aka The Knights Who say Ni Award
In today’s roundup: Vox Day, Lindsay Duncan, Laura “Tegan” Gjovaag, David Gerrold, Sara Amis, Dave Freer, Chris Gerrib, Lisa J. Goldstein, Lis Carey, Rebekah Golden, Russell Blackford, Camestros Felapton, Mabrick, Will McLean, Alexandra Erin and cryptic others. (Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editors of the day sveinung and ULTRAGOTHA.)
Vox Day on Vox Popoli
“In the SF world rages a war” – June 3
[The translation of an article in Finland’s largest newspaper profiling Markku Koponen and Castalia House.]
IN THE SCI-FI WORLD OF USA RAGES A WAR, IN WHICH EVEN THE GAME OF THRONES AUTHOR IS ENTANGLED WITH – AND IN THE EPICENTER OF IT ALL IS THIS KOUVOLA MAN
Sci-fi literature enthusiasts in USA are in civil war. A conservative mutiny is trying to push out of bestseller lists and awards the mainstream, “tolerant” sci-fi. The battle is already being called culture wars – and one of the headquarters is located in Finland.
There is a man in Kouvola, and before the man, a computer.
Together, the man and the computer are in the front lines of a battle that is shaking the entire world of sci-fi literature.
The man and the computer were revealed to the world, spring this year.
At the time was published “the Oscars of sci-fi books” – Hugo-awards – nominees.
The entire sci-fi world roared: lists were full of works by religious extremists and ultraconservatives.
The surprise was so big that even The New York Times and Washington Post wrote about it.
And behind the entire surprise were a man and a computer in Kouvola.
The name of the man is Markku Koponen, and on the computer runs a company called Castalia House.
Lindsay Duncan on Unicorn Ramblings
“Tuesday Thoughts” – June 3
Behind all this kerfluffle is a tension between the idea that the quality of fiction, like all art, is subjective; and the action of presenting an award, which gives the veneer of some objective quality. Let’s add one more statement to the narrative: diversity is a good thing and necessary in a genre that builds upon possibilities, but we don’t want to set up a forced, artificial diversity. (Already, you can see the questions bubbling up.) What am I thinking of when I say “artificial” diversity? It’s when a work rises to the top not because of merit, but because its author or subject matter checks a particular box. It would be like saying that every novel awards slate has to include one urban fantasy, two epic fantasies, one hard science fiction novel and one soft science fiction novel … even if there were three amazing soft SF books that year.
SF Signal
“MIND MELD: Genre Awards: What are They Good for Anyway?” – June 3
[Bradley P. Beaulieu:] I’m saddened by the tactics that were chosen by the various Puppy campaigns to game the Hugos, but I’m confident the award will live on, and I’m hopeful that in the end the voting base for the award will be broadened. After all, as long as everyone is given a fair shake, how can giving a voice to more fans be a bad thing?
Laura “Tegan” Gjovaag on Bloggity-Blog-Blog-Blog
“Oh dear, not the freaking Hugos again…” – June 3
On Facebook, David Gerrold nails the problem with the slate nominations in the Hugo awards. Namely, the people who participated have developed a narrative of “evil liberals” rather than “good works worthy of nomination for the Hugo Award.” Part of the post was also quoted at File770. Of note is the fact that Gerrold has asked these questions repeatedly, and he describes the “answers” he gets from slate-voting puppy-supporters….
…The last question, #6, is a no-brainer. The excellence of the story is the only thing that truly matters. There have been some fantastic works by authors that I wouldn’t want to sit at the same dinner table with. And I’m sure there are awful works by people who completely agree with me on every major political point. Politics are utterly irrelevant to the conversation. Or, at least, they should be.
David Gerrold on Facebook – June 3
As long as we’re still talking about the sad puppies and the rabid puppies, there is one question that has not yet been asked.
Will Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen be attending the Hugo award ceremony? Will Vox Day and John C. Wright be attending the ceremony? What about the other nominees and the various puppy supporters?
I have been told that none of the major architects of the slates have attending memberships. So the answer is no, they will not be there.
(Some of the slated nominees will likely be there, but that’s not the question I’m asking.)
And that causes me to wonder —
Some of the puppy supporters have said this whole thing is about reclaiming “the real science fiction” from those who have hijacked it into the realm of literary merit. (Something like that.)
Okay — but if we take that at face value — then why aren’t the leaders of the movement coming to the award ceremony to cheer for their nominees? If this is really that important, why aren’t they coming to the party?
Not attending the celebration makes it look like this was never about winning the awards as much as it was about disrupting them.
David Gerrold in a comment on Facebook – June 3
I did not know that Brad Torgersen had been deployed. I’m sure he will serve admirably and I expect him to return home safely. I might disagree with him on some things, but I wish him no ill.
