Marginalia

[coalescent]

I like this New Yorker piece [via] about Battlestar Galactica, because it seems to have a sense of the show as an exemplary piece of sf, rather than as something that transcends sf's perceived limitations:

If you switch to the term "speculative fiction," which many sci-fi writers prefer, the genre seems more interesting. In fact, the genre is so capacious that it’s not even very useful to call it a genre—at least, not as a put-down or a comment on its limitations. Stories that are geared to ask "What if?" and "What then?" and "Who are we?" and also have some life to them beyond the nuts and bolts of imagining an alternative reality are a genuine achievement. On the other hand, don’t feel bad if you don’t like watching shows filled with characters who have disturbingly shaped heads and faces. I myself am of the school that believes that frontal lobes belong inside the skull. I’m delighted when a character on TV has a brain—I just don’t want to see it.

Commentary on the most recent episode of Galactica here, here, and here.

James Lovelock thinks we are doomed. [via, links will probably become paid-only soon]

'The Faery Handbag' may become a film (scroll down a little).

Musings on evolving definitions of feminism. [via]

Obligatory pimpage of Strange Horizons reviews, part one: in a review of Christopher Priest: The Interaction, John Clute takes issue with the protocols of academic writing:

In following these shit-stupid protocols Hubble (and/or Butler) sedulously make near nonsense of a speculative historical argument, and they waste our time. I am very conscious that I too have, in a sense, been wasting our time as well with such a long excursus; but the dumb secret strength of the kind of protocols I've been attacking is that it takes a long time to explain how damaging their application is in each specific case. Hubble was my victim here, almost at random. There are dozens of similar dispiriting examples throughout Interaction, each so embedded in industrial practice that each would take a paragraph to describe. The cumulative effect is disastrous, both for the scholars locked into malpractice and for the readers who are baulked from accessing anything much of use in a book so compromised.

Obligatory pimpage of Strange Horizons reviews, part two: Graham Sleight and Tim Phipps debate the merits of 'The Christmas Invasion'.

And finally: a request for recommendations. I need recent (last 18 months or so) examples of either sf translated into English or sf written in English that is set in or engages with other cultures. Thanks!

Comments

[communicator.livejournal.com]

I call bullshit on that feminsm article, paragraph 1.

My husband doesn’t cook. I do. When feminists—particularly older feminists—learn these facts, they invariably give Ted shit.

For a start, if feminist 'invariably' give him shit, then how can she say 'in particular' older feminists. It's either invariable or it's not. I suspect it's not.

Secondly, I am an older woman and a feminist. You will know I am outspoken in my beliefs. I have never given anyone's boyfriend shit full stop. I've never given anyone (male or female) shit for not cooking.

So am I a uniquely saintly person? I think not.

In other words, just from reading this first paragraph, it seems she is creating some straw man (or straw older woman). Perhaps an older woman once made fun of her boyfriend and it upset her. Big deal.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

In other words, just from reading this first paragraph, it seems she is creating some straw man (or straw older woman). Perhaps an older woman once made fun of her boyfriend and it upset her. Big deal.

[Devil's advocate]

So what you're saying is that seeing one black swan doesn't tell you anything about how many black swans there are in total? :p

[/]

But the bit of the post I was interested in actually came further down:

Underscoring this question is a more fundamental question about feminism itself: What, exactly, has it achieved. Cohen points out that women have made significant strides over the past 50 years, and that’s undeniable. But she also highlights the fact that feminists are still agitating over the same issues that got them exercised and mobilized half a century ago. This suggests a real lack of progress to me, and I think the anxiety that “choice” feminism generates is fear that, as long as a substantial number of women are happily opting out of the workplace, it’s harder for women who want a career—a more public life—to opt in. This is, certainly, something that I worry about while I’m staying at home.

[communicator.livejournal.com]

Well caught, but what I'm really saying is that I think she's a big fat liar :-) Or rather (hem hem) somewhat insincere in her protestations.

Given that I smell a rat I'm disinclined to take anything else she says seriously.

