Author Topic: PC032: Senator Bilbo  (Read 32807 times)

Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
on: November 04, 2008, 06:27:58 PM
PC032: Senator Bilbo

By Andy Duncan.
Read by Frank Key (of Hooting Yard)

Dear Americans,

Happy Election Day. As we all go to the polls and wait with mixed anticipation and anxiety for the poll results, PodCastle is happy to bring you into the electoral politics of another world — Tolkein’s — dealing with a trope all sides of the political spectrum can agree on, corrupt senators.

The rest of the world, I hope you’ll forgive our electoral America-centrism, and I hope you enjoy the story.

The Senator jotted down Appledore’s name without pause. He could get a lot of work done while making speeches – even a filibuster nine hours long (and counting).

“There are forces at work today, my friends, without and within our homeland, that are attempting to destroy all boundaries between our proud, noble race and all the mule-gnawing, cave-squatting, light- shunning, pit-spawned scum of the East.”

The Senator’s voice cracked on “East,” so he turned aside for a quaff from his (purely medicinal) pocket flask. His allies did not miss their cue. “Hear, hear,” they rumbled, thumping the desktops with their calloused heels. “Hear, hear.”

“This latest proposal,” the Senator continued, “this so-called immigration bill – which, as I have said, would force even our innocent daughters to suffer the reeking lusts of all the ditch-bred legions of darkness – why, this baldfooted attempt originated where, my friends?”

“Buckland!” came the dutiful cry.

“Why, with the delegation from Buckland . . . long known to us all as a hotbed of book-mongers, one-Earthers, elvish sympathizers, and other off-brands of the halfling race.”


Rated PG. For bigotry and orcs.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2008, 06:47:52 PM 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.


Peter Tupper

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Reply #1 on: November 05, 2008, 09:21:24 AM
I had the odd experience of listening to this at work (I work evenings currently) while tracking the US election results. Senator Bilbo started to look like John McCain in my mind, a old man clinging to the past while the world changes around him.

This story takes accurate yet cheap shots at Tolkien, or perhaps more accurately his legacy. Yes, Tolkien's worldview is pretty Tory, the struggle to keep things the way they ought to be. Yes, it's easy to read Tolkien's elves, men, halflings, dwarves, orcs, etc, as racial stereotypes. Yes, halflings are very solidly bourgeois.

The thing you have to remember is that Tolkien came by his anti-modernism honestly: in the trenches of World War I. When he looked to the future, he didn't see personal computers and gay marriage and a black president. He saw Auschwitz and Hiroshima, bigger wars with bigger bombs and humanity degraded by industrialization. (You could say the same thing about CS Lewis.) It's no wonder he created a fantastic world that is in the mythic past, and his best known work is about the ending of an era of magic and beauty, threatened by a future of tyranny.

I'm not sure why I feel I should defend Tolkien from legitimate criticism. He was a product of his time and his religion, like the rest of us. But his influence on fantasy is so overwhelming that maybe more political criticism of the fantasy genre is necessary. Are heroic, epic narratives possible in a setting with a democratic government?

I also have to say I loved the gay trolls.



Hyperion

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Reply #2 on: November 05, 2008, 11:05:11 AM
[I wrote this comment on the website a few minutes ago.  I have never written on a message board, but felt strongly enough to paste it here as well.]



I have read every comment on every story presented at PodCastle, and sometimes I cringe at some of the criticism, which appears reflexive, or else looking to take umbrage over imaginary fiefdoms.

Sigh.

I guess I join those ranks, for “Senator Bilbo” really rubbed me the wrong way. It wasn’t Frank Key’s reading, dependably excellent as always, or even the story itself. For what it was, Andy Duncan laid out the tale clearly with descriptive panache, creating memorable characters quickly, and making halfling bureaucracy not seem wonkish . The tale was about as subtle as a third grade play, but I suppose if social commentary is the aim, “let that be your last battlefield.”

My problem is twofold:

Mixing politics into any story, especially fantasy, is a tricky proposition. If it’s organic from the material, that’s one thing, but an obvious pastiche can look tacky. In particular, the subject of immigration and racial/national identity is at the very least challenging, and treating it with some Boolean-like “either/or” morality reduces both the story and the struggle.

My bigger issue is with the milieu. Certainly Fantasy is no sacred cow, and is as deserving of parody or satire as any genre. Witness the witty and hilarious “Hallah Iron Thighs” of a few weeks ago. However, in that story, the humor derives mostly from the personal struggles of an aging woman blended into the chain-mail babe setting. Fun is poked, but at the tropes, archetypes and cliches of barbarian tales, not at anything specific.

I think “Senator Bilbo” could have achieved its purpose with a recognizable but generic fantasy setting. There was no need to swipe another’s , and of all people, Mr. Tolkien. Say what you want about him; modern fantasy, including this podcast, would not be here without his imagination and hard work.

Tolkien fans have surely read the theories that LOTR is an allegory for WWII, and industrial gentrification of Tolkien’s homeland. You must also know how abhorrent the author found those ideas, and how adamant he was to the bitter end that Middle Earth was as wholly separate a place as he could make it.

If Tolkien were alive today and read this story, and I think he would be mortified. Now, I believe in artistic freedom, and certainly a cultural icon is fair game, but I just cannot help but wonder why this subject, and why this place. It cheapens the “clever,” and makes me sad to see it.




Corydon

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Reply #3 on: November 05, 2008, 01:47:36 PM
Hahahahahahahahaha!

Theodore Bilbo moved to the Shire: classic!  Just classic.  Even better that the rest of the story held up to the conceit: reimagining the Shire Moot in the mold of the 1930s US Congress was terrific, and the gay trolls were hilarious. 

