Date: Sun, 1 Mar 1998 23:24:08 -0800 Reply-To: jkrauel@actioneer.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Organization: Actioneer, Inc. Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite discussion begins To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu "A self-assured, unselfconscious, convincing depiction of a world without men--doing what only SF can do, and doing it with skill and brio.... It answers the question 'When you eliminate one gender, what's left?' (a whole world, is the answer)." - Ursula K. Le Guin Welcome to our first book group discussion: Nicola Griffith's Ammonite. I confess right off the bat to having really enjoyed this book. Since I'm starting this, here's why: - A whole book with no men, so subtly done you don't even realize it for awhile - A great adventure story. I really like adventure stories. - A strong, independent female lead character: Marghe Taishan That's my completely un-academic and three-inch-deep analysis of why I think Ammonite's great. For more depth, I found a review by someone else: Gwyneth Jones' review, which I encourage you to find at http://gopher.well.sf.ca.us:70/0/Publications/authors/gwyn/jones.ammonite Jones explains that the way Griffith is able to make the lack of men such a non-issue is by populating the world (Jeep) with women who are *whole people*. I thought that was a pretty good way of explaining how such a big thing could end up almost as a non-issue. In fact, while re-reading the last few chapters, I see that one character tells Marghe that she's changed, she seems *whole* - the journey that she follows over the course of the book is paralled with her internal journey toward her whole self. Jones also compares Ammonite to Tepper's Raising the Stones, as both deal with a "virus" or disease that could be considered a horrible plague (on Jeep, it kills every man on the planet), or a transformation into something better than human. When Marghe finally gives in to the virus, she gains incredible power over her own body. In fact, it's the virus that enables the women to have children as well. Here's a brainstorm of questions to get you started. What did the mysterious, probably intelligent creatures represent? The goth I think they were called. Were the goth supposed to have created the standing stones? Or were the Echraidhe? What did the stones represent? Where did the virus come from? Why? What does the power it confers represent for women? Could such a virus work on men, and if so how? If the bad guys come back, as is intimated at the end of the book, do you think will they be able to eradicate the virus? Does Griffith leave us enough hope that this fledgeling new society, tribes merged with technologists, will be able to survive? What do you think happened? What other themes did you find in the book. I'm sure I've missed many, or mis-interpreted them. What did you like best in the book? Characters, places, ideas, entire passages. What disappointed you? What opportunities do you think Griffith missed in telling this story? Why do you think she didn't include them? Griffith gave us a fairly well-realized world with interesting cultures and characters. What in particular stood out for you as an example of how she made it so vivid? Do you think that Marghe's internal conflict was played just right, underplayed, or overplayed? What would you like to have changed in the book? What parallels do you see between this book and Slow River? Any ideas more fully developed there? That ought to be enough to get you started. Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com book discussion group coordinator ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 13:34:21 -0800 Reply-To: jkrauel@actioneer.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Organization: Actioneer, Inc. Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite discussion begins] To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU From: IldikoPaul Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 16:27:12 EST To: jkrauel@actioneer.com In a message dated 98-03-02 02:31:18 EST, you write: << Were the goth supposed to have created the standing stones? Or were the Echraidhe? What did the stones represent? >> Definately the Goth, during the scene where Marghe first experiences Thenike telling a story with her drums she follows along in her trance and there sees the Goth erecting the stones. Which leads me to wonder if the viajera are descendents of the Goths? They access memories from their ancestors, or did the virus come from the Goths and pass on the legacy of their shared memories as well? Hmm, i wonder... any takers? Ildiko ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 17:33:20 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG -- First Cut at Ammonite: A Man's POV To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Before any criticisms, let me say for Nicola's benefit that I LOVED her book. As always happens when I read a book written by such a bright, insightful writer, I found myself falling into spiritual love with her. (Not to worry. I'm no star stalker. :-) Just wanted to say thank you for a wonderful story. In a message dated 98-03-02 02:31:18 EST, you write: > What did the mysterious, probably intelligent creatures represent? The > goth I think they were called. That was one point that left me wondering after I'd completed the book. I think they might have been there to add to the sense that the supernatural was possible, but my orderly -- OK anal retentive -- mind wanted a tidy explanation delivered before the book ended. > Were the goth supposed to have created the standing stones? Or were the > Echraidhe? What did the stones represent? If the song sung by Thenike can be believed, then yes, the Goth built the Stonehenge analog. To me, the sacred, singing stones represented magic, or perhaps more properly, being attuned to supernatural forces. Since Stonehenge seems to be a enormous clock/calendar, perhaps the megaliths remind us that Jeep runs on a pervasive set of time constants, and that successful life forms on GP conform to these times and seasons. > Where did the virus come from? Why? What does the power it confers > represent for women? Could such a virus work on men, and if so how? One could only guess at the source of the virus. I didn't see any direct answer to that question. Griffith hinted that, perhaps, the Goth had brought it with them when they settled the planet. Deliberately, or just as a hanger- on? Perhaps, when explored, the CD-ROM-like discs found at Ollfoss will tell more. Material for a sequel? > If the bad guys come back, as is intimated at the end of the book, do > you think will they be able to eradicate the virus? The future certainly looked less than promising for the new settlers, as well as for the indigenous people of Jeep. Yet much can happen. News of the destruction of the orbiting platform by Company, and the concomitant loss of life, might leak out somehow and sway public opinion on earth -- just in the nick of time, of course. SEC might establish the upper hand. Those on the planet might build a connection with the Goth and learn secrets powerful enough to prepare them for Company's next rape-and-pillage mission. Who knows? > Does Griffith leave > us enough hope that this fledgeling new society, tribes merged with > technologists, will be able to survive? What do you think happened? Life, with its amazing ability to adapt, will often survive in the most improbable of surroundings. Boiling, acidic water from undersea volcanic fumaroles. The frigid wastes of Antarctica. Yes. The book left me with enough hope that the Mirrors could integrate themselves into the native population. The Echradie could learn and adapt. Bring in fresh genes to bolster their breeding. There would be a great deal for the Mirrors to learn. How to reproduce by trancing. Local customs. Agriculture as appropriate to Jeep. How to defend themselves against Company's insatiable lust for more exploitable resources. But the picture isn't so bleak that we should abandon hope. > What other themes did you find in the book. I'm sure I've missed many, > or mis-interpreted them. What did you like best in the book? I'll leave other themes to others on the list. Your intro, the theme of a fascinating world peopled by women so complete one hardly notices the absence of men (some probably celebrated the absence of men) seems good. I liked the depth of science and knowledge included. The reproductive parts of flowers. How sail boats are built to avoid hogging. The fact that Marghe can't hear her footfalls while in a vacuum. Way too many space operas fail in that they tell us the sound heard from distant events in the vacuum of space. Nicola Griffith is either a fountainhead of collected details or she researched a wide range of topics as she wrote. > Characters, places, ideas, entire passages. I liked Griffith's ability to personalize some of the less central characters without bogging the story down in useless detail. Dr. Sara Hiram is made real and evokes my sympathy. Not only Danner, but the staff she draws around her when she finally breaks through her wall of isolation, all these people are made flesh-and-blood. We get to know their strengths and their weaknesses. We share their needs and dreams. I think that without this level of characterization, some readers might end up not caring whether or not the collected people of Jeep can remedy their problems and survive. > Do you think that Marghe's internal conflict was played just right, > underplayed, or overplayed? I don't think we can hold a writer to task for that. They must meet the needs of their audience, or they won't be published. I'm one of those earth dwellers cursed with XY chromosomes, and that genetic trait makes me sometimes impatient with characters that drift too far into angst. However, from my male viewpoint, given all that was going on in Marghe's life, I would have found her less than human had she not felt some internal conflict. I'd say it was handled very well. Things I wondered: 1. Why is Jeep, with an environment so different from earth, populated by flora and fauna not that dissimilar from those of earth? Perhaps that's due to influences brought to the planet by the early settlers from earth. Perhaps a sequel will shed more light. 2. Why couldn't Company simply inform the expedition that, due to the risk of spread of the virus, they were to be quarantined on Jeep till a remedy could be found? I'm looking forward to the thoughts of all you other bright, observant people on the list. Thanks, again, Nicola Griffith, for a fine piece of fiction. Jim ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 10:19:38 PST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Daniel Krashin Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >For more depth, I found a review by someone else: Gwyneth Jones' >review, which I encourage you to find at >http://gopher.well.sf.ca.us:70/0/Publications/authors/gwyn/jones.ammonite Good review, also points out a few of the plot holes. > What did you like best in the book? >Characters, places, ideas, entire passages. I liked very much the descriptions of life and nature on Jeep (although it seemed to me that Marghe should have died in the snowstorm), the marvelously detailed world of the tribes of Jeep. The character of the Mirror's commander, one of the few positive portraits of a military person in feminist SF (as opposed to amazonian fantasy). I especially liked the way the horse tribes of the steppe were believably savage, and not at all utopian. These characters were a lot closer to the real thing than the usual romantic picture of the Noble Savage. >What disappointed you? What opportunities do you think Griffith >missed in telling this story? Why do you think she didn't include >them? I had two big problems with Ammonite: 1) there was something of a "space fantasy" feeling to the part of the book set on Jeep -- I think this resulted from the combo of earthlike elements (Celtic names, Mongol lifestyle, terrestrial lifeforms) on the planet, and also what one person on USENET referred to as the "startlingly convenient" properties of the Jeep virus. The single virus killing men, conferring the ability to mess with your lover's genes, tap into ancestral memories, and sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation was a little too much for me to swallow. 2)I didn't have a problem with the idea of a planet full of women, but I thought there was something a little dodgy about the way it was set up. The scene at the beginning, where the medic doesn't even look at the sexual orientation of someone who may spend the rest of her life quarantines away from men, put me off a bit. Then, when she is down on the planet, the Mirrors do not seem to mourn, or miss, the male half of the group which was killed by the virus. This seemed like a bit of whitewashing to me, and I found it chilling (after all, I'd like to think someone would miss me if a virus killed me and all the other men on Earth). I wondered if a more realistic treatment of the emotional impact of the virus would have spoiled the quasi- utopian mood Griffith was trying to establish. >What parallels do you see between this book and Slow River? Any ideas >more fully developed there? Well, I saw some of the same "good-natured marginalization" of men in Slow River, most notably in the sex scene part way through that book where the husband falls asleep while the wife gets excited. Not bloody likely. (Disclaimer: he may just be pretending to be asleep, Griffith specifically mentions that possibility) >That ought to be enough to get you started. > >Jennifer >jkrauel@actioneer.com >book discussion group coordinator Dan Krashin ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 20:26:42 -0600 Reply-To: Stacey Holbrook Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite discussion begins To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Jennifer Krauel wrote: (snip) > What did the mysterious, probably intelligent creatures represent? The > goth I think they were called. The goth seemed to be the native sentient beings of the planet. It seems like they had some sort of advanced culture until some kind of ice age or natural disaster. It wasn't very clear. I kept getting a sense that the goth were somehow responsible for the virus. > Were the goth supposed to have created the standing stones? Or were the > Echraidhe? What did the stones represent? The goth erected the stones. Thenike's song told of the goth using them for some ceremonial purpose similar to Stonehenge. (snip) > If the bad guys come back, as is intimated at the end of the book, do > you think will they be able to eradicate the virus? Does Griffith leave > us enough hope that this fledgeling new society, tribes merged with > technologists, will be able to survive? What do you think happened? It's possible that they might be able to destroy the virus but the Company was given false information that the FN-17 (the vaccine) didn't work. This could lead to some false conclusions about the virus by scientists working on a cure. The Company will probably attempt to come back but it seems like Marghe and Danner will attempt to prepare their people for any hostilities. > What other themes did you find in the book. I'm sure I've missed many, > or mis-interpreted them. What did you like best in the book? I enjoyed the descriptions of the native flora and fauna. There was just enough to give an alien feeling without turning into a travelogue. I liked the different societies of each group. I liked that the adventure didn't take a back seat to examining the social repercussions of having all female societies. What I especially liked was that the women were not all perfect and the societies were not completely utopian. For example, one woman attempts to cheat an inn keeper. She ends up losing her job in a place far from her kin. The implication is that she will have to struggle to survive far from anyone who will help her. There is also the fact that there is no real help for anyone suffering mental illness (at least two characters had some kind of mental imbalance). > What disappointed you? What opportunities do you think Griffith missed > in telling this story? Why do you think she didn't include them? The final "battle" was settled too quickly and easily considering all the harm that had been done. > Griffith gave us a fairly well-realized world with interesting cultures > and characters. What in particular stood out for you as an example of > how she made it so vivid? When Marghe wakes up the first morning after camping out, she sees a "spiderweb" that is actually a living creature. There were other little moments that made the background vivid. (snip) > Jennifer > jkrauel@actioneer.com > book discussion group coordinator Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 20:52:17 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite Comments: To: Daniel Krashin To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Daniel Krashin wrote: (snip) > Then, when she is down on the planet, the Mirrors do not seem to mourn, > or miss, the male half of the group which was killed by the virus. This > seemed like a bit of whitewashing to me, and I found it chilling (after > all, I'd like to think someone would miss me if a virus killed me and > all the other men on Earth). I wondered if a more realistic treatment > of the emotional impact of the virus would have spoiled the quasi- > utopian mood Griffith was trying to establish. At the beginning of the book, the male Mirrors and quite a few female ones had been dead for about five years. Most of the survivors would have already gone through a mourning period. There is a section where Danner contemplates the fact that she had been promoted by several grades to commander because all of her superiors had died. There was also some mention that the Mirrors had had to make some difficult social adjustments due the lack of men but this is only a slight reference. It probably would have slowed the plot down some but I would have been interested in finding out how the heterosexual women managed to adjust to not having male companionship. I also wondered if Marghe was lesbian to start with because no mention of her sexual orientation is made until she partners with Thenike. Most of the flashbacks involve her parents and she doesn't seem to have had a sex life at all before arriving on GP. > Dan Krashin Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 21:13:01 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU What an enjoyable book this is. What a fine hero was Marghe with her unending courage and fortitude. I loved the fact that she and Thenike made their long journey and saved the world while pregnant. I was so disappointed that we, unlike Letitia and Lu Wai, were not invited to the births. Yes, I think the Goths built the stone calendar (based on the length of gestation, right?) How interesting that the Goth who was killed, passively hooting, was a male. Are they like the sandworms of Dune, holding all the secrets? If they are the cause of the virus, why didn't it kill their males? There was blood shed, but most break throughs, from the interrogation of the traitor to the victory of the Death Spirit came through communication. The women didn't fight against nature they adapted and worked with it. These were practical people, expecting payment for services, expecting to work for their living, and knowing the value of children in not only continuing the race but in educating its members. They balanced the value of change with the honoring of tradition. Feminism at its best. Thank you, Nicola. Joyce Jones ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 00:09:40 PST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Karen Kirschling Subject: [*FSFFU*] [FSFFU] BDG discussion of ammonite Comments: cc: kumasong@mailexcite.com To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU reading the gwyneth jones review, i liked what she said about the absence of the men also creating an absence of women; i thought that was an interesting interpretation of the situation, although i saw it more as the presence of strong character and humanity in the women. in this book they took on the responsibilities, challenges and cultural roles that another author might have assigned to men, but i don't know if one could substitute men here and have the same story. gender does cease to be an issue when there is and has been only one (in the beginning the men have been gone 5 years), but we on earth have to really be able to tune out the male supremacy of the world around us for this to become "normal". when what is "female" becomes what is"human", do the women disappear? hmmm... anyway, the strength and personhood of the characters - major and minor - is to me an outstanding part of this book. karen k. (greetings to all.) ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 08:44:24 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > If they are the cause of the virus, why didn't it kill their males? If the virus was tailored, why would you design it to kill the males? They certainly don't seem to be aggressive/dominant/oppressive. Just an off-the-wall thought. Perhaps the virus was a form of defense to which some human women have a natural resistance? What if its allowance of human reproduction was not a designed part of the virus, but a side-effect? Another question, though--why is the virus toxic to many women as well (perhaps partially answered above)? I forget the figures, but I seem to recall that the death rate for women was pretty high, too. -allen -- Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:06:32 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite discussion begins Comments: To: Stacey Holbrook To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu I noticed we've just started reading AMMONITE and we're already jumping ahead to the end. In the two other reading lists I'm on, we take it a few chapters at a time and discuss them in depth, which may be a very profitable way to tackle a novel as rich as AMMONITE. Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 09:24:54 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Heather MacLean Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: shell games To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Rereading Ammonite was *such* a pleasure... **Ammonite--so many meanings to that word. Griffith gives us the image of a fossilized shell, no longer full of "wet, moist life" sinking into Marghe's hand, fulfilling her in her dream, making her whole. The fossil is interesting in that it is coiled (like most shells) into a round shape, but also has a long point extending from it, blending both female and male symbols into one. **Ammon, the Egyptian equivalent of the Roman Jupiter or the Greek Zeus, is represented with ram horns; rams are traditionally known for the extravagance of their rut. **Amun (Marghe Amun, her chosen deeptrance name) may mean "the complete one"--but it is reminiscent of Ammon, leader of the Ammonites, youngest son of the incestuous rape of Lot by his daughters. All in all, a very tangled etymological background that brings much richness to the questions of the book. The women of Jeep (who have lived there without males for far longer than just 5 years--more like 200, considering no-one has a grandma who remembers the days when men were just as commonplace as male taars or goths) have tangled their genes and their procreative abilities so that they are fully independant. Much of the imagery behind the word "ammonite" suggests a merging of male/female traits. The society of Jeep is not a penetration, but an interpenetration -- not only on the sexual level, but also in the way in which the women have colonized the planet, seeking to find ways in which to blend with the earth, with its rythms, with its pulse. But I think the main question of the book lies not in "what happens to a world in which men disappear", but, "how do you deal with betrayal"; I think the key image is again the ammonite, the fossilized remnants of life, Thenike's carving hung 'round Marghe's neck, the function of collective memories, the viajera role the two of them play. But, I have to run for now... Anyone care to pick up that knot? (Also: is the shape of the writing like an ammonite? A main thrust, but coiled in on itself in the description of different compartments of societies... but maybe I'm reaching here). Heather =) hmaclean@kent.edu Reality is only a question of language. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 09:32:29 -0800 Reply-To: laorka@meer.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Lindy S. L. Lovvik" Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite discussion begins To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Hi, Jennifer Krauel wrote: > I confess right off the bat to having really enjoyed this book. Since > I'm starting this, here's why: > > - A whole book with no men, so subtly done you don't even realize it > for awhile No active male characters, true. Still, I felt the presence of men often (not so much when the story focused on Marghe and her doings, but when Danner and Sue discussed Company and the Kurst and what might happen). The threat posed by the Kurst and the capitalistic frenzy of Company felt "male" to me. I realize that Mirrors included men and women. Judging by Marghe's reaction to the Mirrors on Jeep, I am guessing that gender did not have much meaning in that organization--she did not think for a second that a female Mirror was any less of a threat. Company is probably the same. So why do I feel these threatening "characters" as male? Probably just my experience resulting in my own perspective. Still, I greatly enjoyed women just being people. Restful. Gender "issues" dealt with by not being an issue. :) > - A strong, independent female lead character: Marghe Taishan Yeah. I liked Marghe. She was believable. I don't exactly understand why she had to run off the minute she got there, but it sure drove the story I understand that she only had 6 months, but, like Danner said, Marghe's official mission was to ascertain if the vaccine worked. I guess I was not totally convinced by Danner's reasons for supporting Marghe's personal mission of discovering the origin of Jeep's human inhabitants. If the Mirror's were truly stuck on Jeep, she'd have all the time in the world to find the human origins, and possibly a "cure." Still, it was Marghe's determination and curiosity which created this adventure. _Ammonite_ was a very good read. I didn't ever find myself backtracking for facts, which indicates careful crafting of characters and the story line. Griffith created characters with depth and provided rich, sensory details about the environment. Someone mentioned in another email that the descriptions were complete without sounding like a travelogue. I agree. Details such as the hollow grass, the trees used by the women of Singing Pastures for lodging. . .There was so much description of Jeep that I skimmed through to see why it didn't jar the pace. I think that interaction between Marghe and her environment anchored me into the descriptions of Jeep. They weren't always separate. I'm glad that this book was on the BDG list. Lindy -- "If I had my past life to do over again, I'd make all the same mistakes--only sooner." --Tallulah Bankhead http://www.dotgraph.com Resources associated with women, disabilities and writing. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 10:59:42 -0800 Reply-To: laorka@meer.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Lindy S. L. Lovvik" Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Control To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu Hi, One of the aspects of _Ammonite_ that both drew me into Marghe's character and kept me separate is her occupation with listening to and controlling her body. Passages in which she is meditating seemed to draw me into her world and body. During passages such as during the snowstorm (when she was consciously directing blood flow), I felt more like an observer. Her control is admirable. I found myself wishing to be so skilled with my body. In fact, I think I envy Marghe's general enjoyment of and ability to really live in her body. I was well able to identify with Marghe's concerted effort to gain such extensive somatic control after having her face (and body?) bashed in by a Mirror during a Company sanctioned beating. hmmm.... which makes me wonder if I would have enjoyed these skills of hers so had she not gained them to offset the trauma... I hope so. Well, looking at body and control as a theme, Marghe travels a long road. She loses control of her life/body before this story begins, inspiring her to gain compensatory (plus!) skills. She walks back to "Company" and agrees to allow them to use her body to test the Jeep vaccine (which she sees as using them while they are using her). Control is taken away again when she is captured. She gains survival skills. After nearly losing her life in the blizzard, she is again not in control of her body. However, kind people care for her and help her recover. She loses a couple fingers, spends a lot of time in bed, but gains a lover, friends and family. She chooses to open her body to the virus, and it seems she survives because she didn't fight it (in addition to Thenike's intervention and the preparation). Again, she spends a lot of time in bed being cared for by others. Because she has such a detailed understanding of her body, she is able to become a viajera, which fits her well. She is also able to help Thenike begin gestating a child. One of the things I really liked was that Marghe had a choice whether or not to continue her own pregnancy because of her knowledge and control of her body. She could end the pregnancy without assistance from others and without any damage to her own body. An excellent example of true reproductive choice. Marghe's choice of continuing her pregnancy seems like the ultimate giving away of control of her body. It's a choice, though, so it feels to me as if this indicates Marghe's growth as a human. An aside--I liked how the loss of the fingers was dealt with. Marghe mourns, but she is alive. Also, despite the relatively long time Marghe spends in bed with injury and illness, as well as in convalesce, there is no doubt that she is a strong character. I really like this aspect. Oh, I like this book. Lindy -- "If I had my past life to do over again, I'd make all the same mistakes--only sooner." --Tallulah Bankhead http://www.dotgraph.com Resources associated with women, disabilities and writing. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 11:34:00 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jessie Stickgold-Sarah Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu I didn't get the mail for March 2nd (I get it digest form), and I didn't get the message(s?) that was/were responded to on the 3rd. If anyone has it, could they forward it to me? >Then, when >she is down on the planet, the Mirrors do not seem to mourn, or >miss, the male half of the group which was killed by the virus. This >seemed like a bit of whitewashing to me, and I found it chilling (after >all, I'd like to think someone would miss me if a virus killed me and >all the other men on Earth). I actually found this to be something of a relief. It might also be whitewashing, but it meant that the women on the planet could really exist alone, rather than in relation to all of the absent men. I've read plenty of books about all-female groups in which the absence of men is as powerful a force as their presence would be. I thought it was *wonderful* to see a society made up of women that wasn't intensely political (typically defined by the absence if men) or catastrophic (permanently damaged by the absence of men) or temporary (doomed by etc etc etc). To me, the portrayal of an all-female society, with no sex-bound roles, no portion of their lives defined as not-what-men-do or what-we-can-do-without-men was amazingly refreshing. A literary trick, maybe, and unrealistic; but for one book, I don't mind at all. Men live complete within themselves all the time. I get called Mrs. whenever I go grocery shopping with a man (any man); I get asked for the head of household when I answer the phone (I'm the only wage-earner). It's very hard for a woman to be herself without being asked whose wife, sister, daughter, mother, or other dependant she is. >would have spoiled the quasi- >utopian mood Griffith was trying to establish. Could you (or anyone else) say a little more about this? I thought of this book as utopian for a while just because it featured a situation that doesn't occur in nature, perpetuated by A Magical Virus. But if men had been added (and, for instance, the ancestral memories, genetic manipulation and sensitivity to EM radiation had been kept the same) it would just have been science fiction. What makes it utopian? (Having no men is no utopia for me; I have many that I'd miss a whole lot. On the other hand, existing as myself instead of in relation to men is something I fight for everyday, and seems like a very prosaic and pragmatic desire.) jessie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 20:03:27 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite discussion begins To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-04 09:22:04 EST, you write: << In the two other reading lists I'm on, we take it a few chapters at a time and discuss them in depth, which may be a very profitable way to tackle a novel as rich as AMMONITE. >> sounds good to me--I'm still fairly early in the book, and enjoying it a lot--of course, some comments lead you to look carefully at certain scenes or characters when you do come to them yourself-- barbara ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 22:00:36 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: DAVID CHRISTENSON Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU -- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- > >Then, when > >she is down on the planet, the Mirrors do not seem to mourn, or > >miss, the male half of the group which was killed by the virus. This > >seemed like a bit of whitewashing to me, and I found it chilling (after > >all, I'd like to think someone would miss me if a virus killed me and > >all the other men on Earth). I got the impression that the men were mourned, but this group was getting over it - the deaths did occur some time before current events. Besides, this was a rather military/exploratory group, and death is part of the deal. And mourning didn't serve the purposes of the novel. > I've read plenty of > books about all-female groups in which the absence of men is as powerful a > force as their presence would be. Exactly! That's what makes this book so unusual. (Historiosexist note: the earliest book I've seen tackling this theme was "The Last Space Ship," by Murray Leinster, 1949. He created an interstellar despot who created a planetary ray gun that would kill only men. With all the men dead, the women on any planet were insane with grief and technologically helpless, thus easily conquered. Huh.) > I thought it was *wonderful* to see a society made up of women that wasn't > intensely political (typically defined by the absence if men) or catastrophic > (permanently damaged by the absence of men) or temporary (doomed by etc > etc etc). Unfortunately, these women are still prey to religious fanaticism. That's what takes this book out of the "utopian" category, in my opinion .. -- David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 00:37:43 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail2.wayne.edu To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Daniel wrote: >1) there was something of a "space fantasy" feeling to the part of the >book set on Jeep -- I think this resulted from the combo of earthlike >elements (Celtic names, Mongol lifestyle, terrestrial lifeforms) on the >planet, and also what one person on USENET referred to as the >"startlingly convenient" properties of the Jeep virus. It is, however, USENET. ;) >The single virus >killing men, conferring the ability to mess with your lover's genes, tap >into ancestral memories, and sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation >was a little too much for me to swallow. Look closer: the virus also kills the majority of women who land on the planet. A very small percentage survives - perhaps all of the effects the virus has on these women aren't actually effects. I would argue that the virus unlocks something in the genetic code which allows these things to happen. >I wondered if a more realistic treatment >of the emotional impact of the virus would have spoiled the quasi- >utopian mood Griffith was trying to establish. Don't you get the idea they're drained beyond belief - that they can't mourn any longer? You can see that in patients who have survived massive slaughters - eventually they simply block the event and pass over it in their minds. I think the emotional impact was just as it should be... ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 06:53:48 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, DAVID CHRISTENSON wrote: > Exactly! That's what makes this book so unusual. (Historiosexist note: > the earliest book I've seen tackling this theme was "The Last Space Ship > ," by Murray Leinster, 1949. He created an interstellar despot who > created a planetary ray gun that would kill only men. With all the men > dead, the women on any planet were insane with grief and technologically > helpless, thus easily conquered. Huh.) Have any of you ever read Philip Wylie's THE DISAPPEARANCE? All men vanish from one timeline and all women from another. The women get off to a slow start because after WWII they were NOT, by and large, mistresses of technology, but geton their feet they do. The men devolve into war and barbarism so fast their half turns into a Post Toastie. > Unfortunately, these women are still prey to religious fanaticism. Yes. As others have said, they're human, and a complete spectrum of humanity at that. If you want Utopian, read THE WANDERGROUND.> ... > -- > David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 15:59:41 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: DAVID CHRISTENSON Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG discussion of ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU -- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- This novel is not utopian, IMO, but that's not a negative criticism. So does it strike us as a deliberate avoidance of utopian/dystopian forms? And as such, is it implicitly saying something more complex about women than those forms could? In the deliberate construction of a woman-only society, should we assume Nicola was not merely exploring human nature (as all literature does) but exploring female nature specifically? Thus I'm intrigued by the mystical aspects in this novel - the connection of body to planet. I wonder if other readers see this put forth as a universal latent aspect of female nature brought out by this planet's virus, or just a product of this planet and this society. And the Goth - should we see the Goth as symbolic, again somehow linked to the theme of the nature of women? They lurk in the background, Moby-Dick -ish, and they're even whale-white. (And why the name "Goth?" Nicola certainly must have been aware of the modern connotations of "goth," particularly to readers of "women's literature.") Hey, I'm no critic. Is anybody with me on this? I'm awfully tempted to believe this all-female society is a canvas for a picture of women's deepest drives and resources - faith, fear, freedom, survival, adventure, etc., whether or not the author intended it as such. But it would also be interesting (not quite as interesting, IMO) to see this as an SF adventure that just happens to exclude men. (And there's certainly room for more such exploration in a sequel.) -- David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 06:41:02 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU My two cents on Ammonite... The Goth....I could not stop thinking of Big Foot when I read passages on the Goth. In my first couple readings of the book (years ago) skimmed over the desc. because of that...this time I tried to pay attention. I do not see them as mysterious except that they are absent. The story Thenike tells (pgs 206-208) suggests that they were perhaps the original peoples of the planet. They were male and female. They had the skills/spirituality of at minimum the builders of Stonehenge. That the planet experienced what I could only call a glacial period and they were driven to new territories that were too harsh to sustain life (like the Erachaide). And finally when they tried to return to their worship site they were driven away by..."the sky was split by light and thunder.....the black bolt ground and smashed through the trees. there was a great burning and alien smells." I interpreted that scene as the point when "visitors/humans" arrived at Jeep. The stones with the electromagnetic energy may have attracted searchers to that sight. Whatever reason..the mention of alien smells cinched it for me. That was the beginning of the end for the Goth, and apparently the men and many women of that original arrival of "aliens". the fact that by the end of the book there is a foreshadowing of Companies return convicted me moreso that what we are seeing on Jeep are waves of "arrivals" ,"colonizations" or "invasion" as it were with more yet to come. As is suggested "Company" i.e. capitalist interests will return to the resource laden planet. The goths were driven to near complete extinction by the glacial period, but the arrival of "aliens" finished off the work. Do they still exist? I read the hunting story (pg. 275-8) that Leifin tells and I feel almost that she is making it up. We do not see the pelt,and who would know the bones of a goth if no one has really captured one? If the story is true.....it confirms that this is no utopia. Gerrel complains that Leifin hunts too much (pg. 204/5) suggesting that there is a need to kill on Leifins parts. Conquer perhaps in that way "invading peoples" do so well? So that the trapping/killing of the goth especially in such a horrid manner, is about conquering the original peoples, the mystical past, overcoming the powerful other, maybe i am stretching here.... In sum....I see the Goth as the indigenous population that suffered the consequences of colonization and nature. And i sense that the new colonizers ( the MIRORS) will have there own deleterious effect on the existing populations, especially if the Company returns....more black bolts from the sky and alien smells?.....I see no utopia here. And there is so much more to say about this book.... ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 07:17:39 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I noticed that nobody in Leifin's community saw fit to sanction her for killing sentient natives - not even Thenike. Thenike knew they were sentient and had proved it with her song. If the others were at all receptive they'd know it too. But they mildly shook their heads and said it really wasn't a very nice thing to do ... somewhat as if Leifin were guilty of a minor breach of manners. Interesting... Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 11:52:25 -0800 Reply-To: jkrauel@actioneer.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Organization: Actioneer, Inc. Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite, Goths To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU One interpretation of the Goths is as a symbol of the human "colonists" or invaders' fall from grace. No matter the trials survived and the new civilization created, there is the blood of this sentient, native species on their hands. And Griffith shows us, as someone just pointed out, there isn't even any particular remorse about this genocide. There's no annoying "primary directive" keeping humans from having their way with a world. All this puts a different light on the holistic gaia-like planet heartbeat stuff. How clued in to the planet can someone be if they have so little respect for its inhabitants? Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 09:19:48 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu >Jennifer Krauel >Subject: BDG: Ammonite discussion > >Where did the virus come from? Why?... If the bad guys come back, as >is intimated at the end of the book, do you think will they be able to >eradicate the virus? The Virus.....if the tribal women are in fact "colonizers" , it is not surprising that colonizers would not have systemic defenses for all of the "bugs" of a new planet. Even when populations move around on our globe they are want to bring new ailments with them. I did not trip over the existence of the virus as much as its effect. In 92/3 when i read this book the world was yearning still for a cure for HIV/AIDS. Here is a story where a virus, kills yes, but if doesn't it embues the carrier with enhanced strengths and capabilities. A complete departure from what are minds have been saturated with in these days of HIV: until you die?, eventual total immune system failure. Company has already indicated a great need to eradicate the virus so as to access the planet. Resource need in any future story would dictate if they try again, no? >Does Griffith leave >us enough hope that this fledgeling new society, tribes merged with >technologists, will be able to survive? What do you think happened? The technologists will not long be technologists as equipment breaks down. The existence of the floppy disk at Rathell's with all the "old things" she kept (pg 199) indicates that the original arrivals also had their "technologies" but after hundreds(?) of years it was gone or useless. I believe "what happened?" is that these new women become a unique tribe but are eventualy absorbed into a more primitive way because their external advantages/strengths (technology) cannot be sustained for lengthy periods of time. The dangerous part to me is the "trained killer" (MIRORS) aspects of this new tribe. When trata doesn't satisfy will they just overpower and take since they have "better" weapons and a preparedness to kill? >What did you like best in the book? Characters, places, ideas, entire >passages. I cannot contain it any longer.....The ENTIRE passage with the gong drops me in my tracks (pg 183-188) every time i read this book. what a brilliant vision. I wish we had an innate knowledge that we all pulse together. And it was part of growing to find and hear the pulse of the planet. And before I am considered untethered in the ethereal for my exhuberance about the pulsing planet, let me add that i was also mesmerized by the passages of sexual intimacy.....amazingly written passages of what it sometimes feels that it IS as well as what we know inside it can BE when you really connect with someone. More moving and exciting than anything that would have been more explicit. >What disappointed you? Ummm, i am so busy enjoying the book i did not notice any flaws....that is work best left to reviewers in my opinion. >What parallels do you see between this book and Slow River? Emotionally, physically, excruciating, slow and methodical growth under numerous layers of duress on the part of one extraordinary woman????? I think the things above gave me the biggest buzz....hope we are not done yet....i noticed the last series of posts had pretty much moved to other topics....oh well. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 06:33:02 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Someone wrote "unfortunately these women are still prey to religious fanaticism..." No, not most of the women. The Echraidhe were able to be overcome by Uaithne's fanatical religious obsession because they were a suffering, dying tribe (like the Germans under Hitler). They knew there had to be some kind of drastic change in order for their tribe to continue, they also knew that only stringent discipline, based on respect for tradition, enabled them to survive in their tortuous environment. They were so torn by opposite forces that they couldn't save themselves, thus they fell prey to their leader's psychosis. The other tribes, as I remember, had a nature based spirituality, but no fanaticism. Spirituality is natural and healthy, surely not evidence of dysfunction. The book to me seemed utopian because women were people, as mentioned before, and various human characteristics were believably displayed in different women without their being a function of sex. I have to think that the artist-hunter Leifin would have been a male in any other novel. Marghe the adventuresome main character might have been female, but gender would have come into play in the minor characters. Only in a utopia can one be oneself without regard to gender, how's that for a broad statement? Joyce Jones ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 12:54:45 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-08 07:33:41 EST, you write: << The book to me seemed utopian because women were people, as mentioned before, and various human characteristics were believably displayed in different women without their being a function of sex. >> I enjoyed reading about women as people, whose activities were not classified according to their relationship to men and their concerns. But for several reasons, I don't consider the book utopian: 1. Life is difficult and oppressive for these women. I wouldn't want to live in tents in the bitter cold, in an environment that doesn't seem to offer a possibility of anything better. The people at Ollmoss, while offering a better life, still have a more primitive way of living than I consider utopian. And the people at Port Central have to worry about what Company is going to do to them. Nobody can just relax and enjoy life. 2. I don't see much humor in the book. Everything is so grim and bleak. Not a utopian feel, IMHO. 3. Even without the aggressiveness of males, they still manage to have bloodlust and armed conflict. I'd like to think that women would have a kinder, gentler civilization. That's what seems to happen in corporate America to a great extent. 4. Being hetero, I would not want to live in a place without any men around. They may sometimes be arrogant and overbearing, but to do without all those nice, rippling muscles--the powerful shoulders and bulging biceps--the lean, flat, belly and the washboard abs--the rasp of new whiskers against one's face--oh, my, is it getting warm in here? 5. There's a feeling of isolation and aloneness about many of the characters. I really like the part in the book where Marghe reaches a turning point--she realizes that she was simply an observer and not a participant in humanity, and she knows that she's changing into something else. At that point, she begins to be a part of something larger than herself. But up until that point, I see the kind of separateness in individuals that I would find hard to live with. barbara ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 12:10:44 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robyn Starkey Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I've just finished Ammonite, which I really enjoyed. I'm also enjoying people's comments on the book. The thing I liked best about the book were the descriptions of the 'native' tribal cultures, how the women chose to interact and organise their kin and allegiances and living arrangements. In fact, like Marge in her anthropologist mode, I would have liked to have found out more about how some of these concepts worked, like the "choose-mother" for instance. I liked the descriptions and explanations about the rhythm of the world and the relationship of the people to their environment. Jeep is deceptively like earth at times, and I think the notion of its alien-ness was interesting. It seemed to me that the virus was sorting out the people who could adapt to the new world - Marghe survived because she accepted it. Maybe this is the key to why the virus killed the men? A few people have commented on how gender works in the book, and on the idea of complete people. I must say that although I enjoyed the ideas portrayed in the book, I don't think the genderlessness worked quite as seamlessly as all that. It seemed to me that in the book there was a concentration on the tougher, more 'masculine' women - eg. we learned a lot more about the psyches of Uaithne the Warrior, and Leifin the Hunter than we did about more balanced or more "feminine" characters like Thenike or Torre 'Na. I apprecated the comments of whoever said we learned a lot about Marghe and her body, because while I think that's true, I often didn't really understand her motivations. That was an intriguing relationship to have with a character, I think. A couple of things that bugged me - there were some holes in the ending and things that weren't resolved. Now, I don't mind a mysterious ending, but in this case it seemed more like a failure to tie up loose ends. Is this just room for a sequel? The other thing that bugged me were the names. So many of them seemed like jaw-breakers (not the Irish ones, the others), and their associations were a little unfortunate. Like the goth, and Thenike (I saw this as "the Nike", and couldn't get it out of my head). Robyn *********************************** Robyn Starkey University of Melbourne r.starkey@elp.unimelb.edu.au ************************************ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 12:16:10 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robyn Starkey Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU At 07:17 6/03/98 -0800, you wrote: >I noticed that nobody in Leifin's community saw fit to sanction her for >killing sentient natives - not even Thenike. Thenike knew they were >sentient and had proved it with her song. If the others were at all >receptive they'd know it too. But they mildly shook their heads and said >it really wasn't a very nice thing to do ... somewhat as if Leifin were >guilty of a minor breach of manners. Interesting... I found this disturbing, too. As was Marghe's acceptance - if Leifin isn't swayed by Thenike's song, we can't do anything else. It seems like legal procedures among the natives on Jeep pertain only to property and trata, and there is no process of sanction if there is no commerce. Eg the woman who was punished for faking credits was denied a livelihood for fraud, and the Echraidhe had to pay a heap of compensation for what they had done. It doesn't look like there is anything Leifin's kith can do about her activities, especially as they are profitable. Robyn *********************************** Robyn Starkey University of Melbourne r.starkey@elp.unimelb.edu.au ************************************ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 22:17:31 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kitimher Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU First of all to Nicola, congratualtions on writing of a fine piece of work that is engaging, thought provoking and memorable. My thoughts have jelled a bit, so here they are: ~There's been quite a bit of reference to the lack of men or reference to men in this piece, I have a couple of thoughts about this: --I found Marghe's recollections of her father to be quite poignant, they are some of the most memorable parts of the book. I also didn't detect a lack of caring about the loss of men, I think the somber aspects of the novel reflect a feeling of loss wordlessly. --As a lesbian woman, I found the lesbian relationships wonderfully natural, accurate while being quite subtlely drawn. I appreciated the way the characters were allowed to emerge full and that it was unnecessary to create their personalities based upon how they looked, so Uaithne's darkness was an inherent part of her, and there was no need to paint her for example, as extremely masculine, etc. INHO this is the mark of both a good writer and a woman who "gets it". --Re Barbara's post. . . 