Subject: [*FSF-L*] Louise Marley Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 09:52:58 -0800 From: Maryelizabeth Hart To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I confess, I haven't read TERRORISTS yet. I did read, and really liked, SING THE LIGHT, which I thought was a particularly strong first novel. Louise is visiting San Diego in a month or so, so maybe with the BDG comments, I'll get a chance to read TERRORISTS before she gets here. :) Maryelizabeth -- ******************************************************************* Mysterious Galaxy Books Local Phone: 858.268.4747 7051 Clairemont Mesa Blvd, Suite 302 Fax: 858.268.4775 San Diego, CA 92111 Long Distance/Orders: 1.800.811.4747 http://www.mystgalaxy.com General Email: mgbooks@mystgalaxy.com ******************************************************************* ========================================================================= Subject: [*FSF-L*] BDG: The Terrorists of Irustan Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 21:30:29 -0800 From: Sharon Anderson To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU About a month or so ago, Oprah had a show which was devoted to atrocities around the world, like genital mutilation and throwing acid in the faces of wives who displease their husbands. It got big press. There was a website which was devoted to this issue. The website had been up for months, gaining little attention and less money. The day after the Oprah show, it had more traffic and donations than it could handle. During one of my regular visits to my doctor, I happened to mention the Oprah incident, and how truly terrifying such ignorance is. My doctor, who is a woman, said something that blew me right out of the water. She remarked that it had been going on for centuries, and people in those countries don't know how awful it is. "The women know," I argued. "No, they don't. Not really." My first reaction to both these incidents was to wonder how anyone could possibly graduate from high school in one of our so-called first-world countries and remain ignorant of this sort of thing. Did this ignorance anger you as much as it did me? And, of course, it is rage that provides the whole motivation for what happens in the book. There is a passage early on in Marley's book where one of the Port Force Longshoremen, gossiping, remarks how bizarrely the men of Irustan treat their women. Jin-Li comments that the women on Irustan live much as they did on Earth before they left it. Jin-Li makes the remark casually, in conversation. It is said before we know that Jin-Li is passing. What did you think when you realized that not even Jin-Li could or would really understand what was really happening on Irustan? What did you think of Zahra's final decision? And, of course, there are all the usual questions: Who was your favorite character? What was your favorite moment? Was the writing to your taste, or full of sand? Consider discussion now open. ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] Louise Marley Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 01:43:25 -0800 From: Joyce Jones To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Maryelizabeth wrote: "I confess, I haven't read TERRORISTS yet. I did read, and really liked, SING THE LIGHT, which I thought was a particularly strong first novel. Louise is visiting San Diego in a month or so, so maybe with the BDG comments, I'll get a chance to read TERRORISTS before she gets here." This book is such a quick read you'll zip through it. The style is not the drawing point. Unlike Nights at the Circus there are no passages you'll roll around on your tongue or in your mind in delight at the construction. The plot is the grabber here. Once you start it you won't want to stop. I liked it so much I went right on to The Glass Harmonica. I think the Sing the Light trilogy is next. Joyce ========================================================================= Subject: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 03:11:47 -0800 From: Joyce Jones To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Discussion is pretty slow on this book. Someone asked what we thought of Jin-Li's statement that the women of Irustan live much as they did on earth as if that meant she didn't realize how restricted their lives were. I think she might not have been aware of the totality of restrictions, but coming from the life she had on earth, she knew how restricted women's lives could always be. Yes, Jin-Li could use a phone, but would she have been willing to travel unescorted as a female on earth? Don't most of us have some fear of traveling unescorted at night in the city? That's what it is to be a woman. If the laws don't keep us in our homes, the society does its best to comply informally. I think that's what people in Jordan say about crimes of honor in which male family members murder women for sexually dishonoring their families. There are no formal laws providing for this. It's just the custom that allows them to go nearly unpunished. One thing that I loved about the book was Zahra's deep moral sense. She was very