To the last commenter I'd say, lighten up.  I found this story to be a loving (if irreverent) tribute to Tolkien.  To the extent that there was it was a political engagement with Tolkien, it was an inversion of the themes in the "Scouring of the Shire" episode (change, creeping modernity)- but it wasn't dismissive or disrespectful of the source text.  Still, even if you disagree with that assessment, Tolkien's legacy is assured; a story like this isn't going to damage it.

As to its version of Tolkien- well, my own assessment is that LOTR isn't so much racist as it is deeply classist and culturally conservative.  I absolutely agree with Peter Tupper's assessment of Tolkien as a product of his age, and I can't really blame a bourgeois Englishman of the early 20th century for his classism.  (Moreover, while I'm aware of those attitudes, and don't buy into them, they don't diminish my enjoyment of his books.)  Mind you, I can blame those Tolkien imitators (and worse, Gygax imitators) who buy into those attitudes wholesale- but then, there's enough to criticize in sub-Tolkien fantasy to fill its own thread... or its own forum.

Anyway, this was the third Podcastle episode in a row that just hit it out of the ballpark for me.  Big ups to Rachel and the crew!



Peter Tupper

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 34
Reply #4 on: November 05, 2008, 05:31:03 PM
I think “Senator Bilbo” could have achieved its purpose with a recognizable but generic fantasy setting. There was no need to swipe another’s , and of all people, Mr. Tolkien. Say what you want about him; modern fantasy, including this podcast, would not be here without his imagination and hard work.


That's just the problem. A "recognizable but generic fantasy setting" would be Tolkien's Middle Earth with a few name changes, perhaps with a little Jack Vance and Robert E Howard added for flavor. Tolkien's influence on the genre of fantasy is so huge that nearly everything is either a pastiche or a parody of it, or a rebellion against it.

I view this story as a parody of Tolkien, and if it's parody, it isn't theft. It isn't saying Tolkien or his work is racist, classist or conservative, it's saying, "Let's question something we take for granted in his imitators' works."



wintermute

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1291
  • What Would Batman Do?
Reply #5 on: November 05, 2008, 05:51:27 PM
The one issue I had with this was with the wizards of this so-called "Middle Earth": So far as I could tell, they were mere humans who had learned the arts of magic by long study, rather than the literal gods of Tolkien's works.

Other than that, it was pretty good, if a little heavy-handed.

Science means that not all dreams can come true


Hatton

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 88
    • Front Porch Political Talk
Reply #6 on: November 05, 2008, 09:11:28 PM
Since I'm recovering from the 11/4/08 (putting the date in for historical purposes) election results, this came across to me as a historical element, not a "you need to watch out for this" one.

My biggest complaint of this story came at the end - I felt like it just stopped and didn't go further.

When we look at the concept of cross-breeding, I'm more than a little confused.  As a classic D&D player I know that halflings as "a half-little of everything."  Half-elves are half human and half elf, period.  Halflings don't have a blood line because they don't know where theirs came from!  That makes this story either a classic example of "pot calling the kettle" or maybe it's taking a different approach to the races.

... though come to think of it, the Shire is all of what most halflings think of and most would never think of leaving the borders.

Normal is just a setting on the washing machine.


deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #7 on: November 06, 2008, 02:25:01 AM
everything i want to say has already been said and it leaves me with mixed feelings. on one hand it's nice to know that people share your point of view, on the other hand there's these half-formed sentences kicking around in my head. so, recapping some opinions...

i enjoyed the story but it really didn't fit into the middle earth setting. you could predict behaviour by race (broadly, in most cases) in lotr, there were distinct black hats and some distinct white hats and you could tell who was who by looking at them. that was part of the appeal. there was some manufactured dissent between races, corruption was a big theme, but there was a lot of situations where the gods had literally created races in opposition to each other. this was a world of moral absolutes.

rewriting another author's world history (orcs aren't actually twisted elves, wizards are mortals) to suit a story seems somehow disrespectful. if you've got to use retcon then it's not really a tribute anymore.



Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #8 on: November 06, 2008, 03:33:22 PM
So, do those who object to this use of Tolkein, also object to Gregory Maguire's Wicked?



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #9 on: November 06, 2008, 10:24:19 PM
So, do those who object to this use of Tolkein, also object to Gregory Maguire's Wicked?

The difference, to me, is that Maguire very clearly gave Wonderful Wizard of Oz a very close reading, and, while he changed a lot in the story, he did so with care, letting the original shape of the story remain, while changing a lot of the details to make the interpretation entirely different.

This story felt like it was written by someone who heard about the Hobbit/LoTR but never actually read the books. It is not a reworking of the Tolkien story, it's writing a story that has nothing to do with Tolkien and using Tolkien names in it.

And note that I write this as someone who actually rather dislikes Lord of the Rings as a book, and who was didn't really enjoy the movies. I don't *like* Tolkien, but I am familiar with his work and I respect it. This story didn't offend me, but it felt as respectful of its source material as most Harry/Ron slash fiction is of its own.

Besides, all of this story's sins against Tolkien pale compared to its cardinal sin against the hearer/listener - it is really boring. The only reason I even listened was because I was mildly curious whether I'll understand what was its point. At the end I realized it's nothing more than a wish-fulfillment story - self-important bigots will not notice social change until it is too late, and then they will get their cumuppance - dressed up in a setting where it doesn't make sense because if it was set in the real world no-one would care. To which I will say two final things:

1 - I've said before (in response to How the world became quiet, actually), I find people portraying my own politics crudely irritating. And this story was degrees of magnitude cruder than How the world became quiet ever was.

2 - This was probably the worst week ever to play this story. Even before it was known that Obama won the US election, the first that he was even in position to win it means that we had moved beyond the need for this kind of cloying wish fulfillment. At least for a while, it's time to enjoy the fact that reality shows that racism can be defeated, not to console ourselves with stories like these.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2008, 11:10:40 AM by eytanz »



birdless

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
  • Five is right out.
Reply #10 on: November 07, 2008, 03:03:50 AM
So, do those who object to this use of Tolkein, also object to Gregory Maguire's Wicked?