Sara Amis on Luna Station Quarterly
“Hugos, Puppies, and Joanna Russ” – June 3
I always intended from the beginning to write about Joanna Russ. How could I not? It just so happens, though, that she is particularly relevant right at this particular moment.
So, there are some shenanigans with this year’s Hugo awards. And by “shenanigans” I mean “cheating” in the finest, most self-righteous, letter-but-not-the-spirit-of-the-law, but-really-we’re-the-good-guys fashion.
“But some white women, and black women, and black men, and other people of color too, have actually acquired the nasty habit of putting the stuff on paper, and some of it gets printed, and printed material, especially books, gets into bookstores, into people’s hands, into libraries, sometimes even into university curricula.
What are we to do?” —-from How to Suppress Women’s Writing by Joanna Russ
I might add, some of it gets nominated for Hugos, and even wins. What are we to do???
Vox Day on Vox Popoli
“Hugo Recommendations: Best Fan Writer” – June 3
This is how I am voting in the Best Fan Writer category. Of course, I merely offer this information regarding my individual ballot for no particular reason at all, and the fact that I have done so should not be confused in any way, shape, or form with a slate or a bloc vote, much less a direct order by the Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil to his 368 Vile Faceless Minions or anyone else.
- Jeffro Johnson
- Dave Freer
- Amanda S. Green
- Cedar Sanderson
- Laura J. Mixon
With regards to Mixon, I still don’t consider a professional writer with five novels published by Tor who also happens to be the current SFWA President’s wife to be what anything remotely recognizable as a proper “Fan Writer”, but that ship sailed back when John Scalzi, Jim Hines, and Kameron Hurley waged their successful campaigns for it. No sense in fighting battles already lost. The more relevant problem is that Best Related Work would be a more reasonable category for a single expose, and Deidre Saorse Moen’s expose of Marion Zimmer Bradley was a considerably more important work in that regard. That being said, I don’t regard the Hugo Awards as being the place to recognize investigative journalism, otherwise I would have nominated Saorse Moen’s stunning revelations about Marion Zimmer Bradley as a Best Related Work. But regardless, Mixon did publish a credible expose and she is a legitimate, if not necessarily compelling candidate.
Dave Freer in comment #58 on the same post at Vox Popoli – June 3
“Freer’s been an ass to me, and incoherent at length to pretty much everybody” sniff. I shall wear this with such pride, just because it comes from Crissy! I am amply rewarded for the time spent pointing out he was mathematically illiterate and logically incompetent.
To be fair to Mixon (I do not approve of her biased reporting, but still) 1)I have 20 novels published. 2) Both Amanda and Cedar are independently published – and both quite successful at it. I suspect they outsell Mixon, who IIRC has day job and a husband to share cost (he also has a day job). Strictly speaking she’s more of a ‘hobbyist’ than any of the three of us. 3) I am not, and never have been married to the pres of SFWA. Neither have Amanda or Cedar or Jeffro. Speaking strictly for myself, I hope to avoid that dreadful fate.
I raised the same objection to my being nominated Vox does on MGC when I was first put on recommended lists and, um, never found out my name was still there. I actually didn’t know I had been nominated (the Hugo Admins didn’t succeed in contacting me) until the nasty messages started popping up telling me I was going to suffer for it and should immediately abase myself. I don’t bully well, so despite the fact I didn’t want to be there, or feel I should be, I still am. Screw them and the donkey they rode into town on (the difference is hard to establish, but the donkey is the more intelligent and prettier).
Jeffro seems a good guy, and I can vouch for Amanda and Cedar.
Chris Gerrib on Private Mars Rocket
“Hugos, Fan Writer, Rant Regarding” – June 3
First, per section 3.3.15 of the WSFS Constitution, Fan Writer (like Best Editor) is an award for the person. It is not, like Best Novel, an award for a particular work. It is thus perfectly acceptable to say “fan writer X is a jerk” and use that as a critique of their nomination.
Actually, it is entirely within the rules to vote based on any criterion, if you want to be a stickler for the rules. Or, people who insist on following the letter of the law do not get to lecture me on the spirit of things.
Second, David Freer is a poor writer, at least with regards to his blog. His posts are lengthy, poorly-thought-out, (see, for example, his 1500 word post on Hugo probabilities, discussed and linked to by me here) and not to me particularly entertaining.
Third, in general the Hugo nominees are asking me and the other voters for a favor. They are asking that we take time out of our day, consider their material, and in the end give one of them an award. I don’t know how things work on Planet Puppy, but here on Earth, if one is asking somebody for a favor, normally the person requesting the favor attempts normal human politeness.
Lisa J. Goldstein on theinferior4
“The Hugo Ballot: All the Rest of the Novels” – June 3
I think the final vote on the novel will come down to what kind of sub-genre people like to read. Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Sword deals with galactic empires and planetary intrigue, but also plays with ideas about gender. The Goblin Emperor by Katherine Addison is charming and elegantly told, a tale of manners in a fantasy setting. Cixin Liu’s The Three-Body Problem dances out on the far edges of scientific speculation. Really, any one of these could win and I’d be happy, but if I had to choose (and I guess I do), for me the best of them is Ancillary Sword.
