Escape Artists

Escape Pod => Episode Comments => Topic started by: Russell Nash on April 13, 2007, 09:07:40 AM

Title: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Russell Nash on April 13, 2007, 09:07:40 AM
EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties (http://www.escapepod.org/2007/04/12/ep101-the-43-antarean-dynasties/)

1998 Hugo Winner!

By Mike Resnick (http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/farmer/2/).
Read by  Steven Burley and Gregg Taylor (of Decoder Ring Theatre (http://www.decoderringtheatre.com/)).
First appeared in Asimov’s Science Fiction (http://www.asimovs.com/), December 1997.

A man, a woman, and a child emerge from the Temple of the Honored Sun. The woman holds a camera to her eye, capturing the same image from a dozen unimaginative angles. The child, his lip sparsely covered with hair that is supposed to imply maturity, never sees beyond the game he is playing on his pocket computer. The man looks around to make sure no one is watching him, grinds out a smokeless cigar beneath his heel, and then increases his pace until he joins them.

They approach me, and I will myself to become one with my surroundings, to insinuate myself into the marble walls and stone walkways before they can speak to me.

I am invisible. You cannot see me. You will pass me by.

“Hey, fella — we’re looking for a guide,” says the man. “You interested?”


Rated PG. Contains mild documentary references to violence and sexual acts. It’s also not very upbeat.

Referenced Sites:
Joe Murphy Tribute Podcast (http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2007/04/03/joe-murphy-tribute/)
Joe Murphy Memorial Fund (http://www.joemurphymemorialfund.com/)
Beatnik Turtle (http://www.beatnikturtle.com/)

(http://escapepod.org/wp-images/podcast-mini4.gif)
Listen to this week’s Escape Pod! (http://www.escapepod.org/media//EP101_The43AntareanDynasties.mp3)

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 13, 2007, 10:04:39 AM
I rate this one as just OK.  There's lots of detail, and it's all very nice, and for an info-dump it's very well presented.  Unfortunately, though, nothing really happens anywhere in the story.

The characters are clearly drawn, but with no real depth.  The American tourists are stupid, ignorant and dismissive of other cultures, everything that Stereotypical American tourists are usually portrayed as being.  To be fair, I've encountered people like this while abroad in Germany, but even so, I would think there's still more to them than this one style of behavior.

The major problem is, as I've said, that nothing really happens.  We're presented with a problem (an ancient civilisation has fallen to becoming a tourist attraction) but nothing is resolved, the status quo is exactly the same at the end of the story as the beginning, and there's no character development, none of the characters are any different after the story ends.

This feels something like the first chapter of a potentially interesting novel, setting the scene and the main character, but nothing more than that.

I may well be mistaken, but it gives me the impression that this story comes from the Author's view of himself as being worldly and well-travelled, as represented by the narrator; which is in contrast to his fellows, as represented by the tourists.  This is all fine as an underlying theme, but doesn't make a good story unless we have a plot.

The other major problem I had with it was that the SF element wasn't essential to the story, by changing just a few words the alien city could have been Cairo, Delhi or any number of other Third World cities.

On a side note, it's interesting to see that this was a Hugo winner, it bears some resemblance to Tk'tk'tk, which was presented on Escape Pod some time ago (Except that one had a plot  :P).  I wonder if they have a thing for Travelogues? 

I don't want to give out the impression that I hated this, though.  It was OK, but just that.  It's fun enough, but I doubt I'll give it much thought again now I've finished it.

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: VBurn on April 13, 2007, 01:51:52 PM
Well said, Simon.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Josh on April 13, 2007, 04:05:54 PM
I agree with Simon, it was, I found, a little boring. I fell asleep after awhile. To be fair though, it was about 12:00 AM...and I was in bed...and I did have my eyes closed.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: lowky on April 13, 2007, 07:32:40 PM
again I agree with Simon.  I did find it somewhat hard to follow at times, as it seemed as if there were almost two storylines going on.  1 with the tourists, and another like a guide giving a tour in the future, where the Antarean Dynasties had been reestablished.  The second being given in a slightly different voice, using some sort of vocal effect from the sound of it.  An okay story, but not among my favorites.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Holden on April 13, 2007, 07:43:58 PM
It may have been missing action, it had plenty of conflict. I could feel the guide's hidden resentment of the tourists, his disgust in himself for whoring his own beliefs by lying in the hope of more coins, and his anger at the quiet subjugation of his people.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: lowky on April 13, 2007, 08:05:31 PM
it had plenty of conflict, I think Simon's point was there was no conflict resolution.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Jim on April 13, 2007, 08:15:50 PM
I liked the story for the internal conflict of the narrator.

If there were a few jokes or more sarcasm it would sound a bit like a Douglas Adams work.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Josh on April 13, 2007, 09:31:53 PM
I liked the story for the internal conflict of the narrator.

If there were a few jokes or more sarcasm it would sound a bit like a Douglas Adams work.

Absolutely!
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 13, 2007, 10:17:57 PM
Quote
If there were a few jokes or more sarcasm it would sound a bit like a Douglas Adams work.

Ew, Douglas Adams and Sarcasm aren't really a mix I'd like to see.

Quote
it had plenty of conflict, I think Simon's point was there was no conflict resolution.

Yes, that's it, my problem was that a situation is set up, but nothing is resolved. Normally a story should have three parts: a beginning, and end and a middle which moves one to the other; in this story we only had a beginning, nothing moved and nothing was ended.

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Jim on April 14, 2007, 12:09:24 AM
Ew, Douglas Adams and Sarcasm aren't really a mix I'd like to see.

Are you mad?

Oh, yes, I see you are.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 14, 2007, 12:33:46 AM
not really, Douglas Adams' style of humour wasn't sarcastic.  I might describe it as Glib, Sardonic or just Witty, but not Sarcastic.

I'm probably not explaining myself very well, does any of this make sense?  It's so late it's become early over here, and I need to get to bed :-p

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: clichekiller on April 14, 2007, 02:48:55 AM
not really, Douglas Adams' style of humour wasn't sarcastic.  I might describe it as Glib, Sardonic or just Witty, but not Sarcastic.
I think you nailed it!  His works were...they were just art, every word where it needed to be to deliver maximum impact. 

As for this work, I liked it.  It highlights a problem I noticed myself while honeymooning in St. Lucia.  We drove through such utter poverty to the resort that it was unsettling; the utter dichotomy between the opulence of the Sandals.  At the end, against resort rules, I tipped our concierge $200.00, what I later learned was equivalent to four months salary for him.

The work was full of a lot of conflict but I think it ended perfectly; not with some schmaltzy feel good ending but with the way it occurs in real life.  Obnoxious and rude or friendly and generous at the end of the day the tourists go home and it is the natives who remain behind.  So in that way I found it compelling. 

All in all I liked it.  By far not my most favorite work, but definitely enjoyable. 

- clichekiller
 
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Josh on April 14, 2007, 03:58:34 AM
not really, Douglas Adams' style of humour wasn't sarcastic.  I might describe it as Glib, Sardonic or just Witty, but not Sarcastic.

I'm probably not explaining myself very well, does any of this make sense?  It's so late it's become early over here, and I need to get to bed :-p

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK

I see what you mean, but I think that, while maybe not his writing as a whole, some of Douglas Adams' characters are very sarcastic. For example, the first to come to mind, Marvin from the Hitchhiker's Guide, now there is a character that Adams let his satirical and sarcastic humor flow out of.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: bryanw on April 14, 2007, 06:04:25 AM
When it comes to the story content I largely agree with Simon and the rest of you.  It felt like the first chapter of a novel (especially with the small digression about the possible messiah-child), and I must admit I'm a little intrigued to see where this story would go if given more time. And, as usual for a Mike Resnick story, I felt like I needed a hug after it was over.

However, what stood out to me in this story was the superb presentation!  Each character had a unique and logical voice, and the history narrator (not the guide, but whoever was retelling the history of the dynasties) sounded at once both proud and nostalgic-- exactly as would fit the story universe.  Very well done!
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 14, 2007, 08:32:53 AM
As for this work, I liked it.  It highlights a problem I noticed myself while honeymooning in St. Lucia.  We drove through such utter poverty to the resort that it was unsettling; the utter dichotomy between the opulence of the Sandals.  At the end, against resort rules, I tipped our concierge $200.00, what I later learned was equivalent to four months salary for him.

Oh man, I'd heard there were places like that, of course, but I've never been to one.  That was geuinly hoopy of you  :)  You seem to be a frood that really knows where his towl is. (sorry, I'm still in Douglas Adams mode, but that was genuinly great of you)

You have a point at this, I don't have much experience of travelling abroad, I've only visited Germany and Austria, countries on a similar economic level with the UK, so I've never seen anything like this.  I'd like to say that tourists behaving like this is some sort've US thing, but I'm willing to bet that UK tourists are just as bad in their own way

Now you've said this, I'll allow the story an extra star out of 5 in my rating of it :-)

Quote from: Josh
I see what you mean, but I think that, while maybe not his writing as a whole, some of Douglas Adams' characters are very sarcastic. For example, the first to come to mind, Marvin from the Hitchhiker's Guide, now there is a character that Adams let his satirical and sarcastic humor flow out of.

Again, I don't really agree, but I can see myself causing an argument here, and of all the things we could argue about the precise way in which Douglas Adams is cool shouldn't be one of them  ;)  I may start another thread about this some day.

I'm off for a round of Pan-Galactic Gargle-Blasters, and anyone that wants to join me is welcome  :P

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Josh on April 14, 2007, 02:26:08 PM

Again, I don't really agree, but I can see myself causing an argument here, and of all the things we could argue about the precise way in which Douglas Adams is cool shouldn't be one of them  ;)  I may start another thread about this some day.


Very true, the definition of his humor aside, Douglas Adams is pretty darn awesome!
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Zathras on April 14, 2007, 03:55:33 PM


As for this work, I liked it.  It highlights a problem I noticed myself while honeymooning in St. Lucia.  We drove through such utter poverty to the resort that it was unsettling; the utter dichotomy between the opulence of the Sandals.  At the end, against resort rules, I tipped our concierge $200.00, what I later learned was equivalent to four months salary for him.

 



I agree with you.  Very well said.  The story reminded me of my trips to Mexico, especially away from the tourist havens.  The only thing missing was some ignoramus getting upset with a native because they don't understand English.  I tend to enjoy the Resnik stories and this was no exception.

Zathras
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: 600south on April 15, 2007, 09:38:35 PM
I think i've seen those scenes acted out in real life in various parts of the world. And even though i found the characters a little cookie-cutter in this one, and there wasn't much action, i did enjoy the writer's imaginative descriptions of the ancient Antareans and i'd like to hear more stories set in this world. It was pretty rich material and my favorite part of the story.

Must say, though, people who wallow in the past glories of their 'race', without doing much to advance their existence in the present, kind of irritate me too. A small part of me felt some satisfaction when the dumb tourist started giving the pompous guide a little pushback towards the end.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on April 16, 2007, 03:02:47 AM
madSimonJ pretty much read my mind on this - but he was much more forgiving than me.  I can only imagine that this story won a Hugo out of guilt.

I found the idea and characters to be cliche, the sci-fi element unnecessary to the plot, the story too long, and in one part, a ludicrous event threw me right out of the story (when one Earth ship drops one bomb and annihilates 300,000 Antareans - seriously, they never invented bombs?  They are contacted by an alien spacefaring race and never thought that the aliens might have advanced technology?  I get that this is some kind of analogy to how the English took out the Zulu or any other race with massively advanced tech took out another, but it just seemed dopey, and besides, why mass all your troops in one spot when the attacker could land anywhere?).

The production was excellent - the reading, voices and effects were great!  I will be checking out the Decoder Ring Theatre!!  And I never realized until this podcast that we Canadians really do have an accent ;)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: SFEley on April 16, 2007, 01:51:48 PM
madSimonJ pretty much read my mind on this - but he was much more forgiving than me.  I can only imagine that this story won a Hugo out of guilt.

That's not generally how the Hugos work.  I didn't buy this story for Escape Pod out of "guilt," either.  I don't insist that everyone like a story, and we welcome criticism, but what you're doing here is very close to challenging the validity of positive opinions.  Please tread carefully when speaking of other people's views.


Quote
I found the idea and characters to be cliche, the sci-fi element unnecessary to the plot, the story too long, and in one part, a ludicrous event threw me right out of the story (when one Earth ship drops one bomb and annihilates 300,000 Antareans - seriously, they never invented bombs?  They are contacted by an alien spacefaring race and never thought that the aliens might have advanced technology?  I get that this is some kind of analogy to how the English took out the Zulu or any other race with massively advanced tech took out another, but it just seemed dopey, and besides, why mass all your troops in one spot when the attacker could land anywhere?).

My interpretation of that part was that the Antareans had a code of combat, and assumed that with territory up for grabs, the invaders would respond to customary forms.  And it is entirely possible than weapons of mass destruction were outside their cultural knowledge.  (This is not ancient and archaic thinking.  Recollect Hiroshima, and that the Japanese were busy preparing for a ground invasion.)

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on April 16, 2007, 02:26:02 PM
Quote from: SFEley
And it is entirely possible than weapons of mass destruction were outside their cultural knowledge.  (This is not ancient and archaic thinking.  Recollect Hiroshima, and that the Japanese were busy preparing for a ground invasion.)
And were no doubt also preparing for the "standard" aeriel bombing.  In this particular case, though, it was a paradigm shift - the idea that a single bomb (or even two or three for that matter) could decimate an entire city was beyond reason. 

In the case of the story, even a moderately sized rock/space craft/missile fired from outer orbit would cause massive damage.  Granted, it is unclear what the Antareans tech level is (though the "Dad" does mention that everyone passed them by) - maybe they never got out of feudal level tech, and never understood "flying machines". But they must have understood gravity and what happens when things fall from very high up.  If there was some other reason, considering all the other detail, I would have thought the author could have mentioned that more clearly.  My point was really, it was just one more "feel sorry for the Antareans" part, and from my pov wasn't well thought out.