The difference, to me, is that Maguire very clearly gave Wonderful Wizard of Oz a very close reading, and, while he changed a lot in the story, he did so with care, letting the original shape of the story remain, while changing a lot of the details to make the interpretation entirely different.

This story felt like it was written by someone who heard about the Hobbit/LoTR but never actually read the books. It is not a reworking of the Tolkien story, it's writing a story that has nothing to do with Tolkien and using Tolkien names in it.

And note that I write this as someone who actually rather dislikes Lord of the Rings as a book, and who was didn't really enjoy the movies. I don't *like* Tolkien, but I am familiar with his work and I respect it. This story didn't offend me, but it felt as respectful of its source material as most Harry/Ron slash fiction is of its own.

Besides, all of this story's sins against Tolkien pall compared to its cardinal sin against the hearer/listener - it is really boring. The only reason I even listened was because I was mildly curious whether I'll understand what was its point. At the end I realized it's nothing more than a wish-fulfillment story - self-important bigots will not notice social change until it is too late, and then they will get their cumuppance - dressed up in a setting where it doesn't make sense because if it was set in the real world no-one would care. To which I will say two final things:

1 - I've said before (in response to How the world became quiet, actually), I find people portraying my own politics crudely irritating. And this story was degrees of magnitude cruder than How the world became quiet ever was.

2 - This was probably the worst week ever to play this story. Even before it was known that Obama won the US election, the first that he was even in position to win it means that we had moved beyond the need for this kind of cloying wish fulfillment. At least for a while, it's time to enjoy the fact that reality shows that racism can be defeated, not to console ourselves with stories like these.

Except for the fact that I love Tolkien, I agree with pretty much eytan said... especially the part about this story being boring. And at the risk of sounding either naive or arrogant, I really feel like all of us here have safely moved beyond the point of this story having any sort of impact.



Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #11 on: November 07, 2008, 03:52:48 AM
To be fair, I chat with Rachel every now and then about upcoming stories, and this one was bought well before it was clear that Obama was going to be anything but a gifted orator and thinker who made a respectable run at the presidency.

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


eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #12 on: November 07, 2008, 08:56:12 AM
To be fair, I chat with Rachel every now and then about upcoming stories, and this one was bought well before it was clear that Obama was going to be anything but a gifted orator and thinker who made a respectable run at the presidency.


To which I have two responses:

1 - One of the risks of buying stories that deal with current affairs, either directly or indirectly, is that events may move in unexpected directions. Certainly, while I stand by everything I said above, an occasional poor choice now and then does not mean that I have any less respect for Rachel's editing or purchasing decisions.

2 - That said, while the purchase of the story may have happened a long time ago, I'm pretty sure that it's scheduling was decided more recently. So, "bad timing" is still a valid criticism, I think.



Rain

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
Reply #13 on: November 07, 2008, 03:24:54 PM
Fun story, was better than i expected, heck even Frank Key wasnt as terrible as normal



stePH

  • Actually has enough cowbell.
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 3906
  • Cool story, bro!
    • Thetatr0n on SoundCloud
Reply #14 on: November 07, 2008, 03:41:46 PM
When we look at the concept of cross-breeding, I'm more than a little confused.  As a classic D&D player I know that halflings as "a half-little of everything."  Half-elves are half human and half elf, period.  Halflings don't have a blood line because they don't know where theirs came from!  That makes this story either a classic example of "pot calling the kettle" or maybe it's taking a different approach to the races.

Tolkien's people called themselves "Hobbits" and I understood them to be a "pure" race (not interbred with any othrs). "Halfling" is what the D&D rules called Hobbits.

"Nerdcore is like playing Halo while getting a blow-job from Hello Kitty."
-- some guy interviewed in Nerdcore Rising


wintermute

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1291
  • What Would Batman Do?
Reply #15 on: November 07, 2008, 06:04:21 PM
When we look at the concept of cross-breeding, I'm more than a little confused.  As a classic D&D player I know that halflings as "a half-little of everything."  Half-elves are half human and half elf, period.  Halflings don't have a blood line because they don't know where theirs came from!  That makes this story either a classic example of "pot calling the kettle" or maybe it's taking a different approach to the races.

Tolkien's people called themselves "Hobbits" and I understood them to be a "pure" race (not interbred with any othrs). "Halfling" is what the D&D rules called Hobbits.
The earliest rules referred to them as "Hobbits". Then Tolkien's estate threatened to sue TSR for ripping him off so blatantly, and they settled on "halfling", which was also drawn from LotR.

Science means that not all dreams can come true


stePH

  • Actually has enough cowbell.
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 3906
  • Cool story, bro!
    • Thetatr0n on SoundCloud
Reply #16 on: November 07, 2008, 06:52:29 PM
Tolkien's people called themselves "Hobbits" and I understood them to be a "pure" race (not interbred with any othrs). "Halfling" is what the D&D rules called Hobbits.
The earliest rules referred to them as "Hobbits". Then Tolkien's estate threatened to sue TSR for ripping him off so blatantly, and they settled on "halfling", which was also drawn from LotR.

Nobody raised an eyebrow over "orcs" then?  I thought they were as much Tolkien's creation as Hobbits.

"Nerdcore is like playing Halo while getting a blow-job from Hello Kitty."
-- some guy interviewed in Nerdcore Rising


wintermute

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1291
  • What Would Batman Do?
Reply #17 on: November 07, 2008, 07:03:56 PM
Tolkien's people called themselves "Hobbits" and I understood them to be a "pure" race (not interbred with any othrs). "Halfling" is what the D&D rules called Hobbits.
The earliest rules referred to them as "Hobbits". Then Tolkien's estate threatened to sue TSR for ripping him off so blatantly, and they settled on "halfling", which was also drawn from LotR.

