Author Topic: EP479: The Evening, The Morning and the Night (Read 17330 times)

eytanz · **on:** February 02, 2015, 07:16:19 AM

EP479: The Evening, The Morning and the Night

By Octavia Butler

Read by Amanda Ching

This story originally appeared in the May 1987 issue of Omni

---

Listen to this week’s Escape Pod!

TiDinzeo · **Reply #1 on:** February 02, 2015, 01:43:34 PM

Loved the story as far as I could listen to it. Unfortunately the last five minutes or so had the outro over the top of it. I just figured I should let someone know.

matweller · **Reply #2 on:** February 02, 2015, 02:52:12 PM

I very much appreciate the heads-up! As I posted with your comment on our website, that was how the file was when I initially uploaded it, but I caught the error within about an hour and fixed it. Your podcatcher must have grabbed it in that first hour. If you delete that file and re-download you should be fine.

I’m very sorry for the annoyance. If it makes you feel any better, I realized I had made the error as I lay down in my bed at 1:30 this morning and even though I was getting up at 5:30, I rose and fixed the file before going to bed rather than letting it sit until morning.

wintermute · **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2015, 01:17:35 PM

Is it just me, or did the pre-intro section shift from side to side?

eytanz · **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2015, 03:06:28 PM

The pre-intro section of every EP episode in ages shifts from one speaker to the next. I've been meaning to bring this up for ages but I keep forgetting, so thanks for doing so!

wintermute · **Reply #5 on:** February 03, 2015, 04:13:42 PM

Ah, OK. It's the first time I've noticed.

Dwango · **Reply #6 on:** February 03, 2015, 07:51:54 PM

This story was was a tightly well woven tapestry of themes. It touches on disease and the fear it causes, genetic modification, dealing with a handicap, self will, and what it even means to be human. So many themes might make a short story meander, but this laid them in layers in such a way to make a cloth with one theme leading to the next in a nice way. I felt disturbed at the end as to whether they were even human anymore, and then thought about earlier how sympathetic I felt for their plight of segregation and discrimination. I realized that the only threat was to themselves and the fact they would form enclaves within the society, kind of how immigrants built their own sections of cities, only on a smaller scale. I must admit, I am guilty of thinking of them forming clans and starting political wars between the matrons. How much control do they really have? Of course then I was thinking of the similar theme of Sigler's Contageous. I've got my horror mixed in my science fiction. :-)

EFBQ · **Reply #7 on:** February 04, 2015, 02:26:18 PM

I'd read this story years ago, and remembered it as I listened to it. I was surprised, though, that it ended as it did - somehow in my memory it had gone on longer. Not 'building a new society' longer (read Butlers other works for some of that) but that there was a denouement where the protagonist did go on to build her own haven, but ended her romantic relationship... I suppose I saw Naomi's life unfold before her the same way she did.

The takeaway is - READ MORE BUTLER, and I say that to Escape Pod, but especially to those listeners who are discovering her for the first time. She gets as close as anyone I can think of to developing comprehensible alien cultures, usually peopled by quasi humans or human/other hybrids. At least she builds two of these, developing them over a series of books, then sets them to warring with one another.

Father Beast · **Reply #8 on:** February 05, 2015, 12:50:04 AM

Octavia Butler, Man...

Typical of her, this is about biology, but since biology isn't so exact a science, unexpected effects in biological things have a strong tendency to turn around and bite you. The result is almost always unsettling. That was true in the few Butler books I've read (Clay's Ark, Dawn, Adulthood Rites, Imago, Wild Seed), and it's true here in this story.

I think the reason I've read so little Butler is because I have to have my endurance up before I go in. Not because it's hard to read, but because the situations make me a little queasy. It's always good stuff, but I might not be able to handle it if the doses are too big. These are generally not places I would want to live.

But it's damn good science fiction, and just fascinating.

OK, let me stop slobbering over her and talk about this story.