Lis Carey on Lis Carey’s Library
“Adventures in SciFi Publishing — Best Fancast Hugo Nominee” – June 3
http://www.adventuresinscifipublishing.com/
This is the first of the Hugo-nominated fancasts that I’ve listened to. Briefly — it’s good.
Rebekah Golden
“2015 Hugo Awards Best Movie: Reviewing Edge of Tomorrow” – June 3
Altogether a fun little movie, well handled and nicely plotted. I haven’t watched it, wasn’t planning to, but am happy I did. I will probably rewatch it before I decide how it stacks up against the other movie nominees.
Russell Blackford on Metamagician and The Hellfire Club
“Rest Related Work nominations reviewed & discussed – Hugo Awards Voting” – June 3
Antonelli’s Letters from Gardner seems, from what I’ve read, to be about the author’s development, at a relatively late stage of life, as a well-published author of (mainly) short stories. It includes a considerable amount of Antonelli’s fiction, with much commentary and reflection, and amongst it some perfectly sound advice on the craft of writing. If it were up for a lesser (perhaps regional) award, I’d have no difficulty in voting for it. From what I’ve read, however, I just don’t think the book is good, distinguished, or interesting enough to be worth a Hugo Award. It does not stand up well against past winners. Your mileage may vary. It’s not a bad book, and I’d have happily read the whole thing if it had been provided in the Hugo Voters Packet.
“Why Science is Never Settled”, by Tedd Roberts, is a well-written and thoughtful discussion of its subject matter. It popularises certain ideas in the history and philosophy of science, and does a workmanlike job of it. It was aimed at an SF-reading audience, and it was doubtless of interest to many people within that audience, but it does not seem to me to be sufficiently distinguished or relevant to deserve this award. There is some relationship to science fiction – enough that it would interest many readers who are also SF readers – but it’s a rather tenuous one.
Cirsova
“Hugo Art” – June 3
Fan artist category was rather disappointing; while I don’t want to say that any of these artists are bad, many artists I’ve seen on places like Deviant Art or here on WordPress have impressed me more; I really just don’t feel like many of these are ‘best of the best’ quality in terms of sci-fi art, at least by what I’ve seen. The lone exception is Elizabeth Legget, whose work, while not really blowing me away, is evocative and impressive enough that she easily rises to the top in this category….
In the Professional Artist category, I’d almost say that Julie Dillon wins by virtue of including a much larger portfolio to better display the range of her work….
Lastly, I’d like to note that it’s been interesting to see how the Fan Writer category is playing out. When I think of Fan Writing, I think of Algis Budrys and Baird Searles, who wrote on topic about notable books, movies and television that was relevant to fans of Speculative Fiction. One strange notion I’ve seen floated is that a Fan Writer should be writing ABOUT rather than TO the fandom, yet ironically those Fan Writers who have been writing more about the fandom than to them are paying the price, to an extent, for doing so. I enjoy the Mad Genius Club, but the rants about culture wars type stuff are going to come off to dedicated culture warriors about as well as Ann Coulter telling that Muslim girl to ride a camel. Meanwhile, many of those who don’t find pdfs an inaccessible format (sometimes grudgingly) acknowledge that Jeffro’s kept a laser-like focus on important works of Science-fiction and Fantasy, so we’re starting to see sort of a ‘man, we kind of want to hate this guy, but he’s actually writing about and bringing attention to some great authors!’ reaction. Given Jeffro’s decidedly apolitical approach (not ‘this is conservative/liberal’, ‘this is feminist/anti-feminist’, but ‘this is awesome’) to his subject matter combined with some of the backlash against Mixon (for myriad reasons), I think he has a pretty good shot in this category.
Adult Onset Atheist
“SNARL: Championship B’tok” – June 3
This novelette lacks several of the critical elements that any string of words needs to tie it up into a story; the most glaring of these exposes itself as a regular disregard for continuity. It is impossible to tell if this story is actually a chapter of a larger story, or it is just half-written. I get the impression that this author may be able to wrote, and write stories, but this is not one of them. I will eventually pull out a reasonably good excuse for awarding one whole star to this novelette.
Camestros Felapton
“The Puppy Works – Ranked from Bad to Okness” – June 3
So below the fold is an attempt to rank all the Puppy nominated works (not including dramatic, editorial or artistic) altogether from the worst to the least worst. I’ll spoil the suspense by revealing that “Wisdom From My Internet” not only came top but also provides a neat demonstration why rankings can be inadequate when what you need is some kind of measurement scale.