Nobody raised an eyebrow over "orcs" then?  I thought they were as much Tolkien's creation as Hobbits.
I really couldn't say.

Science means that not all dreams can come true


Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #18 on: November 07, 2008, 11:22:23 PM
"2 - That said, while the purchase of the story may have happened a long time ago, I'm pretty sure that it's scheduling was decided more recently. So, "bad timing" is still a valid criticism, I think."

Nope. Bought and scheduled for election day back when I was supporting Edwards. I scheduled it for election day because it was about the political process. Seemed intuitive to me.

I don't mean to discourage you from thinking the timing is bad, just mentioning that you're imputing motives to it that weren't there. Additionally, I don't necessarily read the story (personally) as persuasive, so much as a fantasy equivalent of Flannery O'Connor's "Everything That Rises Must Converge" (http://www.geocities.com/cyber_explorer99/oconnorconverge.html).



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #19 on: November 08, 2008, 12:44:15 AM
"2 - That said, while the purchase of the story may have happened a long time ago, I'm pretty sure that it's scheduling was decided more recently. So, "bad timing" is still a valid criticism, I think."

Nope. Bought and scheduled for election day back when I was supporting Edwards. I scheduled it for election day because it was about the political process. Seemed intuitive to me.

I don't mean to discourage you from thinking the timing is bad, just mentioning that you're imputing motives to it that weren't there.

I didn't say anything about motives - and, actually, I pretty much guessed the motives correctly, though I didn't comment about that. I did not mean to imply that you were in any way trying to comment on the Obama campaign. Rather, I was trying to say that, in the context of current events, the story seemed even weaker than it was.

And while I did not know that you scheduled this story quite a while ago, I assume that you have the ability to reschedule stories, and my problem with it being superceded by events held as far back as early October. So, unless I'm wrong about you having some leeway, it still seems to me that the unfortunate timing could have been avoided.

Quote
I actually t Additionally, I don't necessarily read the story (personally) as persuasive, so much as a fantasy equivalent of Flannery O'Connor's "Everything That Rises Must Converge" (http://www.geocities.com/cyber_explorer99/oconnorconverge.html).

Is this a response to me as well? Because I never said that I thought the story was meant to be persuasive. Indeed, I called it "wish fulfillment", and wish fulfillment stories don't try to persuade anyone, they try to cheer those already persuaded.

But mostly, I want to hear more about the comparison to O'Connor, which I haven't thought about. Could you please explain what you mean by "a fantasy equivalent"? Equivalent in what sense?



ryos

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Reply #20 on: November 08, 2008, 02:15:07 AM
This story fails. Epically.

First, let me say that I'm interpreting the political message differently than other interpretations I've seen here. This looks to me like a direct commentary on the issues surrounding illegal immigration to the United States. I actually agree with the story's message; I think we should be opening our borders wider, not closing them tighter. I see little reason to fear a greater influx of Hispanic people to this country.

That said, I hate stories with political agendas, and I especially hate stories whose only purpose is their political agenda. Not only does it make for bad fiction, but it makes for poor political discourse as well. This story had no plot to speak of, a weak main character, and was a poor use of Tolkein's creation.

About the only good thing I have to say about it is that it helped me fall asleep last night.



ajames

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 358
Reply #21 on: November 08, 2008, 02:17:02 AM
I may be in the minority here, but I liked a number of things about this story. I liked the irony of the trolls being the senator's bodyguards, I liked the characterization of the senator and his political rival, I liked how the author showed that the world had changed and the senator found himself out of step with the times (although the this was too sudden in my opinion), to name a few things. It was interesting to see orcs - a race created by evil with no hope for redemption - portrayed as worthy of our respect, whereas the senator was clearly portrayed as worthy only of contempt. It got me thinking about what it is okay to hate and not to hate in our world today.

Also, I had never heard of Senator Bilbo until this story. Reading this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_G._Bilbo helped me appreciate the story a bit more. The filibuster, his speech, the part about ousting the professors, the meeting with the press, even the cane biting him (sort of) were all referenced in the Wikipedia summary - I half-expected to read about Senator Bilbo spitting in someone's face there, too.

I don't think this story was meant to be a comment on Middle Earth or Tolkien; I think Middle Earth was used as the setting for obvious reasons (Besides Bilbo Baggins and Senator Bilbo, how many Bilbo's do you know?).

And as far as I can tell, while the word orc seems to have referred to some sea monster prior to Tolkien's use of the word, our conception of orcs as bipedal humanoid monsters does seem to come from Tolkien.



birdless

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
  • Five is right out.
Reply #22 on: November 08, 2008, 04:09:01 AM
… I especially hate stories whose only purpose is their political agenda. Not only does it make for bad fiction, but it makes for poor political discourse as well. This story had no plot to speak of, a weak main character, and was a poor use of Tolkein's creation.
Hear, hear! (no offense to the author or Rachael)



Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #23 on: November 08, 2008, 04:51:39 AM
… I especially hate stories whose only purpose is their political agenda. Not only does it make for bad fiction, but it makes for poor political discourse as well. This story had no plot to speak of, a weak main character, and was a poor use of Tolkein's creation.
Hear, hear! (no offense to the author or Rachael)

I've always enjoyed Animal Farm and 1984.

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


ryos

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Reply #24 on: November 08, 2008, 06:17:49 AM
… I especially hate stories whose only purpose is their political agenda. Not only does it make for bad fiction, but it makes for poor political discourse as well. This story had no plot to speak of, a weak main character, and was a poor use of Tolkein's creation.
Hear, hear! (no offense to the author or Rachael)

I've always enjoyed Animal Farm and 1984.
To each their own I suppose. I've never read the latter, but didn't much care for the former.



Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #25 on: November 10, 2008, 05:27:48 AM
… I especially hate stories whose only purpose is their political agenda. Not only does it make for bad fiction, but it makes for poor political discourse as well. This story had no plot to speak of, a weak main character, and was a poor use of Tolkein's creation.
Hear, hear! (no offense to the author or Rachael)
I've always enjoyed Animal Farm and 1984.
To each their own I suppose. I've never read the latter, but didn't much care for the former.

Look, I'm not saying that politically motivated stories can't backfire horribly, but politically motivated stories can be the giants in their genre just like any other story. For example, the Grapes of Wrath is indisputably political. You might not like Rand, but hers come from a very political place. One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, I haven't read it yet but Little Brother certainly sounds pretty political, Wells' The Time Machine was political. Now, these stories also do other things, and work as stories, but they start from a purely political place.

I also disagree that it makes for poor political discourse. Stories, like the ones above, can cut through and deliver a visceral experience that can sway public opinion (Cuckoos' is probably the best example of this). Now, they don't always work, and most won't cause that, but it's unfair to fault someone for trying.

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


Hatton

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 88
    • Front Porch Political Talk
Reply #26 on: November 10, 2008, 04:05:12 PM
Tolkien's people called themselves "Hobbits" and I understood them to be a "pure" race (not interbred with any othrs). "Halfling" is what the D&D rules called Hobbits.

Okay, that I can understand and thank you for reminding me.  Writing SQL queries and other nefarious code while listening to PC and EP can sometimes move my brain in odd directions.  I do distinctly remember this story using the word halfling, not hobbit, and that's why I was referring to them.

Quote from: Original Post
“Why, with the delegation from Buckland. . . long known to us all as a hotbed of book-mongers, one-Earthers, elvish sympathizers, and other off-brands of the halfling race.”

Normal is just a setting on the washing machine.


MacArthurBug

  • Giddy
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 648
  • I can resist anything except temptation
    • undercaffinated
Reply #27 on: November 10, 2008, 04:24:34 PM
not bad. I've never been a big LOtR fan, but this ran well, if a little dry.  I liked the com-uppance feeling at the end.

Oh, great and mighty Alasdair, Orator Maleficent, He of the Silvered Tongue, guide this humble fangirl past jumping up and down and squeeing upon hearing the greatness of Thy voice.
Oh mighty Mur the Magnificent. I am not worthy.


Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #28 on: November 10, 2008, 05:22:26 PM
Sorry I misinterpreted you, Eytanz.

Quote
But mostly, I want to hear more about the comparison to O'Connor, which I haven't thought about. Could you please explain what you mean by "a fantasy equivalent"? Equivalent in what sense?

"Everything That Rises Must Converge" is O'Connor's moving story of how a woman's life is hollowed out and ruined by her racism. It's a story of the tragic effect of racism on the racist (a theme often reinforced by anti-racist advocates, and which can even be seen in the narratives written by former slaves such as Frederick Douglas and Harriet Jacobs who escaped while slavery was still a solid institution, and wrote about their lives to try to inform northerners about what slavery was and persuade them to oppose it). The characterization is a mixed experience, swinging the reader between disdain for the woman's racism, and pity for how pathetic she is.

Senator Bilbo is a similar figure -- except that we're in his head, instead of in the head of another character. He's a great and powerful man, with much invested in his self-image as a great and powerful man -- but in fact, his power has leached away. Time has moved away from him, so that now the traits which made him great and powerful make him mockable. Again, ideally, this should be a painfully mixed experience to watch. We, the audience, share the sensibilities of those who laugh at Bilbo. He's funny, and despicable, and easy to mock. But inside his head, we see how ruined he is, how pathetic; we cringe for him, uncomfortably.

Near the end of his life, my grandfather embodied this uncomfortable mix of despicable behavior and being pitiable. He was an unmitigated ass, who had been abusive toward his children, creating a great deal of psychological damage to my mother and her sisters. In the hospital, after he was simulatneously hit by a car and afflicted by esophagial cancer (either of which he could have survived, the combination of which killed him), he would reach out desperately for someone to hold his hand -- for some comfort, any comfort. He was a terrible person, but I cringed for his need and I pitied him, and I wept as I held his hand.

In "Everything That Rises Must Converge," OConner kills the racist woman. She literally dies of her inability to change; her racism not only damages, but kills her. Or, in a different analysis, the racist woman refuses to change, but time continues to move on, and one of them must give way to the other.

I actually find Bilbo's ending much more moving and unsettling. By the end of the story, Bilbo has realized that his time has passed. His illusions are gone; he sees himself as pathetic. But unlike O'Connor's character, he doesn't die, he doesn't fade -- he has to live with his realization and ruin. As my grandfather, fragile for the last few days of his life, had to live with the lack of power that he'd taken pride in (and used to hurt other people), as he asked my father (his son-in-law) for help peeing in a bottle, and begged my mother and my grandmother to spend just a few more minutes in the hospital, even as they nodded with exhaustion.



Talia

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2682
  • Muahahahaha
Reply #29 on: November 12, 2008, 01:05:20 PM
enjoyed the story. Not much bothered by politics in fiction, and i actually found the timing appropriate. To me it was a believable account of what could happen if the hobbits in the idyllic shire were to fall into the habit of modern human politics. Anyone is vulnerable to being trapped into old ways and old mindsets. The inability to change creates stagnation, whether you're a person, a town or a country.

Thumbs up.



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #30 on: November 12, 2008, 01:52:59 PM
Rachel - thank you for the explanation.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with it, though. For one, O'Conner's story is about more than just the racist woman - it's about the relationship between her and her son. It is not so much about how a single life is tainted by racism but rather on how it affects the people who care for them as well. In fact, I'd say it's more than son's story than the mother's.

Which is part of what I find unsatsifying about this story. The senator can influence other people's life by virtue of his political power, but no-one around him seems to actually care about him. On an emotional level, his racism affects no-one but himself; everyone else turns out to be pretty well-adjusted and normal. O'Conner's story is much more challenging and honest.