It took until most of the way through this story before I heard about the origin of the condition, It's a magic bullet that cures many kinds of cancer, and has those treated spawn children with the condition. That means that those cancer sufferers will have greatly reduced progeny. Those children with the condition will probably choose not to breed, and those who do, their children will likely not breed. On the other hand, those children of cancer sufferers born before the treatment will be at risk for cancer, and will probably get the treatment when their cancer shows up. In a few hundred years most people with genetic risk for cancer and those people with the condition will be weeded out of the population. That sort of makes me sad.

Most of the action in this story is these people with a terrible condition trying to make some sort of way in life before their inevitable doom descends on them, and then they are offered some sort of hope of something more than their bleak existence. It's not so great, but at least it's something.

Story sure sticks in my head, but I'm not sure I could stand to listen to it again. Take that backhanded compliment how you like.

davidthygod · **Reply #9 on:** February 05, 2015, 07:35:40 PM

Great story, I will definitely pick up some more Octavia Butler. My one very flippant observation would be that I couldn't stop thinking that Ms Butler came up with a nice, scientific reason why women tend to hate on each other. Its all about the pheromones.

Varda · **Reply #10 on:** February 05, 2015, 10:33:09 PM

Quote from: davidthygod on February 05, 2015, 07:35:40 PM

My one very flippant observation would be that I couldn't stop thinking that Ms Butler came up with a nice, scientific reason why women tend to hate on each other. Its all about the pheromones.

Huh. Funny. I'm a woman, and I don't "hate on" other women. Nor do I observe this about other women.

Let's can the flippant sexist jokes, shall we? Thanks.

Ariadnes-thread · **Reply #11 on:** February 06, 2015, 06:37:58 AM

I loved this story so much. I'm already a huge Butler fan, but before this I'd only read her novels, not her short stories. After this one, I'm definitely going to seek more of her short stories out; it's amazing how detailed a world she builds in this short a narrative, and with such an emotional impact, too. I really appreciated the story's themes about how we treat (or, rather, mistreat) people with disabilities in our society, which I thought were beautifully handled.

Varda · **Reply #12 on:** February 06, 2015, 12:16:16 PM

As for this story, I straight-up loved it, (and I'll definitely second Norm's recommendation of Bloodchild over on the Drabblecast). The disease reminded me a bit of an SF variation on autism, like what it would look like if autism struck in your middle or late years instead of early in life, especially the pattern of normal development--> sudden regression, and details like the self-stimming behavior and obsessive focus on a particular hobby or topic. And of course, autism spectrum disorders have been really stigmatized misunderstood, especially historically, which makes sense when you take into account the diagnosis didn't even exist in its present form until around the 1960's (the symptoms were there, but nobody had fully connected the dots before then). I love how part of the challenge in helping the regressing DGD people is just understanding them and their motivations to begin with. It was a fantastic picture of neuroatypicality, and how this looks really scary from the outside.

Unblinking · **Reply #13 on:** February 06, 2015, 02:45:11 PM

Octavia Butler! *swoon*

I have not honestly read much of what she's written. But the two things I have read have been amazing--her novel Wild Seed and her short story Bloodchild. Looking forward to this.

And that reminds me that I need to look up more of her stories--or my favorite podcasts could just buy the right to record them all.

Ariadnes-thread · **Reply #14 on:** February 06, 2015, 04:26:06 PM

I definitely thought of the autism thing, too, Varda! Even more so in terms of the stigma society attached to it and the way the misunderstanding and low expectations of society were what made them so much worse than letting them be who they were and do what they wanted. The symptoms, too-- the self-harm (that is worse in a bad environment), the focus and interest in one thing. (I have Asperger's myself and was definitely thinking about the autism connection throughout the story, but I wasn't sure if I was just reading that into it because I spend a lot of time reading/thinking about autism acceptance stuff, so I'm glad too hear my reading confirmed by someone else!)

albionmoonlight · **Reply #15 on:** February 07, 2015, 02:31:11 PM

We are so bad at dealing with mental illness. I love that this story did not fall into the simplistic trap of having organized lynch mobs out to kill all the DGDs. Instead, the DGDs were still marginalized, but by well-meaning people who just did not know how to handle them. Which is pretty much how we handle mental illness. No mainstream schools of thought are opposed to the mentally ill. We all feel sympathy and want sick people to get better. But we still manage to isolate and marginalize and ignore and mistreat mentally ill individuals. Because we don't know how to do any better. And because we lack the will to commit the resources to applying what we do know will make their lives better.