4. Being hetero, I would not want to live in a place without any men around. They may sometimes be arrogant and overbearing, but to do without all those nice, rippling muscles--the powerful shoulders and bulging biceps--the lean, flat, belly and the washboard abs--the rasp of new whiskers against one's face--oh, my, is it getting warm in here? I would miss men a great deal, I have great male friends, would love to have more, am in fact raising a little man to be, but these are all things that you can find in women, whiskers and all! tara ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 00:20:14 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-09 22:21:30 EST, you write: << but these are all things that you can find in women, whiskers and all! >> I forgot to mention in my list the fact that men have an outie, not an innie--a major (and appreciated by some) difference! I have many women friends I love dearly, but never that way. Someone on the list remarked that Marghe had no sex life before going to this world. It seemed to me that she must be a lesbian, whether or not she'd been sexually active, because she responded in that way to women, and didn't seem to miss anything. I noticed it in particular when Marghe started thinking "Thenike will keep me safe" because it's the way many women feel about men--a dependence thing. Before that, she seemed sadly separate and isolated. But then she started looking to someone for protection. I don't think Nicola intended to show Marghe as being dependent in a weak way--she'd already proven that she could take pretty good care of herself. I think it's natural to want someone to watch out for you sometimes so you can relax now and then. Marghe is a very human character. I admire the characterization in this novel--I can see each of the main characters as a distinct individual. barbara ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 08:35:09 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kitimher Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I forgot to mention in my list the fact that men have an outie, not an innie--a major (and appreciated by some) difference! Well Barbara, I hate to be the one to tell you but. . . ~:-} ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 08:51:45 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kitimher Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu In a message dated 3/9/98 7:17:46 PM, you wrote: <> Oh Robin I so disagree. As I said in an earlier post, I don't think that any of the women were ascribed particularly feminine or masculine characteristics. Uaithne's long braids are one of the most frequently referenced physical characteristics in the novel. Thenike is clearly physically strong, and came across with a great deal of "male" energy. I also disagree that Uaithne was not a "balanced" or "feminine" character, it was clear to me that she was conflicted, and also clear to me that in her own way, she came to love Marghe. The very balanced part about her INO was that she couldn't "go there". I think she had a tenderness that she was unable/unwilling to express, she certainly was full of passion. And I think we learned a great deal about Thenike. She has a quiet wisdom about her. As someone who has spent a large portion of her life travelling, singing and storytelling, it seemed to me that in her personal life, she was able to say a great deal, wordlessly. tara ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 16:29:09 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: DAVID CHRISTENSON Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU -- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- Just ran across the judges' comments on this book when it won the Tiptree Award in 1994, and I thought I'd excerpt some quotes for the list's reaction. "While avoiding rhetoric, cant and stereotype, Griffith's politics run subtle and deep." - Steve Brown "This is the story of how people interact, and the evolution and adaptation of the protagonist to a world that is different from the one she's always known. Also a novel which postulates that a society composed of only women would not be fundamentally different from one containing both genders." - Susan Casper "...an interesting rite of passage novel... This book is not based on 'difference' gender philosophy (i.e. that women and men are basically psychologically different), and therefore, the women-only culture wasn't portrayed as a utopia for its lack of men. Greed and mindless violence exist in this culture as in ours. Its gender-bending message was that sexuality is only a minor part of human relationships." - Jeanne Gomoll "It answers the question 'When you eliminate one gender, what's left?' (a whole world, is the answer). But a lot of books like Moby-Dick eliminate one gender, and yet nobody thinks anything about it." - Ursula K. Le Guin "Ammonite could have been a didactic novel or a utopian fiction, but Griffith has made her world of women complex and full of people both good and bad." - Maureen McHugh -- -- David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 17:44:17 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite Comments: To: Lurima To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU On Mon, 9 Mar 1998, Lurima wrote: (snip) > 3. Even without the aggressiveness of males, they still manage to have > bloodlust and armed conflict. I'd like to think that women would have a > kinder, gentler civilization. That's what seems to happen in corporate America > to a great extent. Most of the tribes had managed to live and trade with each other peacefully. Only a few tribes fought and it seemed that it was more like raiding for goods than actual warfare. It wasn't until the Echraidhe was on the brink of extinction (something that was brought about by Uaithne offending a neighboring tribe) that war broke out. It was clear that Uaithne was insane and managed to drag her clan into her madness. With the exception of the Echraidhe, I found most of the groups to be fairly peaceful (surprisingly enough, even the Mirrors) and I would have found it to be extremely unrealistic if there had been no conflict at all. With or without men, the people on Jeep were still human with all the same human flaws and faults. I liked the fact that no one was "perfect" and that each group had found solutions to problems but none of them were perfect (for example, how do you catch and prosecute a theif when there is no police force or jails? The solution was interesting but not perfect.). > barbara > Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 09:06:57 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kmfriello Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: additional material To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I thought this would be of interest after we had finished discussing Ammonite, so hadn't posted it earlier. If anyone has come across other relevant critical writing, please send me the reference so I can include it in the listings. Additional material relevant to _Ammonite_ currently available online: Gwyneth Jones, review, _The New York Review of Science Fiction_, no. 54 (February 1993) http://gopher.well.sf.ca.us:70/0/Publications/authors/gwyn/jones. ammonite Evelyn C. Leeper, online review, 1993, The Linkoping Science Fiction & Fantasy Archive http://sf.www.lysator.liu.se/sf_archive/sf-texts/books/G/Griffith ,Nicola.mbox Judges' commentary, The 1993 James Tiptree, Jr. Award http://www.sf3.org/tiptree/1993/index.html Links to texts for the following relevant writings/interviews by Nicola Griffith may be found on her web page at: http://www.sff.net/people/nicola "The New Aliens of Science Fiction" in _Nebula Awards 30_ (1996) (brief discussion of aliens, sexuality, lesbians portrayed by women and men) "Writing from the Body"; talk presented at Wiscon 20, 1996 (on Art and the Body; contains an account of her illness and writing _Ammonite_) (also published as "Writing from the Body," _SF Eye_, no. 15 [Fall 1997]) Interview by Ruud van de Kruisweg, _Holland SF_ (Fall 1994) (wide-ranging; includes discussion of _Ammonite_ characters, all- female worlds) Interview by Dave Slusher for "Reality Break" radio show (recorded December 5, 1992) Additional reviews: _Kliatt Young Adult Paperback Book Guide_ 27 (May 1993): 14 _Lamda Book Report_ 3 (Mar 1993): 32ff. James Sallis, _Los Angeles Times Books Review_, June 6, 1993, p.2ff _New Statesman & Society_ (London) 6, April 30, 1933, p.47 Gerald Jonas, _New York Times Book Review_ 98, March 14, 1993, p.14 _Science Fiction Chronicle_ 14 (May 1993): 34 Paul Di Filippo, _Washington Post Book World_, July 30, 1995, p.12 _Women's Review of Books_ 10 (July 1993): 30 _Locus_ reviews and commentary: November 1992, p.17ff.; December 1992, p.27ff.; February 1994, p.75ff. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 15:00:35 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: DAVID CHRISTENSON Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu -- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- > With the exception of the Echraidhe, I found most of the groups to be > fairly peaceful (surprisingly enough, even the Mirrors) and I would have > found it to be extremely unrealistic if there had been no conflict at all. And come to think of it, the major conflicts had pretty much been resolved at the end of the book, hadn't they? So maybe the *sequel* can be more utopian... -- David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 13:22:32 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michelle Bernard Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I think this is sort of following the idea that, even if Leifin's kin were to remove her from the kinship ties, as long as someone will purchase/trade for the Goth hide and bones, Leifin will find a place. Also, if no one buys the Goth hide/bones, then perhaps Leifin will cease and desist. Then again, it also shows the acceptance of family for who they are (that she finds the same beauty in the dead wood and in the dead Goth). When the electromagnetic energy is discussed, all parts of Jeep are said to contain it including plants/trees, that in some ways that the materials (non Goth) that Leifin uses can be compared in any way? misha bernardm@colorado.edu >---------- >From: Robyn Starkey[SMTP:r.starkey@ELP.UNIMELB.EDU.AU] >Sent: Monday, March 09, 1998 7:16 PM >To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG > >At 07:17 6/03/98 -0800, you wrote: >>I noticed that nobody in Leifin's community saw fit to sanction her for >>killing sentient natives - not even Thenike. Thenike knew they were >>sentient and had proved it with her song. If the others were at all >>receptive they'd know it too. But they mildly shook their heads and said >>it really wasn't a very nice thing to do ... somewhat as if Leifin were >>guilty of a minor breach of manners. Interesting... > >I found this disturbing, too. As was Marghe's acceptance - if Leifin isn't >swayed by Thenike's song, we can't do anything else. It seems like legal >procedures among the natives on Jeep pertain only to property and trata, >and there is no process of sanction if there is no commerce. Eg the woman >who was punished for faking credits was denied a livelihood for fraud, and >the Echraidhe had to pay a heap of compensation for what they had done. It >doesn't look like there is anything Leifin's kith can do about her >activities, especially as they are profitable. > >Robyn > >*********************************** > >Robyn Starkey >University of Melbourne >r.starkey@elp.unimelb.edu.au > >************************************ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 13:35:39 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michelle Bernard Subject: [*FSFFU*] femfs: BDG Ammonite- standing stones, EM, and living things To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I've been thinking about those standing stones and who built them The novel lays it out as the Goths and inside the story it doesn't seem plausible that a postcatastrophy colonial society (post virus?) would be ready to use their presumably more technological prowess to erect them. Assuming it is as Thenike's story (Goth's built it and migrated each year for birth/healing)... some thoughts Marghe sees the same effects (EM disturbances) in the Standing Stones as during the electrical storms which hilight both Jeep's alien qualities and the the changed nature of "humaness" with the virus. The Goth used the Standing Stones in association with procreation and died out both because of the ice age and their inability to migrate south (due to the new colonial influx). The Echraidhe counted the Standing Stones sacred to their tribe. Like the Goth, the Echraidhe (and the Briogannon) were dying out for lack of exogamy and the harsh winters of the Tehuantepec. They killed (or rebirthed as their own, as they did Marghe) all the other women the Echraidhe found there. The EM awareness of the body (aided and controlled healing, faster healing, ability to start a modified mitosis/miosis for conception) is affected by the virus. So, somehow this is all connected, the conception of Goth's, the EM of the planet (a giant "computer"?), and the ability of the women to conceive. Possibly connected? The Echraidhe destroyed the northern satellite relay (and then, were all systems destoryed when the Kurst blew the Deck Platform?) either because it was a sacred/EM place for another, or it was disturbing the balance? No conclusions, I know, but more stuff to think about? misha bernardm@colorado.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 21:19:02 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-11 15:08:13 EST, you write: << So maybe the *sequel* can be more utopian... >> I hope there is a sequel! The book seems to leave us in the air, much like McAffrey's first _Freedom_ novel. I know that in real life plots don't always get resolved, but one can hope for it in a work of art-- barbara ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 00:13:37 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail4.wayne.edu To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU ><< So maybe the *sequel* can be more utopian... >> > >I hope there is a sequel! The book seems to leave us in the air, much like >McAffrey's first _Freedom_ novel. I know that in real life plots don't >always get resolved, but one can hope for it in a work of art-- I actually thought the book stands quite nicely on its own, without a sequel. I don't think GP has to become Pern, with all of its facets explored and dissected (not to say I dislike that). And I wouldn't be resistant if Nicola did write a sequel, I just don't think we need one... - Geoffrey, the busy fellow sitting editing and re-editing a review... ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 12:49:43 -0800 Reply-To: jkrauel@actioneer.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Organization: Actioneer, Inc. Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU A note from your neighborhood discussion group coordinator... Seems like the Ammonite discussion is winding down, although there's still plenty of time left for discussion. Anybody out there lurking who hasn't got around to commenting on the book, or on other people's comments? Are there any questions you'd like to put to Nicola about the book? For example: did she have in mind a sequel, as some have wondered? I'd also like to ask for feedback on the overall discussion process. For example, Pat suggested we proceed chapter-by-chapter rather than diving right into overall conclusions. Would you prefer to do it that way, or by section if applicable? Pat, how long does discussion remain on each chapter before proceeding? Also, there were some concerns about bandwidth, but it seems to me there wasn't an overwhelming volume of discussion. At least, nobody has complained to me and asked for a separate discussion list. Comments on this? Finally, remember that discussion on our next book, Dreamsnake, begins April 6: start reading soon so you don't miss any of the fun. Jennifer jkrauel@actioneer.com book discussion group coordinator ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 21:00:51 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-13 00:23:54 EST, you write: << I actually thought the book stands quite nicely on its own, without a sequel. I don't think GP has to become Pern, with all of its facets explored and dissected (not to say I dislike that). And I wouldn't be resistant if Nicola did write a sequel, I just don't think we need one... >> I would have felt the same way, except for that one page in which we learn that Company blew up the orbiting platform and the _Kurst_ took off. They then become a nasty threat that hangs over the people on the planet. When I read that part, I wondered if Nicola's editor asked her to put in a hook for a sequel. Otherwise, I see no need for any further explanations. The society stands on its own. I like a novel that leaves you with the feeling that the characters continue after the particular story you're reading is over. barbara ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 22:41:26 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Comments: To: Jennifer Krauel To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU On Sun, 15 Mar 1998, Jennifer Krauel wrote: (snip) > Seems like the Ammonite discussion is winding down, although there's > still plenty of time left for discussion. Anybody out there lurking who > hasn't got around to commenting on the book, or on other people's > comments? Maybe. I'm still mulling it over. The more I think about *Ammonite* the more I like it. > I'd also like to ask for feedback on the overall discussion process. > For example, Pat suggested we proceed chapter-by-chapter rather than > diving right into overall conclusions. Would you prefer to do it that > way, or by section if applicable? Pat, how long does discussion remain > on each chapter before proceeding? I really enjoyed just jumping right in. I think a chapter by chapter process might slow things down a bit. I liked being able to share my ideas with others who have already finished the book and I also liked hearing what other people thought. I was pleasantly surprised at the diversity of viewpoints and how some people picked up on things that I hadn't noticed or thought about. > Jennifer > jkrauel@actioneer.com > book discussion group coordinator Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 07:11:13 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG process To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu I would cast my vote for discussion to continue as it has been, rather than with a chapter by chapter process. I'm sorry to have been too harried ot really contribute to _Ammonite_, since I didn't get to reread it and only really remembered the barest details, but am looking forward to the _Dreamsnake_ discussion. Maryelizabeth Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX http://www.mystgalaxy.