Thanks, by the way, to ajames for pointing me to the historical senator Bilbo - I guess I now know why set the story in the Shire; it's a play on the two disperate uses of the name, taking the politics of one and putting it in the world of the other. So now I no longer think it's arbitrary, but I still think it's a bad choice on the author's behalf, since A - that explanation only works if you've heard of Theodore G. Bilbo, which I doubt most people have these days (though maybe Americans are taught about him in school, I don't know), and B - it's a flimsy pun that doesn't hold the weight of the themes of the story, and in my opinion collapses under them.



Zathras

  • Guest
Reply #31 on: November 12, 2008, 05:36:24 PM
Got less than a minute into this one before giving up.  I'm not a fan of Tolkien, nor Mr. Key.  Sorry.  Next.



JoeFitz

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
Reply #32 on: November 13, 2008, 10:07:42 PM
I found this story sadly uninspiring on many levels.

It didn't work for me as a send up of Tolkien because it disrespects the work itself and disrespects the political system it intends to parody.

It imposes a simplistic view of American nativism (itself a real but widely overplayed political movement) onto a poorly rendered Middle Earth.

This story lost me at the use of "halfling."

And please, orcs as misunderstood beings? No hint in the Tolkien canon ever expresses the slightest doubt that orcs literally are pure evil with no capacity for good. Choosing them as the "misunderstood other" implying it orcs are like real human immigrants was weird and frankly insulting to the immigrants and Tolkien. There are literally dozens of groups in Middle Earth that would have been a good choice for an allegorical immigrant, orcs was just wrong.




Loz

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 370
    • Blah Flowers
Reply #33 on: November 15, 2008, 09:44:07 AM
So I was the only one thinking of Boss Hogg from the old Dukes of Hazard TV show then?

This was amusing if not laugh out loud funny. These revisionist parodies of work tend to work best in very small doses (see: the Imperial press conference talking about the 9-11esque tragedy of the Rebels attack on the Death Star) and I found this story over long and sometimes as predictable as the source material, half the length would have worked best for me. The best thing, as ever, was Frank Key's delivery.



Dwango

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 166
Reply #34 on: November 17, 2008, 09:00:47 PM
So this is what CSPAN would do to Tolkien? ;-)  Seriously, I don't mind political pieces, but this was rather dry for me.  I love Tolkien and there has been a lot of discussion about the racial tone he takes with the Orcs, dwarfs, elves, and humans.  I just didn't find the metaphors and characterizations that interesting in this piece.  I did not feel the drama of him spitting in the orc's face, and the trolls kissing just felt unnecessary extra.  And those parts, at the Inn, were the most interesting parts.  The obvious Gandalf send up attempted to call up his style of manipulation and mannerisms, but didn't carry it off.  I lost interest in all the political rigmarole so I couldn't enjoy the narrative nor the ideas.

Of course, my own Tolkien interest probably helped sink the story with me.  The idea of Bilbo the racist senator is somewhat disturbing to my image of him.  I think of him as a kind, bumbling character, that really doesn't hate anyone, and gets forced into his more violent actions.  I also fondly recall the interesting narratives at the end of the Lord of the Rings sagas, which went in depth about what occurred in the Shire upon returning from the adventures.  That was one of my favorite parts of the books, and it gets certainly twisted in this parody.



Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #35 on: November 17, 2008, 11:46:33 PM
"I also fondly recall the interesting narratives at the end of the Lord of the Rings sagas, which went in depth about what occurred in the Shire upon returning from the adventures."

This story is about Bilbo's grandson of the same name, isn't it? Am I misremembering?



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #36 on: November 17, 2008, 11:59:50 PM
"I also fondly recall the interesting narratives at the end of the Lord of the Rings sagas, which went in depth about what occurred in the Shire upon returning from the adventures."

This story is about Bilbo's grandson of the same name, isn't it? Am I misremembering?

That was never mentioned in this story (in fact, if I remember correctly, the senator's name is never given in the story itself, just in the title). And there are way too many elements in this story that explicitly contradict Tolkien's world building for it to be worth trying to fit it in in any way.



deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #37 on: November 18, 2008, 01:11:52 AM
Bilbo was a confirmed bachelor and never had children, the same with Frodo and Sméagol (Gollum).
the ring is a harsh mistress.



Boggled Coriander

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
    • Balancing Frogs
Reply #38 on: November 18, 2008, 01:15:47 AM
If I remember correctly, at one point the Senator is said to be named for an illustrious ancestor - presumably Tolkien's Bilbo Baggins.  (But, like deflective said, Bilbo never had children.  Maybe he had a niece or nephew with kids?)  

The name "Bilbo" only gets mentioned in the title.  I assume it's got something to do with keeping the lawyers for Tolkien's estate at bay.

Even after reading all the negative comments, I'm going to go out on a limb and say I really liked this one.  I'm not sure I can really articulate why, apart from "it amused me".  

"The meteor formed a crater, vampires crawling out of the crater." -  The Lyttle Lytton contest


deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #39 on: November 18, 2008, 01:33:30 AM
Samwise named one of his many children Bilbo but the suggestion that his natural dislike of gollum and the orcs was passed on & amplified in a son is depressing. much more likely that the story didn't try to follow lotr faithfully.



Anarkey

  • Meen Pie
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 703
  • ...depends a good deal on where you want to get to
Reply #40 on: November 18, 2008, 11:42:29 PM
I really liked this story, overall.  I did think it was a little too slow in places, and could have gotten to its final scene a little more quickly.  With my sample set of two for Duncan I'd say leisurely may be a stylistic marker for him.  I was happy with the use (or misuse, as some would have it) of political elements.  I am so happy Rachel made the comparison to Flannery O'Connor...that resonance was occurring for me but on a level just below my awareness, and when she said "Everything that Rises Must Converge" I went "Oh, yes.  Yes!" inside.  Southern Gothic in the Shire.  I'm so there. 

