Escape Artists

News:

News

ATTENTION: NEW FORUM THEME Please see here for details: http://forum.escapeartists.net/index.php?topic=13188.0

Author Topic: fantasy women  (Read 43171 times)

hautdesert

  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 315
Reply #20 on: April 20, 2008, 11:11:20 PM
Deflective, Heradel is right--contains isn't the same as about.  I performed no gymnastics at all.  Significance is very important--as it happens, the genders of the oppressors and oppressed in Fear of Dragons is so insignificant that you could change it and not change the story in any essentials.  It would still be about the same things, it would still be the same story.  When something is essential to the story, removing it destroys the story, or changes it radically.

It's your assumptions, not what the story was about, that makes you see the genders of the oppressed as somehow essential.

Heradel is also correct that the sexual attraction angle would have worked in Fiery horse if both had been male, or both female, or if the genders had been reversed.

And, you know, pretty much everything else that Heradel said is right on the nose.



deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #21 on: April 20, 2008, 11:30:12 PM
Bdoomed, Heradel, i'm almost certain this wasn't intentional but between the two of you you just reminded me that you're moderators and asked me to stop arguing. i need to know that you weren't asking me as moderators.

i've gone out of my way to move any and all conversation on this topic into one thread and have only talked to the people that were already talking about it. if i've gotten shrill or there's something i should be doing please let me know, i'd prefer a message as not to distract from the thread.



Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #22 on: April 20, 2008, 11:46:15 PM
Bdoomed, Heradel, i'm almost certain this wasn't intentional but between the two of you you just reminded me that you're moderators and asked me to stop arguing. i need to know that you weren't asking me as moderators.

i've gone out of my way to move any and all conversation on this topic into one thread and have only talked to the people that were already talking about it. if i've gotten shrill or there's something i should be doing please let me know, i'd prefer a message as not to distract from the thread.

Bdoomed might have been, I wasn't. I was involved in the thread, so I have a conflict of interest, which was why I asked Bdoomed to come in and take a look. I was almost about to hit post, went away to grab something to eat, got back and he'd posted. I had the post, wanted to respond, which I did, and as stated, I'm out of the thread unless my blue stars are needed.

As a rule, we don't usually put the breaks on threads. I'm pretty sure all the non-spam threads that have been locked I can count on one hand. Personally I wouldn't intervene in a thread unless someone's exercise of free speech was infringing on the rights of others. Usually via ad hominem attacks or through hate speech/ one of the bad -isms. Personally I feel like your statement concerning Orwellian mental gymnastics crossed the ad hominem line, but being COI'd, my text here has no added weight save that of someone that's been here for a while.

I Twitter. I also occasionally blog on the Escape Pod blog, which if you're here you shouldn't have much trouble finding.


deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #23 on: April 21, 2008, 12:42:00 AM
the three podcasts ... don't talk to each other ... So if you are going to criticize them, you have to do so each on its own basis.

the point i'm trying to eventually get to will eventually cover all the fiction. i agree that the way this thread wound up in the podcastle forum is unfortunate, there's no one place it belongs.

It's your assumptions, not what the story was about, that makes you see the genders of the oppressed as somehow essential.

ah, here's the problem. i wasn't trying to claim that it was essential, just that it was definitely, blatantly a part of it.

i may have been misusing the word theme, perhaps device would be more appropriate. would people be able to generally agree if i stated my position as follows?

the recent stories have relied on male oppression as a device.
(include all standard qualifiers about being non-accusative and only referring to the stories previously mentioned)



Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #24 on: April 21, 2008, 12:56:46 AM
Hey Deflective,

I appreciate that you're still here and willing to chat, even with so much disagreement. I get that you're being non-accusative ,and I really appreciate it. These are definitely issues to think about.

I'll say that some of the reasons I actually like "Run of the Fiery Horse" and "Giant" are because they don't just work with male oppression.

"Run of the Fiery Horse" has this beautiful, healthy relationship between Li Chi and Master Li. He's a fantastic father. He knows her flaws; he knows how deeply she doesn't fit in their culture; he urges her to medidate and find peace. He loves her anyway, and she trusts him.

