Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:48:37 -0400 From: Kirsten Hoyte Subject: [*FSF-L*] The Gumshoe.... Spoilers To: feministsf-lit@UIC.EDU Hi! I'm the "official" moderator so I thought that I would start off by mentioning what I enjoyed about this book. The simplest explanation is that it made me laugh out loud the first time I read it years ago. And since then, I can still pick it up every once in awhile and chuckle. I always like how everything comes together neatly at the end, and you realize that each intertwining story and each hint makes sense in the bigger picture. Furthermore, I liked how Calerant had planned everything so carefully, but so much happened outside his plans and expectations to make it all work. I imagine some of this neatly tied up plot is common to mysteries (a genre that I almost never read) but it still struck me as masterful. I also enjoyed how Hartman poked fun at a bunch of different subcultures. There were the Returnees who tried to out-Cherokee the Cherokee, the performance artists creating increasingly jaded and self-indulgent art (for example, the artist who just flashes a symbol instead of a name) the gay male gym clones, the high school cliques (nerds vs. jocks), Shard, the member of the coven who is lobbying like a politician etc. One of my questions was whether readers felt like the different groups all got equal treatment in the satiric commentary or did the Baptists receive the brunt of the criticism? I was also intrigued by the media/news outlet that employed Holly. Her cubicle was next to a black site newswriter, a Baptist site newswriter, a catholic site and so forth. They all worked in the same office spinning the same news to different audiences. With the growing number of news sources merging, this detail seemed right on target. There were also a lot of other near-future world building details that Hartman employed. Ideas like the portable computers connected to the net, the almost cashless society and the artificial wombs were not unique to this particular novel but I thought they were well-executed as well as exploring the conflict between a detectable "gay" gene and anti-abortion rhetoric. There was really only one part of the book that didn't sit quite right with me (besides a few typos in my edition). The woman characters felt less real to me than the men. Not really in any terrible way. This is a pretty minor criticism. If anything I guess they seemed less real because they were more put together. I recognized the Gumshoe and Benji particularly with their anxieties and self-doubt and the slightly slow Justin. Benji was not too popular, not too attractive, insecure and so forth. But Summer was cool as a cucumber (not just from Benji's narration but also the time or two that she narrated a chapter)! I teach plenty of middle and high school girls. Even the most popular ones are pretty insecure when it comes to meeting a new boy whom they like! Even Megan with her messy hair and Holly with her worries just seemed awfully together. Also Linda and so forth. I was thinking about all that when the very powerful Holly in a wolf paint comes out and saves Benji and there is that line "Not a werewolf, just a woman. But dark and frightening, in a way that only a woman could be." It just seemed over the top. Well that's all for now. I hope that other people have comments either about my remarks or other matters. One favor.... My email system will be down most of today (Monday) and possibly tomorrow. If you are going to reply to my message to the list. Will you please cc a copy to Victoriabl@aol.com? Thanks Kirsten ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:39:56 -0700 From: John Snead Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] The Gumshoe.... Spoilers To: feministsf-lit@UIC.EDU Kirsten Hoyte wrote: > Hi! I'm the "official" moderator so I thought that I would start off > by mentioning what I enjoyed about this book. The simplest > explanation is that it made me laugh out loud the first time I read it > years ago. And since then, I can still pick it up every once in > awhile and chuckle. I always like how everything comes together > neatly at the end, and you realize that each intertwining story and > each hint makes sense in the bigger picture. Furthermore, I liked how > Calerant had planned everything so carefully, but so much happened > outside his plans and expectations to make it all work. I imagine > some of this neatly tied up plot is common to mysteries (a genre that > I almost never read) but it still struck me as masterful. I enjoyed this book a great deal too. My partner and I both read the book and she did not like it as much because of a moral point. The fact that in the end, Calerant's plan worked and that no one revealed what had really been going on struck us both as very much as an "ends justify the means" type ending - where several of the people involved were willing to not reveal who committed several murders. I didn't have much of a problem with the ending, but my partner found it disturbingly immoral and thought that the ending showed several otherwise decent characters in an extremely negative light. In any case, I think the book did raise interesting questions about this issue. Comments? -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:34:05 -0400 From: Misha Bernard Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] The Gumshoe.... Spoilers To: feministsf-lit@UIC.EDU Because of the spoilers, I'll respond below the relevant comments On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, John Snead wrote: > My partner and I both read the book and she did not like it as much > because of a moral point. The fact that in the end, Calerant's plan > worked and that no one revealed what had really been going on > struck us both as very much as an "ends justify the means" type > ending - where several of the people involved were willing to not > reveal who committed several murders. I didn't have much of a > problem with the ending, but my partner found it disturbingly > immoral and thought that the ending showed several otherwise > decent characters in an extremely negative light. In any case, I > think the book did raise interesting questions about this issue. > > Comments? Hm, I didn't like the pat way it all ended- the excuse that everyone gave themselves about not giving Calerant 'credit' for the murders- his performance art- WAS the effects it had. The result, Stonewall taking all the murders on his head, was supposed to calm down the panic and fearful atmosphere in Atlanta. I don't know that I guy it. Actually, I wanted to find out what Jen Gray did and I incorrectly guessed that Benji also received a monetary bribe for his 'amnesia'. I mean, no one seems to worry about Stonewall being imprisoned for life, that Calerant was NOT totally balanced and picked up tools for his revenge in prison, and that (unless more folks were dead and no one believes Stonewall EVER) the case wouldn't be revisited later. I wasn't sure if this was a sort of 'deja vu' in reverse, for some future person to dig around in it. What do folks who read mysteries more often think of the book? I liked it, but something about that ending just didn't feel right to me. OH, and when Kirsten said "I was thinking about all that when the very powerful Holly in a wolf paint comes out and saves Benji and there is that line "Not a werewolf, just a woman. But dark and frightening, in a way that only a woman could be." It just seemed over the top." I had to go back and look- I completely missed the werewolf part, but the dark and frightening part leapt out at me. I tried to see it as part of her Wiccan-ness, women's power and all, but the 'darkness' still sits badly at a point in the book where it's still structured around someone must be evil and/or have power. Is it Stonewall, Calerant, who? The good/evil bit wasn't de-Baptisted enough for me. Hunh, still thinking over whether non-Baptists got short shrift.... Misha Bernard Cultural Studies PhD student mbernar1@gmu.edu George Mason University ------------------------- -mmmm! tastes like a scratch world! but it's Bishop Berkeley's Cosmo Mix!- Ursula K. Le Guin "World Making" (1981) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 12:40:38 -0400 From: Jessie Stickgold-Sarah Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] Gumshoe, late as usual [SPOILERS] To: feministsf-lit@UIC.EDU As seems to be my habit I've just finished _The Gumshoe..._ a month late and have finally gotten to go back and read the comments made last month. This book had a lot of mystery elements--the neat tie-up, the clues scattered throughout the book, even the cover-up at the end seemed characteristic. It also did that annoying SF thing of combining medium-quality writing with some really interesting ideas. In fact I found Hartman's world far more compelling than the characters, who were often indistinguishable from one another. Many of them had the same speech patterns, the same responses, the same smartass lines, etc. I felt like you could have swapped several of them and gotten the same effect. And the typos were legion. And yet I was fascinated. I'd read the first chapter, it turns out, as a short story--I remember loving the logic of those Catholic gay teenagers. I was glad to read more about that world, and a lot of the pop cultural references were hysterically funny. ("Take Reagan, or Stallone in 2012." Puts Reagan in his place!) I didn't think the female characters were less real, though in retrospect it's true that they're more cool and collected. I did notice that although we saw a lot of gay male culture there weren't any lesbians, and the "gay area of town" seemed pretty male too. As to the immorality of the ending--it didn't strike me so much that way, perhaps because Calerant was dead and Stonewall (and that was an amusing name!) had in fact killed two people. Sure, Calerant was a little round the twist by the end. But what punishment should he have received? I can absolutely believe that to expose him would have been to give him the sort of publicity he'd have loved, even if it meant his goals were accomplished. Mind you, I didn't for one minute believe that all the religious rioting would have died down--a nation of conspiracy theorists calmed by plain old proof? I don't think so. --jessie ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 14:40:22 -0400 From: Kirsten Hoyte Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] Gumshoe, late as usual [SPOILERS] To: feministsf-lit@UIC.EDU feministsf-lit@UIC.EDU writes: >As to the immorality of the ending--it didn't strike me so much that >way, perhaps because Calerant was dead and Stonewall (and that was an >amusing name!) had in fact killed two people. Sure, Calerant was a >little round the twist by the end. But what punishment should he have >received? I can absolutely believe that to expose him would have been to >give him the sort of publicity he'd have loved, even if it meant his >goals were accomplished. I think it does get dicey because although Stonewall was clearly the biggest "bad guy," Calerant did kill the schoolteacher-pagan (Roberta Stevens) who he blamed for not coming forward with the evidence despite the fact that she had left Stonewall's employment (perhaps in disillusionment; perhaps in fear). Although he "forgave her". He also was responsible however indirectly for the violence stemming from the panic he caused. Kirsten