But forcing myself to read I would say that yes, capitalism has a massive problem in ensuring that children are properly cared for because resource allocation is based on money-exchange for labour and this is labour which needs resourcing, but which has no pay. Therefore women (predominantly) are caught in a double bind. To expect a handful of agitators like myself to have fixed broken capitalism seems a bit ambitious.

[veggiesu.livejournal.com]

It's an interesting piece, I think. I have some issues with the paragraph you quote, though - the fact that people are still agitating over the same issues doesn't indicate a lack of real progress; it indicates that on some of the most fundamental issues there is still further progress to be made. These two positions are not the same. It means that the most outrageous problems have been addressed, both culturally and legislatively (in some cultures at least), but it means that they're not fully fixed yet. Not quite sure why that's a difficult concept.

Having said that, the question "does the fact that some women opt-out of the workplace make it more difficult for those who choose to opt-in" is a valid one. And in (too) many cases the answer is yes. Too many employers can point to their own experiences of women choosing to leave, taking valuable experience and expertise with them, and then claim that as an excuse to avoid hiring or promoting other women for fear of the same thing happening. I don't believe that such action is at all justified; but I can understand why it happens.
I think one of the underlying issues behind this is the idea that paid work is an option for women, but mandatory for men. If one partner chooses to raise children, then fine, that's a full-time job, and should be acknowledged as such. But when a woman decides that she just doesn't have to work because her partner earns enough to support them both, I boggle. And it's often that kind of attitude (from men and women) that leads to women being considered the lesser option in the workplace - because it makes it too easy for employers to assume that every woman will leave the moment she can.

Although given the number of women I know who choose to work part-time simply because they can, I'm once again left wondering whether my problem with much of feminist ideology is that it doesn't speak to my expereinces of being female :-p

bullshit: a defense

[(Anonymous)]

dear communicator,

i appreciate your semantic quibble, and i have edited my post to amend.

i do, however, take issue with your suggestion that i am creating a straw man. had you read the rest of the post, you would have noticed that i am not so much complaining about old ladies giving my husband shit for not cooking as i am asking myself whether or not they might be right -- right, that is, in questioning a strict boundary between the personal and the political.

jessica lee jernigan
www.jessicaleejernigan.org

Re: bullshit: a defense

[communicator.livejournal.com]

Hi Jessica - I wouldn't have said bullshit if I'd know you were there, because I don't want to be rude, but seeing as you've caught me out, are you seriously saying that older feminists who visit your house 'invariably give your husband shit'? Seriously.

Re: bullshit: a defense

[communicator.livejournal.com]

Oh - I also meant to say, I strongly admire your humorous response to me even if I disagree on other stuff

[faithhopetricks.livejournal.com]

How the hell did I miss an article on BSG in the NYorker?

[stevegreen.livejournal.com]

Not only that, but a thoughtful, level-headed and well-researched piece by a major newspaper on a telefantasy series. That really does crank up the "goshwow" factor.

[abigail-n.livejournal.com]

So, was I really the only one who thought that the New Yorker piece was just another condescending attempt by the mainstream to express admiration for something SF-nal without catching cooties? It certainly follows the standard 'all SF is crap except for this' pattern. Paragraph 1: see how funny SF fans are (as an opening to an article that is supposedly about SF, not its fans - clearly an attempt to distance the author from mouth-breathing, Klingon-speaking convention-goers); paragraph 2: but wait! There's some good, literary SF being written, by writers who naturally wish to distance themselves from said mouth-breathing Klingons and therefore refer to themselves as 'speculative fiction' writers (and really, how many SF - genuine SF, not some weird, amorphous, cross-genre thing - authors are there who do the 'I write speculative fiction' thing and don't get trampled on by the SF community?) I know you read that paragraph as recognizing SF's potential, Niall, but I see the exact opposite. The author recognizes that good SF exists, and she immediately turns around and classifies it as existing somewhat outside the genre.

The rest of the article is indeed very complimentary to BSG, but once again the author segues into a discussion of SF fandom and its quirks. I can understand that fan reaction, particularly from original series fans, is relevant to a discussion of the show, but the author paints these fans as rabid and fanatical instead of people who had seen one too many beloved staple of their youth trampled over by money-grubbing, soulless Hollywood hacks and were justifiably worried (and I've said this before, but people of my generation: just wait 20 years, and let's see how sanguine you are when some know-it-all decides to remake Farscape or The X-Files).