The guilt comment wasn't too detract from the quality of the writing - it's just that I put this in the same grouping as "Blood of Virgins" - it feels as though the author had an agenda to write about, and crafted the story around it.

On a side note, I always feel a bit silly commenting on the stories like this - especially one that has already won a Hugo - it's not as if the author is going to change it, or the people that liked it will suddenly change their mind about it.

I guess I just like hearing myself type ;)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on April 16, 2007, 03:40:01 PM
This doesn't make my top 10, but I was impressed at how well written it was, and how well it was translated (?) in to speech.

There isn't an adventure here, but that doesn't mean there isn't a story.
This is an allegory like any of Aesop's Fables, with a lot of focus on the meaning and only enough superfluous detail to hold it together. I agree that the cast of characters is kind of flat, but they were meant to be tools to convey the message, not stand-alone pieces to be scrutinized.
What I enjoyed about this story as that it wasn't meant to excite, tantalize, or titillate, but to provoke thought by using strong parallels between the alien race and our own third-world vacation destinations.

As for the destruction of their armed forces, consider our own view on weapons of mass destruction: Having used them only twice, the whole world wants to ban them. The only exceptions are powerful nations like us who wave them around as a preventative (you nuke me, I'll nuke your family) and small nations who have little to lose. It seems that it's only a matter of time before we use them, or everyone gives them up. This civilization was old before we even came down from the trees; perhaps they have a more cautious and aged perspective on it?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on April 16, 2007, 03:43:36 PM
again I agree with Simon.  I did find it somewhat hard to follow at times, as it seemed as if there were almost two storylines going on.  1 with the tourists, and another like a guide giving a tour in the future, where the Antarean Dynasties had been reestablished.  The second being given in a slightly different voice, using some sort of vocal effect from the sound of it.  An okay story, but not among my favorites.

You might want to give it another listen Lowky. : )
There wasn't any kind of segue between the 'story' and the 'history', just a change of voice, so I can see where it'd be easy to get lost.
The main story line was all 'as it happened', which was said to be at some point in the future, long after the 43rd Antarean dynasty. The history sections were all stories taken from important moments of douring the 43 dynasties. The reason each snippet of history was included was to show just how far the guide's couture had fallen.
An example of this was when the man 'tipped' the guide at the end. The parable about dropping the diamond was used to illustrate how it was culturally an insult to be given tips, or to take them, but the Antarean guide was forced by his 'powerful desire to eat sometime this month' to abase himself.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Jonathan C. Gillespie on April 16, 2007, 04:42:12 PM
I almost resisted posting, mainly because I'm always leary of possibly irritating one of the greats.  So let me preface this by saying I'm not knocking Mr. Resnick here -- "Bartleby in Exile" is one of my favorites, as a matter of fact.

I'll advance forward the opinion that the historical-asides could have been removed, and the story would not have suffered for it.  Really, what do they add that the guide's narration doesn't?  An intelligent audience can obviously infer the fallen glory of this civilization.

I found the point behind the tale came across as ham-fisted.  The characters are one-sided, with no real development, and they're stereotypical tourists.  Standing back, this tale is essentially two parties moving from point A to B, talking the entire time.  That's it.  To contrast it further with "Bartleby", here the conflict happened thousands of years ago, as opposed to the very present.

I know what the goal was -- impart tension and the idea of an ongoing struggle across pan-economic barriers -- but it just didn't work for me.  On the up side, the world was richly illustrated, and the recollections of the Antareans' defeat were stark and haunting.

Ultimately, my main problem with this tale is logic.  Go forward three hundred years from the height of Expansionism, and we Terrans have already advanced far beyond slavery (at least in our most-free societies).  Yes, we haven't yet fully realized the whole "Good will to men" mantra, but for a Social Darwinist like myself, I see it as inevitability.  I think by the time we roll up on the Antarean homeworld, we might just be far removed from the flash-bulb, flower-print shirt tourism that feeds billions of evil American dollars into the global economy.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Biscuit on April 17, 2007, 01:58:06 AM
I think by the time we roll up on the Antarean homeworld, we might just be far removed from the flash-bulb, flower-print shirt tourism that feeds billions of evil American dollars into the global economy.

Actually, this is exactly what I thought the Antareans HAD evolved from. I thought the Antareans were definitely on the road to enlightenment and scholarship, and because they were so "meek" they got their asses kicked.

Therefore, yes, I go with the Aesop's Fable idea: Be Enlightened, but not to the point that you forget others may still be on the evolution ladder.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on April 17, 2007, 11:46:48 AM
Ultimately, my main problem with this tale is logic.  Go forward three hundred years from the height of Expansionism, and we Terrans have already advanced far beyond slavery (at least in our most-free societies).  Yes, we haven't yet fully realized the whole "Good will to men" mantra, but for a Social Darwinist like myself, I see it as inevitability.  I think by the time we roll up on the Antarean homeworld, we might just be far removed from the flash-bulb, flower-print shirt tourism that feeds billions of evil American dollars into the global economy.

A fine point.
I guess I figured a human is a human, wherever he goes. But that's not giving us much credit as a species.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Monty Grue on April 17, 2007, 10:23:28 PM
The degree of negativity towards the story is a bit puzzling.  There should be more stories, SF or other wise, of internal conflict, even to the point of completely eschewing physical action like this one.  There is a resolution, though narrators may not say so explicitly, the Antareans are doomed to fade away like the lost diamond.  Like it or not, that is a kind of resolution for a story, one that ends not with a bang but a whimper.

Overall, a good story.  Not the best Resnick story I've heard or read, but better than others.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on April 18, 2007, 10:58:47 AM
There is a resolution, though narrators may not say so explicitly, the Antareans are doomed to fade away like the lost diamond.

Aah!
That's why he mentioned the diamond. All the other historic bits were very obviously, but I didn't catch the significance of that one part. Thanks!

edit: (the diamond getting lost in the sand storm, I mean)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 18, 2007, 09:31:00 PM
     Since there seems to be considerable discussion about the story, perhaps the author can clear up a few points.
     My wife, my agent and I were in Cairo in 1989, and had a guide named Iman. He was a very pleasant and highly intelligent fellow, who told me that he had previously taught at the university, but he had a family to feed and found that he could make more money from tourists' tips. He explained that you couldn't even apply for a job as a guide until you had the equivalent of a Masters Degree in Egyptian History and spoke at least 4 languages fluently   -- which meant that he was far better-educated than 99% of the people he guided.
     So here was this man, whose race had built pyramids and temples on an unbelievably vast scale when our ancestors were living in mud huts, showing off the lost glories of his people to the newest set of conquerors. For tips. And I remember that at one point he told us how pleased he was to have attentive listeners, because his previous group got annoyed with him for interrupting their discussion of the point spread in the upcoming Steelers-Rams game.
     I took some notes, thought about it for eight years – some stories take longer to coalesce than others – and wrote "The 43 Antarean Dynasties".             
     Did it have to have science fictional elements it in? No. I doubt that more than 5 stories in my entire output have -required- science fictional elements, and yet according to Locus I am the most-awarded short fiction author, living or dead, in science fiction history -- which implies to me that while not necessary to the stories I wish to tell, science fiction adds insights and resonances beyond those which could exist in a mainstream story and clearly enhances the stories I choose to tell.
    At any rate, "The 43 Antarean Dynasties" won the Hugo and the Ignotus (Spain's Hugo), was resold 5 times in the States as well as to 8 other countries, and was optioned to Hollywood, so -someone- must have felt the resolution was satisfactory.
    (Seriously, if there was a better resolution, the average Egyptian would make more than $61.00 a month, and Ph.D.'s wouldn't quit teaching college because tourists' tips paid better.)
     Finally, if there's a surprise ending, I didn't write it. I consider them cheap shots. My endings are inherent in my beginnings. Otherwise, to my way of thinking, the story wouldn't be worth telling. (That doesn't mean the reader will always see the ending coming, but once it's there he can go back over the story and realize that of course that was the only possible ending.)
     Okay, end of history, end of lecture.

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Swamp on April 19, 2007, 09:27:40 PM
First of all, I liked this story.  As I was listening to it, I decided that I am indeed a Mike Resnick fan.  I like the emotional connections he brings out in his characters.  They all seem like real, genuine, emotional beings--at least the main characters. 

Were the tourists in this story sort of one-dimentional stereotypes?  Yeah, they were, but the story wasn't about them; they were part of the backdrop.  The story was about the guide and his internal conflict, stradling the line between humility and humiliation.

Was the message a little heavy-handed and guilt-inducing?  Maybe, but I think the richness of the guide character (and his people's history) made up for that.

I just don't like it when people say "I will only like a story if it has this." or "To be an SF story worth reading, it has to have these elements."  I think that is quite a limited view.  One the other hand, everyone has the right to their opinion, and I am happy to read them here in the forums. 

I do enjoy the honesty of EP listeners, though.  It doesn't matter if the author is considered a master in the field and a forefather of science fiction (Asmiov), or if Locus claims them to be "the most-awarded short fiction author, living or dead, in science fiction history".  EP listeners say how they feel.  If they didn't like it, they say so.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: GinaCole on April 20, 2007, 06:48:30 AM
Whenever I hear that a Escapepod has a story by Mike Resnick, I groan inwardly. Not because I hate his stories, but because they're always beautifully written pieces that evoke a very specific feeling and leaves me mulling over the story for a good portion of the month - often this feeling is of sadness, which puts me in a funk for the time that I'm thinking it over. Still, I find them to be wonderful stories, and this story was no exception.

Being an American living in a foreign land will give you a different insight on not only other cultures, but your own people. I felt that this story portrayed both the tourist and local very accurately. I found myself nodding my head & smirking when the Antarean gave his educational background as this is kind of over qualification is rampant in other countries due to the severe lack of jobs.

Also, the family's reactions to the various landmarks and local street urchins was spot-on as well.

All in all I found the story great. Also, i felt that the narrators did a really great job and made the story much more fun to listen to.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 20, 2007, 01:56:12 PM
I've been debating whether I should make a response to Mr Resnick's comments. I've finally decided to do so, though purely in an effort to clarify my own opinion. Out of respect to our host, I've no wish to start an argument. I know subjects like this can be touchy, so I'll do my best to tred gently.

First off, I whole-heartedly agree that the situation in Egypt Mr Resnick described is a genuine problem, and an issue that is worthy attention.  I agree also that we have a big problem in the West with ignorance of other cultures. My critisisms of Mr Resnick's story are purely literary. My main points, which I stand by, are these: 1) that it has little or no plot, 2) that the characters are poorly developed, and 3) that it contains no science fiction elements.

For the first, I do not require any plot twists or tagged-on happy endings to satisfy me. I agree with Mr Resnick's comment about the cheapness of surprise endings: they are something that rarely works.  I've no problem at all with an ending that's predictable or inherent, just so long as the plot develops.

The second point I can overlook. This is a short story, and detailed characterisation is very hard in such a short space of words.

For the third point, I disagree that labelling this a science fiction story adds any insight to the situation it puts forward. If anything it might have been more effective if it had retained its original Cairo setting, as that would make everything so much closer to home.  It reminds me of something Jon Pertwee used to say, that the scariest monsters are those you find in your own home, rather than going to other worlds to find them.  I think this might be the case here, that these "monsters," the tourists, might be scarier if they they were shown existing in the real world, and that the guide was one of a number of real people.

I'm not saying that "This is not science-fictiony enough, therefore it's rubbish," just that I feel it's been written in the wrong Genre. Should Mr Resnick ever rewrite this as a mainstream or even an autobiographical piece, I genuinly would be interested to read it.

To be honest, I was rather taken aback by Mr Resnick's argumentum ad numeram view, that the number of awards it has won proves the story's merits. The fact that many people hold an opinion does not make it more valid than any other.

If I've caused any offense by this post, I sincerly apologise. It's not my intention to offend, just to properly explain my opinions. 

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on April 20, 2007, 02:35:39 PM
For the third point, I disagree that labelling this a science fiction story adds any insight to the situation it puts forward. If anything it might have been more effective if it had retained its original Cairo setting, as that would make everything so much closer to home.  It reminds me of something Jon Pertwee used to say, that the scariest monsters are those you find in your own home, rather than going to other worlds to find them.  I think this might be the case here, that these "monsters," the tourists, might be scarier if they they were shown existing in the real world, and that the guide was one of a number of real people.

I neither agree, nor disagree with any of your other points, and I do not mean this in context of this story alone, I only debate the merits of this one comment.

A spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down:
A story is only effective if it gets told/read. If the audience doesn't hear/read your story then the message is dead and it's as good as having never been created. So, if you want to make a point to an unwilling audience it some times helps to wrap that message up in a story that will make it easier to take: a fable.
What I mean by unwilling audience is that if we actively wanted to be better people all the time, we wouldn't waste our time reading silly make believe stories, we would be active and out there in the world, changing things and campaigning for peace and saving lives. But we aren't. We sit her in front of our computers and enjoy fiction. There's nothing wrong with that in moderation, but often people get comfortable with fiction and distraction and look less and less for ways they can improve themselves or the world.
So how do you get your message to an audience that isn't actively looking for an outside perspective? That's where writers and story tellers come in. They bundle meaning with entertainment.
Some obvious objections to this is are "If I wanted a morality tale, I'd have gotten one." or "Who are you to say that I'm culturally insensitive?" or "I'm not here for morality. This is my distraction." Unfortunately, writers can't write a story for every reader all the time. The best they can do is shot-gun the world, aiming a genre and hitting whomever picks up their article. Most people will just get grazed, for some it will go right over their heads, but once in a while someone’s going to get hit where it counts and they’ll be motivated to change the world.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: clichekiller on April 20, 2007, 03:37:54 PM
I've been debating whether I should make a response to Mr Resnick's comments. I've finally decided to do so, though purely in an effort to clarify my own opinion. Out of respect to our host, I've no wish to start an argument. I know subjects like this can be touchy, so I'll do my best to tred gently.
First I would say that if there is one universal truth about good literature, it is that it exists to make people think, challenge preconceived notions and spark debate; it is only through discussion that we can grow as individuals. 