I see "Giant" as one in a long line of fairy tale retellings that works specifically to counteract the obnoxious black and white assumptions of folktales. What's appealing to me about "Giant" is the giant's tenderness as he strives to be a better person, his need to trust and to love, his having been cut off from affection since he was a small child and his desire to reconnect to that affection. He's willing to risk (and lose) his life in order to pretend that he's loved -- and to me, that's so much more poignant and interesting than the original fairy tale version, in which he reveals his secret thorugh accident, stupidity or arrogance.

I actually made the comment to my fiance a few days ago that I see this as a story of male empowerment -- if we were to use the framing of the men's rights movement, we could see the giant as a gender-deviant male, one who is not like his alpha male father, who's using the tools at his disposal to obtain love in a forbidding environment, and who is ultimately screwed over by society's (his mother's, his father's, the princess's) expectations of what an alpha male, a giant, must be.

As a side point, in "For Fear of Dragons," "Run of the Fiery Horse," and my story "Heartstrung" (which is in the run of what you're seeing as feminist stories -- and, as the author, I can definitely say it was intended to be a feminist story) women are all contributing to the oppression of other women. It's not Master Li who wants to bind Li Chi's feet; it's Dowager Eng who crows about how her massive feet and massive energy must be contained. The protagonist of For Fear of Dragons is introduced to the normalcy of her role as sacrifice by her mother. And the seamstress in "Heartstrung" is, perhaps, the piece's main villain -- she chooses to hurt her daughter, as she has been hurt, and fails (perhaps understandably, if I did my job) to envision an active method to end the cycle of violence that is perpetuated by mothers against their daughters. One of the things I was trying (perhaps unsuccessfully) to establish in that story was women's role in oppression.

That's just how I see the stories. I'm just trying to share what I think; I don't want you to feel overwhelmed or anything. I hope to meet you in the same spirit you're offering your criticism, by explaining my take, in case there's something there that's a litlte interesting. I hope it's a little helpful, anyway.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2008, 01:00:46 AM by Rachel Swirsky »



Bdoomed

  • Pseudopod Tiger
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5282
  • Mmm. Tiger.
Reply #25 on: April 21, 2008, 01:29:29 AM
No, i would make it clear if I were acting as a moderator, perfectly clear.  sorry if i confused.  i was merely trying to point out the rediculousness of this argument, and i stand by my conviction.  If you still want to carry on, feel free, just keep it light and healthy and i wont be convinced to end the argument completely.

Yes i want the argument to stop, but not as a moderator, as a citizen of the forum.  I just think its completely rediculous.  im not going to opress anyone from stating their opinion, as long as it is not overly offensive.  Freedom of speech until you piss me off :D (haha)

I'd like to hear my options, so I could weigh them, what do you say?
Five pounds?  Six pounds? Seven pounds?


hautdesert

  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 315
Reply #26 on: April 21, 2008, 02:02:34 AM


It's your assumptions, not what the story was about, that makes you see the genders of the oppressed as somehow essential.

ah, here's the problem. i wasn't trying to claim that it was essential, just that it was definitely, blatantly a part of it.

i may have been misusing the word theme, perhaps device would be more appropriate. would people be able to generally agree if i stated my position as follows?

the recent stories have relied on male oppression as a device.
(include all standard qualifiers about being non-accusative and only referring to the stories previously mentioned)

No, actually, I don't agree. About Fear of Dragons using male oppression of women as a device, I mean. 

The argument could be made about Fiery Horse--but once again, I wouldn't say it's being used as a device there.  It's an integral part of the setting. Any society that practices footbinding, and exposes infant girls because their most suitable husbands wouldn't dominate them, is oppressing women.  Since the author was specifically interested in that particular society, the oppression wasn't avoidable.  It is not, however, a device used in the story, or the point of the story.  It's the setting.

Dragons--no.  The genders of the participants are not part of a device.  Once again, it's an integral part of the sort of tale the author was telling, and that tale can function identically no matter what the genders of the characters are.  I'd be more likely to consider it a device if she had changed the genders.

Given your posts so far, it seems that any time any sort of male oppression of women is acknowledged or even mentioned it's feminist, or glaringly, blatantly about female empowerment.  How, then, is one to write about male and female relationships that aren't perfectly harmonious?  Societies that aren't utopias?  It can't be done.  People have genders.  And while some writers do deliberately use those genders to make political statements, and some writers' beliefs can be inferred from the way they construct their stories (though it's not wise to be too confident about conclusions drawn from a single story), still it's not the case that every story featuring a heroic female protagonist succeeding against a male adversary is feminist, or a story of feminine empowerment.