Like others, loved the gay trolls who can speak articulately but go out of their way to pretend in front of the wacko racist. 
« Last Edit: November 18, 2008, 11:45:42 PM by Anarkey »

Winner Nash's 1000th member betting pool + Thaurismunths' Free Rice Contest!


stePH

  • Actually has enough cowbell.
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 3906
  • Cool story, bro!
    • Thetatr0n on SoundCloud
Reply #41 on: November 19, 2008, 05:26:19 AM
It didn't occur to me that the trolls were gay.  I don't remember the sex of either of them being specified, so when it was revealed that they were a mated couple, I just assumed that one was male and the other female, and the Distinguished Gentlehobbit just hadn't bothered to note that about them.

"Nerdcore is like playing Halo while getting a blow-job from Hello Kitty."
-- some guy interviewed in Nerdcore Rising


DKT

  • Friendly Neighborhood
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4980
  • PodCastle is my Co-Pilot
    • Psalms & Hymns & Spiritual Noir
Reply #42 on: November 19, 2008, 04:53:49 PM
I think the tell was when the senator kept referring to them as his "boys."


Listener

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 3187
  • I place things in locations which later elude me.
    • Various and Sundry Items of Interest
Reply #43 on: November 20, 2008, 02:09:34 PM
I haven't read the thread yet or even had time to finish the story, but I really, REALLY don't like this one already (I have about nine minutes left in the MP3). It's like LOTR fanfic meets Strom Thurmond meets the Republicans meets that story on EP where the Liberals won and Wyoming is still a segregated land...

Too many ideas. Too much going on. Too slavish to LOTR. Stories inspired by, okay. Stories derivative of, not so much.

The reading is up to Frank Key's usual standards, but that's the only good thing. This story is a pastiche that, in my opinion, tries to hold a mirror up to the American political process and ends up smashing that mirror over our heads.

Sorry, Andy Duncan. I'll have to give this one a FAIL.

"Farts are a hug you can smell." -Wil Wheaton

Blog || Quote Blog ||  Written and Audio Work || Twitter: @listener42


stePH

  • Actually has enough cowbell.
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 3906
  • Cool story, bro!
    • Thetatr0n on SoundCloud
Reply #44 on: November 20, 2008, 02:13:22 PM
I think the tell was when the senator kept referring to them as his "boys."

Ah.  That got by me.  Maybe I wasn't liking the story enough to pay close attention.

"Nerdcore is like playing Halo while getting a blow-job from Hello Kitty."
-- some guy interviewed in Nerdcore Rising


mt house

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Reply #45 on: November 27, 2008, 08:26:35 PM
Hilarious! Best podcastle yet! I was trying to do yoga at the same time and almost hurt myself I was laughing so hard!



mt house

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Reply #46 on: November 28, 2008, 01:28:36 AM
wow, I just read the comment AFTER posting mine. LIGHTEN UP PEOPLE! This is SATIRE! My favorite form of story. Reading the posts reminds me of an e-mail I got (pre-election day) about Obama being "anti pledge of allegiance, and anti national anthem." It was all bogus, of course. It was a piece of satire that was eventually taken as fact and e-mailed with reckless abandon around the globe. The world needs more laughter, more Frank Key, and more FUNNY fantasy stories! Thank you Rachel!



stePH

  • Actually has enough cowbell.
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 3906
  • Cool story, bro!
    • Thetatr0n on SoundCloud
Reply #47 on: November 28, 2008, 09:58:44 PM
Reading the posts reminds me of an e-mail I got (pre-election day) about Obama being "anti pledge of allegiance, and anti national anthem." !

So what if he is?  So am I.  It don't mean anything ....

"Nerdcore is like playing Halo while getting a blow-job from Hello Kitty."
-- some guy interviewed in Nerdcore Rising


mt house

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Reply #48 on: November 29, 2008, 05:37:11 PM
The point isn't whether he is or isn't (although when you run for president, it's USUALLY a good idea to buy into that kind of stuff), the point is that it was a piece of satire written by a comedian journalist but it was taken as fact by some, well, gullible (to put it nicely) people.



Zathras

  • Guest
Reply #49 on: November 29, 2008, 05:44:59 PM
The point isn't whether he is or isn't (although when you run for president, it's USUALLY a good idea to buy into that kind of stuff), the point is that it was a piece of satire written by a comedian journalist but it was taken as fact by some, well, gullible (to put it nicely) people.

Wizard's First Rule:  "People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true."



eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Reply #50 on: November 29, 2008, 06:00:54 PM
The point isn't whether he is or isn't (although when you run for president, it's USUALLY a good idea to buy into that kind of stuff), the point is that it was a piece of satire written by a comedian journalist but it was taken as fact by some, well, gullible (to put it nicely) people.

Fair enough, but I should point out that most of us who didn't like this story understood very well that it is satire. Personally, I just think that it's pretty bad satire. I'm glad that it worked for you, but it's not usually a good idea to assume that just because someone doesn't share your taste in stories, they are stupid, which is what your first post seemed to say.



mt house

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Reply #51 on: November 30, 2008, 03:31:34 AM
No No, come now, that's not what I meant. If you didn't LIKE it, OK. If you were OFFENDED by it, which a lot of listeners seemed to be, then you were taking it too seriously. Believe me, I've felt guilty about not finishing some escape pod podcasts because I don't feel I'm "smart enough" to enjoy it. This one just seemed to be the perfect mix for MY taste.



JoeFitz

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
Reply #52 on: December 03, 2008, 11:46:46 PM
No No, come now, that's not what I meant. If you didn't LIKE it, OK. If you were OFFENDED by it, which a lot of listeners seemed to be, then you were taking it too seriously. Believe me, I've felt guilty about not finishing some escape pod podcasts because I don't feel I'm "smart enough" to enjoy it. This one just seemed to be the perfect mix for MY taste.