First off, I whole-heartedly agree that the situation in Egypt Mr Resnick described is a genuine problem, and an issue that is worthy attention.  I agree also that we have a big problem in the West with ignorance of other cultures. My critisisms of Mr Resnick's story are purely literary. My main points, which I stand by, are these: 1) that it has little or no plot, 2) that the characters are poorly developed, and 3) that it contains no science fiction elements.

For the first, I do not require any plot twists or tagged-on happy endings to satisfy me. I agree with Mr Resnick's comment about the cheapness of surprise endings: they are something that rarely works.  I've no problem at all with an ending that's predictable or inherent, just so long as the plot develops.
I disagree with you here.  I think the story definitely had a plot; although maybe not one as concrete as some.  I viewed the plot to be the internal conflict of the narrator between his extensive education and self worth and taking the easy way out by telling lies here and there because they're easier.  A battle not to become a total and complete sell out. 

The second point I can overlook. This is a short story, and detailed characterisation is very hard in such a short space of words.
Again I believe the narrator was really the only character that mattered.  He was the center of the story and the others only served as sources of conflict to move his internal struggle along. 

For the third point, I disagree that labelling this a science fiction story adds any insight to the situation it puts forward. If anything it might have been more effective if it had retained its original Cairo setting, as that would make everything so much closer to home.  It reminds me of something Jon Pertwee used to say, that the scariest monsters are those you find in your own home, rather than going to other worlds to find them.  I think this might be the case here, that these "monsters," the tourists, might be scarier if they they were shown existing in the real world, and that the guide was one of a number of real people.

I'm not saying that "This is not science-fictiony enough, therefore it's rubbish," just that I feel it's been written in the wrong Genre. Should Mr Resnick ever rewrite this as a mainstream or even an autobiographical piece, I genuinly would be interested to read it.
I once heard it said that a work should be considered science fiction if the science fiction elements are integral to the plot.  Such that if you can remove those elements and the work stands on it's own then it is just a mystery or war novel dressed up in science fiction garb, etcetera.  Issac Asimov's R. Daneel Olivaw novels I believe are a good example of this.  At their core they are murder mysteries, while Neil Stephen's Snowcrash or Diamon Age are fundamentally about technology and it's impact on society and as such couldn't be separated out.  This is not to say that Caves of Steel wasn't a good novel, and as such I enjoy many science fiction works that are just other novels wrapped in science fiction trappings.  Mr. Reznic's piece is one such work.   

To be honest, I was rather taken aback by Mr Resnick's argumentum ad numeram view, that the number of awards it has won proves the story's merits. The fact that many people hold an opinion does not make it more valid than any other.
While not absolute public opinion is often a good marker of merit.  Numerous awards would seem to indicate that this work was well received by a body of his peers and his target audience.  Though I will agree with you that it alone does not refute your opinion. 

If I've caused any offense by this post, I sincerly apologise. It's not my intention to offend, just to properly explain my opinions. 

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Again I enjoy well thought out and expressed debate.  When it is done intelligently, as has yours, and not emotionally I believe there is a lot to be gained.  Thanks for making me think. 
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on April 20, 2007, 03:40:14 PM
Quote from: Thaurismunths
...but once in a while someone’s going to get hit where it counts and they’ll be motivated to change the world.
This is a very true statement, but keep in mind it applies to all things.  You could say the same thing if Mr. Resnick wrote this for a travel magazine or submitted it to Reader's Digest.  Someone in a Doctor's office somewhere (for many years to come, considering how often they update the mags) could read that and be just as affected.

To echo/further expound on madSimonJ's third point take the Original Star Trek episode "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" - better known as the Half Black/Half White guys episode.  Clearly, it is about race relations, and dissects the ridiculous idea that the colour of your skin is what defines you.  And yet you cannot just take that story and simply replace the characters with modern day equivalents.

Really, I think you could substitute Earther for American, Antarean history for Egyptian and the story here is the same.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: SFEley on April 20, 2007, 03:46:26 PM
For the third point, I disagree that labelling this a science fiction story adds any insight to the situation it puts forward. If anything it might have been more effective if it had retained its original Cairo setting, as that would make everything so much closer to home. 

Argh.  I hate to step into discussions like this as editor -- I don't ever want people to think I'm cramping feedback or placing my opinion above theirs -- but since there is discussion on the whys and wherefores of this story (civil and intelligent discussion, no less!) I might as well throw my two cents in.

First, not a literary point, but a marketing one: if this story had been a modern recollection set in Cairo, it would not have been on Escape Pod.  Barring odd flukes of publicity, it almost certainly would have been read only by an audience that seeks out and reads travel stories -- and to that audience, this story would be preaching to the choir.

Casting it into science fiction may not have been strictly necessary for the plot, but it did get a message out to an audience that may not have received it otherwise.  I personally didn't think my time was wasted in learning the things this story told me.  And just as, in my EP102 outro, I said I didn't put plausibility on the top of my editorial list, I don't place the question "Is the SFnal component integral to this story?" above effectiveness or fun either.  I agree that most SF stories are stronger with a strong SF idea at their core, but it isn't universal, and it isn't the central point of my buying decisions.

This story blew me away on an emotional level.  I read it and got chills.  The scope, the grandeur, the tragic sense of history erasing all greatness...  It hits me deep for exactly the same reason that Shelley's "Ozymandias" is my favorite poem:


     I met a traveller from an antique land
     Who said: 'Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
     Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
     Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
     And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
     Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
     Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
     The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
     And on the pedestal these words appear:
     "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
     Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
     Nothing beside remains: round the decay
     Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
     The lone and level sands stretch far away.'


That poem, and "The 43 Antarean Dynasties," hit a nerve for me.  They're about the entropy of history and the universe -- and also about fighting that entropy.  To me this is a core of life.

I personally think this piece is the best of Mr. Resnick's that we've produced, and one of the top three contemporary stories we've run on Escape Pod.  It doesn't bother me if people disagree.  It's just where I'm coming from, and that's neither more nor less important than where anyone else comes from. 

(Finally: the imagery of this story, folks!  A million crystal spires!  A Spiral Ramp to Heaven!  Buildings large enough to contain God!  If we're talking about stoking the imagination with grand SF concepts, how frickin' cool is this stuff?)

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on April 20, 2007, 04:51:58 PM
Quote from: Thaurismunths
...but once in a while someone’s going to get hit where it counts and they’ll be motivated to change the world.
This is a very true statement, but keep in mind it applies to all things.  You could say the same thing if Mr. Resnick wrote this for a travel magazine or submitted it to Reader's Digest.  Someone in a Doctor's office somewhere (for many years to come, considering how often they update the mags) could read that and be just as affected.
Yes, that's a principal of my point.
The story could be written (gun could be aimed at) anyone. Mike decided to write (point) it at SF fans.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on April 20, 2007, 05:47:54 PM
Quote from: Thaurismunths
...but once in a while someone’s going to get hit where it counts and they’ll be motivated to change the world.
This is a very true statement, but keep in mind it applies to all things.  You could say the same thing if Mr. Resnick wrote this for a travel magazine or submitted it to Reader's Digest.  Someone in a Doctor's office somewhere (for many years to come, considering how often they update the mags) could read that and be just as affected.
Yes, that's a principal of my point.
The story could be written (gun could be aimed at) anyone. Mike decided to write (point) it at SF fans.
I'm not going to try and guess on how Mr. Resnick decides a market for a story, but considering he's "the most-awarded short fiction author, living or dead, in science fiction history" (according to Locus, I'm told) it's not really surprising that he didn't submit a less sci-fi version to Reader's Digest - and for all I know he did, butI think you get my point.

Perhaps Mr. Resnick purposely chose to thinly veil the characters and setting so more people would draw the obvious parallels - but really that has no bearing on my personal liking/disliking of the story.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 20, 2007, 06:41:13 PM
Time for a clarification. I was not saying that anyone had to like the story because it won a batch of awards. I was saying -- as I have said here about "Barnaby in Exile" (a contemporary story told in the first person of a lab chimpanzee) and "Travels With My Cats" (about the consequences of rediscovering a book forgotten from one's childhood) -- the awards are simply proof that the definition of science fiction has changed and broadened, that writers are no longer constricted byJohn Campbell's definition of what science fiction must be and what it must accomplish. A travelogue set on another world, such as "The 43 Antarean Dynasties",  or stories about a chimp or a forgotten book, are, these days, accepted as legitimate science fiction every bit as much as stories about space wars and alien invasions. The awards simply support the fact that what I write IS science fiction and is universally accepted as such.

Most fans of the literature have adjusted and broadened their definitions. It's movie fans that seem stuck in the past these days. Ask any cross-section of film fans to name their top 10 or 20 science fiction films, and there are two brilliant movies that will almost never make their lists -- Dr. Strangelove and Charly. Both are demonstrably science fiction, but neither have starships, aliens, or zap guns, and most of the moviegoing public, while they'll confess to liking the films, don't consider them to be science fiction.

They're wrong, just as people who claim that Connie Willis's "Even the Queen" or David Gerrold's "The Martian Child" or (dare I say it?) "The 43 Antaream Dynasties" are wrong. Doesn't mean to have to like any of them, but the stories  are clearly, demonstrably science fiction.

-- Mike Resmocl
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 20, 2007, 06:43:25 PM
Oops -- make that signature "Mike Resnick".

Seven eye surgeries in 3 years makes you hit a lot of wrong keys.

-- Mike
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 20, 2007, 08:26:50 PM
Gosh, where to start.

First off, I'm genuinely amazed by the intelligent and reasonable responses I've had.  On many forums offering an opinion contrary to the Host's would kick off some fairly nasty lines of conversation.  Since posting that last comment I was half-expecting to be banned faster than L. Ron Hubbard can type after a night of drinking caffeine!  That or an attack by a vengeful quill-wielding writer :-p

First-off, Thaurismunths:

I'm afraid to say that in my own experience, the chances of anyone's mind ever being changed by fiction are minute.  I'm reminded of the Frank Zappa obscenity trials in which the judges were concerned that his music was adversely affecting the youth of America.  Part of Zappa's defence was to point out that the vast majority of songs are love songs, but that listening to them doesn't seem to make us love each other any more.  Sadly, it's similar here, anyone with a political view adverse to this story will dismiss it out of hand or else give up on it.  The only people that will find meaning in it are those who already hold these views.

It goes without saying that it really shouldn't be like this.

For me a social observation story should work on two levels, the story itself and a deeper level of meaning for those that want to find it.  The only example I can think of off the top of my head is Animal Farm by George Orwell, which could be taken as a fantasy story about animals taking over a farm, of could be taken as a take on the Russian Revolution.  But in the case of Animal Farm, you don't need to appreciate the sub-text in order to be able to just enjoy the story. (This isn't a fantastic example, I know, but it's the first that comes to mind)



ClicheKiller:

(Nice Moniker, btw.)

I do accept your point about good literature existing to make us think.  I would also add that it should stimulate the imagination, this to me is just as important.

I'm afraid I'd be reluctant to accept the internal conflict within the guide, as this conflict was resolved before the story even started, when he decided to take the job.  Had the story started, f'rinstance, when the guide had just left University and was debating whether or not to become a guide, I could have accepted that as a plot.  In this case, though, there is no conflict, the guide's opinions are fixed before the story begins, as are those of the American Tourists.

With the Asimov pieces I'd actually be more inclined to think of them as Science Fiction pieces with a Murder Mystery backdrop.  The Science Fiction aspects are what he's trying to relate, the Murder Mystery is the medium through which he relates them.  With this story here, the story about the Tourists is what Mr Resnick is trying to relate, the Science Fiction elements are only a backdrop.

It's true that awards and popularity are often a mark of quality, but not always.  Dan Brown springs to mind for one example of an exception :-p (I'm in no way implying that Mr Resnick is as bad as Dan Brown, just giving an example to support my supposition)

Thankyou also clichekiller, you presented your arguments most eloquently, I'll look forward to seeing you around on these forums in future.


Mr Eley:

It's OK, I don't think you're trying to cramp feedback, your opinion is always welcome  :)

First off: I have automatic respect for anyone that likes Percy Shellley!  The Mask of Anarchy is one of my favorite poems, I literally have the T-Shirt.

I'm afraid the imagery of the story didn't do anything for me at all for two reasons.  Firstly, that to me this is background material, it's like the painted backdrop of a stage in a theatre, it's better if it's attractive to look at and portrays the atmosphere, but it's the story and the performances that're really important, anything else is secondary.  The second reason (which may possibly explain something of my attitude here) is that I'm a massive fan of the British New Wave SF Movement (Michael Moorcock, Barrington J Bayley, etc) where such imagery is commonplace.  Michael Moorcock for one has produced a multitude of such images in just about everything he's every written.

Also, this idea of Western ignorance is nothing new to me, I've been aware of it ever since I was at school, and images of American Tourists such as those portrayed here abound in films, and have for as long as I've been watching them.

Now, if that building had actually contained a God, we might be on to something  :P



Finally, Mr Resmocl (should we ever meet in person, you'll know me when I address you as that  :P):

SF for me doesn't have to be about "starships, aliens, or zap guns" and never has, just about ideas, vivid new ideas well told, or even just stories that exist for no other reason than to be good stories (though it's much harder to find cases of this working). 

To cite another example: to me calling this story Science Fiction would be like calling the David Carradine TV Series 'Kung-fu' a western, it isn't really.  The series is mostly concerned with philosophy, the Western element is just a backdrop, you could have set it almost anywhere without changing the characters or the plot one bit.

Similarly here, this story could be changed from Science Fiction to Mainstream by pretty much just changing the names and nothing else.



It might be worth mentioning at this point (I've probably not made this clear) that although I stand by my three criticisms, the main one is actually the lack of plot. I can forgive the other two to an extent if the plot is good enough to carry me along, and in this case I don't believe it was.