Chodon

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 519
  • Molon Labe
Reply #27 on: April 21, 2008, 02:22:55 AM
From what it sounds like, Rachel has already said (in the story thread for Run of the Firey Horse) that it was just a coincidence that there was a run of similar themed stories.  To be honest, I didn't even notice until I read this thread.  They were all fantastic stories.

I can see Deflective's concern though.  EP, and PP pick stories on the quality of their writing, not their political or social messages (although they do carry SOME weight).  I'm sure that PC will do the same.  I, for one, enjoy a good chainmail bikini clad sword swinging fantasy story once in a while (as long as it is well written, which Rachel said was hard to come by).  I think deflective's concern, correct me if I'm wrong, is that PC will become a podcast more about women's issues than about fantasy stories.   Based on the episodes thus far I can see how one might draw that conclusion.  However, right now I think we all have to just sit back and wait.  We're jumping to conclusions on a very small sample of stories.  Podcastle has already done and I have confidence will continue to do great things.  Keep up the good work, Rachel!

Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither.


CammoBlammo

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 199
Reply #28 on: April 21, 2008, 03:50:26 AM

...I haven't picked up on any of the sexual politics others have in the EPFVerse (?) of late. I take this as a good thing, because it means I really do accept the place of women in my society.

really? you're proud that you're so used to these type of relationships that you don't even see them anymore? this is the place of women in society?


Yes. I'm used to having strong women around me in all sorts of positions of authority. So when I say that I accept the place of women in society, it's as my equals, and not the place my grandfathers' society reserved for them.

To the case in point, I'm equally used to men and women being heroes. I simply didn't notice the apparently anomalous run of female centred stories.



deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #29 on: April 21, 2008, 06:10:32 AM
i originally intended to arrive at this point using some clever variation of the Socratic method. it's time to admit that's not going to happen.

mainly, i want to frame the current run of woman's stories in such a way that hardcore defenders will be able to understand why people might make objections. from the comments it appears that there are people who already understand (and people who don't want to understand). i'm going to go through my argument in case it helps someone.

there is, by far, one common retort when someone mentions the string of woman's stories: "you never notice men's voice in stories but get three stories in a row with a woman's voice and you complain." there may be an element of truth to it, i can't speak for everyone, but this isn't what catches my attention.

i want you to consider the possibility that, like male characters in podcasts in general, there may be an element that's common to female voiced podcasts. and, like male characters in general podcasts, it's so common that you don't even notice it anymore. can you see possibility that people may object to this element rather than the female voice?

for me, this element is male domination / female victimization. it's present in almost all of the current female voiced stories and while i understand its presence, even appreciate it, the constant exposure to it over extended periods is bad. at some point it stops serving as a warning and becomes a self-reinforcing stereotype.


...I don't agree. About Fear of Dragons using male oppression of women as a device, I mean.

i see gender in a story that invokes both virgin sacrifice and witch burning. saying that it isn't there because it could be removed... that's a thought process i just don't understand. we aren't going to find middle ground on this.

Quote from: hautdesert
How, then, is one to write about male and female relationships that aren't perfectly harmonious?

i've given a couple examples before. come lady death and books of Terry Pratchett that aren't focused on gender.


I'll say that some of the reasons I actually like "Run of the Fiery Horse" and "Giant" are because they don't just work with male oppression.

i can appreciate giant for what it tries to do. you outline it well, there's little i would add to your synopsis. male empowerment is interesting for the role reversal it forces you to confront.

Quote from: Rachel Swirsky
As a side point, in "For Fear of Dragons," "Run of the Fiery Horse," and my story "Heartstrung" (which is in the run of what you're seeing as feminist stories -- and, as the author, I can definitely say it was intended to be a feminist story) women are all contributing to the oppression of other women.

this is an important distinction as well. there was a comment on heartstrung from somebody who said he was ok with the story right up to the point that the father slapped the daughter. his comfort level fell right between the male domination / female victimization line. i can say i understand it, it can feel like a tepid accusation every time there's a belligerent male. sometimes just having a sympathetic male character to associate with can be enough (run of fiery horses).

but all of that is in small doses. week after week of victimization wont sit right with me, no matter how well it's done. lets have a newlywed couple forging their home in the wilderness, a family that finds out their daughter is gifted, three witches bickering, castles sieged and taken, the politics of angels, a wizard with his soul in peril, paths that never end.