I'm all in favour of satire, but, as here, it easily misses its mark because satire is extremely difficult to do well. The satirist who overplays her hand does so at her peril.

I thought this piece was so overplayed as to be offensive to the Middle Earth setting and the United States political "history".

I didn't seen any insightful commentary in this piece. Orcs are not "misunderstood" in the Middle Earth setting. There are plenty of characters and groups within Middle Earth who ARE misunderstood by Hobbits. Choosing one of them as the "immigrant" in a re-hash of US nativism might have been interesting, cute or even funny.



Corydon

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Reply #53 on: December 04, 2008, 02:01:32 PM
I didn't seen any insightful commentary in this piece. Orcs are not "misunderstood" in the Middle Earth setting. There are plenty of characters and groups within Middle Earth who ARE misunderstood by Hobbits. Choosing one of them as the "immigrant" in a re-hash of US nativism might have been interesting, cute or even funny.

I think the point isn't that orcs are misunderstood, by hobbits or anybody else, in LOTR.  Tolkien makes it pretty clear that they are rotten to the core.  Rather, it's that Tolkien in LOTR offers an essentializing worldview (orcs are bad, by their very nature) that mirrors racist attitudes in our own world.  That's not a new critique of Tolkien, for what it's worth.

What is new about the story-- and you can take this or, as a lot of people have, leave it-- is importing the character of Sen. Theodore Bilbo into that critique.  I found that to be clever: I've always chuckled a little at Senator Bilbo's name, and I think the notion of importing a 1940's southern state house into the Shire is just plain funny.  I didn't take it as satire of our world; satirizing a long-dead figure is mostly pointless, and I don't think the picture painted is one that lines up too closely with 21st century America.  Rachel's reading of it as a character study a la Flannery O'Connor is much more convincing to me.



izzardfan

  • Guest
Reply #54 on: January 12, 2009, 05:31:20 PM
It didn't occur to me that the trolls were gay.  I don't remember the sex of either of them being specified, so when it was revealed that they were a mated couple, I just assumed that one was male and the other female, and the Distinguished Gentlehobbit just hadn't bothered to note that about them.

I felt the same way.  In fact, I thought to myself, "Oh, I guess I missed where it was mentioned that one was female."

I think the tell was when the senator kept referring to them as his "boys."

Ah.  That got by me.  Maybe I wasn't liking the story enough to pay close attention.

I noticed the "boys" reference but didn't make the connection later to, "Oh, that means they're gay."

I didn't much care for the story overall, but I'm not a Tolkein fan, and while I understood the reference to U.S. politics, I still felt the story was boring.



MattArnold

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • nemorathwald.com
Reply #55 on: April 01, 2009, 12:16:12 PM
I enjoyed it. It brought to mind David Brin's Salon.com article on Tolkien as the enemy of modernity.

Why is "Senator Bilbo" so interesting to me as a critique of some of romanticism's more common foibles, while "Sweet, Savage Sorcerer" is not? Is it less obvious? Is it that this gives a second look to a work far more well-known than a romance paperback? Is it that the wish fulfillment of "Sweet, Savage Sorcerer" shows the harmless rosy side of romanticism without any downside, and "Senator Bilbo" illustrates the dark side of romantic elitism?

Or is it merely a reflection of me and the concerns of the people around me?



Unblinking

  • Sir Postsalot
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 8729
    • Diabolical Plots
Reply #56 on: December 30, 2009, 09:24:08 PM
I'm glad that I didn't listen to this one back when it originally came out, as I was in political overload listening to all my co-workers talk about politics non-stop, and refusing to listen to anyone's political opinions that conflict with their own.  (None of that is Podcastle's fault, of course)

I like when a story carries a message, but for me to like it the story has to come first.  The story has to exist as an entertaining story without considering the message, which in this case it did not.  Subtle political messages, sure, but this one carried a bludgeon (like the Moon over 1600, or whatever, at Pseudopod did).

And I disliked the Lord of the Rings usage for reasons others have already stated.  I think it was eytanz who said that it seemed more like it was written by someone who had heard of LotR than anyone who was really inspired by LotR.  So, instead of a tribute or a parody, it just struck me as swiping the famous character name simply to draw in the readers.

Rachel asked those who objected to the use of Tolkien here if they also objected to Maguire's Wicked.  I hated Wicked (the novel), but not at all for the same reasons as I disliked the LotR usage here.  I thought the idea for Wicked was pure genius.  It didn't try to make me love the Wicked Witch unconditionally, only to help me understand her, and it tried to do so while (mostly) not mucking around with the events of Baum's original story.  The trouble for me is that Baum's Witch didn't seem particularly evil, but Maguire convinces me that his version is truly a bad person especially with her actions towards the boy.  The play is an entirely different story from the novel (loved it!).  And since one of my two published stories is a retelling of the Wizard of Oz with some of the characters drastically altered, it's obvious that I can't knock anybody simply for using a pre-existing world (insert expression about throwing stones and glass houses).  Anyway, enough Oz ramble, though for those of you who might be interested, I wrote some editorials about Oz a while back.

Wizard vs. Witch:  Who's the Real Villain?
Examines the roles in Baum's original story--I'd say the Wizard is clearly the villain, despite popular.
http://www.diabolicalplots.com/?p=184

Wicked--Novel vs. Musical
http://www.diabolicalplots.com/?p=187
A joint review of both the musical and the novel, what I loved and what I hated.



Fenrix

  • Curmudgeonly Co-Editor of PseudoPod
  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3996
  • I always lock the door when I creep by daylight.
Reply #57 on: April 28, 2012, 05:45:05 AM
"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of the reader. I think that many confuse 'applicability' with 'allegory'; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author."

J.R.R. Tolkien

All cat stories start with this statement: “My mother, who was the first cat, told me this...”