reluctant to kill even the despotic men that she did. Murder to her was not just something she would be punished for, it was crossing a moral line. An example of this is the very realistically drawn scene of her visit to the city to kill Binya Maris. She knew that in her guise as a prostitute she might actually have to have sex with him. She didn't want to, she'd planned her best to avoid it, but she was willing to accept the possibility as the price she had to pay to further her goals. Many women, if I'm correct, have been canonized because they died rather than giving up their sexual purity. Zahra valued her body and her personhood, but life to her was more important than transitory defilement. Contrast this with the priest in The Sparrow going crazy because he was raped. The fact that her individually reasoned morality came from within while his came from the teachings of a church made her the stronger person. Another thing that kept me thinking about Terrorists was the complex relationship between Zahra and her husband. He was good to her, the benevolent dictator that christianity honors in a marriage, but she did not love him in any sexual way. She was rather determined not to love him in that way. Since she had been given to him, she was not going to voluntarily give of herself. Yet she knew that he would be the one punished for her crimes. If she saved herself, he would die for her political statement. She was not willing to let him die partly because she respected him, partly because, valuing life as she did, she was not willing to be the cause of the death of a good (though ignorant) man, and partly because she was not willing to be the cause of individual deaths for individual reasons. Her whole goal was revolution which could be accomplished only by her taking responsibility for her actions. Octavia Butler would have had her compromise and live while the female population remained enslaved until aliens rescued them. I liked her heroism as I like the idea that individual heroism can change society. Lastly, I really liked her death. It was so "Brazil". I think death in the cells would be like that rather than the agony that the Irustani threatened. Having witnessed a few deaths, they have seemed to be transcendent positive experiences for the dying person. Any book with good birth scenes and/or good death scenes, like Conqueror's Child, gets my money every time. Oh no, one more last thing. Didn't you love the medicator? I could really use one of those. Joyce ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 09:45:34 EST From: Phoebe Wray To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 3/10/01 6:12:31 AM, hoop5@LVCM.COM writes: << Another thing that kept me thinking about Terrorists was the complex relationship between Zahra and her husband. He was good to her, the benevolent dictator that christianity honors in a marriage, but she did not love him in any sexual way. >> I agree with Joyce on this. The complicated relationship between them was nicely drawn, I thought. The time that she had sex with him out of feelings of gratitude and appreciation for his better self seemed exactly right to me. best, phoebe wray ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 11:13:21 -0500 From: "Deborah A. Oosterhouse" To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU One of the things that I liked about Terrorists was the variety of complex relationships. There were so many different characters who had different ways of responding in their situations. Even among Zahra and her friends, there were different responses to, for example, their husbands--Zahra's relationship with her husband was very different from her friends who were married to more cruel men (like the guy who wanted to marry his daughter to a man who had already beaten two wives to death) and different again from the one who was married to a very good man and genuinely loved him. However, I think even this latter case can be considered representative of the tragedy of their society--she ended up with a caring, loving husband mostly through chance, she got lucky, rather than through any belief that women should be respected as persons. A woman's safety and happiness, especially in her own home, shouldn't depend on being lucky enough to have been married to a decent man. I also liked the rather hopeful note on which the book ended. Although recognizing that problems will still exist and they have a long struggle ahead of them, the women take the first steps in freeing themselves. It was also very cool that Zahra's husband finally came to realize the problems of their society and what Zahra had been trying to do. Deborah ========================================================================= Subject: [*FSF-L*] BDG: The Terrorists of Irustan Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 16:17:03 -0600 From: "Janice E. Dawley" To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I finished *The Terrorists of Irustan* yesterday. Like Joyce, I breezed through it. It was a quick, gripping read. The alliances and emotional connections between women were the highlight of the