Mabrick on Mabrick’s Mumblings
“Skin Game A Novel of the Dresden Files Book 15 by Jim Butcher” – June 3
….That was a two paragraph introduction to the review of “Skin Game” by Jim Butcher, for which I am somewhat sorry to inflict upon you, but felt compelled to clarify for them that know of the Hugo Award drama. There are strong feelings on all sides of this issue and some will feel like I have somehow betrayed them by listening to and reviewing this book. Poppycock. Jim Butcher is a New York times best-selling author. He didn’t get there because of the Sad Puppies and he deserves a thoughtful and respectful review of his work just like I’ve done with all the other nominees so far (as part of my Nebula Nominee reviews.) Thinking otherwise is puerile behavior as bad as that exhibited by the Sad Puppies. I don’t believe this applies to all authors and publishing houses on the ballot, for some of them were self-serving in the extreme, but it does apply to Jim Butcher and Tor Books, his publisher.
Will McLean on Commonplace Book
“Nutty Nuggets” – June 2
“What are we looking for again?” said Liu, the technician from Mars Spacefleet.
“Ejecta from Perdita, of course.You saw the images we got from Alaunt. One of what hit Perdita shredded the cargo module and blew debris on a diverging course. The hydrogen tanks were holed too, but we’re not going to waste time looking for hydrogen in space. You have the cargo manifest.” Church, agent for Tranjovian and its insurance agency, was a stubby, thick-lipped, stocky man with heavy eyebrows. Perdita had gone silent on an unmanned low-energy trip to the Jovian moons and Alaunt had found what was left of her hull after a tedious search of her extrapolated course.
“Right.” said Liu, as a document came up on his screen. “Spare parts and luxury goods: single-malt scotch, Napoleon brandy, macadamia nuts and cashews.”
“The liquids will have frozen that far out, so we’ll be looking for nutty nuggets. A pretty unique spectral signature beyond Ceres.” ….
Alexandra Erin on A Blue Author Is About To Write
Sad Puppies Review Books: THE POKY LITTLE PUPPY – June 3
Reviewed by Special Guest Reviewer James May
…Here’s the dividing line and the crucial issue: I don’t care what you do. I don’t care about any of your initiatives. What I care about is it is never expressed without dehumanizing men and whites as racist, women-hating, homophobes who have conspired and continue to conspire to keep everyone but the straight white male out of SFF. That is a lie we have proved with facts over and over again. The history of SFF as portrayed by SJWs is a hoax. It has never been any more exclusionary than Field & Stream.
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
re: the Ancillary books, I actually felt it was MORE strange that no one seems to be leading a revolution against the immortal Lord of the Universe than that there are no real robots.
@Meredith: Are there any Dutch authors of sf/f you’d recommend over Heuvelt?
Charles de Lint was born in the Netherlands, but he grew up in Canada, so I suspect he doesn’t really count. Either way, he’s an excellent urban fantasy author.
Mike
Again, there’s a lot of research going on into erasing memory; one of its most counter-intuitive aspects is that memory isn’t really there to provide a record. It’s there to help the brain predict for the future, and there is evidence that our memories are vulnerable to being re-written every time we access them.
If we can do this now, with our very limited understanding of the brain, then I’m not comfortable in claiming that an advanced culture with much more knowledge wouldn’t be able to do what the Radch do in their future.
Incidentally, had not Athens been Lords of the Sea then we not have their Golden Age. We would not have the works of Aristotle. For one brief moment I thought wistfully of what an improvement this would be, but came down on the side of sanity….
@Gabriel F:
***MAJOR SPOILERS for Ancillary Series***
… But of course there was, it was just herself.
*** End Spoilers ***
The works of Aristotle are important. Much of it has been replaced by better knowledge, but we wouldn’t have that knowledge was still built upon Aristotle. It is time that his logic be put upon the shelf next to his physics.
“There is no evidence that cloning is a generally-available technology in the Radch. In fact, I only know of one person with access to it.”
Besides the obvious one, a tea planter in Sword has access.
Rev. Bob on June 4, 2015 at 5:31 pm said:
Not sure this is true. The LotR certainly has access to it, but there’s at least a persistent rumor that Raughd is a clone. (pg 252 of Sword)
@Will, Scott:
Okay, I’d forgotten her. No evidence that she’s got mind-transfer immortality tech, though, and I wouldn’t be at all shocked to find that her access to cloning is a Special Perk rather than an indication that everybody (or even many of the elites) has it.
From Justice, pg 104:
“I used to wonder how Radchaai reproduced, if they were all the same gender.”
“They’re not. And they reproduce like anyone else.” Strigan raised one skeptical eyebrow. “They go to the medic,” I continued, “and have their contraceptive implants deactivated. Or they use a tank. Or they have surgery so they can carry a pregnancy. Or they hire someone to carry it.”
I read this as “carrying a pregnancy is not limited to biological females.”
And the “use a tank” certainly sounds like it could include cloning.
