Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:03:01 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Midnight Robber Wind-up, Other NH Books To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Marcie, Thanks for the great windup and pass off to Ammonite. You did a great job on the discussion for Midnight Robber and I think if people want to continue discussing it or even the short stories as you suggest, they should. Nalo Hopkinson has a unique voice and viewpoint and everyone should at least sample her work. She definitely broadens the sf genre and no one else that I have come across writes like her. Meanwhile, I'll dive into Nicola Griffith. I'm going to conduct this discussion much the same way as Marcie, with one or two questions at a time. There are a number of points I'd like to see full-blown discussions on and if I list everything at once, some are going to get lost. First off--not one of the most important things but something I'm curious about--Why did Griffith choose a fossil for the title and symbol of her book? Is this a statement, especially considering the state of the Echraidhe, or does she simply like ammonites? Second, according the author's notes in the back of my copy, Griffith wanted to show women "with the entire spectrum of human behavior." She wanted to go beyond the sci fi that depicts women-only worlds as either man-like (aggressive and warlike) or extremely woman-like ("hierarchical, static, insect-like societies that are dreadfully inefficient"). Did she accomplish her objective and if so, how? I'm also wondering where she got the idea that woman-like societies are depicted as insect-like and dreadfully inefficient. Does anyone know? Which stories is she referring to? Besides, aren't ant and bee societies actually efficient? Sue Lange ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 11:40:59 -0400 From: davebelden Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Sue Lange wrote: "Second, according the author's notes in the back of my copy, Griffith wanted to show women "with the entire spectrum of human behavior." She wanted to go beyond the sci fi that depicts women-only worlds as either man-like (aggressive and warlike) or extremely woman-like ("hierarchical, static, insect-like societies that are dreadfully inefficient"). Did she accomplish her objective and if so, how?" I thought she accomplished it beautifully (though I have no idea what these supposedly woman-like insect societies are - that sounds bizarre to me). I didn't read the author's notes until I was near the end, and was very interested to see how the things I was appreciating about the novel were so deliberately set out by her as her intentions for it. I don't know how this will be received by the women on the list, but my feeling as a man reading it was one of profound relief. I felt that many of the things for which men are blamed, were here shown to be human traits, not simply male traits. In Ammonite a crazed warrior leading a genocide is a woman; a cold-hearted hunter who knowingly kills an intelligent alien being is a woman; a tribal leader who puts tribe before compassion for individuals is a woman. That isn't to say that in male/female societies men are not more likely to do such violent and dominant things - they are. But here, these were believable women and they did exhibit the full range of human behavior. It makes violent and dominating behavior a human problem, not just a male problem. There is an inevitable tendency in any oppressed group as it rises up to stress its own worth, its goodness, and to suppress news of its own dirty laundry. This is right and proper. After all, a sense of self worth has been stripped from the group, and has to be restored. You can't oppress people without demeaning them, treating them as lesser, more stupid, incapable, weaker or more dangerous, or some other uncivilized or inadequate traits, and the reputation of the group has to be recouped in the wider society, as much as among its own members. So 'Black is Beautiful', as of course it is and always has been and will be. But at a certain point, the group can only claim its full humanity by copping to its own dirty laundry. Black, like white and every other color, is also ugly. Alice Walker got some considerable flak from some African American community leaders, I have been told, for unsparingly portraying African American male violence towards women in her early novels. While this could have given some comfort to those whites who criticize blacks, the books were also unsparing about white racism. To my mind, her washing her group's dirty laundry in public was a mark of confidence and made the novels more true, more real, more something we could learn from. So utopian novels about women-only communities seem to belong to an early stage of feminism, while a later stage, after much success has been gained, can afford to produce novels like Ammonite. The odd thing about that, though, is that simplistic utopias, ones that depend on an unrealistically happy view of human nature (or of the human nature of the formerly oppressed group, who in the utopia are now able to run things better than their former oppressors ever could have done), are not convincing; whereas this book to my mind was very convincing, and I thought that these women were well on their way to creating a very decent culture and society to live in. Not utopia, but a good society. And I also had a clear sense that this had a lot to do with the fact that they were women. It would be a great deal harder to write a realistic-seeming story as hopeful as this about a bunch of men marooned without women (even supposing they had some means of producing boys). So in that sense, I was not particularly cheered up as a man about my own gender by the novel; but I was very happy about the state of mind in a woman that could produce a book like this. It made me feel that there was a humility there, that blame would be less likely to come from such a feminist, than fellow feeling, commiseration, and hope of change. I am feeling my own personality and hang-ups showing through in this email: I have always been prone to be overly intimidated by those who are clear that they are holier than I am and who can persuade me of same: whether religious, political, feminist, whoever. Then I tend to resent them. I warm up more to righteous folk who confess their sins... Dave ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 12:46:03 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >I don't know how this will be received by the women on the list, but my >feeling as a man reading it was one of profound relief. I felt that many of >the things for which men are blamed, were here shown to be human traits, not >simply male traits. In Ammonite a crazed warrior leading a genocide is a >woman; a cold-hearted hunter who knowingly kills an intelligent alien being >is a woman; a tribal leader who puts tribe before compassion for individuals >is a woman. That isn't to say that in male/female societies men are not more >likely to do such violent and dominant things - they are. But here, these >were believable women and they did exhibit the full range of human behavior. >It makes violent and dominating behavior a human problem, not just a male >problem. Dave, it's funny that you mention this now. There are parts of the story that I couldn't figure out where she was going with them. They didn't seem integral to the story and didn't do much more than add some information about Marghe's already well developed makeup. I'm thinking mostly of Leifin, and other side stories like that. From what you're saying I'm guessing now that she added these snippets to illustrate the full range she was after. >There is an inevitable tendency in any oppressed group as it rises up to >stress its own worth, its goodness, and to suppress news of its own dirty >laundry. This is right and proper. After all, a sense of self worth has been >stripped from the group, and has to be restored. You can't oppress people >without demeaning them, treating them as lesser, more stupid, incapable, >weaker or more dangerous, or some other uncivilized or inadequate traits, >and the reputation of the group has to be recouped in the wider society, as >much as among its own members. So 'Black is Beautiful', as of course it is >and always has been and will be. But at a certain point, the group can only >claim its full humanity by copping to its own dirty laundry. Black, like >white and every other color, is also ugly. Alice Walker got some >considerable flak from some African American community leaders, I have