book for me. Zahra's mentoring relationship with Ishi; her protective anguish over the women brought, battered and bleeding, into her surgery; her Doma day gatherings with her longtime friends and the clandestine meetings she arranged at need. I liked how these elements not only illuminated the lives of women on Irustan, but were the building blocks of the plot as well, leading to the revolutionary climax. Men, though impinging on the lives of the women, were not the emotional focus of the book. I might have felt differently about this if I hadn't known from the beginning that Jin-Li was a woman (serves me right for reading spoilers), but I'm glad that there wasn't a heterosexual romance in the book. And I was very moved that as she was dying, Zahra saw neither her husband *nor* Jin-Li, but was embraced by the loving arms of her teacher Nura. An ultimate love that isn't romantic and isn't parental -- amazing! I liked Zahra very much. She was an intelligent and moral person, but no superwoman. The descriptions throughout the novel of her psychological response to her actions -- alternating giddiness, numbness, and exhaustion -- were very well done. And, as others hhave said, her responses to Qadir were complex and convincing. I winced whenever he called her to his room, but she reacted in a practical way that avoided making a scene but still preserved her dignity. She would have sex, but not pretend to like it. The fact that Qadir never seemed to notice her lack of interest made me feel ill. I really didn't like him. It's true that he didn't beat Zahra, and that within certain bounds he genuinely seemed to care for her, but the ease with which he could stop listening and "put his foot down" made it clear that he was fundamentally just another oppressive patriarch. I'm one who found his turnaround at the end implausible, not just on a character level, but on a societal level as well. How could he take a jackhammer to the bedrock of his society and remain in his position as director? And if he could do it after Zahra's death, why couldn't he have done it *before* and saved her life? Not that I would have wanted to cut Zahra's death scene -- like Joyce, I found it a very powerful moment. I just wonder if it was really necessary to the plot. Jin-Li seemed like a Maureen McHugh character. I liked her brisk, competent personality and enjoyed the romantic tension between her and Zahra. However, I was bothered by the author's trick of letting readers assume she was male, pronouns cleverly withheld until the revelation, then blithely used for the rest of the story. Having been "spoiled" beforehand, I wasn't tricked, but on principle I object. And, as the book came to an end, Jin- Li's plot line just fizzled, leaving me wondering what the overall point was. An example to Zahra of how different women can be outside the constraints of Irustani culture? Or how much they have in common? Near the end of the book, Jin-Li said, "Irustan, Hong Kong -- it's all the same," but I find the parallel questionable at best. It was my impression that back in Hong Kong, Jin-Li was constrained mostly by her family's poverty, not by her sex. She did say that the streets were more dangerous for women than men, but fear of crime is *not* the same as being officially viewed as a non-person by the state, denied mobility and even the right to speak. I don't know whether to think that Jin-Li is very naive, or so in love that she's not thinking straight... or that the author wasn't quite sure what to do with her. I liked her. I just wished she had been integrated into the overall story a bit better. My biggest concern about the book was the representation of Islam. Since the book is so transparently based on fanatical sects like The Taliban, I was left wondering how much research the author had actually done on Islam. The take on the veils, for example, seemed a particularly Western one -- that they are a denial of personhood and freedom, rather than shields or equalizers of women. Contrast the character of Katmer Al-Shei in Sarah Zettel's *Fool's War*, who, though a star-ship captain, still wears a hijab veil and prays to Allah twice a day. Of course, Al-Shei's future version of Islam is much less strict than the one on Irustan -- to some extent she can pick and choose what elements of tradition she will observe. But the contrast in representations still gives me the feeling that Marley is making some negative assumptions about Islam that happen to support her argument. I think it would have been really interesting if the character of Jin-Li had also been a Muslim, perhaps of a much more relaxed variety -- that way we could have gotten a more rounded view on a religion that is commonly misunderstood by insular, largely Christian, Americans. Still and all, I enjoyed the book and am happy to have read it. It didn't say anything particularly new to me, but it did take on a serious subject with admirable gravity. The other day I found the author's web site (http://www.sff.net/people/LMarley/) and learned that she is an opera singer and that all of her other novels have focused on music to some