Quote from: Rachel Swirsky
I hope it's a little helpful, anyway.

thanks for showing up, it really did help.



Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #30 on: April 21, 2008, 06:35:46 AM
i originally intended to arrive at this point using some clever variation of the Socratic method. it's time to admit that's not going to happen.

The Socratic method, while a valuable tool, is a bad tool to use in an online discussion. As a moderator, it is impossible to distinguish from trolling. When I see someone asking the same question, showing little to no evolution of thought or argument, and continuing with a dogged persistence, my gut instinct is to think troll.

The same happens in the meatspace if you use that method — one of my philosophy professors had a story about a student that dressed up as Socrates for Halloween and was kicked out of a party in something like five minutes — he had never declared himself as Socrates, and they thought he was playing a frat boy. A few days later when one of his friends finally answered their phone and the student explained himself they understood, but it did take a few days for just one of them calm down enough that he'd pick up when he saw him on caller ID.

It's a good way to suss out the underlying architecture of a person's arguments, but unless it's declared you end up looking like a troll. I'm not saying that you are, but there is no way to distinguish Socratic Method from Trolling unless you're able to read the intent of the poster, and since Steve  won't shell out for the Telepathy v1.2 module for SMF forums(motto: "We know they're trolling before they do, and we also know what they did last summer, though we really wish we didn't"), I don't have anything but your text to work with.

I Twitter. I also occasionally blog on the Escape Pod blog, which if you're here you shouldn't have much trouble finding.


Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #31 on: April 21, 2008, 08:14:37 AM
Hey Deflective,

Standard disclaimers. Just trying to give you my honest response to what you're saying. Hope it doesn't come across as personal, and all that. :-D

I wasn't sure whether to hop in again or not, but it seems to me like you're really thinking about and engaging these issues, and I want to respect the time and thought you're willing to put into our podcasts. (Your engagement is really cool, in my opinion.) I just hope I'm not coming in too much with the stentorian editorial tones. ;-) If I am, it's totally unintentional, and I apologize. Just let me know if I'm crossing a line for you.

Quote
come lady death and books of Terry Pratchett that aren't focused on gender.

I sure do love me some Terry Pratchett. Can you name an example written by a woman that you're comfortable with?

Quote
i want you to consider the possibility that, like male characters in podcasts in general, there may be an element that's common to female voiced podcasts. and, like male characters in general podcasts, it's so common that you don't even notice it anymore. can you see possibility that people may object to this element rather than the female voice?

This is possible... perhaps even likely. See also: K. Tempest Bradford on "penis versus vagina stories." (Gah. I have no link. It is late. Someone want to dig it up?)

Although of course, all this gets muddy rapidly. We occasionally get subs from men that I am damn sure come from women -- and once in a while when there are ambiguous first names, I'll pick the wrong honorific in reply. (The only time this has happened that I know of for sure, the man wrote back saying he was flattered, since he was glad he'd nailed the feminine voice so well.) And of course there's the famous example of James Tiptree, who was really a woman (Alice Sheldon) who wrote as a man (James Tiptree) and was described by Robert Silverberg (who thought she was male) as having a voice no woman could ever have, one that was "ineluctibly masculine." (Interestingly, all her stories revolved around partriarchal oppression of women in a blatantly feminist fashion.)

After it was revealed Tiptree was female, Silverberg made some references that tokenized her - indicating he felt she was a one-of-a-kind exception to the rules about how and whether women can write. (For a much more belligerent example of this, see Vox Day, also known as science fiction writer Theodore Beale, who has written that women can't write hard SF because our brains can't hack the science.)

Still -- there are certain generalities that can often be drawn between "male" stories and "female" stories, just as one can often detect the voice of a person of color. This is to be expected. The social experience of men and women, and of whites and people of color, is usually different in some important ways.

So, it's not just male narrators that go unremarked -- it's also a male perspective. It's what's called in sociology "defaulting" -- we're used to the default narratives that support the perspective of our society's defaults, which are white, heterosexual, etc etc. Perspectives that come from other places are "othered."