Thanks again everyone for such a though-provoking debate, it's been a good many years since I've had to think like this about my own opinions.

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: SFEley on April 20, 2007, 08:37:16 PM
First off, I'm genuinely amazed by the intelligent and reasonable responses I've had.  On many forums offering an opinion contrary to the Host's would kick off some fairly nasty lines of conversation.  Since posting that last comment I was half-expecting to be banned faster than L. Ron Hubbard can type after a night of drinking caffeine!  That or an attack by a vengeful quill-wielding writer :-p

Pshaw, no.  Just to be clear: the only thing that will get someone moderated around here is an insult against a real person or group of people.  Strong disagreement is totally cool, as long as everyone's respectful of the people they're disagreeing with.  Overall I think this community does a superlative job of that.


Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 20, 2007, 09:07:33 PM
madSimon --

Works of fiction never changed anyone's mind? Any student of
American history can refute that with just three words: UNCLE
TOM'S CABIN.

I suspect we will never agree on what science fiction is, and as far
as I am concerned that is a Good Thing, because you have just given
me my editorial for the next issue of Jim Baen's Universe. It will be
an historical survey of all the critics (and others) who tried to put
science fiction in a straitjacket, and how it has broken out and gained
new high ground every time.

So please accept my (sincere) thanks. Editorials are a lot harder to
come by than science fiction stories (my definition -or- yours).

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 20, 2007, 09:59:31 PM
with the very greatest of respect, I didn't say "never" just that the chances were minute.  It is certainly true that there are works of literature that've had a great influence on the world, but if you take the number of these next to the number of those that didn't, the gap is depressingly vast.

I do agree that we'll sadly never see eye-to-eye on this matter, although I should say that I've no interest in 'straight-jacketing' the genre, as you put it.  Believe it or not I have a very wide definition of SF, far more so than many of my fellows.  My *only* criteria is that the SF element(s) be a factor of the plot, not merely a back-drop.  This is the one-and-only restriction I place upon it, anything else is up to the writer.

I should reiterate that, as I'm sure is the same for many here, I'm willing to forgo any debate on classification if a good story is presented.  This is very much a side issue to me.

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 20, 2007, 10:12:58 PM
Pshaw, no. 

I'm a little embarrassed to admit this, but I've no idea what "Pshaw" means.  I'm assuming from the tone of your post that I've not gone too far wrong.  Please don't hesitate to say something if I do step over the line, though.

Thanks,

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Jonathan C. Gillespie on April 21, 2007, 01:59:25 AM
He's saying, "Don't worry about it", or my favorite variation:  "Fugedaboutit".
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mummifiedstalin on April 22, 2007, 03:27:57 AM
madSimon --

Works of fiction never changed anyone's mind? Any student of
American history can refute that with just three words: UNCLE
TOM'S CABIN.

I suspect we will never agree on what science fiction is, and as far
as I am concerned that is a Good Thing, because you have just given
me my editorial for the next issue of Jim Baen's Universe. It will be
an historical survey of all the critics (and others) who tried to put
science fiction in a straitjacket, and how it has broken out and gained
new high ground every time.

So please accept my (sincere) thanks. Editorials are a lot harder to
come by than science fiction stories (my definition -or- yours).

-- Mike Resnick
I'll be interested in what you have to say about the limits of the genre. After all, the idea of genre itself seems to imply limits, or at least a strong tradition. If not for limits, then how could you ever distinguish science fiction as something discrete that could recognizably "break out and gain new high ground"? Even though there are, of course, numerous definitions of what actually constitutes the genre, it seems like almost all of sf's allies want to distinguish it as somehow "special." So maybe it's not a question of genre definitions as a *limit* to what science fiction must be. Instead, "genre" is what distinguishes it, makes it special and different from mainstream fiction (and from other genres).
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 22, 2007, 09:21:04 AM
In one respect, it's a marketing tool. You say "mystery", people kinda sorta know what you're talking about. You then limit it even further, with "hard-boiled" or "cozy" or "trraditional" or what-have-you. Same with science fiction. You say "science fiction", you know you're not going to have a private eye going fown the dark alleys of 1940s Manhattan or San Francisco, unless there's an alien or something similar involved. But because science fiction encompasses all time and all space -- my own definition, however inadequate, is that it deals with an altered past, an alternative present, or an imagined future -- you can't put the same straitjacket/restrictions on it that you can on a detective story or a Western.

Publishers love categories, because every category has a ceiling, above which nothing but the exceptionally rare DUNE or GORKY PARK sells, and a floor, below which nothing sells. You call it "science fiction" and you're going to sell X,XXX copies even if it's got all blank pages. So from a publisher's point of view, when he's dealing with any new or unproven writer, all he has to do is keep his expenses below the floor (low advance, generic cover art, no ads) and he can't lose money....which is why publishers love genres and categories, even if no one agrees about their definitions and restrictions. It lets them know how much (or how little) to spend, and for publishers, it's not about Art, it's about Profit. (Which is not a perjorative; if they don't make a profit, no one pays us to attempt art.)

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on April 22, 2007, 09:35:51 AM
out of curiosity, do you count Cold Comfort Farm by Stella Gibbons as Science Fiction?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 22, 2007, 08:43:45 PM
Never read Cold Comfort Farm. But if I were a publisher and she was an unknown quantity with no track record, I'd -label- it science fiction. The average mainstream novel prints 1500 copies in hardcover and never finds a paperback publisher. Market the same book as science fiction and you'll sell a couple of thousand hardcovers and close to 10,000 paperbacks even if it bombs. Market it as romance and you can triple those paperback numbers with a bottom-of-the-barrel seller. THAT's why publishers love categories.

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mummifiedstalin on April 22, 2007, 09:19:32 PM
I certainly understand what you're saying about the commercial effects on labelling genres. But of course that's not all there is. The sf fandom is one of the most willing to self-identify, to determine their tastes in opposition to mainstream and other genres, and is very self-conscious of its own literary history. So are there any positive benefits to thinking in terms of genre, or are you suggesting that in the end, the idea of genre is simply a marketing tool?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 22, 2007, 10:03:34 PM
That's an almost-impossible question to answer, because there -are- two separate and distinct answers, both of them correct.

From the point of view of the publisher -- and without publishers there are no professional publications -- categories are simply marketing tools, and very useful ones.

From the point of view of science fiction fandom -- which on good days probably numbers abour 30,000 -- about one-hundredth of one percent of the American population -- it clearly means much more, and is the basis of a sense of community and shared interests.

There's a third answer, which is more meaningful to me personally. From the viewpoint of the writer, as long as I feel what I'm writing is science fiction and I can find some editors who agree with me, I couldn't care less about definitions -- yours, madSimon's, Gardner Dozois's, Stan Schmidt's, or anyone else's. If the day comes when I can't find a bunch of editors who agree with me, then I'll have to consider changing my notion of science fiction. But that day's not coming anytime soon. The reason I mentioned "The 43 Antarean Dynasties" awards and sales was not to brag or convince anyone they had to like it; it was to show that, in terms of the sales, 13 professional science fiction editors thought it fit comfortably in their publications and wss clearly science fiction; and in terms of the  awards, they were voted on my science fiction fans, who clearly had no problem defining the story as science fiction.

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 23, 2007, 04:10:50 AM
Again, I apologize for all the typos. Eye surgery #8 is coming up
in May. I would not anticipate the absence of numerous typos
anytime soon. Sorry about that.

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on April 23, 2007, 01:13:30 PM
No apology necessary, most of us have two perfectly good eyes and typos still show up everywhere.

I considered leaving in some of mine, but figured that joke needed a rest - nevertheless in this little note, I've added four extra letters and mispelt 'nevertheless' three times :)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon on April 24, 2007, 10:12:53 AM
Hey guys,

Usually my analyses of stories on EP are based on dissection, I enjoy taking apart the cogs and looking at the screws, but in the case of this story MadSimonj and Slic have already covered everything about the structure I would like to say... So I'm going to talk about how I responded to it emotionally.

I strongly disliked this piece, really reacted to it on a gut level...  Something about the tone went straight to my insides and started chewing them up... Part of it might have been that I am am a relatively experienced traveller myself, and therefore found this twee rather than revelatory.  This week itself I happened to be in Knossos on Crete, visiting friends, and ended up taking a guided tour with a friend of a friend who has a masters degree in Physics but still makes his living giving guided tours of Knossos because real work is no-where to be found.  Crete is not the third world (although my professional experience in Archaeology and Geology mean I've spent quite a lot of time in these sorts of places thinking about these sorts of issues) but I think it illustrates that yes Mike is getting at something valid here.

The problem is that when a story such as this is a morality play as this one is, it needs some level of deeper insight and characterisation in order for it to hold any water, whereas in this piece I felt the characterisation was really pretty third rate.  I didn't empathise with these people, they didn't have enough backstory to empathise with (the only moment the story began to take flight with the blind "saviour" it dies off almost immediately back to the mundane themes)... And while there are many tourists like those mentioned here, I think it doesn't do justice to the story to use tourists this idiotic here.

I think part of it may be that I disagree with the politics so strongly.  This piece is preachy, and is designed as such, but doesn't hold any deeper insight.  These are complex issues, with complex solutions, and I want to talk a bit about Guilt, as already touched upon by Slic.  There is a very very strong theme amongst the western world's middle classes at the moment to feel something akin to puritan guilt about the failings of the economic process be they economic, environmental or political.  There have been a number of Escape Pod stories which to me have hinged on this Political Guilt - Blood Of Virgins, Smooth Talking, and Nano Comes To Clifford Falls.  I think that the key feature when it comes to enjoying these stories is whether feeling political guilt makes you feel virtuous, or kicks off your libertarian (as I have) instinct of "This is a problem, but it is not *my* fault". The audience for this story is the SF market, who are predominantly western and middle class, meaning that the villain in this story is universally similar to the neighbour down the reader/listerners street that they don't respect very much.  The target audience are the very people being demonised, so I will very heavily say that this story is about guilt and whether you find it satisfying to feel guilty.

Thinking about this I am near certain that it is this emotional reaction that put me off the story so strongly, and I'm rather glad I have written this post and got to the bottom of it.  In a story with these themes, I need something a little more than "the failings of western tourism as allegory" to get any enjoyment out of it.  There is no deeper insight here, no solutions offered here, and no real hope - it's an arrow pointed straight at middle class guilt, and I find that really distasteful.

As always much respect to Mr Resnick for taking on us naysayers in the comments thread.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 24, 2007, 06:23:42 PM
I can't make you like it. Enough people did that I'm still in business. I was just explaining why it -was- science fiction.

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Roney on April 25, 2007, 07:30:14 PM
My first reaction to this story was that the reading is excellent.  There are only so many story ideas in the world, so it says something for the... texture of this implementation that it gave the readers so much to work with.  I was entirely convinced by the characters as portrayed, even if the tourists as written didn't have much depth.  (Even that seemed realistic: most people I've met come across as 2D when they've got their tourist hat on.)

I still thought the story was a bit "meh", mostly for reasons that others have mentioned.  Still, it's my favourite Mike Resnick story on EP so far, so I'll play a bit of devil's advocate.

Sure, there's no plot.  Plot is important to story, but short stories by their very shortness often benefit from concentrating on just character or scene instead.  This one had a fairly strong central character and a very densely painted scene: the addition of a plot could have diluted its focus or overwhelmed it with too many details.

Genres in Venn diagrams:
Of course, genre labelling isn't that logical.  But on that scheme, there's no arguing that the story's SF.

Could it just as easily have ditched the SF trappings?  Well, no.  You could write a story about Egypt and bring out the ancient monuments aspect.  (I found this quite amusing in Egypt, actually, when our guide kept emphasizing how the beautiful temples had been built when Western Europeans were barely able to stand the stones of Stonehenge on their ends.)  You could write a story about pacifist reactions to occupation in, say, India or Tibet.  You could write a story about a culture that achieved heights of civilization long before Europeans got civilized, say in Mesopotamia or China.  You could write a story about a primitive nation being utterly defeated by superior technology, such as in the Americas.  But in an SF story you can bring together all these elements and make them bigger, wider, higher, older, wower.  It may not be a particularly imaginative tradition in SF but it's a distinguished one, and pushing those boundaries does mean that the SF element is adding something beyond an ordinary travelogue.

Preaching to the converted is pointless because the converted either feel patronized, or validated in their smug complacency.  An SF audience in America (where some stats indicate that fewer than 30% of citizens own a passport) may not already be converted to this story's message.

See?  Nothing wrong with it at all.  ;)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: .Morph. on April 26, 2007, 09:15:20 AM
I liked this story.
So many of you seemed to have problems with this story because it didnt reach any definate conclusions whereas i loved this story because it was a valid commentary that used SF storytelling to get across a point which is meaningful no matter what setting you put it in.

And as for people saying that there was no plot, in actual fact the story was based on telling the guides life experiences so theres your plot right there.
I do not think that the plot should be the main thinking point for this story....as with all resnick story i went away thinking about the inperfections that it highlighted in our own society or ways of thinking.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: ClintMemo on April 26, 2007, 12:06:00 PM
Well, I picked the wrong time to get behind on my Escape Pod listening. I've been avoiding reading this message board until after I listened to the story and when I finally get here I find the hugo award winning author is prominently in the thread.
How cool is that?

After reading the board, I'm reminded of something Scott Adams said about his short-lived Dilbert animated series. A producer (or someone similar) told him that the show was doomed because everyone liked it but no one loved it (and no one hated it.)  If it didn't make a strong enough emotional connection to make some people hate it (and others love it), then it would fail.

Well, Simon "strongly disliked" it and lots of people, (including me), loved it, so - Success!
Though, I suppose that's not surprising given it's Hugo award winning status.  :P

Congrats and good luck on the eye surgery.

