They were so silly in the Victorian Era! and Connie Willis illustrates it and Verity's contrasting gravity beautifully. I also like the way that she begins her chapters with a sum up of what happens in 20 words that seem to create a series of non-sequiters, like a word game. It reminds me of Neil Gaimans's Sandman comics. And that she pulls in so many references from other material and literature, the take off of Three Men in a Boat, 'Alice', 1930's mystery novels etc.. I like the way she weaves these in. So I'm equally pleased with her place as best 90's author, although I'm sure that we can all name equally good author's if we're pressed... *nudges* Jenn ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 08:29:47 +0100 Reply-To: edward.james@newscientist.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Edward James Subject: Re: Pettiness query MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Todd Mason wrote: > Is there something petty in asking for documentation? The similarity in > tone in all these calls to return to the discussion of Cherryh's work is > also interesting. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Suzanne Hartman [mailto:suzhartman@ZDNETMAIL.COM] > Lesley Hall wrote: > > > In the interests of historical as well as scientific > > rigour, please could we have a source for the > > > very famous case, [when] the KGB used it > > >to try and take over British trade unions during the > > 60s/70s and later. If someone raises an _extremely_ dubious historical a case, then it is perfectly legitimate to ask for documentation: it is not petty at all, it is simply a way of keeping the argument on the level. Edward James ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 20:17:08 +0000 Reply-To: mystgalaxy@ax.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Organization: Mysterious Galaxy Subject: TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A quick reminder for members of this list that the FEMSF-Lit list began a discussion of TSNOTD on Monday, July 5. Maryelizabeth -- *********************************************************************** Mysterious Galaxy Local Phone: 858.268.4747 3904 Convoy Street, #107 Fax: 858.268.4775 San Diego, CA 92111 Long Distance/Orders: 1.800.811.4747 http://www.mystgalaxy.com Email: mgbooks@ax.com *********************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:22:09 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: 'hard' vs 'soft' (value-laden descriptions): Ianthe MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" And, of course, physics and such offshoots as cosmology have gone quasimystical, and the social sciences have been obsessed with proving how numerate they are for quite some time. In both cases, sometimes to their detriment. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 19:44:20 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mike Stanton Subject: Re: _Pride of Chanur_ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 8 Jul 99, at 10:11, Lisa Hopkinson wrote: > I don't know much about history but Im prepared to bet > that you're all wrong. I think that Cherryh *adapted* > her image of the "traders" from two science fiction > sources, Isaac Asimov's Traders in the early part of > the _Foundation_ series and *mostly* the Polesotechnic > League of Poul Anderson. I think this is a very ingenious theory, just as all the theories put forward are ingenious. But I think you're all wrong. My reasoning is based on the "facts" that Cherryh tells us about the denizens of the Merchanter universe and those we know about Cherryh herself. But first it's necessary to remember that no one is expecting historical accuracy or remotely exact correspondence and that we're allowed to combine traders from any era in whatever proportions appears desirable. We can combine Ugh the famous, larcenous Neanderthal trader of 100000 BC with Nick Leeson the famous, larcenous trader of 1995AD if we so wish. Cherryh's liking for, and knowledge of, the ancient civilisations is well-known as is her liking for Latin. So one could, would expect her to at least consider the "classical" traders (the Phoenicians / Carthaginians, the Greeks and the Romans themselves) in considering models. Further, it isn't, I think, stretching things too far when I say that the Venetians and Genovese traders of the Middle Ages etc were linear descendents of the early traders. So I'm proposing that her model was a combination of the ancient traders and the Venetians / Genovese of later times. Her description of the traders of the Merchanter universe is very similar to that of the ancients. Voyages were very long (years in some cases) so that the traders had to build up "family lives" on the trip and at each end (exactly as the ancients); cargos were often small, low bulk, high value (like the spices the ancients carried); and the Merchanters were preferably traders but were skilled fighters and armed to repel off pirates and the Fleet (as for the ancients and, especially, the Venetians / Genovese). The Merchanters' strong political influence differs from the (probably) poorer influence of the ancients, but, except in the latter parts of their voyages, the Venetians etc were generally very influential. Further the Venetians (like the Merchanters) were essentially controlled by an aristocratic oligarchy (the "Council of Ten'); Genoa was similar and at its peak in ~1300 it virtually controlled the trade to Europe (as did the Merchanters within and outside Alliance territory). A combination of the two , therefore, is a pretty fair model. The clincher to my mind is simply geography. Trade routes in Cherryh's universe bear a strong resemblance to those followed by the ancients in the Indian Ocean area. When I first read _Tripoint_ and then _Downbelow Station_ I was struck by how much resemblance there was between her description of the Alliance/Union trading areas and those described by the anonymous writer of the famous _Periplus of the Erythraean Sea_, the famous first century sailor's "guidebook" to the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. It's almost impossible for the Cherryh fan to read about past and even today's trading dhows in the Indian ocean and *not* think about the Merchanters. Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 19:46:48 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mike Stanton Subject: Re: Clarion Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 8 Jul 99, at 14:31, Daniel Krashin wrote: > Famous SF workshops, held in Michigan and Washington State every summer. I highly recommend it to any > aspiring serious SF/Fantasy writer. I will also note > that my attendance back in the late 80's gave me a bad > case of writer's block that is only recently starting > to go away. It must be unnerving for even a fairly experienced writer to expose his work to the critical eye of the sf "greats" - at least that's the way it appears to me. Non-fiction writers, however "great", never unnerve me because I can "rationalise" myself into believing that there's only a *quantitative* difference between their abilities and mine - just a question of degree in other words! Good fiction writers, on the other hand, tend to overawe me because there's a *qualitative* difference between their abilities and mine. Like, I suspect, others on this list, I'm a novelist manque; indeed, I'm the grandson, son, brother, nephew and husband of novelists manque. But no novelist is ever so "manque" that he entirely loses the dream of one day writing a bestseller which is why, of course, I'd never let a really good writer see my work . > There are several Clarion diaries on the web that > will give you an idea of the ecstasy and madness > that is Clarion, if anyone is interested let me know > and I'll dig them up. I'd be grateful if you would. I find the whole topic fascinating. Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:46:39 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Whatever happened to David Palmer? Comments: To: Multiple recipients of list SF-LIT , SCIENCEFICTION-L@LISTSERV.INDIANA.EDU Comments: cc: "jffal@webtv.net" , Frederic Bush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Nope. Anyone else? -----Original Message----- From: jffal@webtv.net [mailto:jffal@webtv.net] Sent: Friday, July 09, 1999 3:42 PM Hey Todd Do you know whatever happended to David Palmer, who authored the well recieved Emergence and the not so well recieved (but to my mind, inventively space operaish and Phillip Jose Farmerish) Threshold? Some out there in cyberland suggest that he simply quit writing despite being contracted to complete more books. Jeff ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 20:31:33 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mike Stanton Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 6 Jul 1999 to 7 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 8 Jul 99, at 18:05, SMCharnas wrote: > If you go at the right moment for you (which > of course cannot be predicted), this intensive, > small-group experience can really give you your > initial lift-off, as well as a cohort of fast friends > who started out with you. It ain't cheap, but from > what I've heard and seen, it's mostly well worth it. I gather from your comment that just having the cash isn't enough to get one onto Clarion? Not that I'm thinking of trying! It must be rewarding for both teacher and pupils when both are devoted to the end of turning novices into polished writers. My staff audit (="judge") so many courses these days where both the teacher and the pupils are just going through the motions, that it comes as a pleasant shock to realise that there really are teachers who care and pupils who are anxious to learn. Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 00:39:02 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: SMCharnas Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 8 Jul 1999 to 9 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >From: Mike Stanton >Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 6 Jul 1999 to 7 Jul 1999 > >On 8 Jul 99, at 18:05, SMCharnas wrote: > >> If you go at the right moment for you (which >> of course cannot be predicted), this intensive, >> small-group experience can really give you your >> initial lift-off, as well as a cohort of fast friends >> who started out with you. It ain't cheap, but from >> what I've heard and seen, it's mostly well worth it. > >I gather from your comment that just having the cash isn't enough to get one >onto Clarion? Not that I'm thinking of trying! Why not? Go for it, man! You have to submit a sample of your work, and that does seem to be part of the selection process -- not that you're supposed to be a polished producer of fiction right out of the starting gate, but they do want some evidence, I think, that you are a reader -- ie you can sort of spell and construct a sentence and have some idea of what a story *is*, which is the kind of thing most of us learn from reading other people's stories. Although I have to say, at CWest one year there was a woman who was so abso- lutely clueless and talented that I was astonished that she had made the cut. So there seems to be a good bit of leeway in the selection process, probably to do with gender balance, balance of short-story and of novel interest, etc. I'm not sure, because the instructors have no part in the selection process. > >It must be rewarding for both teacher and pupils when both are devoted to the >end of turning novices into polished writers. >Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) Well -- I don't think I could say I go with that in mind. It's really a lot more tightly focused and specific than that: you come with a few things you've been working on, and you are given exercises to sharpen up and broaden your attack on your work and to prod you to produce work more freely than you are maybe used to doing when you have to be self-starting, with less worry about how polished it is -- because you're there to have people help you to see your strengths *and* your weaknesses in ways you just can't find for your- self. Personally, I think it's great training (getting some polish on your work is really another stage, for most attendees) because it teaches you that you *can* produce, you *can* survive knoweldgeable criticism under the con- trol of teachers whose job includes making sure that it never degenerates into an attack on you, and you (probably) never again have the same fears of putting your work out there for people to see -- editors, friends, colleagues, readers, whatever -- which leaves you able ot use the best de- vice I know of for fine-tuning work, which is having it read by good readers chosen and instructed by you so that they don't jusst hand it back saying they really liked it (which is reassuring but is of little use to the work). Occasionally somebody comes along ready to learn about polish; but mostly it's just breaking would-be writers out of their hermetically sealed little hamster wheels of closely guarded private work, or their stale, limiting writers' groups of anxious amateurs at home, or some other pattern that they are ready to leave behind. And there are indeed always one or two members who find themselves paralyzed (or simply exhausted) as writers for months afterward. The process is not without its dangers. But the rewards are great. And yeah, I *love* the teaching. Most of us do, or we wouldn't leave our own projects behind for a two-week stint and go talk with strangers about *their* work. Talk about the benefits of being broken out of your own little dog-track! it's wonderfully energizing and refreshing, as well as a challenge that asks something different from you than writing your own stuff. Suzy Charnas ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 23:47:58 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Dave Samuelson Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 6 Jul 1999 to 7 Jul 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------9799A30582459B3A360742A4" --------------9799A30582459B3A360742A4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike Stanton wrote: > On 8 Jul 99, at 18:05, SMCharnas wrote: > > > If you go at the right moment for you (which of course cannot be predicted), > this intensive, > > small-group experience can really give you your initial lift-off, as well as a > cohort of fast friends > > who started out with you. It ain't cheap, but from what I've heard and seen, > it's mostly well worth it. > > I gather from your comment that just having the cash isn't enough to get one onto > Clarion? Not that I'm thinking of trying! > > It must be rewarding for both teacher and pupils when both are devoted to the end > of turning novices into polished writers. My staff audit (="judge") so many > courses these days where both the teacher and the pupils are just going through > the motions, that it comes as a pleasant shock to realise that there really are > teachers who care and pupils who are anxious to learn. > > Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) Off-Topic Response: You touch on a sore point with me, one disappointed teachers on this list and others echo frequently. I don't teach creative writing, though I occasionally consult on sf stories students dare to write despite teachers' disapproval (my minuscule success with fiction and poetry does not qualify me in my estimation and I balk at the group therapy aspect). Our creative writing staff does have some remarkable successes, not all of which is their doing, since students bring some undeniable talents of their own; most of their students genuinely seem to want to be there. Since access to Clarion is competitive, you can assume students want even more to be present; by all accounts, they fill the time with a lot of work, too. Teaching in a less competitive environment, however, I also think most students make an effort. My greatest challenge, met intermittently, is getting them to take seriously that I take them seriously. Incompetence is rife, though it was ever so; with limited access to college before WWII, "gentlemen," then in the majority, often took a "C" or "average" grade for minimum seat time. The actual median grade at American universities is now "B," though all of our students clearly are not above average. Many teachers still reward them for seat time and put little effort into work with their writing or development of ideas, so that I present them with a novel idea as course subtext, that they should be actively involved. I don't expect students to be polished writers and thinkers before they take my classes; they would have no need of classes if they were so. I recall a senior professor in my early days complaining that they students in his (really advanced) Advanced Composition were unprepared, to which I foolhardily responded "isn't that what we're here for?" I do teach Freshman Composition occasionally, though as a senior professor myself I need not, and few of my colleagues volunteer for it. In my subjective experience, freshmen are no worse than their predecessors 30 years ago, although surveys show that many freshmen have never read a book before college! They seem willing to learn and actually do improve (on the average) over 15 weeks. Although I complain about English majors' weaknesses, I have taught interdisciplinary classes where few students had ever received any rigorous responses to their writing, and they were much worse. In Science Fiction (a second-year course not for major credit and lacking even the prerequisite of Freshman Comp) I usually have better writers (partly because they care, partly because they read). Beginning Technical Writing students mostly can not believe the necessity for all the dog work I assign, and they suffer for not doing it. They have never taken writing seriously before but since they have to produce a longish paper that somebody else can actually use, subjecting it to my criticism and that of their classmates, rewriting what they thought was a complete draft and giving a 15-20 minute oral presentation, they usually wind up realizing that this kind of writing is less a gift than a discipline, one in which they can win a modicum of success (my final grades tend to be low). Some of the select few who actually enroll in and finish a program in technical writing become fanatical about accuracy and precision, though a few others are still lackadaisical in their final portfolios. In literature and criticism courses, most students find me a bear and many drop out, but those who complete usually say and who they have learned a good deal; even some I have treated severely return for help and reminiscence ("I survived Samuelson," one said they should print on their T-shirts). Instead of regurgitation, I require critical journals in which they must describe and defend their observations and conclusions, concluding with a take-home essay they have had all semester to consider (and for which they have been encouraged to submit monthly progress reports as well as mini-essays so I can give them feedback on formal writing, contrasted with the more subjective journal-keeping). All of this takes work. It also requires taking their contributions seriously (no matter how jejune or mechanically incompetent). I suspect if fewer of my colleagues just went through the motions or treated the classroom primarily as a place to air their erudition, we could have more competent graduates. As it is, the top 20-30% of our graduates in English can hold their own, though the rest may be problematic. --------------9799A30582459B3A360742A4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike Stanton wrote:
On 8 Jul 99, at 18:05, SMCharnas wrote:

> If you go at the right moment for you (which of course cannot be predicted), this intensive,
> small-group experience can really give you your initial lift-off, as well as a cohort of fast friends
> who started out with you.  It ain't cheap, but from what I've heard and seen, it's mostly well worth it.

I gather from your comment that just having the cash isn't enough to get one onto Clarion? Not that I'm thinking of trying!

It must be rewarding for both teacher and pupils when both are devoted to the end of turning novices into polished writers. My staff audit (="judge") so many courses these days where both the teacher and the pupils are just going through the motions, that it comes as a pleasant shock to realise that there really are teachers who care and pupils who are anxious to learn.

Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk)

Off-Topic Response:

You touch on a sore point with me, one disappointed teachers on this list and others echo frequently.   I don't teach creative writing, though I occasionally consult on sf stories students dare to write despite teachers' disapproval (my minuscule  success with fiction and poetry does not qualify me in my estimation and I balk at the group therapy aspect).  Our creative writing staff does have some remarkable successes, not all of which is their doing, since students bring some undeniable talents of their own; most of their students genuinely seem to want to be there.  Since access to Clarion is competitive, you can assume students want even more to be present; by all accounts, they fill the time with a lot of work, too.

Teaching in a less competitive environment, however, I also think most students make an effort.  My greatest challenge, met intermittently, is getting them to take seriously that I take them seriously.  Incompetence is rife, though it was ever so; with limited access to college before WWII, "gentlemen," then in the majority, often took a "C" or "average" grade for minimum seat time.  The actual median grade at American universities is now "B," though all of our students clearly are not above average.  Many teachers still reward them for seat time and put little effort into work with their writing or development of ideas, so that I present them with a novel idea as course subtext, that they should be actively involved.

I don't expect students to be polished writers and thinkers before they take my classes; they would have no need of classes if they were so.   I recall a senior professor in my early days complaining that they students in his (really advanced) Advanced Composition were unprepared, to which I foolhardily responded "isn't that what we're here for?"

I do teach Freshman Composition occasionally, though as a senior professor myself I need not, and few of my colleagues volunteer for it.  In my subjective experience, freshmen are no worse than their predecessors 30 years ago, although surveys show that many freshmen have never read a book before college!  They seem willing to learn and actually do improve (on the average) over 15 weeks.