been >told, for unsparingly portraying African American male violence towards >women in her early novels. While this could have given some comfort to those >whites who criticize blacks, the books were also unsparing about white >racism. To my mind, her washing her group's dirty laundry in public was a >mark of confidence and made the novels more true, more real, more something >we could learn from. Your point for me illustrates the difference between classic literature and contemporary popular literature, or art in general. Truth is truth and truth telling is what makes something classical. Something that is trendy, politically correct, message-bearing will be popular today, but out of touch tomorrow because it's unrealistic in its portrayals. Not that preachy literature or art doesn't have its place. Some people need to be hit over the head with a message. But a message that is delivered in great art is much more powerful and lasting. >I am feeling my own personality and hang-ups showing through in this email: >I have always been prone to be overly intimidated by those who are clear >that they are holier than I am and who can persuade me of same: whether >religious, political, feminist, whoever. Then I tend to resent them. I warm >up more to righteous folk who confess their sins... For what it's worth, there are a lot of people that feel the same way as you. I think a lot of causes lose supporters because of pressures you are talking about. The cause then ends up blathering to the choir and not making any progress. I think it's something we all have to think about when we are passionate about a cause. I remember a woman in NYC (maybe you encountered this person) who was tireless in her campaign against pornography. I admired this woman and believed in her views, but at the same time was frightened of her. She had a stand on a street corner, (back before Mayor Giuliani did away with street corner riff raff), with huge full color posters of women being sexually tortured. She had anti-pornography petitions for passersby to sign. Back then there was a lot of pornography sold openly on the newstands on every corner, so it really was a good idea of hers. I found the newstands offensive in an aggressive way, yet as an American, there's this thing about free speech always in the back of my mind. I can never quite rectify my opposing views on this subject. And I can't make out how I'm supposed to feel. But there were those posters, so vivid and painful to look at, making everything clear. You couldn't help but become angry and the only thing you could do to stop the torture was sign the petition. I don't remember what the petition was for, probably to inspire some senator or congressman to introduce anti-porn legislation. Anyway, if a man came up to her stand to sign, she would grab the pen out of his hand and shout No! No man! I was offended myself by that. I still admire this nameless woman and wonder what horrible things have happened to her in her life to make her so angry, and so counterproductive. And I note the pornography is not so prevalent on the stands anymore. I don't think it was her so much as Giuliani that effected that change. The whole city is very gentrified now. Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:34:57 -0400 From: davebelden Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG:Postmodernism and back to Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > My point is that the notion of the universal in art is a romantic notion, > stemming from the late 18th-early 19th centuries, developed by > the some of the > first literary critics. You were taught this as well. It didn't > come from the > universe or from nature or from something innate in human beings. It came > from the canon of literary criticism. > > -Frances There is a lot of truth to this, and yet, on the other hand, the thinking you are describing is currently in fashion, every bit as much as the romantic notions you criticize were once in fashion. You are struck by the truth in these current ideas - the fact that many people are likewise is what makes them fashionable. But the pendulum will swing, and most likely the thing that will make it swing in the coming decades is the immense power of evolutionary psychology, allied to genetics, which will get many many people exclaiming about how universal human nature is ('something innate in human beings'), and how limited the range of culture actually is. This will bring 'romantic' notions of the universal meaning inherent in great works of art back into vogue - helped along by a general ennui with the blind alley nature of extreme postmodernism, and by a general desire for representational art after the long desert of abstraction. Indeed, we are already some little way along this road. And after that becomes orthodoxy, people will then be set ready to rediscover how incredibly varied cultures actually are, and how we can't really understand each other that well after all... Through all of this, I think that Ammonite will hold a nice place in fiction, as an early (? or only early in science fiction?) example of a woman claiming the full range of human experience for women, thus painting perhaps a more realistic picture than was previously possible. Will this make it a feminist sf classic? Could be. May depend what else she writes. That's where this side discussion began, in the suggestion that this was a potential classic because it did something broader, acknowledging the unpleasant side of 'woman'. But it would only become a classic if it did it particularly well and convincingly, both for those already immersed in the culture of sf and even better for those in the widening circles outside sf who might find this a good read and a source of insight and resonance about the human condition. Does it do that? That's what I am more interested myself, than whether an artwork can be universal or not... which is why I am hoping to relink with the Ammonite thread... Dave ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 14:02:52 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG:Postmodernism and back to Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >But it would only become a classic if it did it >particularly well and convincingly, both for those already immersed in the >culture of sf and even better for those in the widening circles outside sf >who might find this a good read and a source of insight and resonance about >the human condition. Does it do that? That's what I am more interested >myself, than whether an artwork can be universal or not... which is why I am >hoping to relink with the Ammonite thread... > >Dave Thanks for bringing this back, Dave. I was enjoying the tangent as well and I hope people will continue that. But the question still does remain. Is Ammonite a good example of women being depicted as full blown humans with all the range of possibility? Are the characters realistic? Do you know people like Aoife, Uaithne, Sara Hiam, Danner, Thenike, and most importantly Marghe? Are the relationships between these people and the other characters real and full? Do the events in this story ring true? Would women find themselves doing things depicted in this story? Would women be like this only because men aren't around? Personally I didn't find anything particularly drastic as far as non-female behavior goes in the book. Sure, Uaithne was extreme, but she'd be extreme if she were male as well. Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 09:12:40 +1000 From: Elizabeth Wulff Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG:Postmodernism and back to Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Lange" To: Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 4:02 AM Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG:Postmodernism and back to Ammonite >Thanks for bringing this back, Dave. I was enjoying the tangent as >well and I hope people will continue that. But the question still >does remain. Is Ammonite a good example of women being depicted as >full blown humans with all the range of possibility? Are the >characters realistic? Do you know people like Aoife, Uaithne, Sara >Hiam, Danner, Thenike, and most importantly Marghe? Are the >relationships between these people and the other characters real and >full? Do the events in this story ring true? Would women find >themselves doing things depicted in this story? Would women be like >this only because men aren't around? Hi everyone, The fact that "Ammonite" won the Tiptree Award for 1993 (http://www.tiptree.org/1993/index.html) and the Lambda Award (not sure of the year http://www.nicolagriffith.com/ammonite.html) tells us something about whether this novel will be considered a 'classic', ''important', 'feminist' and generally well respected and received by the sf community. Griffith posts an interesting essay on her site entitled "Writing From The Body" (http://www.nicolagriffith.com/body.html) which discusses the virus she created for the story and her mindset for writing it. I think the characters are wonderfully human with all of the diversities that exist in people I do know and would like to know. I loved the novel for the fact that change is the only option and it cannot be resisted. Despite her fear Marghe embraces change and loves the life she is creating for herself with the help of those around her who she lets in. It's a real personal journey of becoming a participant instead of an observer and Marghe leads the way for the others (Danner & the Mirrors etc), abandoned by the corrupt Corporation. I like the fact that the native population is so diverse in that the Tribes too, find change difficult but eventually have to come around to it. The very fact that Aoife puts the safety of the Tribe first is the reason she stops Uaithne from continuing a war that will kill them all. None of these characters are without their faults (well I can't think of Thenike's faults actually) but all the point of view characters that we are given struggle with how to deal with life and relationships with others, the way they feel, what to think, how to be. They all struggle with the age-old range of emotions and so on that everyone has been discussing which exist in Shakespeare and other established 'classics'. For these reasons, past, and reasons present - the fact that human diversity is not stereotyped by sex or race, I thought it was a great novel. I also like the way Marghe links the virus to positive physical changes (heightened senses) and not so positive ones (the craziness of Uaithne and the 'episodes' that Letitia suffers during or after the amazing storms). The physical impact of the environment on the people and so on. That this is an interaction between living things - the people and the planet. I would love to see another story set on Jeep - you know, the five years time when they have become part of the changing culture and the Corporation returns to have another go at using the planet for its own purposes. Just to see what life would be like for Danner and her crew and those that have ventured off into the world of Jeep to find a place for themselves. I'm not sure Griffith meant to allude to this particularly or just that the capitalist intentions of the Corporation would not stop for anything. Best, Elizabeth. PS. Noone has mentioned this, and I'm a little surprised, but for those of us who were at WisCon it was FABULOUS!! Meeting people from this list was also GREAT. Hello to everyone!! ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 08:15:26 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG:Postmodernism and back to Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >(http://www.tiptree.org/1993/index.html) and the Lambda Award (not sure of >the year http://www.nicolagriffith.com/ammonite.html) tells us something >about whether this novel will be considered a 'classic', ''important', >'feminist' and generally well respected and received by the sf community. >Griffith posts an interesting essay on her site entitled "Writing From The >Body" (http://www.nicolagriffith.com/body.html) which discusses the virus >she created for the story and her mindset for writing it. Elizabeth, Thanks for the above link to Griffith's essay. I would like to discuss the virus in detail a little later. > I would love to see another story set on Jeep - you know, the five years >time when they have become part of the changing culture and the Corporation >returns to have another go at using the planet for its own purposes. Just >to see what life would be like for Danner and her crew and those that have >ventured off into the world of Jeep to find a place for themselves. I'm not >sure Griffith meant to allude to this particularly or just that the >capitalist intentions of the Corporation would not stop for anything. > Best, > Elizabeth. This was going to be one of my discussion questions as well. What's going to happen onthis planet? Will it become more technological due to Danner and her people's presence? How will it evolve? Will it thrive? Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 08:20:14 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG:Postmodernism and back to Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >The very fact that Aoife puts the safety of the Tribe >first is the reason she stops Uaithne from continuing a war that will kill >them all. Let's talk about this for a second. Early in the story Aoife defies Uaithne when Uaithne wanted to kill Marghe for trespassing on the sacred area. And then Aoife defies her at the end as you mention here. Why doesn't Aoife defy her in the middle when Uaithne is doing the most damage? Why does Aoife only stand up to her when Marghe is around? Why does Marghe have that effect? Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 09:43:25 -0400 From: davebelden Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Aoife To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > Let's talk about this for a second. Early in the story Aoife defies > Uaithne when Uaithne wanted to kill Marghe for trespassing on the > sacred area. And then Aoife defies her at the end as you mention > here. Why doesn't Aoife defy her in the middle when Uaithne is doing > the most damage? Why does Aoife only stand up to her when Marghe is > around? Why does Marghe have that effect? > > Sue That's a great question, and I think the author leaves the answer deliberately vague. But it does seem that Marghe acts as some kind of conscience to Aoife of a different kind from her conscience as tribal chief: she seems to remind her of her humanity, of the claims of a wider human society. One could argue that that happens because they live together and Aoife teaches and mentors her, and thereby gets respect for Marghe and liking for her, and that must be a good part of why she eventually comes around at the end. But that doesn't explain why she allows Marghe to live at the very start, at the standing stones, when she doesn't know her. So there's something in Aoife that respects outsiders. Maybe this is partly why she has been selected to be the tribal leader - that she is a mature person of breadth, even though she seems like such a loner all the time. Being the future leader may be enough to make someone feel alone, and a capacity to bear aloneness may be one of the qualifications the tribe seeks in a future leader. After all that is the experience of Danner, that she is essentially alone and can only find equals in outsiders, like Marghe and the doctor on the space station (and that is one of the very interesting aspects of the book, that women here get to that lonely place above the glass ceiling where they are truly the leader of a whole community - and how often does that happen in regular non-sf novels? - so that's another piece of the 'male' experience that here becomes a 'female' experience and thereby simply a human experience; though it may well be that women forced into that position may do better with it than men - now there's an interesting question). So Marghe, as the outsider, had this special role to play with leaders - Danner and Aoife: she can speak the truth to them, or at least truths that are not apparent to others or that subordinates are constrained from saying, and she can remind them of obligations outside their group. But only if she escapes their control, which is the challenge she has to get away from Aoife in winter. If she hadn't left, and obviously if she hadn't survived, she would not have been able to play that role of outsider / wider conscience. Truly individuals can matter in history and this was a great example of it. Dave PS. While I'm writing, I wanted to thank Yvonne for her beautifully expressed synthesis of intuitive and close reading responses - that was really helpful to me, and I fully agree with it. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 10:35:32 -0500 From: Charley Earp Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU I am 3/4 through the book, just after the confrontation of the Mirrors and Echraidne. I just want to throw out some random impressions. Did anyone else get a "Hero's Quest" vibe from this story? I'm talking about the classic Joseph Campbell paradigm of the one unknowingly destined for greatness embarking on a perilous journey, facing and overcoming trials, receiving initiation into mysteries, and emerging as a giant among humankind? I got that feeling from the opening pages where Marghe faces the long corridors leading her away from the familiar and into an irrevocable confrontation with death and mystery. It's also interesting to me is that this almost qualifies as "hard" science fiction. Purists of that genre might question whether psychic gene recombination and parthenogenesis are truly scientifically possible, but most of the story is decidedly realist and non-technotopian. As for "gender-bending", I felt this worked in most places. I was impressed by how even though Marghe, Sara, Hannah, and Lu Wai were in "male" roles they felt like women competently doing their jobs. The absence of men felt almost odd to me, but I appreciated it both as part of the book's intent and the story's internal logic. I experienced this oddness as enhancing my experience of the book and am impressed with Griffith's talent in provoking such a subtle and important impression. The one place where I felt it the most strained was Vine's story of how she and Thenike first became friends. Vine felt stereotypically hypermasculine. Perhaps this is my limitation. I tend to see hypermasculinity as a cover for emotional dysfunction. Vine's prejudices about "lazy" viajeras were like the stockbroker who tells the homeless man to get a job. Unfortunately, we never get beneath this superficial introduction to Vine. A minor critique that is more aimed at the author's agenda than the book on its own terms. I feel that Griffith has perhaps unintentionally actually used one of the tropes of utopian femnist fiction that she so energetically disclaims. While Ollfoss was not a utopia, it's agrarianism still harks back to works like Wanderground. Given the "quest" trope, that agrarianism was actually essential, even determinstic. Only the agrarians had the cultural womb capable of rebirthing Marge into her Ammonite destiny. Even the bleaker subsistence existence of the Echraidne was fated to its role in shaping Marghe's path to libertor. I won't accuse of Griffith of totaling buying into this utopian tilt, as North Haven was a clear contrast to the agrarianism of Ollfoss and Echraidne. While the agrarian society was needed to rebirth Marghe, the inhabitants of Jeep were not uniformly agrarians. Basically, this was a good read. peace - Charley ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 10:06:35 -0600 From: PAT MATHEWS Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >From: Charley Earp > >Did anyone else get a "Hero's Quest" vibe from this story? I'm talking >about the classic Joseph Campbell paradigm of the one unknowingly >destined for greatness embarking on a perilous journey, facing and >overcoming trials, receiving initiation into mysteries, and emerging as >a giant among humankind? Oh, most decidedly! >It's also interesting to me is that this almost qualifies as "hard" >science fiction. Purists of that genre might question whether psychic >gene recombination and parthenogenesis are truly scientifically >possible, but most of the story is decidedly realist and >non-technotopian. That's why, if I only had one book by her, this would be it. SLOW RIVER is very hard sf, the science being wastewater treatment, but I find it rather hard to get excited about that! >As for "gender-bending", I felt this worked in most places. You know, I never even saw it as gender-bending? We're used to women as cops, engineers, soldiers, etc by now - I think if you ask anyone from GenX (1961-80) or a Millie (1981-2000) about it, they'd wonder what you were talking about. >I was impressed by how even though Marghe, Sara, Hannah, and Lu Wai were in >"male" roles they felt like women competently doing their jobs. Yes - how long it took us to reach that point and how unremarkable it is today! Check out Lois McMaster Bujold's SHARDS OF HONOR, where her Barrayaran hero Aral says the same thing about his Betan trekmate/POW Cordelia. Barrayar is slowly coming out of a long Time of Isolation. >The one place where I felt it the most strained was Vine's story of how >she and Thenike first became friends. Vine felt stereotypically >hypermasculine. Perhaps this is my limitation. I tend to see >hypermasculinity as a cover for emotional dysfunction. Vine's >prejudices about "lazy" viajeras were like the stockbroker who tells the >homeless man to get a job. Unfortunately, we never get beneath this >superficial introduction to Vine. Sigh. And haven't we all known her sort? I'd like to introduce Vine to Lady Margaret Thatcher - or to some hardheaded hardhatted woman from a ranch or small business - and watch the lovefest. >A minor critique that is more aimed at the author's agenda than the book >on its own terms. I feel that Griffith has perhaps unintentionally >actually used one of the tropes of utopian femnist fiction that she so >energetically disclaims. While Ollfoss was not a utopia, it's >agrarianism still harks back to works like Wanderground. Given the >"quest" trope, that agrarianism was actually essential, even >determinstic. Only the agrarians had the cultural womb capable of >rebirthing Marge into her Ammonite destiny. Even the bleaker subsistence >existence of the Echraidne was fated to its role in shaping Marghe's >path to libertor. Hmmmm.... yes. The pastoral ideal. Robert Heinlein (BEYOND THIS HORIZON) had a Man from the Past run into that sort of daydreming and set the (urban intellectual) dreamer straight with tales of the outhouse on a cold morning, mules stepping on your foot, and cow patties on the path. Snicker. >I won't accuse of Griffith of totaling buying into this utopian tilt, as >North Haven was a clear contrast to the agrarianism of Ollfoss and >Echraidne. While the agrarian society was needed to rebirth Marghe, the >inhabitants of Jeep were not uniformly agrarians. > >Basically, this was a good read. A very good read. I'm only sorry she abandoned science fiction for murder mysteries. Pat ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 13:30:07 -0400 From: Charlotte Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Parthenogenesis is a scientific fact, though not known widely to occur with humanoids, as far as we know. People do manifest illnesses from their spiritual and mental states--so psychic gene recombination is not impossible either. Some of our genes are known to cause mutations, hence the variety of the species. Charlotte Babb Adventure at the Edge of the Galaxy –Port Nowhere Teacher – CharlotteBabb.com Web Design – Southeastern Writers ~ FindAGoddess ~ STC Continuing Ed ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 00:13:02 -0500 From: Charley Earp Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU I finally got through the final pages of _Ammonite_. I have to say that it made me want a sequel or prequel. I am interested in the unanswered questions about the Goths. DId humans play a role in their demise? Was the virus natural or engineered? I'm actually uninterested in whether Company and SEC ever return. I want to address the "male roles" question. I work for a travel wholesaler, and my workplace is about 90% female. I am the only male in a workgroup of 13 and my supervisors are all female. However, I still had a feeling of oddness for the first few chapters coming from the absence of male characters. This feeling wasn't, "something is missing" but rather something unusual is present. Probably the first scene I noticed it was when Marghe meets Danner. I expected Danner to act masculine, but she didn't. She was military, yet repeatedly struggled with her authority in ways that men don't. Men do struggle with their authority, but it's different. I don't know if I can describe the difference and probably I would be over-generalizing. When I am in a position requiring authority, for example when I have to interpret and implement company policy with a travel agent, I often worry that I am not properly owning my authority, which feels like I'm being unmanly. I have been told by my female Evangelical Republican supervisor that I don't measure up to her idea of how a man should act. I am 41 years old and remember the 70s quite clearly and how gender roles shifted dramatically. I grew up in a world dominated by men, but by the time I entered the adult workforce, women in authority were becoming commonplace. I know that complete gender equality is still unrealized, but most of my supervisors have been women. One personal effect of the influence of feminism on me in the 80s was to give me