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 26, 2007, 07:06:11 PM
You cannot have a valid fiction story in -any- category without conflict (which is why most so-called Utopian fiction is really anti-Utopian, or at least about major problems with a proposed or imagined Utopia). Plot is a way of working out the conflict, but the conflict is the essential element.

In "The 43 Amtarean Dynasties", the conflict was internal -- take the tip money and be humiliated yet again, or don't take it and go hungry. Was it resolved
in a satisfactory way? Well, No, if you want the narrator to overcome his difficulties -- but the problem is that I've -been- there, and there ain't no one in that position overcoming poverty this year/decade/century. If the purpose of the story was to elicit an emotional response, and it did so, then it worked.

Clearly it didn't work for some people. As a writer, I've been living with the unhappy fact that I can't please everyone for more than four decades now. But it pleased enough readers and voters so that I was still in business to write my next story, so to that extent -- and that's really the only extent a writer is concerned with -- it succeeded.

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on April 28, 2007, 02:50:54 AM
Probably a bit late, but oh well. 

Simon explained well what I meant about "I can only imagine that this story won a Hugo out of guilt."  To add to Simon's points, the Hugo is voted on by Con attendees, a good part of whom travel, and his comment "it's an arrow pointed straight at middle class guilt" is exactly how I should have written my first post.  And, as such, I think Roney's point is backwards - that mostly this is the choir who is reading the story - which in turn, hopefully, further clarifies my "guilt" comment.

Another thing I will borrow from Simon, is a thank you to Mr. Resnick for putting up with and intellegently responding to critics - as he pointed out this particular story has been published in many markets and won at least one prestigious award.

As mentioned by mummifiedstalin, I too would be interested in your editorial in Jim Baen's Universe, Mr. R. 
Having just now found it online http://www.baens-universe.com/ I would consider subscribing to read it - when is it due out?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on April 28, 2007, 03:32:30 AM
Let's see. My first editorial was for February, this is my third, the magazine is bi-monthly...I guess that makes it June. Writers and editors never know what the date is; I'm currently working on a 2009 novel, a story for a summer 2008
anthology, and the April 2008 issue of Jim Baen's Universe. Hell, often I don't even know what month it is, let alone what day.

I'll take my Hugos any way they come, including guilt. But I have some difficulty believing that the Spanish voters who gave it the Ignotus (their Hugo) did so out of guilt.

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Wingates_hellsing on April 29, 2007, 03:42:47 AM
This story seemed to liken itself to certain wars of our own history. I feel it was a cut and paste of a culture becoming over-confident and facing destruction due to it's refusal to keep up with the world around them. I much prefer stories that go further away from things I have heard in history class yesterday.

The method was fun, I liked the historical statements of the other voice that always connected to the exact opposite things happening with the Hermes and his clients.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: ClintMemo on April 30, 2007, 11:50:28 AM
I much prefer stories that go further away from things I have heard in history class yesterday.


I think that until we start learning those lessons, bringing them up again in a different fashion is a good thing.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on May 01, 2007, 10:31:31 AM
Simon explained well what I meant about "I can only imagine that this story won a Hugo out of guilt."  To add to Simon's points, the Hugo is voted on by Con attendees, a good part of whom travel, and his comment "it's an arrow pointed straight at middle class guilt" is exactly how I should have written my first post.  And, as such, I think Roney's point is backwards - that mostly this is the choir who is reading the story - which in turn, hopefully, further clarifies my "guilt" comment.

Was Mike preying on guilt, or did he strike a nerve?
I can be difficult to tell the difference some times.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: clichekiller on May 01, 2007, 02:41:04 PM
Simon explained well what I meant about "I can only imagine that this story won a Hugo out of guilt."  To add to Simon's points, the Hugo is voted on by Con attendees, a good part of whom travel, and his comment "it's an arrow pointed straight at middle class guilt" is exactly how I should have written my first post.  And, as such, I think Roney's point is backwards - that mostly this is the choir who is reading the story - which in turn, hopefully, further clarifies my "guilt" comment.

Was Mike preying on guilt, or did he strike a nerve?
I can be difficult to tell the difference some times.
I really doubt Mike was after guilt as an emotion when he wrote this.  Heck I really didn't feel guilty after reading this.  To me I was more struck by the absurdity of such a highly educated individual having to choose between an academic career and that of a tour guide.  It also highlights nicely how little we value higher education and knowledge without any immediate practical application. 
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 01, 2007, 09:44:00 PM
For what it's worth, guilt never entered my mind. I thought his situation,
indeed the situation of a people who've spent a couple of thousand years
being occupied by first one conqueror and then another, who had their
religious idols defaced by both Christians and Moslems, who had been great
once and were reduced to catering to tourists for their major source of
hard currency, was tragic. It had nothing to do with guilt; I had no reason
to feel guilty, and unlike some, I don't take others' guilt upon myself.
It was just a little slice of life story that seems to have elicited a favorable
response from editors and voters. I would have said from readers, too --
but after reading these comments I'm not that sure.  ;-)

-- Mike  Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: goatkeeper on May 02, 2007, 01:31:36 AM
I thought it was fantastic. 
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on May 02, 2007, 10:58:20 AM
Hi,

   Sorry for ducking out for a week, I've been on holiday to Germany.  It's been fasinating to read how this thread has developed, it's probably one of the most interesting threads I've yet read on a message board.

a couple of quick points to Mr Resnick:

I mentioned Cold Comfort Farm because it's most definitely not SF, it was written as a parody of Gothic Novels (the Bronte Sisters, Mary Web & co) the author didn't consider it SF and it was never marketed as SF.  The thing is, though, it was written in the 1930s and set in the 1950s.  It contains a number of predictions about the future (World War II, Air Taxis, etc) but this is all completely incidental and most readers wouldn't even notice it.  According to your definition this is SF and could be marketed as such.  It occurs to me, though, that any SF fan reading Cold Comfort Farm looking for an SF novel would be completely disappointed, but anyone who read it coming away from, say, Wuthering Heights, would probably love it.

By my definition this could be a Mainstream Novel or a Comedy, and fans of each genre would get far more out of it than those looking for SF. 

Personally I absolutely love it, and highly reccomend it to anyone  ;D but I read very widely in the genres.

Secondly, the idea that the plot is the internal struggle of the narrator.  I would agree that this would count as a plot, but this was (as I commented earlier) resolved before the story began.  The conflict occured when the narrator left university and became a tour guide.  When we meet him at the beginning of the story he's already resigned to his fate, and we're effectively presented with a long epilogue.

Also: it's not a requirement that a plot resolution be a nice one, any resolution is fine. To this day 1984 by George Orwell is one of my favorite books, which has one of the most downbeat endings I've ever read, but couldn't possibly be ended any other way without defeating the whole point of the book.

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: finnmccool on May 02, 2007, 06:27:08 PM
I registered for this forum just so I could comment on this story.  I thought it was beautifully crafted.  It brought to my mind a quote I heard from somewhere, "the supreme gift of an artist is knowing when to stop."  I usually like tidy endings, but if the resolution in this story had been too tidy I think I would have forgotten it by now instead of having it linger in my mind these several days.

The reading was also excellent.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 03, 2007, 02:16:13 AM
madSimon -- you're asking me to defend my story, and this I refuse to do. Its record speaks for itself. If you don't like it, you don't like it and I'll have to live with that.

But I -will- defend my notion (which I think I have made clear is a majority opinion) of science fiction. There are certain stories and novels that screw up definitions. Back when I was a kid and the glaciers were still in California, Damon Knight and Jim Blish and Ajay Budrys called it the "Arrowsmith problem"...which is to say, it was just about impossible to come up with a definition of science fiction that disqualified Sinclair Lewis's ARROWSMITH, yet not a person alive considered it science fiction. Okay, this generation can call it the "Cold Comfort Farm problem" if you wish (I haven't read it; I'm trusting to your brief synopsis). There will be books and stories like that. But it proves nothing except that COLD COMFORT FARM isn't science fiction despite being set in the future (when written). You can probably name two or three others as well.

But my story used all the tropes of science fiction: an alien narrator, an alien planet, a far future setting, references to interstellar wars, alien physiologies, a consistent future in which I've set 25+ novels and 20+ stories, references to alien events. Is the story a metaphor? Of course it's a metaphor. Does that disqualify it as science fiction? Absolutely not.

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Chodon on May 03, 2007, 12:30:45 PM
Why is there always such a heated debate about what is Sci-Fi and what isn't?  I don't think we need to categorize everything out there into neat, little boxes.  This was a great story because it made me want to hear more.  I would like to see something about the 44th Antarean Dynasty.  I don't care if it fits into a "Sci Fi" genre or not.  I know what I like and this is it! 

Keep the great stories coming Mr. Resnick.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Simon Painter on May 03, 2007, 01:43:21 PM
I quite agree, Chodon.  Whether a story is SF or not isn't really an important issue.

I think the distinction is usefull purely because there are so many stories out there that it's usefull to know which ones are likely to appeal to you, due to being placed in the same category as a book you already like.

Had someone just finished, say, Pride & Prejudice by Jane Austen, it wouldn't be a particularly good idea to recommend them to try Starship Troopers!  That's perhaps an extreme example, but you get the idea.

Beyond this, though, I don't believe Genres to have any real importance.

My major critisisms of this story concern its plotting and characterisation, as I've said before it's genre is a side issue.

Simon Painter
Shropshire, UK
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: DKT on May 03, 2007, 05:22:18 PM
But I -will- defend my notion (which I think I have made clear is a majority opinion) of science fiction. There are certain stories and novels that screw up definitions. Back when I was a kid and the glaciers were still in California, Damon Knight and Jim Blish and Ajay Budrys called it the "Arrowsmith problem"...which is to say, it was just about impossible to come up with a definition of science fiction that disqualified Sinclair Lewis's ARROWSMITH, yet not a person alive considered it science fiction. Okay, this generation can call it the "Cold Comfort Farm problem" if you wish (I haven't read it; I'm trusting to your brief synopsis). There will be books and stories like that. But it proves nothing except that COLD COMFORT FARM isn't science fiction despite being set in the future (when written). You can probably name two or three others as well.
-- Mike Resnick

This got me thinking.  Does Cormac McCarthy's "the Road" fit into this category, or Michael Chabon's latest? 

I haven't read either, but their premises both sound like what SF/F fans (and most other people, actually) would consider SF/F but since the authors are who they aren't considered that.  I don't know how much this really matters to me -- I like both these authors anyway and look forward to reading the books.  What I do think is interesting is that people who normally wouldn't pay attention to something like this if it was on SF/F shelf and not a literature shelf will champion these books.  Not because they're better or worse because of it, just because where they are placed. 
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 03, 2007, 06:38:30 PM
Historically, writers/publishers tend to go where the money is. Kurt Vonnegut was clearly a science fiction writer, his early stories were in Galaxy and F&SF,  but somewhere along the way he and/or his publisher perceived that he could do much better as a mainstream writer, and so, without changing what he wrote, he embarked on a 50-year campaign of denying he wrote science fiction -- and it worked: the New York Literary Establishment, which should have known better, bought it.

Move the clock ahead to the early 1970s, and Silverberg, Ellison, Koontz and Malzberg all left the field because it was "too restrictive" (well, Koontz was honest; he left because he saw a way to get rich writing associated stuff and took it)...but public perceptions had changed, Dune and Riverworld and Heinlein and Clarke were all on the NY Times bestseller lists, and there is a huge economic difference between writing mainstream and writing blockbusters...and by 1980 everyone but Koontz was back in science fiction again. The thing is, by my (and most readers') definition, they never left; by madSimon's, they were probably never here, Malzberg ever, Ellison and Silverberg by the mid-1960s.


-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on May 03, 2007, 07:09:17 PM
I don't imagine that there are too many people out there that rip off the labels from the canned goods in their cupboard.  Why not? Because they like to know what they are about to consume before they open it.  This is why it's useful to label stuff.  Labelling all the cans "Food" is better than nothing, but can still lead to interesting results.

And this thread also shows why it's useful to know how other people classify things.  If Mr. Resnick offers me some supper warning me that it's a bit spicy, it's good to know what he considers spicy. 

That Mr. Resnick has a much larger acceptance of what he considers sci-fi than madsimonJ is also good to know. The opportunity to debate these views with someone with "insider knowledge" like Michael Resnick is too good to pass up.  Whether we agree or not, it's a perspective I couldn't get anywhere else. 

A key point, for me, is that each person's classification is valid - helps me understand what I might be in for. Majority opinion doesn't mean I'm wrong, just that I might disagree.
 
Escape Pod runs stories that meet Steven Eley's criteria, not mine or madsimonJ's or Mike Resnick's.  And while I like that there is a mix of stories at EscapePod, that won't stop me from telling people what I liked and disliked.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 04, 2007, 04:30:49 AM
I'm not arguing good or bad; that's up to each reader to decide, and any writer who argues that he wrote a good story when some critic or reader claims to dislike it is playing a fool's game. ("No! You only -think- you hated it! Actually, upon further consideration and six more readings, you'll realize that you really loved it!")

But I -will- argue definitions, at least to this extent: not all opimions have equal weight. Let me explain:

A few people here have denied that this story is "real" science fiction. Okay. Now, who actually dictates what is and isn't science fiction? First or all, of course, are the science fiction editors. The story sold to 5 of them in the USA and 8 of them in foreign countries.  So it's not just me saying that it's science fiction; there are 13 editors, many of them with unassailable credentials,  who clearly agree with me.

Who else decides what will be termed science fiction? Well, the readers. And other than actually buying the story or novel, how do the readers express that opinion? The most obvious way among the cognescenti, those most familiar with science fiction in all its forms and evolutions, is by voting for the Hugo. This story won the Hugo.

Is it possible that foreign science fiction editors were just buying it for my name value and didn't think it was science fiction, and that the definition really doesn't extend beyond our shores? Spanish fans voted it the Ignotus, which is the Spanish Hugo.