extent. I wonder what prompted her to write this one? ----- Janice E. Dawley.....Burlington, VT Feminist SF Posting Archive at: http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/femsf-index.htm Listening to: Gomez -- Liquid Skin "...the public and the private worlds are inseparably connected; the tyrannies and servilities of the one are the tyrannies and servilities of the other." Virginia Woolf, Three Guineas ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG: The Terrorists of Irustan Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 19:54:44 -0500 From: "Deborah A. Oosterhouse" To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Janice E. Dawley wrote: > I finished *The Terrorists of Irustan* yesterday. Like Joyce, I breezed > through it. It was a quick, gripping read. > > The alliances and emotional connections between women were the highlight of > the book for me. Zahra's mentoring relationship with Ishi; her protective > anguish over the women brought, battered and bleeding, into her surgery; > her Doma day gatherings with her longtime friends and the clandestine > meetings she arranged at need. I liked how these elements not only > illuminated the lives of women on Irustan, but were the building blocks of > the plot as well, leading to the revolutionary climax. Men, though > impinging on the lives of the women, were not the emotional focus of the > book. I might have felt differently about this if I hadn't known from the > beginning that Jin-Li was a woman (serves me right for reading spoilers), > but I'm glad that there wasn't a heterosexual romance in the book. And I > was very moved that as she was dying, Zahra saw neither her husband *nor* > Jin-Li, but was embraced by the loving arms of her teacher Nura. An > ultimate love that isn't romantic and isn't parental -- amazing! I don't think I would agree completely that the relationship between Nura and Zahra was not parental, at least in some respect. There isn't really a whole lot of information presented on their relationship because Nura is already dead by the time the events of *Terrorists* take place. However, if one extrapolates from the relationship between Zahra and Ishi, Zahra probably came to live with Nura at a very young age and became a surrogate child to her during her medical training. I can't remember if there was any information in *Terrorists* about Zahra's birth mother. On the other hand, I would agree that the various relationships among the women were definitely a highlight of the book and one of the things I enjoyed most about it. > > The fact that Qadir never seemed to notice her lack of interest made me > feel ill. I really didn't like him. It's true that he didn't beat Zahra, > and that within certain bounds he genuinely seemed to care for her, but the > ease with which he could stop listening and "put his foot down" made it > clear that he was fundamentally just another oppressive patriarch. I'm one > who found his turnaround at the end implausible, not just on a character > level, but on a societal level as well. How could he take a jackhammer to > the bedrock of his society and remain in his position as director? And if > he could do it after Zahra's death, why couldn't he have done it *before* > and saved her life? Not that I would have wanted to cut Zahra's death > scene -- like Joyce, I found it a very powerful moment. I just wonder if it > was really necessary to the plot. I think I found Qadir's "conversion" plausible simply because he could think both ways. Others of the men, such as his secretary who wanted to marry Ishi (can't remember his name), could be ONLY oppressive patriarchs and couldn't appreciate any sign of intelligence or strength in a woman. I think Zahra's death was necessary to the plot because it is the most obvious way to show commitment to something that one believes is important--she was willing to own up to what she did and take the punishment that was meted out to her. Her death galvanized the women who came to mourn her, as well as Qadir. > > My biggest concern about the book was the representation of Islam. Since > the book is so transparently based on fanatical sects like The Taliban, I > was left wondering how much research the author had actually done on Islam. > The take on the veils, for example, seemed a particularly Western one -- > that they are a denial of personhood and freedom, rather than shields or > equalizers of women. Contrast the character of Katmer Al-Shei in Sarah > Zettel's *Fool's War*, who, though a star-ship captain, still wears a hijab > veil and prays to Allah twice a day. Of course, Al-Shei's future version of > Islam is much less strict than the one on Irustan -- to some extent she can > pick and choose what elements of tradition she will observe. But the > contrast in representations still gives me the feeling that Marley is > making some negative assumptions about Islam that happen to support her > argument. I think it would have been really interesting if the character > of Jin-Li had also been a Muslim, perhaps of a much more relaxed variety -- > that way we could have gotten a more rounded