Still, I suppose my main objection to the article is an unworthy, insular one - it's too lightweight. The author clearly wasn't paying very close attention. She almost certainly hasn't seen more than a few episodes of the show, or she wouldn't be talking about the absence of symphonic scores or close attention being paid to issues of supplying the fleet (ha!). In the end, the article is no more than a semi-knowledgable critique written by someone who doesn't really know what they're talking about.

[cellardoor28.livejournal.com]

Graham is wrong.

Tim is right.

I now feel a little unclean...

[grahamsleight.livejournal.com]

*sticks out lower lip in a sulky manner*

[ninebelow.livejournal.com]

If it's any consolation I tend to the other view.

[mattia.livejournal.com]

I'm with you on the critique end 'o things.

[fba.livejournal.com]

Scary isn't it?

[pikelet.livejournal.com]

!

[grahamsleight.livejournal.com]

And finally: a request for recommendations. I need recent (last 18 months or so) examples of ... sf written in English that is set in or engages with other cultures. Thanks!

Have you ever read River of Gods by Ian McDonald?

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

Funny. You're a funny man.

[peake.livejournal.com]

Or, let's see, Gwyneth Jones ... Jon Courtenay Grimwood ...?

Regarding Lovelock

[applez.livejournal.com]

Funny when the professional futurist and fiction-writer lot come off more reasonable than Lovelock...but that's not all that surprising is it?

My tuppence: I think we're in for some quite rough times, and our options are quickly being reduced to very few, but some core inequities: wealth, power, military force, infrastructure will insulate those of us on this Internet better than most on this planet. :-/

[i-ate-my-crusts.livejournal.com]

I need recent (last 18 months or so) examples of either sf translated into English or sf written in English that is set in or engages with other cultures. Thanks!

Not sure it meets last 18 months, but
Kalpa Imperial By Angelica Gorodischer, tralated by Ursula le Guin
The Carpet Makers by Andreas Eschbach, translated by Doryl Jenson

[cassiphone.livejournal.com]

Less than Human, by Maxine McArthur (2004) - a novel set in a future Japan, written by an Australian author who, like her protagonist, married a Japanese man and lived in Japan for more than a decade. It won the Aurealis Award for best SF novel of 2004.

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

Zoinks! James Lovelock really does think we're doomed doesn't he?

(Memo to self: first reaction to end of world should not be the word 'zoinks')

I don't necessarily think he's wrong - he's a lot smarter than me, and while I hope he's wrong I fear he may be right. However saying that we should assume the worst and start packing the world's knowledge into our rucksacks is a rather tough notion to sell, and will sound dangerously crackpot to most people. The world feels far too comfortable, stable and, well, 'Not Doomed' for that. Of course, that's always been the main obstacle in getting people to think seriously about global warming.

[applez.livejournal.com]

I see where you are coming from, and also broadly agree, however, I think Lovelock offers little that will genuinely assist the situation: political or ecological.

The basic problem in the 1st World is that we have so much built-up infrastructure and wealth, that it's going to take quite a lot to radically change the political landscape, especially one to Mad Max-styled warring factions & brigandry.

Many of the most dramatic changes to our way of living will probably happen slow enough that society can adapt to them in relative ignorance. The US, for example, has in fairly short order grown accustomed to $2.50-3.00/ga fuel prices - something publically unthinkable just 5 years ago.

The civilisation-endangering question is when a given nation has experienced it's 3th-5th New Orleans flood in a season, against a backdrop of $10/ga fuel, pricey food, and refugees.

Even then, there is always the ugly & expedient option of blaming the foreigners, enforcing that with lots and lots of arms. :-/ Organisationally though, that would probably preserve the domestic core, even if it requires domestic purges. :-(

[twic.myopenid.com (from livejournal.com)]

packing the world's knowledge into our rucksacks

Like this?

-- tom