I'm not claiming it as a utopia, but it's certainly not fascistic.
Fascistic in intent, probably not. But in practice - well, yes, it would seem so. Certainly insofar as the clones' dealings with the astronauts, any way. A society that is unwilling to accept anything new, anything different, on the basis of their assumptions and a rather dodgy "experiment", and sees murder as the only option to protecting itself, certainly has fascistic tendencies. It's clear that enough animals were unaffected by the plague to make farming sustainable. It's clear that two million people living in one small area of the planet have nothing to fear from three blokes living somewhere else on the same planet. No attempt is made to allow the men to go and make their own lives elsewhere - in fact, this option is explicitly denied them. Why? Because the destruction of the that which is different is the only choice these women are prepared to make.
in fact: it is a society to which men are inimical... the presence of men would inevitably destroy the society that has been created in their absence
More accurate perhaps to say that it is a society which believes that to be the case; and which sets out to prove it be fair means or foul. We are told that it is March when the men come aboard the Gloria, and New Year's Eve when they're drugged - there's been no indication in that time that there have been any untoward incidents. In fact, after *nine months* of living with the men, the women have to resort to mood-altering and inhibition-suppressing drugs to get the proof they want before they go ahead and murder them. Hardly unchecked and wanton destruction of the existing social order by the men, is it? Yes, these particular men (or rather two of these particular men) are steeped in military hierarchy. All of them are products of their time and culture (which is also true of this story), and that leads them to be as confounded by the clone society as the clone society is confounded by them. That this leads to the men's murder is an indictment of that society. That even the most sympathetic of them (although he is blind to his own deep-seated prejudice until the final moments) is murdered (and it *is* murder) shows how unbending this society is willing to be. The fact that the men have to be drugged into acting reprehensibly is, for me, the deciding factor - this society condemns the men as barbaric, uncivilised and an inherent danger, then goes to any lengths necessary to prove this to be true, in order to justify to itself the equally barbaric act of murder.
the narrator...has the self-awareness to realise the damage his life would cause and, while lamenting, face up to the consequences of it
I simply can't agree. He's murdered, just as the others are. The fact that takes the drink doesn't make it any less murder (the fact that Judy doesn't resist Bud doesn't make it any less rape). He has only two options - fight, or drink. Either way he's dead in the next few minutes. He chooses the path of least resistance, because that's inherently who he is. But he doesn't kill himself, he makes no sacrifice, he doesn't choose to die rather than to live. He simply makes a choice about the manner of his murder.
I mentioned that this story is a product of its time. Both sexes are drawn in relatively broad stereotypes - the men are sexist, dominating, sexual predators who lack understanding and empathy; the women are manipulative, passive-aggressive, talkative, and equitable. Anyone writing a story now with such unsophisticated gender politics would be rightly criticised. Which, I suppose, goes to show just how far we've come in the past thirty years.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 03:33 pm (UTC)Fascistic in intent, probably not. But in practice - well, yes, it would seem so. Certainly insofar as the clones' dealings with the astronauts, any way. A society that is unwilling to accept anything new, anything different, on the basis of their assumptions and a rather dodgy "experiment", and sees murder as the only option to protecting itself, certainly has fascistic tendencies.
It's clear that enough animals were unaffected by the plague to make farming sustainable. It's clear that two million people living in one small area of the planet have nothing to fear from three blokes living somewhere else on the same planet. No attempt is made to allow the men to go and make their own lives elsewhere - in fact, this option is explicitly denied them. Why? Because the destruction of the that which is different is the only choice these women are prepared to make.
in fact: it is a society to which men are inimical... the presence of men would inevitably destroy the society that has been created in their absence
More accurate perhaps to say that it is a society which believes that to be the case; and which sets out to prove it be fair means or foul. We are told that it is March when the men come aboard the Gloria, and New Year's Eve when they're drugged - there's been no indication in that time that there have been any untoward incidents. In fact, after *nine months* of living with the men, the women have to resort to mood-altering and inhibition-suppressing drugs to get the proof they want before they go ahead and murder them. Hardly unchecked and wanton destruction of the existing social order by the men, is it?
Yes, these particular men (or rather two of these particular men) are steeped in military hierarchy. All of them are products of their time and culture (which is also true of this story), and that leads them to be as confounded by the clone society as the clone society is confounded by them. That this leads to the men's murder is an indictment of that society. That even the most sympathetic of them (although he is blind to his own deep-seated prejudice until the final moments) is murdered (and it *is* murder) shows how unbending this society is willing to be. The fact that the men have to be drugged into acting reprehensibly is, for me, the deciding factor - this society condemns the men as barbaric, uncivilised and an inherent danger, then goes to any lengths necessary to prove this to be true, in order to justify to itself the equally barbaric act of murder.
the narrator...has the self-awareness to realise the damage his life would cause and, while lamenting, face up to the consequences of it
I simply can't agree. He's murdered, just as the others are. The fact that takes the drink doesn't make it any less murder (the fact that Judy doesn't resist Bud doesn't make it any less rape). He has only two options - fight, or drink. Either way he's dead in the next few minutes. He chooses the path of least resistance, because that's inherently who he is. But he doesn't kill himself, he makes no sacrifice, he doesn't choose to die rather than to live. He simply makes a choice about the manner of his murder.
I mentioned that this story is a product of its time. Both sexes are drawn in relatively broad stereotypes - the men are sexist, dominating, sexual predators who lack understanding and empathy; the women are manipulative, passive-aggressive, talkative, and equitable. Anyone writing a story now with such unsophisticated gender politics would be rightly criticised. Which, I suppose, goes to show just how far we've come in the past thirty years.