Although I complain about English majors' weaknesses, I have taught interdisciplinary classes where few students had ever received any rigorous responses to their writing, and they were much worse.  In Science Fiction (a second-year course not for major credit and lacking even the prerequisite of Freshman Comp) I usually have better writers (partly because they care, partly because they read).

Beginning Technical Writing students mostly can not believe the necessity for all the dog work I assign, and they suffer for not doing it.  They have never taken writing seriously before but since they have to produce a longish paper that somebody else can actually use, subjecting it to my criticism and that of their classmates, rewriting what they thought was a complete draft and giving a 15-20 minute oral presentation, they usually wind up realizing that this kind of writing is less a gift than a discipline, one in which they can win a modicum of success (my final grades tend to be low).  Some of the select few who actually enroll in and finish a program in technical writing become fanatical about accuracy and precision, though a few others are still lackadaisical in their final portfolios.

In literature and criticism courses, most students find me a bear and many drop out, but those who complete usually say and who they have learned a good deal; even some I have treated severely return for help and reminiscence ("I survived Samuelson," one said they should print on their T-shirts).  Instead of regurgitation, I require critical journals in which they must describe and defend their observations and conclusions, concluding with a take-home essay they have had all semester to consider (and for which they have been encouraged to submit monthly progress reports as well as mini-essays so I can give them feedback on formal writing, contrasted with the more subjective journal-keeping).