I'm not using these examples to prove that the story is good. If you don't like it, all the reviews, sales and awards in the world won't change your mind, and I'm not trying to. I am trying to show you that when madSimon (or whoever) says it's not science fiction and I say it is, it's not just his opinion against mine. It's his against 13 professional science fiction editors from all over the world, and the readers/voters of two countries.

-- Mike Resnick, who seems to have to point this out every time Steve runs one of my stories for grown-ups

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Swamp on May 04, 2007, 05:08:08 AM

-- Mike Resnick, who seems to have to point this out every time Steve runs one of my stories for grown-ups


Let's hope you have to point it out again soon.  :)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: SFEley on May 04, 2007, 07:38:12 AM
-- Mike Resnick, who seems to have to point this out every time Steve runs one of my stories for grown-ups

On the upside, the feedback to your stories always gives me great subject matter for intros.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 04, 2007, 07:54:50 AM
Steve --

It's been an education. Like most successful writers, I don't lack for self-confidence. I always thought I was good, I always thought I was commercial, I always thought I was pretty adept at the mechanics of pushing a noun up against a verb...

...but prior to Escape Pod, in more than 40 years as a full-time writer, I never thought I was controversial.

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on May 04, 2007, 12:05:59 PM
Mr. Resnick, right off, I really do appreciate that you're willing to debate these things with us.

I agree with your point that opinions have different weight.  A person's background and/or experience will definitely factor in how their opinion is held.  Clearly, if you gave someone advice on a story and I gave them advice on a story, yours will have more weight.  But my point is that it still doesn't mean you are right or that my opinion is invalid.  Note, above I said valid (not to be picky, just clarifying what I wrote).

Opinions are personal.  You may cite 35 more recognized authories on sci-fi, but it won't matter.

Let me put it this way - The tomato is by definition a fruit (http://plantanswers.tamu.edu/fruit/definefruit.html), but in 1893 the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Mother Nature and declared that tomatoes were not fruits, but rather vegetables (http://www.lawyersweeklyusa.com/nix_hedden.cfm). So if the Justices of the 1893 Supreme Court want to classify tomatoes as vegtables - well, I can't stop them (even if I had a time machine).  Anyone who takes their case before them will be told, "Yes, tomatoes are vegtables."  But if I ask a botany teacher, I will be told that tomatoes are fruit.  The tomato hasn't changed, just people's opinion of what it is.  I only care so I know what to expect when I ask for a fruit.

For me, it doesn't really matter how you classify this story (or any others), just so long as I understand your (and others) rules of classification. 

And for the record, I do consider this story a form of Sci-fi (in the same group as Star Wars).
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 04, 2007, 07:05:33 PM
Sonuvagun! I just remembered that -I'm- an editorial authority. I
have two Hugo nominations for Best Editor, so add me to those 13
other editors I quoted/listed.

For the record, I will freely admit that I haven't written a sci-fi story
since I adapted a Battlestar episode in 1980, and I have no intention
of ever writing another. I am one of that multitude of writers who
equates "sci-fi" with bug-eyed monsters, brass bras, and very bad
movies.

I write science fiction.

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on May 05, 2007, 07:33:56 PM
I am one of that multitude of writers who
equates "sci-fi" with bug-eyed monsters, brass bras, and very bad
movies.

I write science fiction.
Well, sir, since you have made it clear that you consider anything this side of Plato's Dialogues to be science fiction, your comment is no surprise.  However, you may be surprised to find the majority of discerning public opinion on my side in this case - this story is definitely sci-fi, up there with Star Wars and the Honor Harrington series.

I freely admit that I love both - even if one is a "ray-gun" Hero-Myth Archetype story and the other is a modernized version of Horatio Hornblower.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 06, 2007, 05:30:20 AM
I can't stop you or anyone else from using the term "sci-fi". I just come
from a generation that had to hide our science fiction magazines inside the far more socially acceptable Playboy on the bus because of the public perception of "sci-fi", and finds the term repugnant. "Sci-fi" was created by Forrest J Ackerman, whose enthusiasm was (and still is) boundless, and whose taste and discrimination was (and still is) just about nonexistent. He spent years popularizing the term "sci-fi" in his magazine, Famous Monsters of Filmland, and to many of us that is exactly what the term implies and represents.

We have a First Ammendment. Call the field what you will, and I'll defend to the death your right to do so. But I'll defend to the death my right to deny that I write "sci-fi".

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on May 06, 2007, 11:48:05 PM
Maybe it was just the "voice" in which I read your reply, but I smiled all the way through it.

I imagined this distinguished man saying "You whippersnappers and your sci-fi - I show you some real science fiction" ;)

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 07, 2007, 01:12:51 AM
I'm too young -- well, on the inside, anyway -- to call anyone a
whippersnapper. When I lose interest in writing, sports, and
naked ladies,  -then- it'll be time.

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: BrandtPileggi on May 07, 2007, 03:37:43 AM
I disagree. Minus the naked ladies. I think you've got something there.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mfitz on May 07, 2007, 08:43:15 PM
.

Being an American living in a foreign land will give you a different insight on not only other cultures, but your own people. I felt that this story portrayed both the tourist and local very accurately. I found myself nodding my head & smirking when the Antarean gave his educational background as this is kind of over qualification is rampant in other countries due to the severe lack of jobs.

Also, the family's reactions to the various landmarks and local street urchins was spot-on as well.


It doesn't have to even be another nation, American are just as insulting to their own countrymen.  Check out a tourist area in Amish country, Appalachia or near a reservation if you don't believe me.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: wakela on May 08, 2007, 01:27:23 AM
I'm showing up late in the game, and there isn't a lot to say that hasn't been said.  I pretty much agree with MadJSimon. 

The story is definitely science fiction, but it lacks a sense of wonder, which is why I, personally, read science fiction.   I still don't like being preached to, even if it's an alien who is doing the preaching.

I found the Americans insulting.  Could any other group have been portrayed so stereotypically?  True, we've all seen ugly Americans in our travels, but they stand out only because they are louder than the peace corps workers, English teachers, and backpackers.  This had the effect of putting me on the defensive from the beginning.

The story was about the tour guide, but I found him unlikeable.  I agree that a more interesting story would be to tell what brought him to this level.   As it stood I felt like I was being blamed for the sorrow of his country.  If the story were about him, why did the family have to be such jerks?  I felt like I was listening to four people competing to be the biggest prick.

Though having said that, I found the characters of the Americans more sympathetic.  Maybe it's because I was on the defensive.  The mother was open-minded and curious, the boy knowledgeable and intelligent, the father realistic and skeptical -- rightfully so, we discover.  These are traits not all cultures admire, but the West does, and I think all of us do, too.  The tour guide was arrogant, racist, overly religious (IMHO), and deceitful.   So now I've talked my way from "stereotypical" to "nuanced."  But there was still a heavy enough dose of ugly American to put me off. 

I would like to say that it is a real and rare treat for the author to participate in the discussion.  Thank you, Mr. Resnick.  I don't mean to bash your story, these are just my feelings.  I understand that a lot of people thought it was great.   
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on May 08, 2007, 11:21:59 AM
Though having said that, I found the characters of the Americans more sympathetic.  Maybe it's because I was on the defensive.  The mother was open-minded and curious, the boy knowledgeable and intelligent, the father realistic and skeptical -- rightfully so, we discover.  These are traits not all cultures admire, but the West does, and I think all of us do, too.  The tour guide was arrogant, racist, overly religious (IMHO), and deceitful.   So now I've talked my way from "stereotypical" to "nuanced."  But there was still a heavy enough dose of ugly American to put me off. 

The mother was curious, but short-sited, ignorant, and a little dim. She at least gets points for asking questions, even if the answers go whizzing right over her head.
The son only demonstrated an 8th grade education, was rude, whiny, and terribly disrespectful to everyone. His only interest in speaking up was to correct his father and listen to stories of carnage.
The father was arrogant, ignorant, pompous, and a jackass. He didn't give a rat's ass about being there or seeing anything. My guess is he would have been a whole lot happier back at the hotel bar hitting on the Venusian waitresses, but his dim-bulb wife whined until he capitulated.
I really don't see how those are positive traits in any culture.

In America there is a growing persecution of anyone who exhibits any kind of religion. The tour guide wasn't overly religious; in fact he was barely religious. Mistaking "religious" for "overly religious" happens a lot and is something I imagine a lot of the Christians on this board can relate to. Though not a Christian myself, I have several friends who are and often get thwacked about the head and neck whenever they stand firm on any kind of religious issue. Hermes wasn't a priest or monk, but a very educated historian who told only one story about the "Footprint of God" and had a lot of love and respect for his culture’s history.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 08, 2007, 04:58:17 PM
Thaurismunths: right on the button.

Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: wakela on May 09, 2007, 12:51:54 AM
Quote
The mother was curious, but short-sited, ignorant, and a little dim. She at least gets points for asking questions, even if the answers go whizzing right over her head.
The son only demonstrated an 8th grade education, was rude, whiny, and terribly disrespectful to everyone. His only interest in speaking up was to correct his father and listen to stories of carnage.
The father was arrogant, ignorant, pompous, and a jackass. He didn't give a rat's ass about being there or seeing anything. My guess is he would have been a whole lot happier back at the hotel bar hitting on the Venusian waitresses, but his dim-bulb wife whined until he capitulated.
I really don't see how those are positive traits in any culture.
Obviously, that is true, and that is the part I found personally insulting and uninteresting.
Also, we are seeing them though the eyes of Hermes, who is bitter and arrogant enough to see them as he wants to rather than as they are. 

No one thinks they are being an Ugly American Westerner when they travel to a poorer country, but I can't help but think that all of us are at some point to some degree, even if we do everything "right."  For me, seeing the positive traits in the family made me realize that sometimes I must look ignorant, disrespectful, or pompous to the locals even when I think I'm being open-minded, knowledgeable, and appropriately skeptical.   This made the story more interesting to me rather than seeing the family as people I had nothing in common with.

You're right about my comment about his religion.  I felt like I was going a little too far with it, so I'll take the hit. 
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mfitz on May 09, 2007, 01:00:37 PM

In America there is a growing persecution of anyone who exhibits any kind of religion. The tour guide wasn't overly religious; in fact he was barely religious. Mistaking "religious" for "overly religious" happens a lot and is something I imagine a lot of the Christians on this board can relate to. Though not a Christian myself, I have several friends who are and often get thwacked about the head and neck whenever they stand firm on any kind of religious issue.

I don't see that in real life, but I do see it in SF.  It's long been one of my pet peeves that in 90% of SF the only bad guys are ever practicing members of traditional religions.  I'm not foaming at the mouth religious myself, but I'm mostly Catholic. I think the almost complete lack of sympathetic people of faith in SF is a distortion of reality. 

I had to go back an listen to this story to even remember any religious comments, other than the one about the possible child messiah, and even it seemed more academic than devout to me.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Thaurismunths on May 09, 2007, 02:46:53 PM
In America there is a growing persecution of anyone who exhibits any kind of religion. The tour guide wasn't overly religious; in fact he was barely religious. Mistaking "religious" for "overly religious" happens a lot and is something I imagine a lot of the Christians on this board can relate to. Though not a Christian myself, I have several friends who are and often get thwacked about the head and neck whenever they stand firm on any kind of religious issue.
I don't see that in real life, but I do see it in SF.  It's long been one of my pet peeves that in 90% of SF the only bad guys are ever practicing members of traditional religions.  I'm not foaming at the mouth religious myself, but I'm mostly Catholic. I think the almost complete lack of sympathetic people of faith in SF is a distortion of reality. 
This probably doesn't apply to EP listeners, because I think we're all a little too hip to fall for it, but it's out there. I admit it's pretty sneaky, but anti-religious sentiment is common and becoming more so, but I wasn't aware of it until recently.
It doesn't take the form of "God Loving = Bad Person" as it does in SF, or anything that obvious. It likes to come dressed up like "equal rights for all religions," which usually means "equal rights for my religion." In misguided attempts to accept all religions it's becoming more and more important that you disavow all religions. Especially anything Christ-based.
For example, and from my perspective: I don't know if it's because of Christianity's popularity (making them a big target), their evangelical streak, political correctness has gone too far, or there's a grudge over that wacky Crusade thing 800 hundred years ago, but often just standing up and saying "Because I'm Christian, I think this is good/bad." is about enough to get oneself burned in effigy. Saying a prayer before dinner can get you branded as Very Christian. And don't even think of mentioning god, the bible, or church. On the other hand, a Muslim stopping to pray 5 times a day, participating in Ramadan, and making the Hajj is cool. A Jew keeping Kosher, celebrating Chanukah, and wearing a kippah makes them 'devote.'
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mr. Tweedy on May 09, 2007, 03:42:02 PM
Wow, I am surprised to hear this perception being expressed in a non-Christian forum.  I've been noticing it myself my whole life, but I didn't think Western culture's anti-Christian leaning was noticed by anyone on the "outside."  I guess it must be pretty obvious.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: DKT on May 09, 2007, 04:06:07 PM
I agree with Thaurismunths 100%.  There is a huge irony in embracing other religions but *not* Christianity.  That's probably partly do to Christianity being the majority religion in the US for so long.  Some of it -- like prayer at dinner -- is just looked at as weird, I suppose, and that's about it. But a lot of it is a backlash against Christians (and I do lump myself into that camp, although I don't consider myself conservative) because of angry/hateful things that are said in politics.  To be honest, that's the one thing that bums me out about my religion -- that when people are asked what they think of Christians,the good stuff like grace and love don't come to mind.  Instead, they remember the chants and picket signs and some of the really awful things Christians have said. 

I realize I'm completely off topic at this point (apologies to Steve and Mr. Resnick) but these comments really got me thinking and made me want to discuss this a bit more.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mr. Tweedy on May 09, 2007, 05:10:04 PM
I think that perception is mostly due to a concerted effort in the media to portray Christians in that light for the last few decades.  The mean, hateful "God-hates-fags" people are really a tiny minority, but the cameras always focus on them when they come out.  Christians in all fiction (not just sci-fi) have largely played stock roles as ignorant, supersitious fools in need of enlightenment or as crazed fanatics in need of restraint.  (Compare that with the concerted media effort to make Islam seem cool since 9/11.)