It’s in no way implied that only that one person has the cloning tech though. No one seems to think there’s anything odd about what she’s doing.
@influxus – that’s more of a civil war. But given the level of unrest and oppression Breq finds, it’s very odd that there’s no organized revolution. Which may be the answer to the “why ancillaries and not robots” question, really. Because once enough revolutionaries are turned into “corpse soldiers,” who wants to be next in line for that?
The Gouda, the Brad and the Pugly
{Slow clap}
Rev. Bob:
“Okay, I’d forgotten her. No evidence that she’s got mind-transfer immortality tech, though, and I wouldn’t be at all shocked to find that her access to cloning is a Special Perk rather than an indication that everybody (or even many of the elites) has it.”
I think the text very strongly implies that the tea planter *doesn’t* have access to mind transfer tech. I was only addressing the question of cloning itself.
Tirechasers Song is pure gold. My wife loled.
Little Shar-Pei of Horrors
Throne of the Chinese Crescent Dog
Sorry, that should have been
Throne of the Chinese Crescent Moon Dog
@May tree:
I’m not quite sure how to respond to this. The interchange between Breq and Strigan plainly points out that the Radch don’t think they stand for oppression or stagnation.
You seem to be saying that the Radch do oppress and are stagnant. I don’t disagree, but I think it is more a product of their structure as a colonial empire than any underlying cultural principals. The Radch, with its fetish for crockery and tea is referentially a colonial empire. Trying to stick either contemporary anglophone forms of conservatism or progressivism as the sole heirs of colonialism misses the complications of its history.
Chris
My daughter’s physics teacher had the most amazing rant about Aristotle; his point was that Aristotle had screwed up big time and set back science for millennia.
He used to stand on his desk, just to make sure everyone in the room was watching, and tear him apart, science wise.
It was great fun! This may correlate with the fact that my daughter is very good at physics and therefore understands why he should go a bit frothy at the mouth when confronted by gibberish…
A tank pregnancy sounds more like letting a viable egg grow out of the womb. Possibly cloned but probably fertilised in vitro.
On the plus side, Radchaai don’t extend their lifespans by harvesting the life forces off the planets they “own.”
I may still be bitter about the 2.5 hours of my life I lost to Jupiter Ascending.
For Nick Mamatas:
Move Under Hound
Under My Woof
Pitbullettime
Love is the Paw
@Gabriel F:
We’re back in head-canon territory, but given that reeducation is an part of the Radch civilising infrastructure I guess I assumed that revolutions and uprisings were part of the background. They just probably aren’t that effective given that the means of intergalactic travel and communication seem to be monopolised by the Radch (within its borders).
Trying to stick either contemporary anglophone forms of conservatism or progressivism as the sole heirs of colonialism misses the complications of its history.
I don’t believe that’s what I was actually doing. How did you come to that conclusion from what I wrote?
I’m talking about value systems — that is, morals. As I said, Haidt’s research is cross-cultural. He’s documented that conservative thinking and value structures crosses cultural borders to the extent that, for example, a strongly conservative individual in the U.S. has more in common, values-wise, with a strongly conservative individual in Brazil than they do with a strongly progressive individual in the U.S., and the same holds true for people with progressive moral values. In the sense of morality, we are more “alike” people from other cultures with a similar political lean than we are “alike” people from our own culture with an opposite political lean.
The point I was trying to make is that the mindset of the Radch heavily emphasizes “Keeping the Radch Pure through absolute Authority and imposed absolute Loyalty” as a moral system. In the Radch Empire, Disloyalty, Insubordination, and Impurity are all seen as evil and destructive and individuals who show those traits are brainwashed, enslaved, or killed. When an annexation is done, any individual expressing any of these traits in the conquered population is shot out of hand. On Shis’urna during the annexation people were shot merely for using a not-quite-respectful-enough tone when addressing a Radchaai, Breq notes. In another example, the Radchaai attitude toward brainwashing is that it’s a valid medical technique that they are willing to use to break addictions (Breq suggests this to Seivarden.) The Radchaai economic system is colonial, and colonialism is not, as far as I know, either conservative or progressive in lean since both attitudes can find things about colonialism that align with their sense of what is “moral” behavior and can thus be used to justify the economic practice.
@RevBob has some of the same thoughts I do, re: robots–I imagine it’s a question of payload. You take a small group to a planet, you take over the smallest area, you make ancillaries out of all of them, you take over the next biggest, and every time somebody dies, as long as it’s not a headshot, your medic ancillary yanks out the implants and shoves them in the next warm body. You can’t do that with robots, you’d need much bigger troop ships until you built up factories, whereas, much like zombies, the more you conquer, the bigger your fighting force until you run out of implants. You never need yo repair an ancillary, you just kill them. A great savings for the interstellar empire on the go, if you’re travelling distances where you don’t want to keep going back to a supply depot.