view on a religion that is > commonly misunderstood by insular, largely Christian, Americans. I was also uncomfortable with this aspect of the book. It sort of bothered me that Marley is of European descent and no mention was made of any sort of research into or experience with Middle Eastern cultures or religions. All of the men in the book seemed to buy into the same beliefs to greater or lesser extent--even Zahra's assistant (whose name I can't remember either) who was excluded from most male privilege because of his deformed leg. He saw more value in women than most of the other men, but largely because he was closer to them on the social ladder. Deborah ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG: The Terrorists of Irustan Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 17:57:11 -0800 From: Laura Quilter To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU as always, janice does an excellent job of discussing the material ... a couple of responses i had below. On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Janice E. Dawley wrote: > I finished *The Terrorists of Irustan* yesterday. Like Joyce, I breezed > through it. It was a quick, gripping read. > > I liked Zahra very much. She was an intelligent and moral person, but no > superwoman. The descriptions throughout the novel of her psychological > response to her actions -- alternating giddiness, numbness, and exhaustion - > - was very well done. And, as others have said, her responses to Qadir were > complex and convincing. I winced whenever he called her to his room, but > she reacted in a practical way that avoided making a scene but still > preserved her dignity. She would have sex, but not pretend to like it. > > The fact that Qadir never seemed to notice her lack of interest made me > feel ill. I really didn't like him. It's true that he didn't beat Zahra, > and that within certain bounds he genuinely seemed to care for her, but the > ease with which he could stop listening and "put his foot down" made it > clear that he was fundamentally just another oppressive patriarch. I'm one > who found his turnaround at the end implausible, not just on a character > level, but on a societal level as well. How could he take a jackhammer to > the bedrock of his society and remain in his position as director? And if > he could do it after Zahra's death, why couldn't he have done it *before* > and saved her life? Not that I would have wanted to cut Zahra's death > scene -- like Joyce, I found it a very powerful moment. I just wonder if it > was really necessary to the plot. i actually found Qadir to be rather believable -- at least until his conversion. i think he was intended to exemplify the liberal male in a patriarchal society. we've all known them: the sensitive guys who are still complicit and do not fully reject their gender privilege. one doesn't want to call them sexist -- no, no, he's not sexist, that's just the way he is -- but at the same time "the way he is" is that way because of gender privilege, yes? Qadir is that same pattern, in a different society. the novel was rather slim. that's not a fault, but at the same time, the length made it harder to include as much depth as one might like. so, as far as i could tell, we had about two types of men. one: the full patriarchal abuser. two: the sensitive guy (who nonetheless benefits and does not fully reject the patriarchal norms). > Jin-Li seemed like a Maureen McHugh character. I liked her brisk, competent excellent observation. > My biggest concern about the book was the representation of Islam. Since > the book is so transparently based on fanatical sects like The Taliban, I > was left wondering how much research the author had actually done on Islam. yes, and yes to the comments below as well. there is always that risk i think when one seeks to criticize elements of someone else's culture. are we critiquing it unfairly because we don't fully understand it? because we don't get it? racist? on the other hand, as an ardent secularist / atheist, i feel free to critique the religion in which i was raised. and yes i do critique other religions & cultural traditions, and religions on general. but when you're critiquing someone else's stuff, i think it has to be done very consciously, and very carefully. i would love to hear from someone with an Islamic background & get their perspective on it. that said, i don't think Marley did a bad job. i think that yeah it does have some of the same feel as Tepper's work: a strong, relevant, useful, important -- but *simple* -- critique of those elements of the judeo-christian-islamic religious tradition that particularly affront a western feminist's eye. > The take on the veils, for example, seemed a particularly Western one -- > that they are a denial of personhood and freedom, rather than shields or > equalizers of women. Contrast the character of Katmer Al-Shei in Sarah > Zettel's *Fool's War*, who, though a star-ship captain, still wears a hijab > veil and prays to Allah twice a day. Of course, Al-Shei's future version of > Islam is much less strict than the one on Irustan -- to