All of this takes work.  It also requires taking their contributions seriously (no matter how jejune or mechanically incompetent).  I suspect if fewer of my colleagues just went through the motions or treated the classroom primarily as a place to air their erudition, we could have more competent graduates.  As it is, the top 20-30% of our graduates in English can hold their own, though the rest may be problematic. --------------9799A30582459B3A360742A4-- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 18:37:57 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Peatling & Barnes Subject: Re: TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Re: [*FSFFU*] TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG I've read this book twice (or even thrice) already this year. I love the interplay between the time-lagged male hopelessly in love with the cool as a cucumber VERY smart young woman. While written in first person from HIS point of view, the real hero(ine) is Verity, without any doubt. JaneP ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 10:04:18 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: SMCharnas Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 7 Jul 1999 to 8 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:00:15 +1200 >From: Ianthe >Subject: Re: Locus Awards - Willis > >>Best Science Fiction Novel > >>*To Say Nothing of the Dog* Connie Willis > >I'm very happy about this. > >I don't know how many of you have read this book, but I loved it, it's a >semi-sequel to The Doomsday Book, and it was the wittiest cleverest science >fiction novel that I read over the summer. > >I believe that it is feminist science fiction too, the difference between >Verity, (from near-future Oxford) and her 19th century companions is so >sharp, it's hilarious, she's a strongly grounded independant woman, but in >the Victorian Era, she is seen as a stoic spinster-to-be cousin from the wap >waps. They were so silly in the Victorian Era! and Connie Willis illustrates >it and Verity's contrasting gravity beautifully. I'd agree that Willis shows the contrast very nicely, as well as the effects of Victorian strictures in women producing overbearing battle-axe types like Lady Schrappnel and the paterfamilias' wife at Muching End. I thought that the complaints voiced by characters that the money used to rebuild the cath- edral could have been put to better purposes were clumsily manipulative, though: somebody says hey, we could have had a better *shopping mall,* but no one says how about using that money to provide computers and training to inner-city kids, which is the kind of thing real liberals actually say, some- times, about expenditures for things like, yes, the space program, which I think is sort of the model here. Everybody's set-point is different on such matters, of course, but I found this a gratuitous swipe that suddenly brought me up against Willis' deep conservatism -- which, being a liberal, I really prefer to forget so that I can enjoy her work when it's at its best (like THE DOOMSDAY BOOK). > >I also like the way that she begins her chapters with a sum up of what >happens in 20 words that seem to create a series of non-sequiters, like a >word game. It reminds me of Neil Gaimans's Sandman comics. Actually this is a charming reminder of how novels used to look in the time- period the story takes place in; authors used to regularly provide these little precis at the beginning of their chapters, as a teaser, I suppose, because they were always just hints of what was coming ("I confront my opponent -- flight -- unexpected arrival -- " that kind of thing) rather than giveaways of the outcome. A minor art in itself, in a way, and one of those delicious little extras that made a novel seem a bit richer, and added an element of the puzzle for the reader's delectation. Another casualty of film/tv influence on fiction, and less time for reading, to say nothing of higher production costs of publication, I guess. Suzy Charnas ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 14:54:10 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Ianthe Subject: Re: TSNOTD Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I really do believe that this novel was harmless enough, It is very different to the Doomsday Book, but it's also set years later in near-present Oxford, and in an equally silly time in Victorian England. The different mood works. >Actually this is a charming reminder of how novels used to look in the time-period the story takes place in I'm aware of this, right from Tom Jones's chapter headings that describe the action of the chapter, so on and so forth... it's the same reason Neil Gaiman uses it. I like it that Willis does this, and you're right, it makes the novel much richer, I don't think it would have been the same without it. That she incorporates all the small details of the times that we are seeing into her story. The same way that Verity is fascinated by Hercule Poirot, and the novel becomes a satire, or not, of those mystery novels. I can see where you were coming from that the novel is farcical. > to say nothing of higher production costs of publication or the dog! Jenn ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 08:40:15 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mike Stanton Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 6 Jul 1999 to 7 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dave Samuelson wrote: > You touch on a sore point with me, one disappointed > teachers on this list and others echo frequently. It's probably a lot more sore because teachers are in one of the "sacrifice" professions where job satisfaction supposedly makes up for poor pay. > Teaching in a less competitive environment, however, > I also think most students make an effort. My greatest > challenge, met intermittently, is getting them to take > seriously that I take them seriously. I've noticed, possibly wrongly, that students on "vocational" courses, like engineering or commerce, tend to be *much* more focused than students taking courses which will not contribute directly to their future job. Must be worse where courses are, for example, required liberal arts courses for business majors. I once had to attend lectures on multicultural studies but all I can remember is using the Caribbean writers segment to do an assignment on discounted cash flow. > Incompetence is rife, though it was ever so ... > The actual median grade at American universities is > now "B," though all of our students clearly are not > above average. I wonder whether the American/British educational systems with their emphasis on "equality of outcome" rather than the European stress on "equality of opportunity" aren't responsible. Obviously I'm not talking about AJ called the "brutal gauntlet" schools, but the "sausage makers" who churn out graduates with wide, superficial knowledge but no real learning. I recently vetted job applications from US graduates and was shocked at the motley array of courses which they were able to use to get degrees. Even my own two British alma maters have changed in 10 years to the point where we don't recruit there. It saddens me to have to recruit in Berlin or Paris rather than the British Midlands. > In literature and criticism courses, most students > find me a bear and many drop out, but those who > complete usually say and who they have learned a good > deal; even some I have treated severely return for > help and reminiscence I'm surprised you can get away with it in these politically correct days. In my Master's year, we had a most unlikeable lecturer on derivatives who used to set almost impossible tasks and then stride about the lecture theatre flogging delinquents with his tongue. But he had a gift for clear, precise explanation and for getting the best out of his students. A few years after I left, he was forced out because of this unwillingess to tolerate fools gladly. Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 08:43:59 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mike Stanton Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 8 Jul 1999 to 9 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 10 Jul 99, at 0:39, SMCharnas wrote: > Why not? Go for it, man! Unfortunately the cost would be far too high - not in accommodation or course fees, but in lost income. It [Clarion] is the sort of thing I might try when I retire in 10 or so years; I'll only be 42 so I'll have plenty of time. Then again, I wonder how much I would enjoy writing for a living. When I was a boy, I wanted to be a photojournalist, and for the last 14 years, I've freelanced for newspapers and magazines. Last year, though, I had to take a *massive* demotion to accompany AJ to South Africa. With a two-thirds cut in pay I had to string to make up lost income because, of course, my expenses didn't go down. Immediately what had been an enjoyable hobby became a burdensome necessity because I *had* to work very hard for little pay. If it hadn't been for the Mandela wedding and similar strokes of luck, I'd have ended up the year making little more than minimum wage. Since we returned to Europe in September, I haven't submitted much for publication because my African experience really took the fun out of journalism. I wonder how many other "aspiring" writers have similar problems. They lavish years on a novel, and when they finally get an offer for it, they realise that the amount of money they're going to make, simply wouldn't make up for the inevitable disruption of their lives. I read somewhere (_Writer's Digest January issue???) that only 16% of US writers (who are relatively well-paid) make more than US$30K per year. After tax, that wouldn't even cover our annual holiday! Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 21:15:57 +0000 Reply-To: mystgalaxy@ax.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Organization: Mysterious Galaxy Subject: THE MOON AND THE SUN from ZENtertainment MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit VARIETY reports JIM HENSON Pictures has optioned Vonda N. McIntyre's sci-fi novel THE MOON AND THE SUN, which is set during an alternate 17th century where a young woman tries to free a mythical sea monster that France's King Louis XVI plans to test for its rumored immortality and extract a treasure believed to be hidden in its body. The trade adds that Laura Harrington (Secrets) and McIntyre will write its script, and Christopher Renshaw (The Mikado) is expected to direct. -- *********************************************************************** Mysterious Galaxy Local Phone: 858.268.4747 3904 Convoy Street, #107 Fax: 858.268.4775 San Diego, CA 92111 Long Distance/Orders: 1.800.811.4747 http://www.mystgalaxy.com Email: mgbooks@ax.com *********************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 09:21:13 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Dave Samuelson Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 6 Jul 1999 to 7 Jul 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------850F0D43BC61EC9AEE695F56" --------------850F0D43BC61EC9AEE695F56 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike Stanton wrote: > It's probably a lot more sore because teachers are in one of the "sacrifice" > professions where job satisfaction supposedly makes up for poor pay. I mostly enjoy my work and do not suffer a low family income. My wife heads the Academic Advising Center (for which she is paid less than I am) and together we seem to be in the top 10% bracket. I can not bemoan my "sacrifice" (although we are paid less in California's second-rank university system, some of my colleagues earn up to $100,000 with various bonuses, not including work on the side or grant money). > I've noticed, possibly wrongly, that students on "vocational" courses, like > engineering or commerce, tend to be *much* more focused than students taking > courses which will not contribute directly to their future job. Must be worse > where courses are, for example, required liberal arts courses for business > majors. You're wrong, I think, in assuming this general rule holds with any uniformity. Far less than a majority of students pick a course of study on entry and stick to it till they get a degree. They usually do not know what their future job(s) will be, though they may have one in their sights. "Focus" should logically include attention to speech and writing and math (propadeutic studies), which many are hard put to master. And I at least have not had a lot of trouble with students being in class under duress. > I wonder whether the American/British educational systems with their emphasis on > "equality of outcome" rather than the European stress on "equality of opportunity" > aren't responsible. We did have a state legislator who wanted to require the university to produce graduates in proportion to the ethnic variety of entering students, but I think "equality of opportunity" is still operative at the college level. Or are you referring to prebaccalaurate education? > I recently vetted job applications from US graduates and was shocked at the motley > array of courses which they were able to use to get degrees. Is this the other side of the coin you refer to above, in terms of liberal arts courses and future jobs? Are course topics more important than disciplines learned? When I teach a class in science fiction, it is also an introduction to literary study, including attention to style and context and complications of any act of communication. My capsule description of the advantages of an English major is that a student who applies her/himself to it will learn to read critically, write carefully, and analyze situation and character [in the virtual reality of literature (I include film and electronic media), with which we have far more experience than we do with people in real life]. > I'm surprised you can get away with it in these politically correct days. In my > Master's year, we had a most unlikeable lecturer on derivatives who used to set > almost impossible tasks and then stride about the lecture theatre flogging > delinquents with his tongue. But he had a gift for clear, precise explanation > and for getting the best out of his students. A few years after I left, he was > forced out because of this unwillingess to tolerate fools gladly. I have not been faulted in any public way for relatively low enrollments in my classes, but like anybody else I compromise. I try to set up the compromises themselves as learning experiences; a student may earn an "A" from me without writing a single "A" essay, if (s)he has undertaken other tasks from which (I think) significant learning emerged (e.g., editing others' papers, giving summary presentations, asking penetrating questions in discussion). I even offer a small bonus for "perfect" attendance (i.e., no more than one week's worth of absences after the shakedown cruise of the first two weeks in a semester, when students are free to transfer between classes without written permission). If a student is actually present almost all of the time, the chance increases that (s)he will absorb more. I have had only one "grade appeal" in 33 years. My worst confrontation may have come 7 years ago in a Master's class (intro. to literary theory and research), in which I had a student who had apparently never learned to write (or think) at a college level. Her complaints to other faculty about how unfeeling I was were swiftly defused, but she poisoned the well for 2-3 years thereafter: some students were saying I had a "personality defect" and the Writers Lab apparently had me on a list of faculty who were too hard (this was never proven). Students find me more demanding than behaviorally intimidating and I am more or less the faculty ombudsman for students as the friendly Undergraduate Advising Coordinator. > Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) --------------850F0D43BC61EC9AEE695F56 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike Stanton wrote:

It's probably a lot more sore because teachers are in one of the "sacrifice" professions where job satisfaction supposedly makes up for poor pay.
I mostly enjoy my work and do not suffer a low family income.  My wife heads the Academic Advising Center (for which she is paid less than I am) and together we seem to be in the top 10% bracket.  I can not bemoan my "sacrifice" (although we are paid less in California's second-rank university system, some of my colleagues earn up to $100,000 with various bonuses, not including work on the side or grant money).
I've noticed, possibly wrongly, that students on "vocational" courses, like engineering or commerce, tend to be *much* more focused than students taking courses which will not contribute directly to their future job. Must be worse where courses are, for example, required liberal arts courses for business
majors.
You're wrong, I think, in assuming this general rule holds with any uniformity.  Far less than a majority of students pick a course of study on entry and stick to it till they get a degree.  They usually do not know what their future job(s) will be, though they may have one in their sights.  "Focus" should logically include attention to speech and writing and math (propadeutic studies), which many are hard put to master.  And I at least have not had a lot of trouble with students being in class under duress.
I wonder whether the American/British educational systems with their emphasis on "equality of outcome" rather than the European stress on "equality of opportunity" aren't responsible.
We did have a state legislator who wanted to require the university to produce graduates in proportion to the ethnic variety of entering students, but I think "equality of opportunity" is still operative at the college level.  Or are you referring to prebaccalaurate education?
I recently vetted job applications from US graduates and was shocked at the motley array of courses which they were able to use to get degrees.
Is this the other side of the coin you refer to above, in terms of liberal arts courses and future jobs?  Are course topics more important than disciplines learned?  When I teach a class in science fiction, it is also an introduction to literary study, including attention to style and context and complications of any act of communication.  My capsule description of the advantages of an English major is that a student who applies her/himself to it will learn to read critically, write carefully, and analyze situation and character [in the virtual reality of literature (I include film and electronic media), with which we have far more experience than we do with people in real life].
I'm surprised you can get away with it in these politically correct days. In my Master's year, we had a most unlikeable lecturer on derivatives who used to set almost impossible tasks and then stride about the lecture theatre flogging delinquents with his tongue. But he had a gift for clear, precise explanation
and for getting the best out of his students. A few years after I left, he was forced out because of this unwillingess to tolerate fools gladly.
I have not been faulted in any public way for relatively low enrollments in my classes, but like anybody else I compromise.  I try to set up the compromises themselves as learning experiences; a student may earn an "A" from me without writing a single "A" essay, if (s)he has undertaken other tasks from which (I think) significant learning emerged (e.g., editing others' papers, giving summary presentations, asking penetrating questions in discussion).  I even offer a small bonus for "perfect" attendance (i.e., no more than one week's worth of absences after the shakedown cruise of the first two weeks in a semester, when students are free to transfer between classes without written permission).  If a student is actually present almost all of the time, the chance increases that (s)he will absorb more.

I have had only one "grade appeal" in 33 years.  My worst confrontation may have come 7 years ago in a Master's class (intro. to literary theory and research), in which I had a student who had apparently never learned to  write (or think) at a college level.  Her complaints to other faculty about how unfeeling I was were swiftly defused, but she poisoned the well for 2-3 years thereafter: some students were saying I had a "personality defect" and the Writers Lab apparently had me on a list of faculty who were too hard (this was never proven).  Students find me more demanding than behaviorally intimidating and I am more or less the faculty ombudsman for students as the friendly Undergraduate Advising Coordinator.

Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk)

  --------------850F0D43BC61EC9AEE695F56-- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 19:48:53 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Rose Secrest Subject: I'm So Confused! Is this really the feminist utopia egroup, or did I get on the wrong egroup? I published an article (before I got this cheap computer to find the extensive bibliography on here) in The Reader's Guide to Women's Studies about feminist utopias. I had to find 6-15 full-length books about the subject. I found six and read them all. I ended up saying that feminist utopias were mostly published in the 1970's. Is this true? Also, years ago, before I had written this article, I wrote a novel in which I tried to pull together what I thought would be my utopian society. I used the utopia as the background for my characters and didn't make it the main point of the action. Now that I think I know the most common characteristics of 1970's feminist utopias, I feel as if I had done the ol' "New Twist on an Old Theme" without realizing it! My few readers have been in awe of my brilliantly original 1990's utopia, so they all must be ignorant of the tradition I unwittingly stole. I hope in this egroup more knowledgeable people can set me straight. Rose Secrest rmsecrest@msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 00:47:51 THT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anne-Marie Langford Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 11 Jul 1999 to 12 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mike Stanton:- > Even my own two British alma maters have changed in 10 years to the point > where we don't recruit there. It saddens me to have to recruit in Berlin > or Paris rather than the British Midlands. That's very unfair because colleges do the best they can with the funds and the students they have. Surely you should work with the students you get and train them to meet your standards. Not only will it be good for the students but also for your corporation because you'll get loyal employees with a stake in working for you. Anne-Marie ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:34:40 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jocelyn & Sheryl Denton-LeSage Subject: Re: I'm So Confused! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Is this really the feminist utopia egroup, or did I get on the wrong egroup? You have the right group, although it's feminist science fiction and fantasy as much as feminist utopias that we discuss. This list goes off-topic a lot, though, which I hope you learn to love as I do. >I published an article (before I got this cheap computer to find the >extensive bibliography on here) in The Reader's Guide to Women's Studies >about feminist utopias. I had to find 6-15 full-length books about the >subject. I found six and read them all. But don't stop there! Which 6 books did you read? Tell us about them, and if it isn't too much trouble and you can remember, which did you find more or less valuable? >I ended up saying that feminist utopias were mostly published in the 1970's. >Is this true? Mostly, yes, but of course there's a 300-year-old tradition here. >Also, years ago, before I had written this article, I wrote a novel in which >I tried to pull together what I thought would be my utopian society. I used >the utopia as the background for my characters and didn't make it the main >point of the action. Now that I think I know the most common >characteristics of 1970's feminist utopias, I feel as if I had done the ol' >"New Twist on an Old Theme" without realizing it! My few readers have been >in awe of my brilliantly original 1990's utopia, so they all must be >ignorant of the tradition I unwittingly stole. Come on, tell more! What was the plot? What do you now think was "stolen"? Sheryl >I hope in this egroup more knowledgeable people can set me straight. > >Rose Secrest >rmsecrest@msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:03:27 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Mike Stanton Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 11 Jul 1999 to 12 Jul 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Anne-Marie Langford wrote: > That's very unfair because colleges do the best > they can with the funds and the students they have. That's the point. Colleges do what *they* think is best with the money and students *they* have, then *they* say "Here's what we've produced. Take them or leave them!" So we leave them. And go where we can get the right people. Trouble is, in the "old" days, students learned theory and practice by rote, so when they came into the world, they were productive at the right level from Day One but had to learn "broad thinking" along the way. Now education emphasises understanding broad concepts and learning "think for themselves" but brushes basic practice aside. New graduates have to learn the basics - which means that they'll be expensively unproductive for 12-18 months. Business has to take one of three courses: train new graduates, hire experienced people who've been trained by other companies (the best way) or hire graduates educated in the old way (a good second-best). > Surely you should work with the students you get and > train them to meet your standards. Not only will it > be good for the students but also for your corporation > because you'll get loyal employees with a stake in > working for you. It doesn't work like that. Firstly companies are in business to make a profit, not to train people; training is rarely cost-effective. Secondly, people who stay with a company for years because of training aren't the dynamic, ambitious people we want. The 80/20 rule - 80% of a company's revenue is generated by 20% of its employees - is trite but true; *we* want the dynamic revenue-generating 20% and we hope that our competitors have the other 80% !. Mike Stanton (m_stanton@postmaster.co.uk) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 16:46:32 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Phoebe Wray Subject: OT: The bear story MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Several people asked me to pass along the name of the bear story I had inquired about for a friend... enough for me to say to all -- it is "The Alien Way" by Gordon R. Dickson. many thanks to those who dug around to find a bear sff story! phoebe ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 20:44:11 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Rose Secrest Subject: Thanks, folks! I didn't know I could subscribe to both! Rose Secrest ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 20:52:18 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Rose Secrest Subject: The Article Is Wearing a Bib Lucie Armitt, Where No Man Has Gone Before Marleen S. Barr, Future Females Marleen S. Barr, Lost in Space Libby Falk Jones & Sarah Webster Goodwin, Feminism, Utopia, and Narrative Sarah Lefanu, In the Chinks of the World Machine Natalie M. Rosinsky, Feminist Futures Tom Staicar, The Feminine Eye Seven books, not six! My article summarizes these, so I cannot provide an opinion of each book. It was a long time ago, too. But at least now you can see which books I was able to find in the biggest university library in Tennessee. Rose Secrest ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 20:58:42 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Rose Secrest Subject: A Much More Boring Message from an Admittedly Modest Person The plot of my novel was the adventures of a brilliant woman "inside" a computer program that invaded her mind with a portrait of all life on Earth The society was communal. No crime, equal opportunity, low population, vegetarian, agricultural but low environmental damage, education that catered to activity, interracial folk, sex when ready, no war, no weapons, decentralized, selective technological development, er...never mind. Rose Secrest ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 19:33:27 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: The Article Is Wearing a Bib In-Reply-To: <002d01becd93$228ff960$8c51fdd0@default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Rose Secrest wrote: > Tom Staicar, The Feminine Eye > > Seven books, not six! > > My article summarizes these, so I cannot provide an opinion of each book. > It was a long time ago, too. But at least now you can see which books I was > able to find in the biggest university library in Tennessee. > I had an article in THE FEMININE EYE. Brag, brag.> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 19:45:27 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Keith Subject: Re: The Article Is Wearing a Bib In-Reply-To: <002d01becd93$228ff960$8c51fdd0@default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Rose Secrest wrote: > Sarah Lefanu, In the Chinks of the World Machine > The woman responsible for that excellent, excellent study "Feminsism and Science Fiction" has written so Tiptree-titled a story? This is indeed welcome news! Thank *you*, Rose Secrest. Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 09:51:57 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: The Article Is Wearing a Bib: Kathleen (House?) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Alas, Kathleen, IN THE CHINKS OF THE WORLD MACHINE is nonfiction, if I'm not mistaken. Not that there's anything wrong with that. -----Original Message----- From: Keith [mailto:kmhouse@HALCYON.COM] Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 1999 10:45 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] The Article Is Wearing a Bib On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Rose Secrest wrote: > Sarah Lefanu, In the Chinks of the World Machine > The woman responsible for that excellent, excellent study "Feminsism and Science Fiction" has written so Tiptree-titled a story? This is indeed welcome news! Thank *you*, Rose Secrest. Kathleen ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 08:33:14 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Daniel Krashin Subject: Re: The Article Is Wearing a Bib Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 20:52:18 -0400 >From: Rose Secrest >Subject: The Article Is Wearing a Bib > >Lucie Armitt, Where No Man Has Gone Before >Marleen S. Barr, Future Females >Marleen S. Barr, Lost in Space >Libby Falk Jones & Sarah Webster Goodwin, Feminism, Utopia, and Narrative >Sarah Lefanu, In the Chinks of the World Machine >Natalie M. Rosinsky, Feminist Futures >Tom Staicar, The Feminine Eye > >Seven books, not six! > >My article summarizes these, so I cannot provide an opinion of each book. >It was a long time ago, too. But at least now you can see which books I >was >able to find in the biggest university library in Tennessee. Umm... all of these are lit-crit books, yes? Did you also read any actual utopias? I think Laura Quilter's website has a list of the major ones. I liked "Chinks in the world-machine," BTW. I found it, looking rather out of place, in a New Age bookstore on the Big Island of Hawaii, on top of a stack of feng shui books. Danny _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 11:04:50 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jocelyn & Sheryl Denton-LeSage Subject: Re: The Article Is Wearing a Bib MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>Subject: The Article Is Wearing a Bib >> >>Lucie Armitt, Where No Man Has Gone Before >>Marleen S. Barr, Future Females >>Marleen S. Barr, Lost in Space >>Libby Falk Jones & Sarah Webster Goodwin, Feminism, Utopia, and Narrative >>Sarah Lefanu, In the Chinks of the World Machine >>Natalie M. Rosinsky, Feminist Futures >>Tom Staicar, The Feminine Eye >> >>Seven books, not six! If anyone is thinking of reading these, I would warn most people against Future Females. I respect Marleen Barr's work in general, but this book is what is called "confessional criticism." For those who don't know, that means that most of the essays in it are a lot more interesting to the people who wrote them than they would be to you or me. These writers won't illuminate the books they write about as much as they tell you how they felt when they read them, or how the books reminded them of their first-year English composition class. The book struck me as remarkably self-indulgent. My two cents only, Sheryl ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 14:00:29 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Nicola Griffith Subject: feminist litcrit MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sheryl writes: > If anyone is thinking of reading these, I would warn most people against > Future Females. I didn't much enjoy Barr's _Lost in Space_ either, to tell you the truth. One text I did thoroughly enjoy was Robin Roberts' _A New Species: Gender and Science in Science Fiction_ (University of Illinois Press, 1993). As a bonus, it has some reproductions of wonderful pulp illustrations, all of giant women, or giant female aliens, menacing teeny tiny men. Good stuff. Nicola Nicola Griffith http://www.sff.net/people/Nicola ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 13:18:14 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: feminist litcrit MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" For that matter, I recently picked up a battered remainder of a British antho unappealingly entitled FROM MY GUY TO SCI-FI, a collection of essays of feminist popcult crit, which includes a decent Roz Kaveny essay (title to follow eventually if anyone is interested) dealing with the Usual Suspects (Russ, Le Guin, et alles) and a few more...the only bobble I remember is RK's mistaken recollection that Russ's "When It Changed" was first published in DANGEROUS VISIONS rather than AGAIN, DANGEROUS VISIONS (RK footnotes it multiple times incorrectly). There's at least one other essay of SFnal interest I haven't read yet. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 13:50:10 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jocelyn & Sheryl Denton-LeSage Subject: Re: feminist litcrit MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Sheryl writes: > >> If anyone is thinking of reading these, I would warn most people against >> Future Females. > >I didn't much enjoy Barr's _Lost in Space_ either, to tell you the truth. >One text I did thoroughly enjoy was Robin Roberts' _A New Species: Gender and >Science in Science Fiction_ (University of Illinois Press, 1993). As a >bonus, it has some reproductions of wonderful pulp illustrations, all of >giant women, or giant female aliens, menacing teeny tiny men. Good stuff. > >Nicola > >Nicola Griffith >http://www.sff.net/people/Nicola Oh, yeah, I LOVED that one! That whole chapter, on the planets full of giant scarey women who run their own planets until the Earthmen come to show them what REAL love is all about....hee! Sheryl ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 22:51:47 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Vivian Lee Subject: OT: Amazon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Anyone ever read Barbara O. Walker's _Amazon_ ? I liked reading it and if no one else has recommended it for future list discussion, I'd like to. V. Lee