permission to be unmanly, which actually has provoked hostility at times, like the above comment from my supervisor. Danner's self-doubts are more of the nature "is my authority really earned?" Although it doesn't directly come out as, "how can I do this and still be a woman?" I wonder if that sort of thinking is present in female struggles with authority in contrast to my own worry that I am not being manly enough. Is it generally true that men think ineffectiveness in using authority is unmanly, while women worry at some level that using authority undermines their femininity? peace - Charley ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 08:01:14 -0400 From: Charlotte Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite - authority To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU AS Charley noted, it is hard to be in charge. Many women have had to learn to speak as men do (Deborah Tannen has several books on this subject of how men and women use talking differently) in order to be heard. I had to learn to stick out my hand to greet men with a handshake, so that they treated me as an equal instead of one of the girls. This is "mannish" behavior in our culture. Since the male dominated business world is only one generation away, yes, I think many women question balancing femininity with authority. There is an internet "funny" that goes around every so often to the effect of "When a man does ***, he's strong; when a woman does ***, she's a bitch." We've come a long way, baby, but we're still climbing. I have several male friends who, like you, are considered "not just a guy" due to their ability to listen, to ask for and follow driving directions, and all the other clichés. From my perspective, these guys are secure in their masculinity, although one of them shies away from being the only guy in a group of women in concern for being thought gay. I for one hope that in another generation, or less, that being gay will be thought of as a personal attribute, like having brown eyes or being tall. Most of us, men and women, experience female authority from day one from our mothers. How does it change the culture for the mother to be a person of power, not just in her kitchen but in the world at large, just as the father is? (Not that fathers have all that much power either.) How does it change mothering style? How does it change the child's experience of authority? Charlotte Babb Adventure at the Edge of the Galaxy –Port Nowhere Teacher – CharlotteBabb.com Web Design – Southeastern Writers ~ FindAGoddess ~ STC Continuing Ed -----Original Message----- From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU] On Behalf Of Charley Earp Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2004 1:13 AM To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite Danner's self-doubts are more of the nature "is my authority really earned?" Although it doesn't directly come out as, "how can I do this and still be a woman?" I wonder if that sort of thinking is present in female struggles with authority in contrast to my own worry that I am not being manly enough. Is it generally true that men think ineffectiveness in using authority is unmanly, while women worry at some level that using authority undermines their femininity? peace - Charley ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:49:05 +1000 From: Elizabeth Wulff Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG:Postmodernism and back to Ammonite - spoilers To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > Let's talk about this for a second. Early in the story Aoife defies > Uaithne when Uaithne wanted to kill Marghe for trespassing on the > sacred area. And then Aoife defies her at the end as you mention > here. Why doesn't Aoife defy her in the middle when Uaithne is doing > the most damage? Why does Aoife only stand up to her when Marghe is > around? Why does Marghe have that effect? > Sue Actually it's the Levarch who forbids Uaithne harm Marghe when they find her in the Ring of Stones (p69 my paperback copy 2002 edition). The Levarch orders Aoife to 'take up the stranger'. The Levarch does this because those who trespass amongst the stones belong to the tribe. The tribe is dying out although this is stated indirectly by Marghe's observations of the camp etc (p103) and later when she confronts Aoife about the other two women who were found amongst the stones (p139). I think it's part of Uaithne's madness that she killed Winnie alone and she starts the feud with the Briogannon alone that actually disconnects her from the codes of the tribe but the others are bound by the tribal codes which in turn serves to protect Uaithne from being restrained. Whilst Marghe is in Aoife's care - tent sisters - she is protected from Uaithne. That Aoife acts later might have something to do with the fact that the Levarch is dead and although Uaithne has taken control of both tribes, Aoife is rightfully the next Levarch and acts for the greater good. Perhaps she finally believes Marghe's story?? Or sees that they will be beaten or both. Charley also mentions the hyper-masculinity of Vine the sailor. When I read the story of how Thenike and Vines met I thought it was more a class/culture thing than anything else (difference between ethnic blue collar worker and white collar pen-pusher or something). Do you think the physicality of being a sailor - how many women sailor's or even ships captains are there in Western anglo-americ-aussie cultures?? - affected your feelings about that? In a world with literally no men, why would having a physical occupation be masculine? I think your comment about the stockbroker and homeless man is less about gender than class and circumstances. I thought North Haven was stereotypically something out of eighteenth century port towns of London or something - very 'Oliver Twist' or something. I might have to re-read that section about Vine - hardened by the sea and all that. I agree about the Joseph Campbell hero quest, as does Pat, yet I think there's a couple of twists - or maybe that's just wishful thinking - Campbell's hero's journey ends with becoming 'enlightened' and Marghe certainly seems to obtain that. It's very spiritual in that sense. The finding of peace and home etc. Charley's comments about Marghe's rebirthing in Ollfoss to become liberator, saviour are very interesting - I hadn't thought of that. Elizabeth. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 06:56:21 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Charley, >Did anyone else get a "Hero's Quest" vibe from this story? I'm talking >about the classic Joseph Campbell paradigm of the one unknowingly >destined for greatness embarking on a perilous journey, facing and >overcoming trials, receiving initiation into mysteries, and emerging as >a giant among humankind? I did get this somewhat early on, but after a while it didn't feel that way anymore. I think it's because much of the story was focused on Danner as well as Marghe, and I actually started getting more interested in her. Marghe seemed to be not so much on a quest in the classical hero sense, but a muddling kind of search for her inner self. She seemed to want to be a hippie. There also didn't seem to be an underlying good vs. evil theme as in classic sf and fantasy. Uaithne might have been the rep from the evil side, but Marghe wasn't really trying to overcome her. It wasn't the point of the book; it just sort of happened as an afterthought. >As for "gender-bending", I felt this worked in most places. I was >impressed by how even though Marghe, Sara, Hannah, and Lu Wai were in >"male" roles they felt like women competently doing their jobs. This did not really feel like gender-bending to me. These roles are no longer typical male roles in my opinion. In the past that might have been true, but nowadays there are women ambassadors, military leaders, administrators of laboratories, and medical team leaders. Nothing seemed particularly advanced or beyond the realities of today. Not that most of these roles are filled with women; it's just that given the circumstances, it didn't feel any more progressive than having the coach of the women's basketball team be a woman. > Vine's prejudices about "lazy" viajeras were like the stockbroker >who tells the homeless man to get a job. This is interesting that you bring this up. I actually felt like this was more along the lines of my own prejudice against artists. I've never had as much respect for those that seem to get by on their storytelling abilities as opposed to actually doing labor with their hands. I'm not saying I'm right, it's just