In other words, it's not the mere presence of a female voice that catches one's attention -- though it often does (and that was part of the point of bringing up the studies about what percentage of people are in a room versus what the perception is of those percentages, or who gets hired when you listen to them play a violin while you can see them versus when they're behind a screen). It's also the presence of non-male (non-white, non-straight, etc, but basically "othered") perception.

It may be -- though it's not necessarily -- this element of female voice that's bothering you. I don't really know. We've got way too small a sample size, and certainly I can totally see where all your analysis of - say - "Heartstrung" is on target. 

I don't mean any of this to be accusatory; it's just my response to what you're saying. I am trained in anthropology, so I use tools of sociological and cross-cultural analysis to look at how people look at things; I'm also trained in literature, so I tend to use lit theory. These are, of course, limited tools, as any set is. They're just what I have to bring to bear.

Quote
week after week of victimization wont sit right with me, no matter how well it's done.


OK. Well, I think we can agree on there being two stories that play with these ideas, at least on some level, in PodCastle itself, "Run of the Fiery Horse" and "For Fear of Dragons" (Although I've already mentioned why I don't necessarily see them as straight-up male v female stories, I do see where you're drawing textual support for sustaining those readings). Personally, I really don't see "Giant" as fitting in, unless basically all fairy tales do, but that's a different argument. So, we're back to small sample size -- although again, that's just the material with me as editor, and I understand that your broader point is about all the podcasts simultaneously.

Unfortunately, since I'm the editor of PodCastle, I'm PodCastle focused. (Terrible confession: I haven't even listened to the Escape Pod episode that's been mentioned in these discussions.) So, please forgive me for continuing to think about our podcast. ;-)

This coming week's piece has a female hero -- but also a female villain. It involves collusion between a man and a woman with a happy result, and it ends with a happy relationship between equals. Perhaps it'll work better for you.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2008, 08:21:27 AM by Rachel Swirsky »



deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #32 on: April 22, 2008, 12:57:16 AM
right off, i need to say that i misused the word 'voice'. i intended it to mean a female main character, point-of-view may be the proper term. i blame my mistake on the medium! a female character gives you a female narrator here.

still, unintended consequences, you response brought up points i wouldn't have considered otherwise.

Can you name an example written by a woman that you're comfortable with?

JK Rowling's stuff is enjoyable. Anne Mccaffrey & Margaret Weis is far in my past but i read several books from each so i must have enjoyed them. (side note: i just saw Weis's picture at wikipedia, after spending a lifetime associating her with the picture in the back of dragonlance chronicles i feel a little older.)

i wouldn't say that i have a real feel for male / female writing styles but, looking at my shelf, i don't own a single book by a woman. maybe Mary Shelley in a compilation. obviously i have my preference even if i'm not aware of it. on the other hand, well over half my shelf is british as well so i might just be very predictable.

Quote
It's also the presence of non-male (non-white, non-straight, etc, but basically "othered") perception.

It may be -- though it's not necessarily -- this element of female voice that's bothering you.

with my clarification of voice as main character, it's pretty straight forward what bugs me about the female point-of-view in recent podshows (including the other feeds as well): it's pretty much guaranteed that she will face victimizaton. she may face it very well, but it's always there.

in terms of my reading habits, i'm going to start paying more attention. the whole british thing is freaking me out a bit. does anyone have suggestions for favourite stories/books with a distinctly female voice? ideally without the victimization hotbutton, but variety's the key.



debergop

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Reply #33 on: April 22, 2008, 01:02:53 AM


 and perhaps Mr. Derego will pop by and explain it more,


If you are referring to me, it's actually Ms. Debergo. And to explain my comments on The Fiery Horse comment area: First, I made my comments because this podcast is new and (one would assume) open to feedback on format before settling into a routine. Second, my question/comment was more about the format than anything else - at the risk of inciting more fracas, having an intro to an intro where someone comes on talking about her pokemon toys struck me as being a bit like, "hey girls, let's talk about nail polish". That's where the "by women for women" thing came in. I tune in for a story, brief simple intro/extro is really all (IMO) that's needed. I like strong female characters, and I very much enjoyed the first couple of stories I heard. I never meant to suggest anyone should ever scrutinize how many male versus female writers or protagonists are published - balance is nice, but high quality stories trumps everything else.  I put the question out there (obviously not very well) as to whether other listeners felt the same about the additional "front matter". I apologize for causing a stir - really, *truly* didn't intend to insult or offend anyone.