some extent she can the contrast with FOOL'S WAR is a nice one. what i noticed in FW, however, was an absence of gender-oriented critique. so Islam played a very different role in that book. i'm not sure what role. i have no idea, for instance, if zettel has an Islamic background or not, but the use of an Islamic character was a nice bit of "exoticization" for Western sf readers, right? there is a similar question that can be raised with both marley & zettel: what function does Islam play in the novel in creating a sense of "otherness" for a sf readership that is historically judeo-christian? i think that Islam is in marley's work BECAUSE in part it is "other," either for the author or the readership or both. and although i don't know zettel's intention in FOOL'S WAR, i suspect that at least one impact it had on this mainstream Anglo audience was to exoticize the character. we haven't seen a lot of sf that does a good job with religion, period. and we certainly haven't seen the sf that does a good job with religion & gender, in my opinion. but at least we're seeing sf that is getting there. that's what marley & zettel & tepper have been doing, i think: getting there. but i would suggest they're not there yet. > pick and choose what elements of tradition she will observe. But the > contrast in representations still gives me the feeling that Marley is > making some negative assumptions about Islam that happen to support her > argument. I think it would have been really interesting if the character > of Jin-Li had also been a Muslim, perhaps of a much more relaxed variety -- > that way we could have gotten a more rounded view on a religion that is > commonly misunderstood by insular, largely Christian, Americans. Laura Quilter ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG: The Terrorists of Irustan Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 02:42:06 EST From: Phoebe Wray To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 3/17/01 8:57:35 PM, Janice E. Dawley wrote: << > My biggest concern about the book was the representation of Islam. Since > the book is so transparently based on fanatical sects like The Taliban, I > was left wondering how much research the author had actually done on Islam. >> I didn't have a problem with this. She wasn't discussing Islam, just one aspect of it -- the Taliban. I didn't think she had an obligation to water that down by showing other kinds of Islamic beliefs. There are still people out there who don't know what the Taliban is, so I say more power to her for her focus. best, phoebe w ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 07:40:05 -0800 From: Allyson Shaw To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Hello all-- I want to thank whoever recommended this book. I really enjoyed it-- was spell bound, as others were. The complex relationships, as others pointed out, were the most fascinating aspects of the novel for me. The character of Jin-Li was a wonderful "in" for the western woman reader in that we could see "both sides" (the boy's club of power we supposedly have access to, as well as gender oppression) and empathize with the dissonance of being treated "equal" (I'm using this word ironically) with men, while women around us (in the world in other communities, etc.) are oppressed more severely or in other ways. I also thought the use of quotes in front of the chapters was effective at paralleling how the capitalist Port Force controlled Jin-Li's life, and Fundamentalism controlled the women of Irustan. In both cases their gender was used to silence and control them. I think it makes an argument that here in the US (though the Christian fundamentalists hold a scary amount of sway, especially with the current administration.) people often claim moral high ground and point to Saudi Arabia, etc. for gender oppression, congratulating the US for being so far ahead in women's issues. But this book seemed to argue, to me, that capitalism has it's own doctrines which are as "fundamentalist" as any religious doctrine. I wanted to respond to something Joyce wrote: > Lastly, I really liked her death. It was so "Brazil". I think death in the > cells would be like that rather than the agony that the Irustani threatened. > Having witnessed a few deaths, they have seemed to be transcendent positive > experiences for the dying person. Any book with good birth scenes and/or > good death scenes, like Conqueror's Child, gets my money every time. I agree that the death was well written, but I have to say deep inside I was hoping she would not be martyred, and I was in suspense the whole time, even as she was dying-- I was hoping for a last minute rescue. I think that says more about me than any fault of the book-- and more about why I read. I just finished reading The Binding Chair by Kathryn Harrison and SPOILER----!