Also, if I have a robot and you have a computer, there is a chance that eventually YOU have MY robot. Whereas you cannot hack an ancillary once it’s assimilated, without producing a weird screwed up person (see AS) who isn’t one thing or another, and certainly is no longer a useful killing machine. If the Rach is conquering planets with reasonably high tech, maybe they fear the robots could be turned against to them, but the ancillaries can only be destroyed.
@Scott Fraser “Not sure this is true. The LotR certainly has access to it…”
Well, possibly, but we are never told exactly how the orcs are made… …oh, wait. Never mind.
Acronym overload!
>> Tirechaser’s Song >>
Ha! That’s great!
@May tree:
I’m not addressing Haidt, because I haven’t read his work. However, you’ll find that his claims regarding the cross-cultural psychology of conservatism and progressivism are far from uncontroversial.
I think where we are talking past each other is in this respect. I don’t agree that conservatism or progressivism are fundamentally psychological archetypes that can be cross-culturally or cross-historically applied. Or, in this case applied to an analysis of fictional cultural psychology which does not invoke them.
Colonialism and imperialism have historically involved seizing and maintaining power through excessive brutality. I don’t see the Radch as more aligned with “Keeping the Radch Pure through absolute Authority and imposed absolute Loyalty” than any historical empire. So by trying to imply that they are, and that thereby their modes of brutality are aligned with conservative psychology I think you are sticking conservatism with the legacy of colonialism.
We’re back in head-canon territory, but given that reeducation is an part of the Radch civilising infrastructure I guess I assumed that revolutions and uprisings were part of the background. They just probably aren’t that effective given that the means of intergalactic travel and communication seem to be monopolised by the Radch (within its borders).
It’s true, the only uprising we really hear about is the one in AS and it certainly didn’t work. I think shuffling people around from the assimilated home-planet to become the underclass on an older planet probably helps as well.
But on the other hand, look who references Aristotle and his rhetoric all the time.
glenn: I think we can all differentiate between Aristotle and “Aristotle! Rhetoric! [FROTH]!”
Glenn
I was wondering when someone would notice this :)’
I’m not addressing Haidt, because I haven’t read his work. However, you’ll find that his claims regarding the cross-cultural psychology of conservatism and progressivism are far from uncontroversial.
More on the progressive side, though, as Haidt has — I think improperly — characterized conservatives as more “morally nuanced” in that they use all six of his pillars, whereas progressives largely restrict themselves to three. But it’s been pointed out that the values of Authority, Loyalty, and Purity are strong tribal values, not universal values, so his interpretation is questionable.
But I have no problem at all in agreeing that I undoubtedly have more in common in terms of morality with a progressive from another culture than I would with Vox Day, despite he and I both being USians. I don’t think that’s controversial in the slightest.
So by trying to imply that they are, and that thereby their modes of brutality are aligned with conservative psychology I think you are sticking conservatism with the legacy of colonialism.
Er….no. There was a lot of brutality in man’s nature long before colonialism was a thing. It’s not like colonialism causes human beings to become brutal (though it often handsomely rewards them if they are.) The brutality and callousness of the Radch enables their colonialism; it does not arise from their colonialism. The psychology that allows the Radch to justify their colonialism is what I’m interested in here. Colonialism is the symptom, not the disease. The disease is thinking “My way of doing things, which is the way we have always done things, is the only right way to do things, and if you try to change it or even question it, I will destroy you, for you are evil.” That kind of moral logic is not sourced in colonialism. It sources the colonialism. It enables one culture to dominate and exploit another culture on the grounds of “They aren’t doing things right; they are primitive savages, and by forcing them to do things the right way, we are helping them, even if they don’t like it.” It’s paternalism writ large and nasty.
I don’t think its controversial that the world is made up of two kinds of people, the ones who think the world is made up of people that align to the US political spectrum and the ones who don’t.
Yep, right here is where we disagree. I don’t think psychology is the foundational determining force in human history, or at least not the limited form of it describable by moral psychology.
If you want to discuss the role the structure of the human mind plays in shaping politics and economics I think a much richer ground than Ancillary X and a much richer philosophy than what you are ascribing to Haidt is to be found in Watts’ Blindsight (and probably Echopraxia, although that is still on my TBR).
influxus: I don’t think psychology is the foundational determining force in human history
Out of curiosity, what do you see as being the foundational determining force in human history?
I think a much richer ground than Ancillary X and a much richer philosophy than what you are ascribing to Haidt is to be found in Watts’ Blindsight (and probably Echopraxia, although that is still on my TBR).
While I will talk at length about psychosocial systems in fictional novels because it interests me, I draw a very distinct line between made-up systems, which are constructed out of the author’s knowledge and the needs of the narrative, and actual psychological data collected by a trained academic psychologist. It’s odd to me that you refer to Haidt’s theories as a “philosophy” and compare them to fictional philosophies created by non-psychologists, as I don’t think the two can be directly compared at all. While we can argue about Haidt’s interpretations (and I will, if you actually bother to read his work and base your arguments on that instead of …well, whatever you’re basing them on currently) the data is actual data, not background invented to serve a fictional narrative.