a deep seated envy I carry. Really good observations, Charley. It will be interesting to see what you think when you finish. Sue -- Susan Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 07:00:39 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > SLOW RIVER is very hard sf, the science being wastewater treatment, but >I find it rather hard to get excited about that! As a holder of an NPEDS license (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) I take offense at that! (just kidding) Sue -- Susan Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:13:34 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: [Spoilers] Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Charlotte, I'm not sure if my response to this came through yesterday so I'm going to respond again. Sorry if you're getting this twice >People do manifest illnesses from their spiritual and mental >states--so psychic gene recombination is not impossible either. I find this very hard to believe and in fact thought this was a weakness in the book. I was tantalized by the fact that Marghe had noted that many, many people were interested in how the women of Jeep reproduced. I too was interested and couldn't wait to find out. I didn't really buy the whole process taking place in some sort of sleep/hypnotic thing. I wanted to know the exact mechanism. I felt that the dream state made it seem like anything could be happening but this was Marghe-the expert biofeedback practioner's-interpretation of what was going on. Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 08:13:03 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Here's another question on the virus for anybody with an evolutionary biology and/or virology background: The virus in this book seems highly capable. It destroyed one half of the species based almost solely on gender; it effects parthenogenesis; it enhances both sense perception and memory. How is it possible for a single strain of virus to accomplish all of that? Except for the first item, it seems like it would take thousands of years of side-by-side human and viral evolution for these types of enhancements to come about. Am I right, or is this, in fact, not expecting too much of a virus? Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:21:21 -0400 From: davebelden Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > The virus in this book seems highly capable. It destroyed one half of > the species based almost solely on gender; it effects > parthenogenesis; it enhances both sense perception and memory. How is > it possible for a single strain of virus to accomplish all of that? > Except for the first item, it seems like it would take thousands of > years of side-by-side human and viral evolution for these types of > enhancements to come about. Am I right, or is this, in fact, not > expecting too much of a virus? I'm no expert to say the least, but it certainly looks highly unlikely: but maybe less unlikely than it did when she wrote it, as I seem to recall reading in my New Scientist mag in the last year about viruses messing with DNA. If true, this seems to add a huge element to evolution - it's not just random mutations, it's also viruses making changes to suit themselves. So maybe I misunderstood what I read... It made no problem for me in reading the novel. I took it to be about as scientific as Le Guin's ansible or anybody's faster than light travel or Asimov's positronic robot brains: gobbledygook that enables the author to keep within a supposedly non-magical universe, when they are actually using magic. It's an interesting question whether Ammonite would have been just as strong a novel if she had written it as an outright fantasy: e.g. Marghe wanders into an enchanted realm where a wicked wizard has killed all the men and enabled the women to self-impregnate. The same issues could be written about - the same gender issues, the same exhibition by women of the extreme traits as well as roles more commonly labeled masculine, plus their bringing a female take to those qualities... All that really would have been different is that it would have appealed to a slightly different (but overlapping) audience, and it would have sacrificed some claim to reality, some claim that this could actually happen in our actual future. The difference between sf and fantasy seems to me to be akin to that between memoir and novel. The memoirist can claim that the story is true, or truer than a novel, because it actually happened; while the novelist can counter-claim that their fiction gets as close (or closer) to the real truth through imaginative invention, and can counter-attack by saying that anyway memoir is only one person's take, and is fairly fictional from the point of view of other actors in the story. Likewise science fiction claims to be truer or at least more possible than fantasy, but a good fantasist can counter claim that they are telling just as much truth through metaphor, and can counter-attack that anyway much of science fiction is fantasy in scientific dress. It's also true that so much of what we take for granted now as real, would appear as magic to pre-modern humans, so that surely future technology will seem like magic to us: that seems to give sf writers a lot of license to describe the impossible. The difference between magic and scientific technology is hard to define anyway, because so much traditional magic actually does 'work': people get healed or invigorated or withered unto death, and it may be the herbs or the placebo effect or social pressure, or some kinds of psychic phenomena our science hasn't yet caught up to. Science is perhaps just one particular branch of magic, one that involves particular standards of testing... Dave ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:43:00 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >I'm no expert to say the least, but it certainly looks highly unlikely: but >maybe less unlikely than it did when she wrote it, as I seem to recall >reading in my New Scientist mag in the last year about viruses messing with >DNA. If true, this seems to add a huge element to evolution - it's not just >random mutations, it's also viruses making changes to suit themselves. So >maybe I misunderstood what I read... Yes, I think that's the feeling that I got from this fabulous virus, that it almost knew what it was doing or picked and chose what effects it wanted to have. It was never spelled out, but it just seemed to me that the virus had higher brain functions; but a virus has what? a strand of dna and some sort of protein coating. Not much to work with so for me there was an overriding feeling of some sort of something bigger than ourselves at work here. I don't know what; I don't recall anything being hinted at. Nevertheless, I kept waiting for a plot to be unveiled. -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:39:13 -0400 From: Claudia Schlosser Subject: [*FSFFU*] Ammonite, LHOD and war To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Hi, I am kind of late on this discussion and it is more of a general issue than related to a specific book, but here it is. When I first read "The left hand of darkness" about 10 years ago, I did so because it had been recommended in several feminist treatises. (I do not remember these feminist books clearly -- most probably some of the classics of the 70s, which were the only books my library had on the topic, maybe Marylin French). Anyway, LHOD was lauded as a feminist utopia. (I remember being kind of disappointed when I read the book. The society seemed kind of dull to me as a teenager.) The reviewer claimed that war arises only in patriarchic societies and that a world without gender would consequently be free of wars, as Winter showed. Ammonite, otoh, suggest that wars could arise in a women-only society as well. (We could argue about the exact definition of war and where mere aggression between people or a feud between tribes develops into a war. I see at as a kind of prolonged armed conflict that uses a huge amount of resources.) Is anybody current on theories how war came to be/how gender is related to its genesis? I am only familiar with the viewpoint that war is a byproduct of patriarchy, which again was engendered by communism and males' need to control females in order to ensure that their offspring was truly theirs. [A rather polemic book I once read suggested that it was not so much about possession but men's need to control women's "superior sexuality", but the control issue stays the same.] These theories are very old (and probably have been revised since.) Newer ones I know