Windup

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1226
Reply #34 on: April 22, 2008, 01:05:42 AM

I don't have anything to add to this discussion -- anything I might say has already been said better better by someone else -- but I am impressed by it.

On most forums I've frequented, this type of topic would have quickly degenerated into name-calling and useless personal attacks.  Possibly ending in forumites taking sides, moderator intervention, and temporary or permanenent bans.  Too often, the tools of Web 2.0 seem to be governed by the social code of the middle school cafeteria.  

By contrast, you've managed to disagree, but kept it substantive, and given the participants and observers something to think about.

Good job, group...
« Last Edit: April 22, 2008, 01:07:18 AM by Windup »

"My whole job is in the space between 'should be' and 'is.' It's a big space."


Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #35 on: April 22, 2008, 01:29:32 AM

 and perhaps Mr. Derego will pop by and explain it more,

If you are referring to me, it's actually Ms. Debergo. And to explain my comments on The Fiery Horse comment area: First, I made my comments because this podcast is new and (one would assume) open to feedback on format before settling into a routine. Second, my question/comment was more about the format than anything else - at the risk of inciting more fracas, having an intro to an intro where someone comes on talking about her pokemon toys struck me as being a bit like, "hey girls, let's talk about nail polish". That's where the "by women for women" thing came in. I tune in for a story, brief simple intro/extro is really all (IMO) that's needed. I like strong female characters, and I very much enjoyed the first couple of stories I heard. I never meant to suggest anyone should ever scrutinize how many male versus female writers or protagonists are published - balance is nice, but high quality stories trumps everything else.  I put the question out there (obviously not very well) as to whether other listeners felt the same about the additional "front matter". I apologize for causing a stir - really, *truly* didn't intend to insult or offend anyone.

Actually, I was actually referring to Mr. Jeffery Derego, who posts as jrderego on the forums quite regularly and wrote one of the stories in question (Freedom with a small f). I wasn't referring to you in any way, I must admit that I don't usually look at the blog comments and that I only went in to drop in the link to this thread after I'd been made aware that similar comments were being made there as well. I'm sorry for the confusion, though it was a bit of a freak coincidence with the name (for the record, I only attach the Mr/Ms/Mrs if I know for certain which to use, an old boss beat that into me when I was younger).

But let me just say — welcome to the forums and I hope you like it here.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2008, 01:31:36 AM by Heradel »

I Twitter. I also occasionally blog on the Escape Pod blog, which if you're here you shouldn't have much trouble finding.


debergop

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Reply #36 on: April 22, 2008, 01:40:07 AM
Heradel,

Many thanks. And my apologies once more.




Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #37 on: April 22, 2008, 01:47:44 AM
Heradel,

Many thanks. And my apologies once more.

You brought up something that bothered you, I don't think you need to apologize for that. You weren't the only one that noticed it — deflective in fact posted about 16 hours before you did. Honestly, we welcome criticism about both the stories and the nuts and bolts of the podcasts, including intros to intros.

I Twitter. I also occasionally blog on the Escape Pod blog, which if you're here you shouldn't have much trouble finding.


Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #38 on: April 22, 2008, 06:26:52 AM
Quote
including intros to intros

The explanation for that one's simple. We had a last minute narrator change. Actually, two, despite a large amount of time and redundancy built into the schedule. Tempest swung with the first one, but by the time it was 3am the night before the story was to be edited and it was clear that I had to record it myself, it was no longer feasible to have Tempest rerecord the "here's who's narrating" bit, so I did it.

Can't guarantee it won't happen again. It's not ideal, though, definitely.



Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #39 on: April 22, 2008, 06:33:46 AM
Quote
does anyone have suggestions for favourite stories/books with a distinctly female voice? ideally without the victimization hotbutton, but variety's the key.

Just from the Brit thing, you might enjoy Susannah Clarke's Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell (I've probably biffed that title. Anyone want to help?)

Maybe Marion Zimmer Bradley, or Andre Norton, or C. J. Cherryh?

Mod:Put in an EPized link, added Strange to the title, so it's, er, de-biffed. Biffed?
« Last Edit: April 22, 2008, 07:08:21 AM by Heradel »