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! * * * * I was so upset by the character's death at the end-- a 19th century novel kind of death-- when a woman breaks the mold she must die so order can be restored. So reading the Harrison novel so disappointed me, I wasn't ready for another death, though the deaths in both books were so different. I wanted the romance between Jin-Li and Zahra to flourish, I wanted them to find some amazing outpost of women and live and fight. But that would have been a different book completely, a weaker book probably. --Allyson -- Die Cast Garden: http://www.diecastgaarden.org A Weekly Sestina: http://www.diecastgarden.org/weeklysestina/index.html Editor's Picks at Web Del Sol: http://webdelsol.com/f-epicks.htm English 1 Home Page: http://www3.lbcc.cc.ca.us/coursepages/eng1as ========================================================================= Subject: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:14:39 -0800 From: Joyce Jones To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Great discussion recently. I can understand that one would be concerned about a possible anti-Muslim stance of Terrorists. I do think it is anti-Taliban rather than anti-Muslim, but I have to confess, I wouldn't be too concerned if it were anti-Muslim. As Laura mentions, Sheri Tepper writes anti fundamentalist Christian novels that have the same bent. Should all Christians be offended by them? Maybe, maybe not. I think that patriarchal religions, no matter how delicate they might seem, are the antithesis of feminism. It seems to me a woman would have to compartmentalize differing beliefs to accept both. I like Allyson's statement regarding the quotations from the Offworld Port Force Terms of Employment: "But this book seemed to argue, to me, that capitalism has it's own doctrines which are as "fundamentalist" as any religious doctrine." Right. Do you think Marley was trying to show that the anti-woman stance of the Irustani was the same as the inhumane stance of the Port Force Authority? Under capitalism humans don't matter, profits do. How do we achieve maximum profits? There has to be some way to have the workers under complete control -- a strong motivational drug works. Didn't Marx say religion was the opiate of the masses? (Does the idea of faith based initiatives come in here?) Maybe this wasn't an anti-Taliban book. Maybe it's an anti World Trade Organization novel. Oh, oh, better watch out who sees you buy it. Joyce ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:09:43 EST From: Phoebe Wray To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 3/21/01 3:17:06 AM, hoop5@LVCM.COM writes: << Maybe this wasn't an anti-Taliban book. Maybe it's an anti World Trade Organization novel. Oh, oh, better watch out who sees you buy it. >> heh heh... Anti-Taliban certainly. Anti-Islam? A fiction writer isn't under an obligation to be *fair*. best, phoebe w ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 09:28:03 -0800 From: Kristina Solheim To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU At 11:13 AM 3/11/2001 -0500, Deborah wrote: >I also liked the rather hopeful note on which the book ended. Although >recognizing that problems will still exist and they have a long struggle >ahead of them, the women take the first steps in freeing themselves. It was >also very cool that Zahra's husband finally came to realize the problems of >their society and what Zahra had been trying to do. This is exactly what made me not like Terrorists of Irustan. It was like a sitcom trying to delve into a serious issue and trying to tie it all up prettily in thirty minutes. I wish Marley had taken the situation in Afghanistan more seriously in the novel. It is such a terrible situation, I wish she hadn't ended it the way she did. It's like using "magic" or some other literary device to overcome a situation you are uncomfortable in. Maybe I'm the only one on this list that didn't like the book because of the ending. I think it's great that we can get books like this one published, but I think Marley fell under the spell of fantasy (like Tepper in _The Fresco_ or _Gibbon's Decline and Fall_) and "solved" this issue simply (in my opinion, betraying her characters' natures) instead of really tackling it and finding ways to make a difference (like education) in real life. I went on to read _The Glass Harmonica_ and didn't find a lot of meaning in that one either. Just a love story with a historical twist. ciao! Kristina ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:52:52 EST From: Phoebe Wray To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU In a message dated 3/26/01 12:28:32 PM, solheimk@STANFORD.EDU writes: << Maybe I'm the only one on this list that didn't like the book because of the ending. >> I was disappointed in the ending. I didn't believe it, and it felt like a cop-out. Yes, there was a kind of thrill when the women unveiled -- challenged the status quo, but I didn't accept the idea that a real revolution had begun. best, phoebe w ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists Of Irustan Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:58:52 -0800 From: Kristina Solheim To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU At 12:52 PM 3/26/2001 -0500, Phoebe wrote: >I was disappointed in the ending. I didn't believe it, and it felt like a >cop-out. EXACTLY! Cop-out is the perfect