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 07:13:57 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Comments: To: Jennifer Krauel To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu On Sun, 15 Mar 1998, Jennifer Krauel wrote: > I'd also like to ask for feedback on the overall discussion process. > For example, Pat suggested we proceed chapter-by-chapter rather than > diving right into overall conclusions. Would you prefer to do it that > way, or by section if applicable? Pat, how long does discussion remain > on each chapter before proceeding? About a week on the Heyer and Bujold list, but they don't do one chapter at a time, they do the first 3 or whatever seems a natural break. This also helps give us a sense of the author's structure. I'm very pleased with that format.> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 09:20:32 -0800 Reply-To: jkrauel@actioneer.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jennifer Krauel Organization: Actioneer, Inc. Subject: [*FSFFU*] [Fwd: [*FSFFU*] BDG] To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU From: WaterLuv Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 10:13:20 EST To: jkrauel@actioneer.com Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG In a message dated 98-03-15 16:24:28 EST, you write: > Are there any questions you'd like to put to Nicola about the book? For > example: did she have in mind a sequel, as some have wondered? The intended role of the GOths in the book seems to have stirred the most speculation. I'd love to hear about that straight from the horse's mouth. Of course, I'd like to hear if she plans a sequel, as well. I thoroughly enjoyed reading part 1 and would be very pleased to think she'll tell us what happens when the dreaded Company returns. Jim ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:26:11 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Kmfriello Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite sequel To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Just for the record: in her interviews and elsewhere (see the "Ask Nicola" section of her website), Griffith has repeatedly and firmly stated that she does not intend a sequel to Ammonite. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 04:46:58 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anita Easton Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Leifin, being a god and insanity To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu Sorry for getting involved in the discussion so late :) This is kind of a ramble about things that have stuck in my mind about Ammonite. First off, Leifin and the Goth. This all made me feel really sick and I had nasty dreams about it that night. I first reated to it by thinking how completely inhuman her behaviour had been, and then turned it over nd over in my mind. The first thing that struck me was that I wouldn't have been so sickened if she had done that to a human, I guess I've become so enured to voience against humans :( The second thing was that I wondered whether I would've been less distressed if Leifin had been male and I honestly don't think I would've. I think it was partly that there was so little development of Leifin's character, so I simply couldn't find a framework that made her actions make any sense. Finally I thought about the place of her actions in the story, and thought of how hwhat she did mirrored what we see the Company doing, and wanting to do. Her behaviour is so similar to the Marghe's fear that the Company would wipe out the virus and thus the society on GP, without a second thought motivated only by profit. Having thought about that for a while I was really glad it was in the story. It would have been so easy to make a society of women into a utopia threatened by the patriarchal culture, but having flawed women, and a woman who so clearly contains all that we see as terrible in the patriarchal gives the story much more depth IMHO. On a completely different note, and having recently read Ursula Le Guin's "Dancing to Ganam" (in _Fisherman of the Inland Sea_) I wondered what effects of Marghe being accepted as speaking for the Death Spirit by the Echraidhe and Briogannon will be. How will this effect the tribes? Will she keep some kind of relationship with them? How would it effect her? Finally, and this is a personal grizzle, Uaithne's insanity really bugs me. I don't think it was necessary for her to be mad, and in some ways that takes away from the story. To me it makes the tribes' behaviour more about one person than about the tribes' situation. It also bug me because it makes it easy to see the problem as one of mental illness, rather than of the society as a whole. Anyway, I enjoyed Ammonite, and I loved _Slow River_ so I'm happy :) Anita ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:00:29 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michelle Bernard Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Leifin, being a god and insanity To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu I guess I just didn't react to the situation as one of Uaithne's insanity. That she wasn't entirely complete after her experiences with the Briogannon I accepted as part of her past history, and it this was classed as insane by Marghe (still the SEC rep at that point)... it didn't seem to make a large difference in how the Echraidhe treated Uaithne, except we are told that Aoife's motivation was to watch Uaithne more carefully. So when the 1 then 2 tribes fell in behind Uaithne, I didn't see it as being about following an "insane" person. Sanity is measured by culture/society and it seemed somewhat that the Echraide didn't see Uaithne as "insane" but rather a sort of "blessed" person filled with the death spirit, the way that medieval christian raptures can be "diagnosed" by current medicine as xx disorder, but were seen by contemporaries as legitimate expressions of religion. Just my take on it, but then I didn't spend any of the novel thinking about Uaithne as insane. misha bernardm@colorado.edu >Finally, and this is a personal grizzle, Uaithne's insanity really >bugs me. I don't think it was necessary for her to be mad, and in some >ways that takes away from the story. To me it makes the tribes' >behaviour more about one person than about the tribes' situation. It >also bug me because it makes it easy to see the problem as one of >mental illness, rather than of the society as a whole. > >Anyway, I enjoyed Ammonite, and I loved _Slow River_ so I'm happy :) > >Anita ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 20:05:33 -0500 Reply-To: blue47@uky.campus.women's, lit.mci.net@sac-a.mp.campus.mci.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Blue Subject: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu I've lurked on the list for a month and a half. I think I finally have enough of the flavor to jump in. I'm (nominally) female, mid-twenties, halfway educated, hetero, rural, white, Appalachian, feminist, American, and blunt. The third characteristic is the only one in which I had any say. I purchased _Ammonite_ several months ago when I glommed the entire James Tiptree award list. However, I didn't like it. I am not terribly good at understanding what's going on in my own head, so it's hard to say why. For a while I thought it was because of prejudice. Yes, I am prejudiced. [Definition of prejudice: Something that isn't rational. So, don't try to talk me out of it.] Why do I want to read this novel about a bunch of lesbian women? My best friend is a homosexual, but I am not. Where is the interest for me? After reading all the posts and several reviews of this novel, I have a little bit more clarity about why I didn't like it. 1. the setting: I don't like novels that are set in technologically dry worlds. I am interested in the easy life that technology, or the fantasy equivalent -magic-, provides, not grit, dirt, heat, and pain. (The reason I avoid all novels with the word "Texas" in the title.) I didn't like _Jaran_, for exactly the same reason, though it is a very nice story. The fourth book of that series was more enjoyable, because most of the book was spent off-world. 2. I think part of the reason I didn't like it was because I am not a lesbian, so I needed some acknowledgment that being on Jeep meant giving up hetero sex. I tend to agree that the best explanation is that Marghe was a lesbian, but I still wanted to hear some discussion. Something. Part of this is due to, I am sure, prejudice. Though I try to eradicate it, vestiges of it still remain. Enough so a novel like this will get an initial negative reaction from me for no other reason. Then, I recognize what I'm doing and shame myself out of it. 3. not feminist: I didn't see the feminism here. Due to the constraints of the setting, the novel not only had no men, but no feminism. No activism. No dreamseekers for change. Not the type of change I associate with feminism anyway. How can reality be changed when a big part of reality is gone (males)? Yes, I recognize the good parts of the novel. All-female society does not equal utopia is very true and not often written about. However, I just couldn't like it. 4. sorta basic, "kill off all the men" storyline I read years ago by Russ and liked better. It seems sorta a cop-out, just to kill off an entire gender. I understand that this is an exploration of lesbian sf, to a certain extent. However, most of us don't live cloistered with no contact with males. To me, it's a cop-out. 5. virus is damned convenient, isn't it. FYI, I thought it was made by a human female. This isn't why I ended up not liking the novel, but other thoughts about or inspired by it. 1. losing her fingers was jarring, but (after some thought) I think it worked and I think it had significance to her character (not to the character) 2. why would the corporation blow up the station? If it has the kind of control where they would not be censored, morally or legally, for that, then wouldn't it have the kind of control that wouldn't need to do it in the first place. 3. if the corporation can travel to Jeep, then why can't they wear suits like they would on the Moon, for example, and exploit it that way? It's been a while since I read the novel (2 months), so I may be forgetting something like, oh, corporation desperately needed it for colonization or something. 4. I want something different, like a virus that rewrites the "Y" chromosome. Then we have old-fashioned "Y's" dying out, new "Y's" coming in, and the same old systems and belief patterns that the old "Y's" created and the new "Y's" will be indoctrinated in because that's the culture. As you can probably tell, I like character-driven stories. Another post to introduce myself is coming after. Or maybe before, depending on when my mail system gets it out. -- "All disasters, or an enormous proportion of them, are due to the dissoluteness of women." -Leo Tolstoy "I haven't read _War and Peace_, but that's a man's book anyway." -author Kaye Gibbons ___ remove "women's lit" to reply Blue 47/Annabel Leigh/Jhoto/RB ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 13:12:34 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anita Easton Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU "Geoffrey D. Sperl" writes: > I actually thought the book stands quite nicely on its own, without a > sequel. I don't think GP has to become Pern, with all of its facets > explored and dissected (not to say I dislike that). And I wouldn't be I agree, and in many ways I think a sequel would diminish _Ammonite_. I personally like not knowing what happens next, it gives me a chance to imagine and explore the concepts on my own. I also can't see how a sequel could void either being about a utopia, or being a good vs evil struggle (with the return of the Company), I find both these styles pretty facile. It's one of the things i loved most about _Ammonite_, that it wasn't utopic, IMHO it allowed more depth and colour, and more exploration of the reality of human nature. Which brings me to anther thought I've been mulling over, are the inhabitants of GP human? Is the change brought about by the virus so fundamental that they become something-other-than-human? Anita ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:07:41 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anita Easton Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Daniel Krashin writes: > 2)I didn't have a problem with the idea of a planet full of women, but > I thought there was something a little dodgy about the way it was > set up. The scene at the beginning, where the medic doesn't even > look at the sexual orientation of someone who may spend the rest of her > life quarantines away from men, put me off a bit. Then, when Wasn't it Danner, the commander? I thought it made a lot of sense, and helped set up Danner's character. It was no business of Danner's what sexual orientation Marghe was and it was a good way to show both her ethical views and her relationship to the Company (who would care, if it gave them leverage). Anita ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:13:59 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anita Easton Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU "Geoffrey D. Sperl" writes: > Look closer: the virus also kills the majority of women who land on the > planet. A very small percentage survives - perhaps all of the effects the I don't think so, early on (whle Marghe is in D sector) it says 80% recover, I seem to remember that later on someone says that they're not quite sure of the death rate, ebacsue some people are listed as missing, but that it's probably a bit over 20% for women. Anita ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 01:40:40 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: DAVID CHRISTENSON Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu -- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- There's been some discussion here of Ammonite's alleged plot holes, regarding the virus and/or the Company. It seems to me that a man-less world with a marooned colony is the main premise of Ammonite, so how it became that way is not all that important. To me. What's important to me is how the premise is developed, not how it's justified. Though that's probably grating to the harder-SF crowd. Blue sez: > 2. I think part of the reason I didn't like it was because I > am not a lesbian, so I needed some acknowledgment that being > on Jeep meant giving up hetero sex. I'm not a lesbian either (obviously) but this didn't occur to me. As busy as everybody was in this novel, I wonder how they had time to think about sex at all. I can't quite imagine a scene like the one you describe in an all-male novel of, say, war or adventure. (And hey, look at Star Trek: Next Gen, where most of the characters gave up sex for years at a time...) > 3. not feminist: I didn't see the feminism here. Due to the constraints > of the setting, the novel not only had no men, but no feminism. No activism. > No dreamseekers for change. Not the type of change I associate with feminism > anyway. How can reality be changed when a big part of reality is gone (males)? An interesting thought. Is this a feminist novel? Can feminism exist without men? I would say yes, since in a wider sense feminism is a philosophy, not merely a movement. If Ammonite demonstrates the principles of feminism, it can be feminist without any characters demonstrating opposing principles, eh? Aside: Just found an old SF novel, "World Without Women" by Day Keene and Leonard Pruyn (Gold Medal pb, 1960). Sorta like Ammonite in reverse, with only a few hundred women left on Earth after some disaster having to do with nuclear testing. Needless to say (since it was written in 1960) the remaining men don't handle things as diplomatically as Griffith's characters, and the remaining women are all placed under armed guard with their husbands or whatever and given strong hints that they should get pregnant ASAP. Skimming through it, I detect plenty of additional machinations and kidnapping and such, but not much SF development beyond the initial idea. (The women apparently never get the idea that this may be their chance to take over.) -- David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 02:08:58 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >Why do I want to read >this novel about a bunch of lesbian women? My best friend >is a homosexual, but I am not. Where is the interest for me? Why would I want to read a novel about a bunch of lesbian women? After all, a male would be the furthest removed from that point of view... But, as I see it, these aren't a bunch of lesbian women. On GP there's no recourse for human biology to take if the race is to perpetuate itself...it doesn't make these women lesbians (it doesn't make them non-lesbians either, for that matter) >1. the setting: I don't like novels that are set in >technologically dry worlds. I am interested in the easy >life that technology, or the fantasy equivalent -magic-, >provides, not grit, dirt, heat, and pain. (The reason I >avoid all novels with the word "Texas" in the title.) But what about the fact that the reliance on technology giving us the easy life put these