include the distinction between "authority" and "dominion" ("Autoritaet" and "Herrschaft") and that authority was founded on respect while dominion was based on force. It was suggested that during some natural catastrophes in the past leadership had to be switched from advice (authority) to unquestioned orders (dominion) and that those leaders did not give back their power after the drought/flood/migration... was over but got themselves some underlings who would ensure their power by violence ("Erzwingerstab"). A very recent article about archeological findings in Mexico and investigations about the founding of the first villages suggested that war was bred by wealth, not poverty, because only rich villages and an economy that knew how to keep stores of goods ("Vorratshaltung") could have the ressources for an ongoing conflict. Any input/reading recommendations/ideas what makes a war-free society? Claudia ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 07:31:30 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Ammonite, LHOD and war To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >"war arises only in patriarchic societies and that a world without gender >would consequently be free of wars, as Winter showed. > >Ammonite, otoh, suggest that wars could arise in a women-only society as >well." Claudia, This is a good observation and perhaps that answers the question about whether or not Griffith achieved her point of showing all aspects of women's character. So what is the correct feminist view point? These books are both considered feminist, yet they draw two different conclusions. How do we rectify that? Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 07:32:17 -0400 From: Gaile Pohlhaus Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Ammonite, LHOD and war To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU I think there is no "correct" feminist viewpoint. There are as many different "feminisms" and feminist views as there are different philosophic views. And they differ or agree on many things. Take, for example, pro-life feminism. Gaile Sue Lange wrote: > So what is the correct feminist view point? These books are both > considered feminist, yet they draw two different conclusions. How do > we rectify that? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:14:28 -0400 From: Claudia Schlosser Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Ammonite, LHOD and war To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >I am only familiar with the viewpoint that war is a byproduct of > patriarchy, which again was engendered by communism and males' need to > control females in order to ensure that their offspring was truly theirs. > > Where does communism come into it? Sorry if I'm being dim! Sorry for being confusing. I meant capitalism. The books I read back then were quite leftist and blamed virtually anything on capitalism. The idea was that from a communist paradise were mankind shared everything, the need to control property and who inherited it caused warfare and the subjugation of women. Claudia ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 08:20:39 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Getting back to Ammonite, here's something I'm wondering about: Thinking of Danner and her management style, is she going to break from patriarchal tradition and assimilate her group into the indigenous population, or will she use her superior technology to try and bend the local and already-adapted-to-the-environment people to her "advanced" way of life. In other words, is genocide going to happen? Culture suppression maybe? Does the fact that the Company is expected to return one day going to have an effect on this one way or another? Will Danner fight the Company? Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:32:30 -0400 From: Susan Bernardo Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Hello all. I have been a quiet listmember and have enjoyed the Ammonite discussion. I just wanted to try to reply to some of Sue's queries. Thanks, Sue, for the interesting questions. I think it's clear that Danner knows that she has already made an anti-Company choice in bringing Hiam etc off the station. She also understands that she and her Mirrors will be getting even more involved in the affairs of the planet over time. There are hints early in Marghe's stay on Jeep that the Mirrors are already planning to stay in the way they decorate their mods. I think that genocide would not appeal to Danner since it is clear that she has a lot to learn from the indigenous people about how to manage to live well on Jeep. Her advanced way of life is not going to work on Jeep without resources from Company, so she and her group must adapt. She also appears to be a person who keeps her word and the fact that trata exists would be important to her. I think instead of cultural suppression, there would be cultural differences and deals between groups. Another way to see this issue of how she will manage is to remember how she reacted to finding out that Company was spying on her and undermining her. She sees that Company is not her friend and never will be. I would predict that Danner would fight Company in order to save her people. What do others think? Susan Bernardo At 8:20 AM -0400 7/22/04, Sue Lange wrote: >Getting back to Ammonite, here's something I'm wondering about: > >Thinking of Danner and her management style, is she going to break >from patriarchal tradition and assimilate her group into the >indigenous population, or will she use her superior technology to try >and bend the local and already-adapted-to-the-environment people to >her "advanced" way of life. In other words, is genocide going to >happen? Culture suppression maybe? Does the fact that the Company is >expected to return one day going to have an effect on this one way or >another? Will Danner fight the Company? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 11:20:35 -0400 From: Claudia Schlosser Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > I think that genocide would not appeal to Danner since it is clear > that she has a lot to learn from the indigenous people about how to > manage to live well on Jeep. Her advanced way of life is not going > to work on Jeep without resources from Company, so she and her group > must adapt. She also appears to be a person who keeps her word and > the fact that trata exists would be important to her. Danner's first responsibility are her own people. She was not willing to help the herdswomen at first because she was busy with the evacuation of her own people. She only reacted shen Aoeife's tribe atacked the weather station. Thankfully, the fact that she is most concerned about the survival of her own group will probably prevent her to develop missionary tendencies toward the natives. Danner says that military personnel will stick to the military code as long as possible because that is part of their identity and it is difficult for them to think of themselves as something else. Something that has not been adressed in Ammonite is what they are going to do when their technical equipment fails piece by piece. I remember another book (title forgotten, but it has mercenaries that are stranded on a world that has intelligent octopuses) where that was a very important issue. The mercenaries could not produce their high-tech equipment themselves so they were struggling to stabilize their culure at least at the level of craftsmanship that the middle ages had known as opposed to hunter/gatherer tribes. How do you think it will affect the Mirrors when they realize that they are losing technology? Is it an important part of their identity? Also compare how the adaption process is described in Ammonite to "Landfall on Darkover" where the struggle for survival was so much harsher. (I hate the book for the way it describes patriarchy as inevitable and women have to become birthing machines in order to promote the survival of their species. It fitts nicely, though, with our discussion of why the heck men drew the conclusion from women have to be protected to they don't have any rights.) One of the main differences seems to be that in the LoD universe humanity used technology to shield themselves from nature and their own biology. The camp is equally divided between alternative settler who want to overcome this artificial world and "technologists" who are afraid to let go of technology and return to base natural living. All the people on Jeep (even the Mirrors) seem pretty much in touch with themselves and probably don't see such a strong dichotomy between nature and