word for how betrayed I felt as a reader. Her characters were so lovingly complex and interesting for the most part. But the conversion of her husband's character into thinking this very liberal viewpoint was unbelievable. I think, when we create science fiction, we need to make it believable and draw upon real accounts of this kind of oppression to show the reader that these horrible things are ongoing and need to be addressed. Men who grow up being indoctrinated into that kind of society wouldn't be very quick to change their ways. Try arguing anything with a fundamentalist Christian. The religion has all the "answers" built right in. There's no way for them to step outside the box and see with other eyes. I was struck by a comment by another listmember earlier when she said that even in America we women do not feel safe walking around unescorted. I had thought that the situation in Afghanistan is such a localized occurrence of oppression and that we in America are so much more enlightened and wise. Boy was I wrong! Though we are a little further down the evolutionary ladder, we are still required to "veil" ourselves, get a male escort to go out of doors, and are discouraged from working in "male" jobs. Thank you, whichever of you mentioned that. ciao! Kristina ========================================================================= Subject: Re: [*FSF-L*] BDG Dress (from Terrorists of I) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 13:19:27 -0600 From: Robin Reid To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU >I was struck by a comment by another listmember earlier when she said that >even in America we women do not feel safe walking around unescorted. I had >thought that the situation in Afghanistan is such a localized occurrence of >oppression and that we in America are so much more enlightened and >wise. Boy was I wrong! Though we are a little further down the >evolutionary ladder, we are still required to "veil" ourselves, get a male >escort to go out of doors, and are discouraged from working in "male" >jobs. Thank you, whichever of you mentioned that. > >ciao! >Kristina Not to mention the fact that Arab and Arab-American feminists have written about mainstream American's (mostly but not solely white) feminists' tendency to see the veils and other dress requirements as "oppressive" while seeing their own dress choices as "free" and signifying individual choice. To paraphrase (it's been a few years since I read these essays, so I'm vastly oversimplifying, but I found reading them an enlightening experience), an outsider might look at American women and say: oh these poor women, forced to bare their legs in public, to wear tight clothes that reveal their body to men, to have to wear makeup (and remember, some women have been fired from some jobs for refusing to wear makeup) and "style" their hair, to always be on public view and to be seen by men as sexual objects. This perspective, aligned with rape statistics in America, casts doubt on the easy idea that "American women" are free while women in other cultures are oppressed. So, has anybody done an analysis of how women characters in sf dress? As Deborah Tannen wrote in an excellent op-ed piece once, no matter how a woman dresses she is "marked," that is, her attire is "read" for meanings regarding her sexual identity, status, availability, etc. And since I've gotten tenure, I wear panty hose a LOT less often! Robin ========================================================================= Subject: [*FSF-L*] BDG Terrorists of Irustan Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 12:08:24 -0700 From: Joyce Jones To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU I was surprised that some of you thought the "happy" ending of Terrorists meant that the gender apartheid was fixed and women and men would live happily ever after. I didn't think this at all. I saw the women's removing their veils as the fist big public step taken in a movement toward gaining their freedom. I don't think the scene meant that their freedom had been accomplished. In fact I think it likely that some of the women who bravely stood up for themselves might well have been beaten for it later. Private steps lead to public steps but it take many more than one to accomplish a revolution. How many times did Gandhi have to fast, how many marches did he have to lead before the Brits left India to Indian rule? How many sit ins and marches did it take before integration was accomplished in the US? How many demonstrations has it taken to get the equal rights amendment passed? Demonstrate though we may in large and small ways, it's still not here. I saw the book chronically a beginning of a movement, not an end. I saw Qadir as a man who had thought himself benevolent and cultured and had his eyes opened by his wife's willingness to sacrifice herself for freedom. Yes, I do think such things can happen, but they don't start on a large scale. He was one man, as the struggle went on more would follow. The ending was a beginning, and I don't think it any more irrational than any beginning of a revolution. Joyce