I'm going to go off on a little tangent here and say that I think all the talk about "tollerance" and "diversity" is really creating a new religion.  A religion which embraces both Christ and Buddha is neither Christianity nor Buddhism: It's something else.  It is not intelllecually honest to claim both Christ and Buddha, because they offer different routes to salvation.  The only way you can claim both is treat both as mere fiction, which is exactly the tennant that this New Religion holds: It's all fiction.  You can embrace everything because none of it has any substance anyway.

If I am to respect a person with a different religion then I have to be honest and say that his/her religion is wrong.  If I claim that our religions are equal, what I have really done is call his/her religion a fantasy without substance.  You can only embrace both if neither is real.

Is it cool to go off-topic?  I'm new here.  Is that rude?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: ClintMemo on May 09, 2007, 05:40:45 PM
I think that perception is mostly due to a concerted effort in the media to portray Christians in that light for the last few decades.  The mean, hateful "God-hates-fags" people are really a tiny minority, but the cameras always focus on them when they come out. 

The perception is completely different depending on where you live.
I live in one of the many states that passed changes to their state constitutions banning same sex marriages. In Kentucky, where I live, it passed by a HUGE margin - like 80% approval.
Where I live, people I think of as "blindly religious" are far from a tiny minority.

Now I'm taking it further off-topic.   
Maybe we should start another thread.....
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: DKT on May 09, 2007, 05:58:56 PM
I think that perception is mostly due to a concerted effort in the media to portray Christians in that light for the last few decades.  The mean, hateful "God-hates-fags" people are really a tiny minority, but the cameras always focus on them when they come out.  Christians in all fiction (not just sci-fi) have largely played stock roles as ignorant, supersitious fools in need of enlightenment or as crazed fanatics in need of restraint.  (Compare that with the concerted media effort to make Islam seem cool since 9/11.)

I'm going to go off on a little tangent here and say that I think all the talk about "tollerance" and "diversity" is really creating a new religion.  A religion which embraces both Christ and Buddha is neither Christianity nor Buddhism: It's something else.  It is not intelllecually honest to claim both Christ and Buddha, because they offer different routes to salvation.  The only way you can claim both is treat both as mere fiction, which is exactly the tennant that this New Religion holds: It's all fiction.  You can embrace everything because none of it has any substance anyway.

If I am to respect a person with a different religion then I have to be honest and say that his/her religion is wrong.  If I claim that our religions are equal, what I have really done is call his/her religion a fantasy without substance.  You can only embrace both if neither is real.

Is it cool to go off-topic?  I'm new here.  Is that rude?

Cool to go off topic?  I don't think it's a problem, in general, although the discussion might get moved to a different area of the forums.  I'd move it myself if I knew how to transfer the conversation.  ;)  Maybe we could even start up a new discussion about this somewhere.  

I don't believe that Christians scream mean-spirited things in general but I've heard an unbelievable amount from the pulpit that is exactly that.  I live in an LA suburb, and I've attended 3 churches seriously in the last 6 years and have been frustrated with all of them because of things I've heard coming out of the pulpit or the congregation (we're currently looking for another church).  I heard one pastor literally say that AIDS was God's way of punishing homosexuals only a few years ago.  Like I said before, I'm not a conservative, although I was brought up that way.  But being a liberal in an evangelical church makes me feel like a leper sometimes.  Three years ago when people found out I didn't vote for Bush and didn't support the war in Iraq, I half expected someone to come up and tell me to move to France :)  

And as far as tolerance goes, I took apologetic-type classes at my private junior-high that made fun of other people's relgions.  As if believing a virgin gave birth to the messiah is a completely logical thing to accept  ;)

So I don't think I agree that more tolerance creates a different religion.  The idea of tolerance is so that people will be educated and understand the different kinds of religion and have respect for them.  I can be a Christian and respect people who have different faiths than I do without accepting what they believe as my own faith.  The important thing about tolerance is listening to what others believe and realizing, whether we believe it or not, that there's some value to it (and we don't need to go crazy invading anyone's holy land).

I'd love to see Christianity portrayed as more than just a stereotype.  But at the same time, I love seeing it poked and prodded, too.  I'm actually a big fan of "Burning Bush" and I enjoyed "the Capo of Darkness," too (see me trying to stay on topic?).  I don't even know that I'd consider those stories blasphemous, even though I think Steve Ely might.  In the end, if I can't laugh at myself, then I'm taking myself way too seriously and I'm really screwed.   ;)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mfitz on May 09, 2007, 06:58:34 PM
.
Where I live, people I think of as "blindly religious" are far from a tiny minority.

Now I'm taking it further off-topic.   
Maybe we should start another thread.....

Same goes for Southwest Ohio.  No one is trying to make Islam cool here.  Nuke the ragheads is more the tone. 

People called in on local talk radio, and complained in the Cincy Inkliar that other than Christian clergy took part in some of the Virginia Tech memorial services because that somehow was a slam at what it really means to be American.

You do see people pray in public eating places here.  I've been told that because I'm RC I'm an idol worshiper not a real Christians.  We have a Creation Science Natural History Museum going in across the river for heaven's sake.  How much more crazy Christian could the area get?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mr. Tweedy on May 09, 2007, 07:02:53 PM
I think we need to rethink what is meant by the word "tollerance."  Like many terms, the meaning of the word has become polluted and turned into Newspeak.

What tollerance actually means is this: You allow others to believe or behave in ways you disaprove of any you don't harras or assault them for it.  You leave them alone.

But that's not how it's come to be used.  Now, when people say it, they usually mean that you must accept other people's belliefs and behviors as right.  You must not disaprove.  In fact, you must approve heartily and do it with a smile.

These two are not nearly the same.  What DKT says is true, "The idea of tolerance is so that people will be educated and understand the different kinds of religion and have respect for them.  I can be a Christian and respect people who have different faiths than I do without accepting what they believe as my own faith."  But that isn't how the word "tollerance" is usually used in 2007.

To ClintMemo: I don't think that defining marriage as male-female has anything to do with either intollerance or blind belief.  There's a lot more to the argument than that and homophobia need not enter into it.

Side note: I guess I've been lucky in not encountering that sort of speech from the pulpit.  I can't say I've heard anything like that in any of the churches I've gone to.  (Not that I would go to a church where the pastor makes such an ignorant statments.  Most AIDS victims are heterosexual anyway.)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 09, 2007, 08:03:33 PM
I had no idea my little story would generate this type off discussion, but as long as it has...

I am a lifelong athiest. I wish I believed in God, because I see what comfort such a belief brings to others -- and having just passed my 65th birthday, I would take enormous comfort in believing in an afterlife.

In my books and stories I have tried to treat all religions with respect...and
I caught a lot of hell for it when I was writing the Kirinyaga stories. I have had protagonists of every faith and no faith, and I have even given God speaking lines in a few stories.

I have no problem with anyone's faith. My problem comes when they insist that they have a direct line to God, know His tastes and desires, and have the right to enforce those belief on others using God as their authority. "God is against same sex marriage." "Allah says kill all unbelievers." "Jehovah says you must keep kosher." "You obey God's rules as my church/temple/mosque/shrine interprets them or you've got a one-way ticket to hell."

My only answer is, "Yeah? Well, I was talking to God just this afternoon and He didn't say anything about that to me -- and come to think of it, He never mentioned -you- at all."

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: DKT on May 09, 2007, 08:16:01 PM
With total respect, Mr. Tweedy, the dictionary on my desk at work defines tolerance as "The capacity for or the practice of recongizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others."  Which is pretty much where I'm coming from whenever *I* use the word tolerance.

As far as the church thing goes, it really is weird.  That incident was the worst thing I'd ever heard from a pulpit, but I've heard subtle gay-bashing and the villification of liberals at the other churches I attended in those 6 years too.  Like I said, we live close to LA.  It's strange that in a place so big and so liberal, we've struggled so hard to find a church.  We've met some great people at different churches and maintain friendships with them, but we don't go to any of those churches anymore...

I also just started a new discussion about Christianity in Fiction here:
http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=815.0 (http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=815.0)

I'm attempting to be proactive but really I'm procrastinating! ;)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on May 09, 2007, 08:40:38 PM
I do agree with the comments about the anti-religios slant within sci-fi, though I would admend it to say I've never seen a hero in sci-fi that is very religious.  Lots of the sci-fi baddies are non-religious, as well, though.

I will add my voice to the idea that where you live in the States affects the prevalence of  "Western culture's anti-Christian leaning".  Having recently returned to Canada after living in the Indianapolis for nearly 4 years.  Many people who I thought should have minded their own business were happy to mutter under their breath that I was essentially going to Hell. 

I think the issue is that Christianity is so prevelant in North America - only it's holidays are considered statutory holidays, you have Easter and Christmas decorations in stores, on streets - songs on the radio etc..  I think the other part is that NA christians are alot more open in the faith - the only way I know you are kosher is if pay attention to what you eat.  Muslims don't pray at there desk - they find a quiet, out of the way room.  I've been in restaurants where the whole family with clasp hands, bow their heads and speak a prayer - personally, I'm unoffended by it, but my point is that it is very obvious, and how many other religions do that (in NA)?

Look at the backlash against headscarves. Here is a very obvious form of religious belief and it is banned in public schools in France.

Quote from: Mr. Tweedy
I don't think that defining marriage as male-female has anything to do with either intollerance or blind belief.  There's a lot more to the argument than that and homophobia need not enter into it.
How is denying same sex marriage about anything but homophobia? I would really like to know your arguements.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mr. Tweedy on May 09, 2007, 08:46:11 PM
What dictionary are you using?  I'm using the Oxford American Dictionary (the one that comes with a Mac).

The OAD defines tolerance as "1.) the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions of behaviors that one does not necessarily agree with.  2.) the capacity to endure continued subjection to something... without adverse reaction"

I don't think tolerance implies either appreciation or understanding, just abstaining from persecution or antagonism.  My dictionary agrees.

Appreciating and understanding contrary viewpoints is good and important, but it isn't implied in tolerance.  You can tolerate something you don't understand.

Checking out your other topic...

Mike Resnick: Don't confuse God with religion.  God is a person.  Religion is something people do.  People can be wrong and therefore religion can be corrupt, but that isn't necessarily a reflection on who God is.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on May 09, 2007, 09:04:13 PM
Quote from: DKT
"The capacity for or the practice of recongizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others." 
No where does DKT's definition mean that you have to agree either.

Quote from: Mr. Tweedy
Now, when people say it, they usually mean that you must accept other people's belliefs and behviors as right.
This is likely just the company you keep. 
Quote from: Mr. Tweedy
If I am to respect a person with a different religion then I have to be honest and say that his/her religion is wrong.
I'm not exactly sure what you meant by this.  Are you saying that you personally can only respect a Buddist if you personally think his is wrong and bound for Hell?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mfitz on May 09, 2007, 09:05:02 PM

My only answer is, "Yeah? Well, I was talking to God just this afternoon and He didn't say anything about that to me -- and come to think of it, He never mentioned -you- at all."

-- Mike Resnick

That's always what I think in my head, but I almost never get the nerve to say it out loud.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: DKT on May 09, 2007, 09:13:15 PM
Clearly our dictionaries need a grudge match.  I'm using the American Heritage Dictionary.  It came with my desk ;)

Whatever the case, it seems we don't agree on the definition of tolerance, with or without our dictionaries.  But I get where you're coming from.  

And I'm thrown off by your repsonse to Mr. Resnick, too.  How did he confuse God and religion?
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Mr. Tweedy on May 09, 2007, 09:39:05 PM
To slic:

When homosexuals demand that they be legally able to marry, they are asking for the state to formally endorse and sanction their behavior.  This is far more than asking for tollerance: They already have that (as they should).

Homosexuals are already completely free to live their lifestyle and have access to the same legal rights as heterosexuals, including the oft-bemoaned inheritance and medical consent rights.  These arrangements can be made with a stop at any law office: A wedding is not required.

The only reason for homosexuals to be able to marry is to give them saction, for society to formally state that their behavior is good, healthy, moral, etc, and furthmore to hallow it and give it reverence and respect.  This is a demand for far more than tollerance: It is a demand that each of us change our beliefs to match theirs.  It is a demand that I alter my morality, my religious beliefs and my view of my own sexuality in subservience to theirs.  It isn't enough that America tolerates: America must approve, agree and endorse.

In other words, it is a minority attempting, through law, to force its beliefs upon people who just want to be left alone.

Fear of or aversion to homosexuals is not part of my reasoning.  I've lived in the same appartment building with homosexuals, worked closely with them, attended classes with them and invited them to dinner in my home.  Homophobia isn't the issue here.

(Talk about off-topic!)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Holden on May 09, 2007, 11:02:36 PM
I have an interest in etymology. The discussion on tolerant/intolerant caught my eye. Instead of posting on this thread, I will start a new one. Any further discussion on the meaning of 'intolerant' is welcome and encouraged there.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: slic on May 09, 2007, 11:13:52 PM
Mr. Tweedy,

Quote from: Mr. Tweedy
...they are asking for the state to formally endorse and sanction their behavior
We will have to simply disagree about your interpretation of the reason for gay marriage.
For me, it is simply the desire to be included in all aspects of society.  It's not much different in my view to not letting blacks marry, or not letting women own property.  Many, many people get married with no religious intent/inferance (myself included).  It's not like gay people demand to get marriage in your church - I'm sure most would be satisfied with a Justice of the Peace.

How are you not adverse to something if you wish to exclude it - "I don't hate you, I just don't want you in my house"?

And to get pointed - what about sodomites, child molesters, etc.?  They are allowed to marry - in some cases even lead a church (until they are publically exposed, of course).
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: SFEley on May 09, 2007, 11:54:54 PM

THIS. ENDS. NOW.