And this discussion has somehow wandered far afield from the place it started, which was my attempt to comprehend why the Puppies — who proclaim themselves conservative — might regard the Ancillary books as “message fiction” and “affirmative action fiction” that no one could possibly genuinely enjoy, as literally none of the characterizations I have seen the Puppies make of this work have born any resemblance to the actual work when I got to read it. The “mixed up gender pronouns” authorial conceit doesn’t seem at all sufficient to explain their hatred of Leckie’s work, so I was hypothesizing that they see portrayal of the Radch empire’s values as evil and they regard that as the “message” that they hate so much.
I will repeat what I said the last time something like this came up in these discussions: this isn’t intended to be any kind of PROOF of anything, nor is anyone required to agree with me. This is a thought I had while reading AJ as I was trying to make sense of the Puppy hatred for the gripping, expertly executed work in my hands. When they go after “Dinosaur,” at least the charge of “Not what is typically thought of as SFF” holds a tiny bit of water, as some non-Puppies concur with it. But nothing of what they’ve said about AJ fits the actual book. If you have any thoughts on what exactly self-professed conservatives find so enraging about AJ, that is what I would really like to hear. I’m not interested in debating the validity of Haidt’s work with you, particularly when you haven’t even read it and don’t seem to differentiate actual research from fiction.
@JJ:
I’m pretty convinced there isn’t a singular one. Maybe over the ultra long term you could make a case it will be the four fundamental ones from physics, but that account misses a huge chunk of the good stuff.
@May tree:
The line I am trying to draw with you is between psychosocial systems, both fictional and real ones, and moral psychology. Confusing one with the other is a philosophical position.
I think your speculations about the puppies not liking Ancillary because they identify with the Radch is specious. I think the ones over on MGC will tell you that they don’t like it because of the unbelievability of its gender conceit and that it is grey goo.
the unbelievability of its gender conceit and that it is grey goo.
It doesn’t have a gender conceit; it has a linguistic conceit, which is that Breq uses “she” instead of “he” as the default pronoun when she doesn’t care enough to differentiate between biological males and biological females because her native language doesn’t do that. It’s an interesting way of making Breq more alien while also challenging the reader to consider which of these characters seem “male” or “female” based on Breq’s descriptions of their behavior rather than on her assigning them to one group or the other.
And it’s hardly the point of the book — the book is not about gender in any way. Even if you don’t like the pronoun conceit, why would it cause you to ignore all the other stellar qualities of the book? I tend to be annoyed by the experimental use of hir/kir as a gender-neutral english pronoun because it jars me out of the narrative, but it doesn’t ruin the underlying story.
As for “grey goo”, that’s a new one. I’ve heard that term used to describe hypothetical nanotech, but that doesn’t seem to fit here (no mention of nanotech in AJ that I’ve run into.) So to what does this refer?
May Tree: This is a thought I had while reading AJ as I was trying to make sense of the Puppy hatred for the gripping, expertly executed work in my hands… But nothing of what they’ve said about AJ fits the actual book. If you have any thoughts on what exactly self-professed conservatives find so enraging about AJ, that is what I would really like to hear.
I think it’s as simple as that most of them haven’t actually read it. They’ve been told by their <cough> noble <cough> leaders that it has horrible! SJW! Glittery HooHa! Librul! Affirmative Action! cooties!, and that’s all they need to know. If their Masters say it’s so, then that’s all the proof they need — they don’t actually have to read it to know the “truth”.
@May Tree:
I think saying that “the book is not about gender in any way” might be stating your case a tad strongly. But, yes, I think it is a shame that experimenting with gender in futuristic alien societies is taken to be a partisan political position in the current climate.
As for grey goo, it is linked to the human wave credo. You can read more about it here:
http://madgeniusclub.com/2012/10/18/why-is-there-so-much-gray-goo/
http://madgeniusclub.com/2012/03/21/what-is-human-wave-science-fiction/
My take on what they are saying is SFF with a complex and ambiguous moral and political background either:
1. Prevents the reader from having a clear emotional attachment to the protagonist and particular narrative outcomes – this is grey goo;
2. Propagates a nihilistic (and often violent) vision of the fictional world, where narrative triumph is not linked to moral order – this is grimdark.
@May Tree
And this discussion has somehow wandered far afield from the place it started, which was my attempt to comprehend why the Puppies — who proclaim themselves conservative — might regard the Ancillary books as “message fiction” and “affirmative action fiction” that no one could possibly genuinely enjoy, as literally none of the characterizations I have seen the Puppies make of this work have born any resemblance to the actual work when I got to read it. The “mixed up gender pronouns” authorial conceit doesn’t seem at all sufficient to explain their hatred of Leckie’s work, so I was hypothesizing that they see portrayal of the Radch empire’s values as evil and they regard that as the “message” that they hate so much.