characters in the situation they find themselves? >2. I think part of the reason I didn't like it was because I >am not a lesbian, so I needed some acknowledgment that being >on Jeep meant giving up hetero sex. But it also means giving up your entire view of life and rebuilding it from the ground up. I didn't really see a giving up of hetero sex - I saw a different society that does things differently than ours.... >3. not feminist: I didn't see the feminism here. Two words: the Company. You have to look at the larger context of the piece to see the feminism. While I, as an editor and a writer, don't agree with the construction of various things in the book, I think it pulls feminism off in a very loud way. The characters, for me, don't really represent the sexes, but the genders in our society. The technological is masculine, the natural is feminine. Sure, it's a recurring them throughout many feminist books, SF and otherwise, but it is there. I don't think it would hurt to view these characters in terms of gender-types, not sex-types. IMHO, Geoffrey ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:58:21 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-19 02:16:17 EST, you write: > >2. I think part of the reason I didn't like it was because I > >am not a lesbian, so I needed some acknowledgment that being > >on Jeep meant giving up hetero sex. > > But it also means giving up your entire view of life and rebuilding it from > the ground up. I didn't really see a giving up of hetero sex - I saw a > different society that does things differently than ours.... In defense of Lady Blue's original comment that she found the silent migration to same-sex orientation jarring, I have to say that this element of Ammonite bothered me too. I think in reality that such a smooth transition could only occur if all the colonists were homosexual before being sent to Jeep. I took it as part of the mindset of Nicola Griffith, who is, herself, a lesbian. In her mind, it never occurred to lament the absence of men in the world she'd created. Pas de problem. Jim ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 10:59:52 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Elizabeth Marsh Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu Hi. Elizabeth here, also delurking for the discussion of what I thought was a very interesting book, one of the better I've read in quite a while. I found the whole sexual orientation aspect to have been resolved on two levels. The first is the internal plot aspect. No one went down there expecting to be cut off from male company (except the three technician/doctor types on the station and they only went to the surface to avoid certain death at the hands of the company). Marghe was vacinated (sp?) to prevent this and also we do get a fair amount of sole searching from here that reveals that this is her "dream opportunity" as an anthropologist and she goes *despite* the danger. The Mirrors go where they are told to go, like good chain of command following military types, and still you see some actively resist the idea of spending the rest of their lives on Jeep. But also, Ms. Griffith seems to be specifically examining a universe that excludes men. The counterpoint that comes to mind is Moby Dick. What I really found fascinating about the novel was the whole rexamination of the "journey of the hero" in this single sexed context. The differences seemed profound between this journey and what I would call the standard. So much of the conflict and self exploration was focused on the idea of community building and family ... this woman's journey amoung women was about bonds and less about proving personal worth. Or perhaps I would rather say she proves her worth and achieves her status as hero by working with in social bonds and not by her own personal strength. This seems to me to be quite a difference, and what makes the novel clearly feminist. I think it will be interesting to compare Marghe's development with that of Snake in "Dreamsnake (which I haven't read, yet I believe also contains the "journey" element). Elizabeth On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Anita Easton wrote: > Daniel Krashin writes: > > > 2)I didn't have a problem with the idea of a planet full of women, but > > I thought there was something a little dodgy about the way it was > > set up. The scene at the beginning, where the medic doesn't even > > look at the sexual orientation of someone who may spend the rest of her > > life quarantines away from men, put me off a bit. Then, when > > Wasn't it Danner, the commander? > > I thought it made a lot of sense, and helped set up Danner's > character. It was no business of Danner's what sexual orientation > Marghe was and it was a good way to show both her ethical views and > her relationship to the Company (who would care, if it gave them > leverage). > > Anita ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 09:10:10 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michelle Bernard Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Hm, I didn't see the transition as smooth... just something that had been partially accomplished before the start of the book, and I was given the impression somewhere in the book that it was difficult for some women still (after 5 years) to accept a life/world without men (and that some would prefer to take their chances in decontamination). I don't think it necessary to have even such an apparently smooth transition (which I didn't see... thinking we just didn't focus on the dissatisfied people) to be started with a group of lesbian colonists. I think that the constant daily contact/context of women being the only people around and the "human" need/desire for touch and love would be enough for a large number of women to "naturally" form close relationships with other women. Whether this leads to sexual contact would then be between individual women, while some may stop (feeling more comfortable with the barriers) at a companionable, touchy, sort of adoptive family. A continuum of experiences, where the novel exposed to us only a few. just my thoughts misha bernardm@colorado.edu >In defense of Lady Blue's original comment that she found the silent >migration to same-sex orientation jarring, I have to say that this element of >Ammonite bothered me too. I think in reality that such a smooth transition could >only occur if all the colonists were homosexual before being sent to Jeep. >Jim ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:44:28 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Le Anne Fossmeyer Subject: [*FSFFU*] FW: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In Response to: Jim writes: > In defense of Lady Blue's original comment that she found the silent > migration to same-sex orientation jarring, I have to say that this element of > Ammonite othered me too. I think in reality that such a smooth transition > could only occur if all the colonists were homosexual before being sent to > Jeep. I took it as part of the mindset of Nicola Griffith, who is, herself, a > lesbian. In her mind, it never occurred to lament the absence of men in the > world she'd created. Pas de problem. > > Jim> IMHO, humans are a whole lot more adaptable than you're giving us credit for, and we can adapt (even our sexual behavior and emotional responses) very quickly. Straight men have sex with and strong emotional commitments to other men when those straight men are locked in a prison and told they won't be leaving for years. Same goes for women inmates. It doesn't take long either--months, weeks. For most people, I think, sex, physical affection, and emotional attachment are things they really can't do without (or can't live satisfactorily without). Some can lead solitary or asexual lives, but face it, sex is sex. It's a primal, instinctual need. Puritanical Americans try to reduce or deny the power of human sexuality, but look at us now. We're sooo sex-obsessed. My friend's great-aunt just came out as a lesbian at the age of 73. She lived a relatively happy, married life, completely unaware of her sexuality. In her world, homosexuality wasn't discussed and it wasn't an option. She did what was expected of her and lived a very sheltered life. Then, she had lunch with my friend and her lesbian step-sister. The step-sister was talking about her girl friend and their relationship when the aunt interrupted her with questions about what kind of relationship is this anyway? how did this happen? what were they going to do when they had to get married? what do you mean this is your marriage? we didn't encourage such girlish notions when I was a kid, you're supposed to forget about those silly ideas--that's not how you're supposed to react to those feelings, and so on. Well, needless to say (since I already said it), the great-aunt finally put two and two together about herself. A funny aside is that she'd thought everyone felt the way she did, that everyone had homosexual feelings for their friends (although she never would have called it that), but you're supposed to put those things aside as adults. She thought that explained why there's such a strong division between men and women. Okay, my point is (and I do have one) if humans believe that only a certain set or range of actions are possible due to whatever unchangeable circumstances, humans can and will adapt their behaviors within the limits of possible actions to meet their needs. It's all circumstantial. LeAnne ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 14:04:03 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Leifin, being a god and insanity To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU On Wed, 18 Mar 1998, Anita Easton wrote: (snip) > Finally, and this is a personal grizzle, Uaithne's insanity really > bugs me. I don't think it was necessary for her to be mad, and in some > ways that takes away from the story. To me it makes the tribes' > behaviour more about one person than about the tribes' situation. It > also bug me because it makes it easy to see the problem as one of > mental illness, rather than of the society as a whole. Uaithne's insanity was due to the marginal lifestyle of the tribe. They were becoming dangerously inbred and that combined with their harsh living conditions produced Uaithne's mental imbalance. Later in the story Thenike tells Marghe about another condition produced by inbreeding where they are unable to leave the place where they were born. They are unable to cope with anything that wasn't experienced by their ancestors. They could only tread on familiar ground. I don't think it was really necessary to make Uaithne insane but it did touch on the issues of genetics and interbreeding when there is only one sex. I thought it was interesting. > Anita Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 18:48:11 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Frances Green Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Shakespeare/bluntness/backlash To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu On Wed, 18 Mar 1998 20:16:01 -0500 Blue writes: >... Shakespeare was a >dramatist, not a writer, so a play or movie is O.K., but why >would anybody want to read him? Well, he was/is a poet (prose and verse). And the plays are full of beautifully expressed perceptions. Unless you have perpetual access on demand to performance presentations, reading is a practical way of accessing the words. And the content is not without interest. "I don't see what the all the fuss is about Shakespeare. All he has done is string together a lot of very well-known quotations." (Approximate, from memory of source forgotten) .... >From the above example, you can tell I am not tactful. It's >a character flaw that I can't seem to shake. I also state >my opinions very forcefully, I'm told. I don't know any >other way to state them .... Go ahead and state them! But the occasional "in my opinion" may be optionally used to soften the edges if you have any qualms. >On the one hand, >acceptance for great kick-ass female characters may signal a >cultural change. On the other, what if it's just a Wonder >Woman/Bionic Woman/Xena/Buffy oddity and we'll have another >Reagonite '80's-type backlash later. How horrible. Have you read Suzette Haden Elgin's "Native Tongue" re Reaganite backlash (sort of)? _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 21:21:05 -0500 Reply-To: blue47@uky.campus.women's, lit.mci.net@sac-b.mp.campus.mci.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Blue Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Shakespeare/bluntness/backlash To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Frances Green said: > Have you read Suzette Haden Elgin's "Native Tongue" re Reaganite backlash > (sort of)? Yep. It ends kind of unresolved, how I remember it. (There was no exposition of the new culture, only the description of the subversion of the old.) I also don't buy into that language shapes psychology/culture type of idea. I believe it's more the other way around. Of course, the language may just have been the outer manifestation of a radically different cultural indoctrination. However, Ms. Elgin herself doesn't espouse that. > Well, he [Shakespeare] was/is a poet (prose and verse). And the plays are > full of beautifully expressed perceptions. Unfortunately, I don't understand poetry. It's just not the way my brain is shaped, I think. Some poems, individually, I have understood and appreciated (hackneyed, but "The Way Not Taken," - by Robert Frost was it? - for example). But, poetry as a whole escapes me. And, poetry in archaic English is utterly beyond me. David Christenson said: > I wonder how they had time to think > about sex at all. I can't quite imagine a scene like the one you > describe in an all-male novel of, say, war or adventure. (And hey, look > at Star Trek: Next Gen, where most of the characters gave up sex for > years at a time...) Sexuality is an integral part of a person. Any person. I don't read all-male novels. No, never. [Told you I was sexist] Also, ST:TNG isn't asexual, just prudish. (Check out some of the erotic fanfic on the web based in/on NCC 1701-D. It's sorta cute.) As far as I could tell, Riker was just one walking hormone. You'd've thunk Wesley had the honors. > Can feminism exist without men? Yes, maybe. If it's more than gender relations. Feminism is so undefined. I should've been more clear. However, I like to read about gender-liberated men. I hope it's clear what I mean when I say that. Geoffrey Sperl said: > But what about the fact that the reliance on technology giving us the easy > life put these characters in the situation they find themselves? But this is a book. If I wanted grit, dirt, heat, and pain I'd go visit some friends who don't have running water. Or, take a walk through a denuded strip mine. Or go fishing in August. I don't want that sort of reality in my books. > But it also means giving up your entire view of life and rebuilding it from > the ground up. I didn't really see a giving up of hetero sex - I saw a > different society that does things differently than ours.... Yes. . . but wouldn't you have thunk it if you were on a planet with only men? If you got put in a male jail, wouldn't you start thinking about the next time you wanted to screw someone and what your new environment means. And, I would posit that jail is just as life changing as being stuck on Jeep and sick with the Virus. > The technological is masculine, the natural is feminine. I don't subscribe to that particular form of feminism. ------ I also don't like "journey of the hero" sort of books. When I read _Ammonite_, I was really enjoying myself, at first. I liked maybe the first third or half of the book. Then, the terrible things that are happening and the environment all start kinda pulling me down. Then, it hits me. No men. Nowhere. Then I realize that this isn't the type of book that I like (i.e. journey plus barren world), but the type I have learned to avoid. Probably my discontent with _Ammonnite_ has a lot more to do with personal preference than faults of the books itself. However. I accept the "no men" story. I've actually read other books like that. (Though all the men were simply absent, not dead or off-world.) Once I notice "no men," then I notice that there is no discussion of that. Nobody acknowledges it. Not even Marghe when she realizes that she's gonna stay on Jeep. I started being very negative toward the book from that point on. Part of it may also be that lesbian fiction doesn't really interest me. Examples, early Gael Baudino are fantastic, middle and late are boring. To me. She comes out more and more until the story is so permeated with her sexuality that I feel left out. Probably what most lesbians feel when reading a hetero novel. However, _Ammonite_ isn't really lesbian sci-fi. After all, it's not about choice or even lifestyle. Time to stop. I am getting too muddled even for me. -- "All disasters, or an enormous proportion of them, are due to the dissoluteness of women." -Leo Tolstoy "I haven't read _War and Peace_, but that's a man's book anyway." -author Kaye Gibbons ___ remove "women's lit" to reply Blue 47/Annabel Leigh/Jhoto/RB ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 17:51:15 +1100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Julieanne Le Comte Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Shakespeare/bluntness/backlash Comments: To: blue47@uky.campus.women's, lit.mci.net@sac-b.mp.campus.mci.net To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU At 21:21 19/03/98 -0500, Blue wrote: >When I read _Ammonite_, I was really enjoying myself, at >first. I liked maybe the first third or half of the book. >Then, the terrible things that are happening and the >environment all start kinda pulling me down. Then, it hits >me. No men. Nowhere. Then I realize that this >isn't the type of book that I like (i.e. journey plus barren >world), but the type I have learned to avoid. Probably my >discontent with _Ammonnite_ has a lot more to do with >personal preference than faults of the books itself. >However. > >I accept the "no men" story. I've actually read other books >like that. (Though all the men were simply absent, not dead >or off-world.) Once I notice "no men," then I notice that >there is no discussion of that. Nobody acknowledges it. >Not even Marghe when she realizes that she's gonna stay on >Jeep. I started being very negative toward the book from >that point on. I'm with Blue on this point, as my main criticism of Ammonite was the lack of discussion amongst the characters about the missing men. Nobody acknowledges it, or even mentions it in passing, or in casual conversation etc. >Part of it may also be that lesbian fiction doesn't really >interest me. Examples, early Gael Baudino are fantastic, >middle and late are boring. To me. She comes out more and >more until the story is so permeated with her sexuality that >I feel left out. Probably what most lesbians feel when >reading a hetero novel. However, _Ammonite_ isn't really >lesbian sci-fi. After all, it's not about choice or even >lifestyle. Time to stop. I am getting too muddled even for me. Like Blue, I wasnt overly thrilled by reading Ammonite, but I suspect it has more to do with my personal preferences in stories, utopian visions and especially a preference for characters that I can identify with. Besides the lack of conversation/discussion about the absence of men, there was also an unbelievable lack of curiousity about life elsewhere, or of "movement" beyond their "space". Its as if the women of Jeep had bound themselves to their planetary "kitchen" and were happy to stay there. This is why I couldnt see it as "feminist", as feminism to me implies a "movement", an "evolution" of constant change and growth. Marghe is the only character to undergo any growth in this manner - on a personal level, but her growth, is more like *acceptance* of the existing status quo in an increasingly stagnant society. Regards Julieanne ppp98@cs.net.au ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 12:08:38 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] FW: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-19 11:53:26 EST, you write: > IMHO, humans are a whole lot more adaptable than you're giving us credit > for, and we can adapt (even our sexual behavior and emotional responses) > very quickly. Straight men have sex with and strong emotional > commitments to other men when those straight men are locked in a prison > and told they won't be leaving for years. Same goes for women inmates. > It doesn't take long either--months, weeks. Jim answers, I fully agree with your Humble Opinion. We are adaptable, and could adjust to living in a world minus any partners of the gender we prefer. Still, I thought this aspect of life on Jeep would have crossed Marghe's mind, and that of the Doctor and other recent arrivals. I thought there might be some mention of the transition period by those who, through 5 years of adjustment, had already bridged that chasm. If we accept prisoners as an example, I'm sure that ways of dealing with sexual deprivation are high on their list of topics to discuss with old timers just after they arrive in this new setting. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 10:39:55 PST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Daniel Krashin Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: odds and ends To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 01:40:40 -0500 >From: DAVID CHRISTENSON >Subject: Re: bdg: Ammonite > >-- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- > >There's been some discussion here of Ammonite's alleged plot holes, >regarding the virus and/or the Company. It seems to me that a man-less >world with a marooned colony is the main premise of Ammonite, so how it >became that way is not all that important. To me. What's important to me >is how the premise is developed, not how it's justified. Though that's >probably grating to the harder-SF crowd. I disagree. The Jeep virus is a major part of the plot, you can't cut it out of the novel without making nonsense of the rest of it. Thinking about _Ammonite_ further, I think the reasons that the Jeep virus bugged me were: 1) the virus was too damn convenient, it smacked of wish-fulfillment to me; 2)the novel started off with a fairly "hard" SF feeling, interstellar Companies, space stations, viruses, battleships in orbit -- this feeling continues in the first part of the book that is set among the Mirrors, but then there is an abrupt shift in tone and genre when suddenly the protag is riding horses among the tribepeople and developing strange new powers. Someone else on the list (Blue47?) also mentioned that this transition threw them, and that they liked the second half less than the first. I know that Griffith probably intended this change-up in the novel, but I still didn't like it. First, I just don't like sudden changes in tone genre (which may make me shallow, I dunno) -- I didn't like Peter Hamilton's _Reality Dysfunction_ for the same reason, it started as high-flying space opera and mutated into Stephen King-like horror halfway through. Second, I like SF with spaceships better than SF with horses. But, I *did* like _Lord Valentine's Castle_, which is clearly "science fantasy" from the very beginning. Blue sez: >> 2. I think part of the reason I didn't like it was because I >> am not a lesbian, so I needed some acknowledgment that being >> on Jeep meant giving up hetero sex. > >I'm not a lesbian either (obviously) but this didn't occur to me. As >busy as everybody was in this novel, I wonder how they had time to >think about sex at all. I can't quite imagine a scene like the one you >describe in an all-male novel of, say, war or adventure. (And hey, look >at Star Trek: Next Gen, where most of the characters gave up sex for >years at a time...) Actually, most SF war novels contain a few girlfriends, fiancees, or whores, even if they're mostly offstage. I think there's a big difference between being in a single-sex environment for a brief, or even extended time, and being in a single-sex environment for the forseeable future. After all, most heterosexuals in prison, boarding school, Marine boot camp, or whatever, even if they do engage in homosexual activities in that setting, expect to resume a heterosexual lifestyle afterwards. It's interesting that most of the objection to lesbian content so far on this list has come from heterosexual women, isn't it? Personally it didn't bother me. >Aside: Just found an old SF novel, "World Without Women" by Day Keene >and Leonard Pruyn (Gold Medal pb, 1960). Sorta like Ammonite in reverse, >with only a few hundred women left on Earth after some disaster having >to do with nuclear testing. Needless to say (since it was written in >1960) the remaining men don't handle things as diplomatically as >Griffith's characters, and the remaining women are all placed under >armed guard with their husbands or whatever and given strong hints that >they should get pregnant ASAP. Skimming through it, I detect plenty of >additional machinations and kidnapping and such, but not much SF >development beyond the initial idea. (The women apparently never get the >idea that this may be their chance to take over.) How would it? Women get treated like chattel enough right now, when there is no particular shortage of them. OTOH, Frank Herbert's _White Plague_, in which a tailored plague kills off most of the world's women, ends with society moving towards polyandry. To be honest, this seems a lot less likely than the "World without women" scenario! But I am currently immersed in research for a presentation on evolutionary psychology, so this kind of thing seems self-evident to me. >-- >David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com **************************************************************** > >Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 21:21:05 -0500 >From: Blue >Subject: Re: BDG: Shakespeare/bluntness/backlash > >Frances Green said: > >> Have you read Suzette Haden Elgin's "Native Tongue" re Reaganite >> backlash (sort of)? > >Yep. It ends kind of unresolved, how I remember it. (There >was no exposition of the new culture, only the description >of the subversion of the old.) I also don't buy into that >language shapes psychology/culture type of idea. I believe >it's more the other way around. > >Of course, the language may just have been the outer >manifestation of a radically different cultural >indoctrination. However, Ms. Elgin herself doesn't espouse >that. I also thought that the "women's language" at the end was very much of a deus ex machina, but I have not read the other books in the series and don't know where she goes from there. [snip] >Unfortunately, I don't understand poetry. It's just not the >way my brain is shaped, I think. I think anyone can read poetry if they can read fiction, they just haven't developed the skills. Of course, there are lots of things to do with your spare time, but if you feel like giving it another crack, try Philip Larkin. He's one of those poets-for-people-who- don't-like-poets. Dry, unsentimental, and his diction is very down to earth. Whew! Enough gabbing for one day, I think, now let's get Powerpoint running... Dan Krashin ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 14:47:03 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Stahl, Sheryl" Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: odds and ends To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu > >-- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- > > > >There's been some discussion here of Ammonite's alleged plot holes, > >regarding the virus and/or the Company. It seems to me that a > >man-less world with a marooned colony is the main premise of Ammonite, > >so how it became that way is not all that important. To me. What's important > >to me is how the premise is developed, not how it's justified. Though > >that's probably grating to the harder-SF crowd. > > From: Daniel Krashin[SMTP:dkrashin@HOTMAIL.COM] > I disagree. The Jeep virus is a major part of the plot, you can't cut > it out of the novel without making nonsense of the rest of it. > Thinking about _Ammonite_ further, I think the reasons that > the Jeep virus bugged me were: > 1) the virus was too damn convenient, it smacked of wish-fulfillment > to me; > 2)the novel started off with a fairly "hard" SF feeling, interstellar > Companies, space stations, viruses, battleships in orbit -- this > feeling continues in the first part of the book that is set among the > Mirrors, but then there is an abrupt shift in tone and genre when > suddenly the protag is riding horses among the tribepeople and > developing strange new powers. I agree with David - I think the how the plot is developed is the more interesting/important aspect. Seems to me that in any novel (or movie or tv shoe), but especially in SF or fantasy, there is some willing suspension of disbelief. A major premise behind Star Trek is the warp engines - without them Kurk can't go chasing women across the galaxy - yet I haven't heard ST criticised for this, or Babylon 5 for its Jump gates, or for the resources needed to build such a station - we just accept that these thing "work" in their respective universes and instead discuss the characters and the plots. I very much enjoyed Ammonite - but then I like stories in which a physical journey is also a spiritual journey. I've also been interested in lesbian utopian lit. and while I agree that this isn't utopian it is still a very interesting work. I think that we have lots (and lots and lots) of models both in real life and in literature of how men shape society - its always intriguing to me to see different explorations of how women would make a society. just my 2 cents sheryl ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 23:13:10 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Katharine Woods Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: odds and ends To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu Hello, I'm delurking after six months deep lurking. I'll put a short introduction to myself at the end of this message. Daniel Krashin wrote: > 1) the virus was too damn convenient, it smacked of wish-fulfillment > to me; I didn't find the virus any more convenient than FTL travel or other such things that populate SF in general. It doesn't sounds like wish-fulfillment to me, more like one of those "what if?" questions from which loads of SF is supposed to spring. I've always thought of Ammonite as a book about people, not sexual orientation, and I labelled it an SF novel, rather than a lesbian novel. I wondered that was beecause to me, being straight and having grown up in a society which promotes heterosexuality as normal, lesbian has connotations of otherness. The women in Ammonite aren't "other", they're mainstream. > there is an abrupt shift in tone and genre when > suddenly the protag is riding horses among the tribepeople and > developing strange new powers Marghe's powers seemed to me to be an extension of the body-awareness she already had. (That body-awareness is why I could accept her surviving in the blizzard.) None of the others, not even Day who'd been there longer, had gone as far as she had in integrating with Thenike and the people of Ollfoss. I see Marghe as a catalyst for the Mirrors, showing them how they could be a part of the Jeep communities, not an isolated technological enclave in which they would have stagnated and died out (assuming Company left them alone to do that), as the Echraidhe and Briogannon were doing. It's another demonstration of the theme of becoming whole which Marghe does on a personal level and brings about in Jeep society. I also thought that the initial stages of the book dealt with failure, Marghe's in her career, the Company's on Jeep, technology in environment of Jeep, Sarah's to find a cure for the virus, Danner to understand the importance of trata and integrating with the whole community in order to survive and track down her spy until to late, the failure of both technological communication and the methods that were used on Jeep (Marghe's message going astray), the Echraidhe and Briogannon in resisting change, Leifin's in ignoring the meaning of Thenike's story. These failures are at all levels and the theme of failure cuts across the shift from the hard SF start and horse-riding continuation. Things are bad, they get worse but people survive and accept the necessity of change to survive. > Actually, most SF war novels contain a few girlfriends, fiancees, or > whores, even if they're mostly offstage. Which is why I tend to avoid them and enjoyed a book like Ammonite so much. (I got very fed up with reading stuff in which my gender only existed in a relationship to a man. A woman might well be a girlfriend, fiancee or whore (or all at once) but there's still going to be more to her life than her relationship with men.) Marghe's father appears in the book and gets as least as much time as Linda Fiorentino's character does in Men in Black for example. Marghe's father isn't there to simply reassure the reader that the rest of the universe is a happy hetero one. He's an important part of who Marghe is that she has to integrate into Amon. I think I'd agree that it would have been interesting to show one of the Mirrors making the change from knowing about the possiblity of a return to a heterosexual lifestyle but I didn't notice that as a lack while I was actually reading the book. I did enjoy Ammonite hugely, loved Slow River even more and am looking forward to The Blue Place(?) and in fact it was the first book I read after discovering Laura Quilter's web site (many thanks to Laura for creating such a marvellous resource which has meant I've found so many feminist SF novels to enjoy) about two years ago. Katharine Woods kjw@whitecrow.demon.co.uk PS Introduction: I am a software technical author, British, always lived in mainland UK. I'm 29 and did a degree in English Lit and Linguistics at York University, UK (I was an undergrad there at the same time as Farah Mendlesohn who used to contribute to this list (hi Farah, although I doubt if you'll remember me :-) ). I'm married, didn't change my name to my husband's (didn't see why I should have the hassle of the paperwork), 2 cats, no kids. I go to a creative writing class (run by Josephine Saxton) but have written very little myself - I'm still finding out what I can do. I've always read SF&F and have very fond memories of H.M. Hoover's, Monica Hughes', Alison Utteley's, and Sylvia Engdahl's books. I grew up with Tom Baker's Doctor Who and Blake's 7 (best female villain ever). I like Nicola Griffith's work hugely, also Suzette Haden Elgin's, Mary Gentle's, Joanna Russ' (although I've not yet got hold of a copy of The Female Man), Julian May's, and Sheri Tepper's books and recently, I finally got to read Door Into Ocean, The Misconceiver, Dreamsnake, The Sparrow and am looking forward to reading more by those authors. I enjoy some Anne McCaffrey too (I like it when dragons are the good guys!) I do like short SF&F stories too - and I'm more likely to read short hard SF than hard SF novels. I don't read horror and vanpire stories. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:09:45 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-18 20:14:03 EST, you write: << Is the change brought about by the virus so fundamental that they become something-other-than-human? >> I'm sure that plenty people on Earth would say so. The Other is often perceived as non-human. Some inhabitants of our planet consider women non- human, and some consider blacks non-human. I don't think we should automatically assume that a change or an enhancement makes a person non- human--but that's often the first thought that the unchanged populace thinks. Much SF deals with this. I think of "Beggars in Spain," for example. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:19:56 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-19 01:43:42 EST, you write: << (The women apparently never get the idea that this may be their chance to take over.) -- >> That's more of a male kind of thinking, in my opinion (go ahead, flame away). Men are conditioned and probably naturally programmed to seek dominance. I still believe that women are more likely to look for a win-win scenario. I saw a lot of that in _Ammonite_, although there was a lot of self-aggrandizement going on as well. I mightily resist having anyone try to control me (especially after being married to a control freak), but I have a hard time understanding why anyone wants to control other people. Yet we know that the lust for power and control motivates many people. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:47:54 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: odds and ends To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-20 18:42:08 EST, you write: << I also thought that the initial stages of the book dealt with failure, Marghe's in her career, the Company's on Jeep, technology in environment of Jeep, Sarah's to find a cure for the virus, Danner to understand the importance of trata and integrating with the whole community in order to survive and track down her spy until to late, the failure of both technological communication and the methods that were used on Jeep (Marghe's message going astray), the Echraidhe and Briogannon in resisting change, Leifin's in ignoring the meaning of Thenike's story. These failures are at all levels and the theme of failure cuts across the shift from the hard SF start and horse-riding continuation. Things are bad, they get worse but people survive and accept the necessity of change to survive. >> This is a very perceptive comment. I can't help wondering what Nicola's reaction to it is. Sometimes people point out to us themes in our writing that we ourselves didn't know were there. barbara ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:52:07 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sharon Anderson Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Okay. Niobody has said it yet, so I will. Re the coment: "Why should I want to read a book about a bunch of lesbian women, etc.?" 1) I thought the whole point of reading was top expand your horizons, to make you consider things from a viewpoint you had never considered before. 2) If we are to only read what is safe and comfortable and within our own currently-accepted worldview, then: -what about books written by and about members of the opposite sex? does this mean that if you are a man, you are not supposed to want to read books by and about women? if you are a woman, do you only want to read books by and about women? then you should forget most of the literature available in the English language. -what about all of the books written with the intention of challenging currently-held beliefs about class, race, gender roles, etc.? If all of this is too boring or too challenging, what are we doing reading sf in the first place? 3) I am a lesbian. If I made the same statement, about not wanting to read about heterosexual situations, because I found them boring, I would have stopped reading anything longer than cereal boxes by the time I was ten. 4) This is nolt intended to slam anybody. I believe very firmly in personal choice. Personally, I DO find most heterosexual situations boring. Either I skip a few pages, put the book down, or tell myself that there are enough other reasons why I want to find out what happens, so grit my teeth and keep reading. 5) I liked the book. I'm glad I don't live on Jeep; the life is too harsh. There seemed to be nobody in the book and no situation in which it was safe to decide to let things go on as they were. You do this, and your tribe dies. At every turn, heroic change was called for. I'm not a heroic person. I'm comfortable in my ruts, thankyouverymuch. However, I like reading about situations which are different from mine. It makes me glad I enjoy the life I do, while still being able to dream about a life I will never have. Sharon Anderson ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 00:35:50 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu In a message dated 98-03-20 23:53:51 EST, Sharon Anderson writes: > 4) This is nolt intended to slam anybody. I believe very firmly in > personal choice. Personally, I DO find most heterosexual situations > boring. Either I skip a few pages, put the book down, or tell myself that > there are enough other reasons why I want to find out what happens, so grit > my teeth and keep reading. Just to exercise my "equal time" rights I'd like to add to this discussion. I'm a male and pretty much heterosexual, but more honestly just sexual. I'm absolutely certain that if I were stranded on a planet without women, I'd make the transition to homosexual love rather than accept an end to my sexual nature. Also, hetero as I may be -- and I REALLY do like women -- I didn't find the lesbian content of _Ammonite_ the least bit off-putting. Quite the opposite, I thought Marghe's slow simmer till her sexual desire for Thenike boiled over was fascinating and entirely believable. Just as your rebutal suggested, it gave me a chance to see thorugh a pair of eyes I can never posess in the real world. Jim ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 04:52:03 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >> >2. I think part of the reason I didn't like it was because I >> >am not a lesbian, so I needed some acknowledgment that being on Jeep >> >meant giving up hetero sex. >In defense of Lady Blue's original comment that she found the silent >migration to same-sex orientation jarring, I have to say that this element >of Ammonite bothered me too. ......I took it as part of the mindset of >Nicola Griffith, who is, herself, a lesbian. In her mind, it never occurred >to lament the absence of men in the world she'd created. Pas de problem. > >Jim Am I hearing a subtle "yeah, you know those lesbians, they hate men" comment here? IMHO, this is a broad an I would submit inaccurate judgment about the "mind of the author" based on fictional content. So whatever an author draws in the way of a fictional world is limited by their real lives? I am to presume then that Stephen King lives in a really hideous world that I am glad not to be a part of? And well science fiction/fantasy would not exist since none of have really experienced those realities.....etc....This is an ages old issue I won't belabor it here. I suspect that N. Griffith was very conscious about how she drew all aspects about the absence of men. I would also assume that Ms. Griffith would mourn the abrupt absence of men in her own life would that horrible fate occur but perhaps not for five years. One makes do in life as well as fiction....Also as the BDG leader indicated...we could always ask her since this seems to be a burning issue? donna ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 15:48:26 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anita Easton Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: odds and ends To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Daniel Krashin writes: > >about sex at all. I can't quite imagine a scene like the one you > >describe in an all-male novel of, say, war or adventure. (And hey, look > Actually, most SF war novels contain a few girlfriends, fiancees, or > whores, even if they're mostly offstage. I think there's a big I guess I see novels which are all men and "girlfriends, fiancees, or whores" as all-male, as all the women are defined only in terms of their relationship(s) to men. If I read a book about women, in which some women happen to own cats I think of it as a book about women, not a book about women and cats. *shrug* Women-as-male-appendages is such a male concept, and removes all sense of woman-as-person. Anita ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 15:26:49 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: odds and ends To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu On Sun, 22 Mar 1998, Anita Easton wrote: (snip) > I guess I see novels which are all men and "girlfriends, fiancees, or > whores" as all-male, as all the women are defined only in terms of > their relationship(s) to men. If I read a book about women, in which > some women happen to own cats I think of it as a book about women, not > a book about women and cats. One of the reasons that I started to read feminist science fiction is I got so tired of the "girlfriends, fiancees and whores" syndrome. I wanted to read about women having interesting adventures that didn't necessarily revolve around men. I have read so many books where women are peripheral to what the men are doing that I'm just sick of it. In *Ammonite* women are not background characters whose sole purpose is to be rescued by the big strong hero. These women are not idealized. They are individuals with their own differing agendas. I liked that. > Anita Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 15:04:03 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robyn Starkey Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >I also thought that the initial stages of the book dealt with failure, >Marghe's in her career, the Company's on Jeep, technology in environment >of Jeep, Sarah's to find a cure for the virus, Danner to understand the >importance of trata and integrating with the whole community in order to >survive and track down her spy until to late, the failure of both >technological communication and the methods that were used on Jeep >(Marghe's message going astray), This is a really interesting reading, and this last point also reminded me of something I thought was intriguing in the book - who changed Marghe's message? Was it just a tragic mistake, or did someone deliberately alter the meaning of the message in order to shape the way that the newcomers interacted with the Jeep natives? Robyn *********************************** Robyn Starkey University of Melbourne r.starkey@elp.unimelb.edu.au ************************************ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 07:16:29 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >>I also thought that the initial stages of the book dealt with failure, Marghe's in her career, the Company's on Jeep, technology in environment of Jeep, Sarah's to find a cure for the virus, Danner to understand the importance of trata and integrating with the whole community in order to survive and track down her spy until to late, the failure of both technological communication and the methods that were used on Jeep (Marghe's message going astray),.....>> Is it failure or real life....humanity makes many stabs at solutions that sometimes do not achieve our objectives. As do individuals. There were also successes. Marghe finding her answers, Marghe bringing understanding between the native people and the "colonists, Danner opening herself to cooperations rather than defense, The tribes being halted from slaughter, getting the folks off the ship without Company finding out, etc....That seesaw of failure with success is what made the book so rich and convincing for me. >>> something I thought was intriguing in the book - who changed Marghe's message? Was it just a tragic mistake, or did someone deliberately alter the meaning of the message in order to shape the way that the newcomers interacted with the Jeep natives?>>> Well now, here is how silly I am, I thought that was the one really hoaky (sic).... "made up contrivance to steer the story"... bit in the book. No men? fine. Virus that allows women to "conceive" children? fine. One woman salvaging the entire population from themselves? fine....but those message stones somehow getting messed up? No way. I could see the authors hand reaching down into the frame and shuffling them around. Too funny. I had to laugh at my own intolerance. donna donnaneely@earthlink.net ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 19:47:10 -0500 Reply-To: blue47@uky.campus.women's, lit.mci.net@sac-a.mp.campus.mci.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Blue Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu Donna Simone said: > Am I hearing a subtle "yeah, you know those lesbians, they hate men" > comment here Um. . ., no. _________ I didn't like the book because it had so many things I didn't like in it. It's simply not the type of book or setting I prefer. Did the lesbian part of it turn me off? Not really. Marghe and Thenike were believeable. It's just that I like sci-fi, not fantasy, which is really what this book turned out to be. (I have my own definition of fantasy, i.e. they aren't in space anymore, etc.) -- "All disasters, or an enormous proportion of them, are due to the dissoluteness of women." -Leo Tolstoy "I haven't read _War and Peace_, but that's a man's book anyway." -author Kaye Gibbons ___ remove "women's lit" to reply Blue 47/Annabel Leigh/Jhoto/RB ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 09:46:11 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: DAVID CHRISTENSON Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@listserv.uic.edu -- [ From: David Christenson * EMC.Ver #2.5.3 ] -- I wrote, about the early '60s novel "World Without Women": > << (The women apparently never get the > idea that this may be their chance to take over.) >> Barb says: > That's more of a male kind of thinking, in my opinion (go ahead, flame > away). Men are conditioned and probably naturally programmed to seek > dominance. Me again - (Response option 1) On the contrary. Whenever some James Bond villain threatens to take over the world I say, "Go for it." How could he be worse than the current theocatic-capitalist conspiracy that runs the world now? (Response option 2) In the context of the bad novel to which I was making reference, it would have made sense for the women to "turn the tables" and take control, because that's what the whole novel was about - power games. I guess I didn't convey that in my summary. (Response option 3) I believe you're underestimating men's ability to adapt, evolve and depart from the norm. Not all men are controllers, or dominating types, not all by a long shot - I'm certainly not, and that has caused me trouble in relationships with women who *expect* that type. But anyway, thanks for the reminder of the culmination of Ammonite in the "win-win" peace - for me, that made for a satisfying conclusion to this novel of conflict *without* war, or revenge fighting, or wholesale bloodshed. -- David Christenson - ldqt79a@prodigy.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 10:05:32 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-21 04:58:34 EST, Donna Simone writes: > >In defense of Lady Blue's original comment that she found the silent > migration to same-sex orientation jarring, I have to say that this element > of Ammonite bothered me too. ......I took it as part of the mindset of > Nicola Griffith, who is, herself, a lesbian. In her mind, it never occurred > to lament the absence of men in the world she'd created. Pas de problem. > > > >Jim > > Am I hearing a subtle "yeah, you know those lesbians, they hate men" > comment here? Not at all. What I'm suggesting is, "You know those humans. Unless they force themselves, they don't consider other viewpoints outside their own." Jim ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 12:30:05 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-22 16:14:19 EST, you write: << What I am trying to say, in my opinion people who want to control others often simply want to prevent others (or some universal evil forces, like Satan or international conspiracy) from controlling (or affecting) them. It's self-defense. At least, that's what I think. >> H'mmm. That makes sense. But I wonder what explains Bill Gates? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 12:32:36 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite: odds and ends To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-22 16:28:52 EST, you write: << I wanted to read about women having interesting adventures that didn't necessarily revolve around men. I have read so many books where women are peripheral to what the men are doing that I'm just sick of it. >> You know, I agree about this. I don't think half the human race exists only to service the other half. But yet I feel disappointed when the female protagonist does everything herself and the male protagonist doesn't get to do much of anything. I guess I like the teamwork scenario: she brings her skills and abilities to the situation, and so does he. barbara ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 12:47:49 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lurima Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] bdg: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 98-03-24 09:53:34 EST, you write: << Not all men are controllers, or dominating types, not all by a long shot - I'm certainly not, and that has caused me trouble in relationships with women who *expect* that type. >> I remember Alan Alda's complaint that women say they want the sensitive types, yet they are consistently attracted to the macho types. There's a lot of truth to that, unfortunately. What I want is someone with wonderful muscles on the outside, and sweet sensitivity on the inside! (To think about, anyway. I wouldn't know what to do with a real one.) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 13:25:39 +1200 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anita Easton Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Lurima writes: > In a message dated 98-03-18 20:14:03 EST, you write: > << Is the change brought about by the virus so > fundamental that they become something-other-than-human? > >> > I'm sure that plenty people on Earth would say so. The Other is often > perceived as non-human. Some inhabitants of our planet consider women non- > human, and some consider blacks non-human. I don't think we should > automatically assume that a change or an enhancement makes a person non- > human--but that's often the first thought that the unchanged populace thinks. > Much SF deals with this. I think of "Beggars in Spain," for example. I guess thinking of them as non-human would make it easier for the Company to justify dstroyign the society if and when they come back. I was wondering about whether the women of GP were not human because I wonder if gender is a necessary part of humanity. I recently read "Husbands" by Lisa Tuttle (in _Memories of the Body_), in which children in a society from which men have vanished start to create a gender distinction. Is gender or some kind of similar social division so inherent in us as to be a defining characteristic of humanity? In Lisa Tuttle's story the lack of biologically determined social gender distinction is lost, but is replaced by a purely social distinction. (This reminded me a little of the butch/femme distinction that was so popular in lesbian communities for a time) In _Ammonite_ no social gender distinction is made, is this because the distinction has not yet developed (after all, they have only had 5 years on GP)? Or will it never develop? I've been specifically avoiding talking about gender being a bipolar distinction, because there are societies which have more than two genders, but these are far from the norm (aren't they?). What does this mean? *wondering* Anita