I'm sorry I haven't been keeping sufficient tabs here.  I'm too damn tired right now to go back and figure out where the off-topic talk started. I don't particularly feel like moving it all, especially since the story author's chimed in.  And I do not want to lock a story comments thread against future feedback.

But it ends.  Any future comment in this thread that is not specifically and completely about "The 43 Antarean Dynasties" by Mike Resnick is going to get deleted immediately.  If you want to talk about gay marriage or religion or whatever the hell you want to, we have a Gallimaufry forum.  It means "miscellaneous."  Look it up.  All things are welcome there, until people start personally insulting each other.  That hasn't happened yet, but my nerves are fraying.

Moderators, you have your orders.  Phasers on delete.

I look forward to the continuing discussion about the story.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: ClintMemo on May 11, 2007, 04:04:07 PM
Long after listening, I realized that the Tour Guide reminded me of Kif from Futurama - except that his was not funny.
(though I remember laughing out loud at some the idiotic things the father said)

Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: JaredAxelrod on May 11, 2007, 06:36:55 PM
Long after listening, I realized that the Tour Guide reminded me of Kif from Futurama - except that his was not funny.
(though I remember laughing out loud at some the idiotic things the father said)

There was a Kif-esque tone to the narration, wasn't there?  In accent and the cadence.

...That vocal choice makes a lot of sense, now that I think about it...
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: ClintMemo on May 11, 2007, 06:50:17 PM
Long after listening, I realized that the Tour Guide reminded me of Kif from Futurama - except that his was not funny.
(though I remember laughing out loud at some the idiotic things the father said)

There was a Kif-esque tone to the narration, wasn't there?  In accent and the cadence.

...That vocal choice makes a lot of sense, now that I think about it...

The voice, definitely, but also the character itself - mild mannered, very capable, very under-appreciated, having to sadly serve an arrogant and less capable man.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 12, 2007, 12:58:56 AM
If you all think he resembles Kif of Futurama, then probably he does -- but the author confesses to having no idea who or what Kif and Futurama are.

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: ClintMemo on May 12, 2007, 01:16:14 AM
If you all think he resembles Kif of Futurama, then probably he does -- but the author confesses to having no idea who or what Kif and Futurama are.

-- Mike Resnick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama

Futurama is an animated television show created by Matt Groenig (sp), creator of "The Simpsons."   It is a science fiction comedy set in the year 3000.  I could go on praising it at great lengths (as could lots of others around here.)  In the US, it was on the Fox television network for 4 seasons and is currently in reruns on Cartoon Network almost nightly.   There are new episodes in the works to be shown on (I think) Comedy Central. 

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0149460/3009800_2_5.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.imdb.com/rg/photos-name/summary//gallery/ss/0149460/Ss/0149460/3009800_2_5.jpg.html%3Fpath%3Dgallery%26path_key%3D0149460&h=637&w=485&sz=25&hl=en&start=1&sig2=rb73HfimgYNGeMZgvPc-EA&tbnid=alh8pJybtUE8JM:&tbnh=137&tbnw=104&ei=hhRFRuXXD4WqhQS3hMDGCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dfuturama%2Bkif%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG
More specifically, Kif was the 1st officer to the very over-the-top Captain Zapp Brannigan. 

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0149460/3009800_2_5.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.imdb.com/rg/photos-name/summary//gallery/ss/0149460/Ss/0149460/3009800_2_5.jpg.html%3Fpath%3Dgallery%26path_key%3D0149460&h=637&w=485&sz=25&hl=en&start=1&sig2=rb73HfimgYNGeMZgvPc-EA&tbnid=alh8pJybtUE8JM:&tbnh=137&tbnw=104&ei=hhRFRuXXD4WqhQS3hMDGCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dfuturama%2Bkif%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG


Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: mike-resnick on May 12, 2007, 01:47:17 AM
OK, that explains it. I haven't watched a network TV series since 1980. I decided I could either watch TV or write -- I'm sure madSimon thinks I made the wrong decision <g> -- but I couldn't do both. So it's been 27 years and counting, and somehow I do not feel culturally deprived.

-- Mike Resnick
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: BrandtPileggi on May 14, 2007, 02:45:13 PM
Oh my God, that's funny. I thought of Kif the whole time! Ha!

The story was great! I have a degree in Anthropology and one of my professors (and now good friend) was one of the people that did the field research with Napolean Chagnon in the Amazon with the Yanamamo. With all the Eco-tourism taking off, he had endless accounts like this one. This is SO dead on, it's sad. Great story Mr. Resnick.

-Brandt Pileggi
(sorry for grammar and spelling. @ work)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Nora on May 16, 2007, 07:44:47 PM
Wow.  Steve's comment in the recent episode about the controversy regarding this story lured me here, because I wondered what on earth could've been so controversial about it.  But after skimming this topic, what this seems to boil down to is that it's not the story itself that was controversial, but the dominant-culture guilt (or resentment thereof) that it triggered.  Most of the comments seem to reflect this in one way or another -- for example, the repeated comment that the characters were two-dimensional.  Yes, they were, if you expected development of the tourists -- but the story wasn't about them.  (I found it interesting that so many readers tried to identify with the tourists, rather than the tour guide protagonist.)  It would've co-opted the story entirely if the author had focused any further on them, IMO; the point was to see people like this through the lens of the tour guide.  Yeah, it's an ugly, one-dimensional picture -- but what do you expect?  Why would any tour guide try to delve further into the personal lives of his clients so as to develop a more nuanced understanding of their behavior (beyond what's necessary to make a decent tip)?  Why would he give a damn about the culture they come from, when he can learn all he needs to know about it from the behavior of its people? 

The Antarean characters, in particular the tour guide, were well depicted, IMO.  The examination of the tour guide's internal conflicts, his hopes and ultimate hopelessness, gave the story a richness and realism that's unfortunately rare in science fiction, so I'm glad the genre saw fit to recognize it with a Hugo.  I'm also glad EP ran it for me to hear.  Bravo!
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Listener on May 16, 2007, 08:30:05 PM
But after skimming this topic, what this seems to boil down to is that it's not the story itself that was controversial, but the dominant-culture guilt (or resentment thereof) that it triggered. 

One of my Poli Sci classes was "Politics of the Developing World", and I really got a lot of dominant-culture guilt out of that class.

Like many others, I got the "American tourists in a Buddhist monastery in Asia" vibe, but I still liked the story.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: robertmarkbram on July 07, 2007, 07:51:49 AM
A magnificent story.

Nora's comments reflected upon "dominant-culture guilt". The sense of sadness portrayed through the down trodden narrator really got to me. Damn tourists! I think that "dominant-culture guilt" is a good thing to have. It reminds us that everything we do as a community/society/nation ... and global community has a cost. Finding this expressed in Mike Resnick's "The 43 Antarean Dynasties" reminds me that one day, I believe we will be in a position to decide what that cost will be on other planets as well.

I empathised strongly with the narrator because of my own "dominant-culture guilt". I certainly felt disappointed when the blind guy was revealed not to be the new Neo. :)

Of course, it is not just about cost. Stephen Eley expressed it as the entropy of history.

That poem [Shelley's "Ozymandias"], and "The 43 Antarean Dynasties," hit a nerve for me.  They're about the entropy of history and the universe -- and also about fighting that entropy.  To me this is a core of life.

I admire the way Steve put it, and yet I feel conflicted when I hold it up against my own thoughts of "dominant-culture guilt". Nothing lasts for ever (that's entropy), yet the Antarean's didn't fall apart like a statue eroding over time; guilt was a distinct flavour in this story.


hmmm.. everything else I was going to reflect on has already been said. (http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=759.msg9362#msg9362) :)

I only wish I could visit the walk Spiral Ramp to Heaven. Imagine the photos I could take of a building large enough to contain God! I could take the photo on my mobile and SMS it to my friends..

Rob
:)
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: El Barto on September 08, 2009, 03:59:49 PM
I discovered Escape Pod earlier this year and have spent the last few months joyfully listening to more than 150 previous episodes.   I'm delighted to see the discussions taking place here in the forums and hope to add some small value to them as time unfolds.

Having now also read all the comments posted here -- something that took almost as long as listening to the story -- I provide my feedback with those comments in mind.

The first thing I thought after listening to this story was, "we are SO not ready to explore the galaxy:  I could see this happening down to every last detail."   Sure, our space explorers are likely to be our best and brightest and most polite but what about the second, third, and tenth waves or humans that teem into the galaxy?   

It also got me thinking about how we as a civilization and collection of cultures need to evolve and mature, and wondering how that will (hopefully) happen someday.  For the life of me I can't remember having read a good story -- ever -- that does a good job of explaining how we could/will grow up as a society.  What makes it happen?   Who is the catalyst?  Do we need to hit bottom first?  Is it a shared threat from within or without? 

So, in that regard, the story was a success in that it definitely made me think.

And, while I am one of those people who absolutely loves hard sci-fi (and will throw a hissy fit when Asimov's or Analog or Escape Pod runs something that is utterly devoid of Sci-fi elements**), I'm quite fine with occasional stories like this that use a distant world as the setting for holding up a mirror to current human society.  In that regard, I disagree with the posters who said you could have just done this in Egypt.   If this story was in Egypt we would have all known what was coming.   Here we learned the story of their culture and every new fact provided insight into their world.   In the end there may not have been many twists but the future may really look as Resnick painted it here, and for me that made for a good listen.

All in all I felt it was a good story but didn't love it.


-Bart

**  The only example I can think of, of a Mike Resnick story that seemed utterly devoid of sci-fi and yet was published in a sci-fi magazine was "Alasdair’s Baffle’s Emporium of Wonders," in the Jan 2008 issue of Asimov's.   I thought that story (which was touching) contained zero sci-fi but rather was about "magic" and the devil.   Contrast to that to his other works I've loved such as Distant Replay from April 2007 Asimov's.



Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: El Barto on September 08, 2009, 04:40:57 PM
I also just realized that Mike Resnick's "Article of Faith," Episode 193 here, is one of my favorites.   I also very much enjoyed his "Barnaby in Exile," and "Down Memory Lane," Episodes 073 and 055 respectively.  I will gladly read everything he reads!

-Bart
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Unblinking on February 25, 2010, 06:45:21 PM
I've loved some of Resnick's other stories that have appeared here, in particular Barnaby in Exile.  He's a very good writer, able to trigger emotions in the reader (as the responses to every one of his stories has shown)

But this story fell flat for me.  A few reasons that I've figured out:
1.  No plot movement.  There was definitely conflict, the internal conflict of the guide.  But nothing about him or the tourists changes from beginning to end.  I guess that's the point, that nothing is going to change, but to me, having nothing change tends to make the story very dull.
2.  It carried a familiar theme, showing the evils of Western tourism, but didn't offer anything new to the theme.
3.  I would've really liked to get to know the guide's point of view, in particular where his views did not mesh with my views.  In this respect, I think the story would've been better served to make the tourists not so clear infuriating tourist stereotypes.  I'm not saying those stereotypes aren't sometimes true, but these are the sort of tourists that I, as a fellow tourist, would be pissed off at too.  If the tourists had behaved in a way that I would've thought was reasonably acceptable, but seeing into the guide's thoughts I could see how their behavior was infuriating, then it might've inspired new insight into how I behave when I travel.  Instead I was told that these people were jerks, when it was already clear that they were jerks.
4.  The SF setting weakened the emotional impact for me.  I'm not trying to re-open the can of worms that is the "Is it SF?" question.  My dislike for it is similar to my dislike for the fantasy setting of Narrative of a Beast's Life over on Podcastle.  Both take real-life settings which carry a great deal of emotion with them and make a minor change to make them fantastic/SFnal.  But the original setting is already so emotionally strong because these things REALLY happen, and moving them to another world where everything still pretty much works the same takes away some emotional impact.  If there were some traits of the alien world, whether it be differences in aliens to humans, or the materials they had for construction, or an infinite number of other possibilites, than the world could've been used to enhance the emotional impact, but because it was so similar to the real place it was based on, it just became a dim reflection with nothing vivid of its own.

Somewhere back in the topic thread was the question of why some books were in the literature section and others in science fiction/fantasy section, and how SF/fantasy looked down upon by many who declare themselves lovers of literature.  I don't have anything profound to add to the discussion but I wrote a blog post a while back that had a paragraph about this I particularly liked:

"Classic science fiction and fantasy is generally classified as literature also–I believe I’ve seen The Time Machine, A Clockwork Orange, 1984, and other classics in there. Is Speculative fiction like a fine wine, somehow gaining quality as it ages? If we’d been alive to taste of The Time Machine shortly after it was written, would it have ruined the experience because it wasn’t old enough? Maybe if I take a George R. R. Martin novel and put it in the book cellar, and pull it out again in several generations, it will have become literature, perfectly aged and fetching a handsome price from literature connoisseurs who will riffle the pages, sniff the binding, and read only a paragraph at a time so as not to be overwhelmed by the power of the prose between the covers."

Original post:  http://www.diabolicalplots.com/?p=155
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Scattercat on February 25, 2010, 08:08:29 PM
I think the comparison to "Narrative of a Beast's Life" is apt, and the reasoning sound.  I, too, read this one and said, "So why did this need to be actual aliens?"  It would have been MORE impressive, not less, if we were reading about real treasures and real ancient cultures here on Earth instead of hyperbolic miles-high monuments and exaggeratedly long-lived dynasties.
Title: Re: EP101: The 43 Antarean Dynasties
Post by: Boggled Coriander on February 27, 2010, 02:20:10 AM
On its own terms, this story was very well-written and engaging.

However, I must admit I really dislike the trope where humans/Earthlings represent The West (Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand) and nonhumans/extraterrestrials represent The Other (the whole rest of the world).  I'm willing to forgive when it's done really well, but I still groan inwardly whenever I encounter it.

To me, that's what this story has in common with "Narrative of a Beast's Life".  Also maybe with the EP story "Tk’tk’tk", though that one was cool and well-written enough that I'm willing to forgive.  I think Star Trek writers used this trope a lot too, maybe unconsciously.