civilization. Do you think the fact that they are all female might have helped? Some more thoughts on the book: Yes, Thenike seemed like a perfect character. I wouldn't say that she was bland but I didn't find her as interesting as the other characters who had more conflicts/flaws? Does anybody feel that way, too? I like that Marghe becomes complete through her journey and the people she meets. I was afraid it might be a cardboard love story where only Thenike makes her whole. I like the idea much better that they are both whole personalities on their own who complete each other. I think it was the first book I read where there are only female protagonists although men do exist in the wider universe. It is also the first book where rounded, independent, competent female characters interact who are neither friends nor enemies. We got to the story from Marghe's and Danner's point of view and both their views were valid. It wasn't as though the author, by choosing a sole heroine, gave us only one perspective. Very complete. :) I have read a lot of books about female heroines. Often, they interact only with male characters. If there are other (non-marginal) female characters they are either mentor, best friend or deadly enemy. What I like so much about Ammonite is that they are meeting as kind of neutral but with mutual respect. > I think > instead of cultural suppression, there would be cultural differences > and deals between groups. Danner's group needs help to survive so they probably will not turn into an isolated enclave of technology/wisdom. > Another way to see this issue of how she will manage is to remember > how she reacted to finding out that Company was spying on her and > undermining her. She sees that Company is not her friend and never > will be. I would predict that Danner would fight Company in order to > save her people. If company tries to take over the planet again, Danner (or her daughters) might recognize the need to unite the people against an external threat. That could change their society a lot. Claudia ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 11:59:04 -0400 From: davebelden Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Susan, I fully agree with your read on it. The question of what will Danner and co. do if the Company returns could be more interesting than simply warfare. Imagine that by then they are fully integrated into the local cultures. They will not be the same as them, because they will always have their off-world knowledge, and in fact wherever that knowledge works for them in helping their survival, it will get spread out to the other cultures on the planet also to some extent. But imagine that they have developed a viable and sustainable culture. If the Company comes, Danner and her group or their descendants will have the choice of whether to be outrightly hostile, or whether to act as the natural diplomats to try and negotiate with the Company. The Company might not be monolithic - it might have an anthropologist Marghe-type person who can actually communicate and give the inside scoop on what the Company's aims are, as well as having total company loyalists following orders. There will be politics on the Company's side - reasons to try and exploit the planet, reasons why it might be too costly to do so, especially if there is strong resistance, or if the second-generation vaccine isn't working as expected (it might be disruptable by the local semi-mystical gene manipulation artists). Could be a fun sequel to write. Dave > I think it's clear that Danner knows that she has already made an > anti-Company choice in bringing Hiam etc off the station. She also > understands that she and her Mirrors will be getting even more > involved in the affairs of the planet over time. There are hints > early in Marghe's stay on Jeep that the Mirrors are already planning > to stay in the way they decorate their mods. > > I think that genocide would not appeal to Danner since it is clear > that she has a lot to learn from the indigenous people about how to > manage to live well on Jeep. Her advanced way of life is not going > to work on Jeep without resources from Company, so she and her group > must adapt. She also appears to be a person who keeps her word and > the fact that trata exists would be important to her. I think > instead of cultural suppression, there would be cultural differences > and deals between groups. > > Another way to see this issue of how she will manage is to remember > how she reacted to finding out that Company was spying on her and > undermining her. She sees that Company is not her friend and never > will be. I would predict that Danner would fight Company in order to > save her people. > > What do others think? > > Susan Bernardo ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 09:26:20 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU One last question about this book before we move on: Regarding N-17, the vaccination that was tested by Marghe to determine its effectiveness against the virus: The vaccination worked but Marghe was unable to get her message through. The Company then pulled out. Why did the author construct the story this way? Why not just have the vaccination fail. It seems to me that most people survived its ill effects anyway, and in fact not taking the N-17 at all seemed preferable because of the great effects of the virus. So what was so important about having this preventive work in the first place only to have the Company leave anyway? Sue -- Sue Lange Digital Production Manager IEEE Communications Society 3 Park Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10016 s.lange@comsoc.org ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 09:37:46 -0400 From: davebelden Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > One last question about this book before we move on: > > Regarding N-17, the vaccination that was tested by Marghe to > determine its effectiveness against the virus: The vaccination worked > but Marghe was unable to get her message through. The Company then > pulled out. Why did the author construct the story this way? Why not > just have the vaccination fail. It seems to me that most people > survived its ill effects anyway, and in fact not taking the N-17 at > all seemed preferable because of the great effects of the virus. So > what was so important about having this preventive work in the first > place only to have the Company leave anyway? > > Sue I thought it was to set up a sequel, or at least to generate anxiety and tension in Danner and co. (and the reader) about the future, because the success of the virus means the company could return and blow away or marginalize the locals and settle the planet. Dave ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 09:53:27 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU But the Company left under the assumption that N-17 failed. How will they know? That's a good idea, though. Women are immune to the most devastating effects of the virus, so having a viable preventive possibly portends the return of men. Sue Dave Belden wrote: >I thought it was to set up a sequel, or at least to generate anxiety and >tension in Danner and co. (and the reader) about the future, because the >success of the virus means the company could return and blow away or >marginalize the locals and settle the planet. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:00:12 -0400 From: davebelden Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU How will they know? That would be part of a sequel's plot: maybe the company would send out a new reconnaissance group. Much tension would be inherent in making sure that any company spies who landed were not allowed to phone home. There is a vital piece of knowledge that the company must not be allowed to know. Sue Lange wrote: > But the Company left under the assumption that N-17 failed. How will > they know? > > That's a good idea, though. Women are immune to the most devastating > effects of the virus, so having a viable preventive possibly portends > the return of men. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:56:10 -0400 From: Sue Lange Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG: Ammonite To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU aha! Dave Belden wrote: >How will they know? That would be part of a sequel's plot: maybe the company >would send out a new reconnaissance group. Much tension would be inherent in >making sure that any company spies who landed were not allowed to phone >home. There is a vital piece of knowledge that the company must not be >allowed to know.