Actually, that part of it makes perfect sense to me. Not the gender bits (that’s still dumb and to me indicates that they never got past it) but why they would regard it as message fiction.
I loved both books, and I am as liberal as they come, but even I felt message almost beating me over the head, especially in the second book but there was plenty in the first during One Esk’s time with Lieutenant Awn. The one person Breq really loves is in the swampland, fighting for justice for the underprivileged people who are literally being oppressed for their race. The upper class race claims that the underclass is being given basically affirmative action in their test results and couldn’t possibly be actually qualifying their exams. That they’re being jumped-up and uppity and taking part in processes they can’t possibly understand or be fit to take part in.
If you don’t see how that’s a message that American conservatives would loathe, then I dunno. And I’m willing to bet 90% of them never made it past that part of the story.
@influxus “As for grey goo, it is linked to the human wave credo. You can read more about it here:”
I read both of the linked essays.
As the Nac Mac Feegle would say, that’s a fine load of blethers!
Am I right in thinking that the entirety of those essays is saying that writing should conform to the Just World fallacy?
Huh. I avoid grimdark books as much as anyone, but I don’t feel that I’m part of a movement for doing so.
Rather than blethering on with two long slabs of vagueness about what sort of stories are bad and which ones are good, couldn’t they have just wandered around with Father Ted’s sign http://seriouslyhilary.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/down-with-this-sort-of-thing.jpg
The upper class race claims that the underclass is being given basically affirmative action in their test results and couldn’t possibly be actually qualifying their exams.
Is “the Tanmind are typical racists/classists” really such an unusual and jarring story element? Hell that’s been part of SFF going way back. That element looked utterly standard to me, unlike much of the rest of the story. Awn was sympathetic to the underclass because she herself was of the underclass among the Radch, so naturally she sided with the lower class against the upper class. It was a reflection of her understandable resentment of people regarding her as an affirmative action choice.
The really interesting thing, though, was where the Awer lieutenant came right out and said “Yes, in fact, the aptitudes are now being skewed toward these guys and away from the upper classes, obviously.” The upper classes weren’t wrong in their perceptions that the underclass was being favored. It was part of the struggle going on for the soul of the Empire. Isn’t that a confirmation of everything conservatives believe about affirmative action in our world — that it’s part of a plot? Why would they object to that?
I think it’s as simple as that most of them haven’t actually read it.
Well that’s a horrid shame if true. They are really missing out.
Maximilian: Am I right in thinking that the entirety of those essays is saying that writing should conform to the Just World fallacy?
Far worse: the world should conform to the Just World fallacy; God wouldn’t have it any other way. If there’s no Just World, then there’s no…
I think I see their objection.
@May Tree “The really interesting thing, though, was where the Awer lieutenant came right out and said “Yes, in fact, the aptitudes are now being skewed toward these guys and away from the upper classes, obviously.””
Wait, really? I missed that. Was that book one or two?
“Far worse: the world should conform to the Just World fallacy; God wouldn’t have it any other way. If there’s no Just World, then there’s no…”
*headdesk*
@Maximillian:
The way I am reading the Human Wave and Superversive movements, more or less.
Or the Human Wave argues that narrative satisfaction and emotional pay off are linked to something like a just world hypothesis. Where as the Superversive Movement argues that narrative satisfaction and emotional pay off should be linked to a just world hypothesis.
Given both of these movements I think Kurt Busiek was right, when he lamented that if the puppies not starting their own award rather than trying to reclaim the hugos.
@Maximillian:
Lieutenant Skaait and Awn have a discussion about the aptitudes being manipulated in book one.
I’m with May Tree, I have difficulty seeing the liberal messaging in the discussion over the Radchaai rigging the supposedly meritocratic aptitudes.
Wait, really? I missed that. Was that book one or two?
Book one, right near the start, where Awn and Skaaiat are talking.
“For centuries only the wealthy and well-connected tested as suitable for certain jobs. Like, say, officers in the military. In the last, what, fifty, seventy-five years, that hasn’t been true. Have the lesser houses suddenly begun to produce officer candidates where the didn’t before? [….] The question is the right one and the answer the same. The answer is no, of course. But does that mean the tests were rigged before, or rigged now?”
“And your opinion?”
“Both. Before and now. [….] If you ask me, the Orsians are being rewarded for collaborating.”
Skaaiat presents this as his/her opinion but I read it as a simple statement of fact, as Skaaiat understands that the Aptitudes weren’t fair before and they’re not fair now — they’re a political tool and the results will read what the Emperor wants them to read, no more, no less. Yes, the formerly excluded lesser houses of the Radch and the underclass on Shis’urna are now being promoted for reasons that have jack all to do with actual ability.