A very powerful story by an author that has a great sense of how to reflect the real world through the mirror of speculative fiction.

jkjones21 · **Reply #16 on:** February 08, 2015, 01:53:55 AM

Loved the story, and definitely got the autism vibe as well. I was a little saddened by the explanation of DGD's origins, simply because it mirrors so closely the misinformation that just won't fucking die about autism being linked to vaccination. Obviously Butler couldn't have foreseen that particular travesty, but it sours the autism comparison for me slightly simply because I imagine anti-vaxxers running with the story's concept as some kind of horrific tale about the cost of lifesaving medical technology.

Setting that aside, I did think the picture painted of how people suffering from DGD would eventually organize into collectives established under a biological hierarchy was pretty bleak, perhaps simply because it's a very alien social structure in comparison to what we'd ideally strive for as humans (on a side note, the only other Butler story I'm familiar with is "Bloodchild," and that piece also deals heavily in alien social structures that appear to be inspired by insects; I wonder if Butler took arthropods as a major source of inspiration for her creations).

Zelda · **Reply #17 on:** February 08, 2015, 08:12:02 AM

I can see a weak similarity to autism but the central concerns about DGD seem to me to be quite different. Uncontrolled DGD triggers violence against others, in addition to self harm. The main character's father killed her mother. During her boyfriend's reunion with his mother, Beatrice, the main character and the boyfriend all watched the mother carefully for any threatening actions against her son and all three had to intervene to deflect such actions. Most of the violence might be self harm, but enough of it was directed outward to make uncontrolled DGDs a realistic concern for society.

The little we learned about DGD raised a lot of interesting questions. The story answered only a few of them because only a few fell within the its scope. I liked this story very much.

hardware · **Reply #18 on:** February 09, 2015, 04:34:49 PM

Woah. That might just be one of the best stories I've had the pleasure to listen to in this podcast. It reminded me in parts of 'Never Let Me Go' in it's depiction of a biological underclass with not much prospects, but then had so many more interesting ideas hidden in all we learn about the disease and it's consequences for society, biology and psychology.

Bruce Arthurs · **Reply #19 on:** February 09, 2015, 05:13:14 PM

Quote from: jkjones21 on February 08, 2015, 01:53:55 AM

Loved the story, and definitely got the autism vibe as well. I was a little saddened by the explanation of DGD's origins, simply because it mirrors so closely the misinformation that just won't fucking die about autism being linked to vaccination. Obviously Butler couldn't have foreseen that particular travesty, but it sours the autism comparison for me slightly simply because I imagine anti-vaxxers running with the story's concept as some kind of horrific tale about the cost of lifesaving medical technology.

I'm pretty sure the parallel Butler had in mind was the Thalidomide tragedy in the late 50's, when a new prescription sedative turned out to cause horrifying birth defects when taken by pregnant women who also had a vitamin-B deficiency. Thousands of children were born with truncated or missing arms and legs, most in Europe. It would have been a HUGE news story when Butler was a young teen; I was a pre-teen about that time, and remember the reports pretty clearly.

(In the US, a minor official at the FDA, Frances Oldham Kelsey, refused to approve sales of the drug in the US without further testing, despite intense pressure from pharmaceutical companies. Because of her, only 17 "thalidomide babies" were born in the US, rather than the thousands in West Germany and other countries. She later received a Presidential medal for her caution.)

Unblinking · **Reply #20 on:** February 10, 2015, 05:16:49 PM

A great story, as I've come to expect from Butler.

I did see the autism parallel though the more violent manifestations reminded me more of something like schizophrenia.

The most interesting theme I saw in it was exploring the idea that no matter what our intellectual capabilities are, we are at our core products of our biology, something which we have little conscious control over. Our minds are capable of amazing things, but much of our motivations are driven by chemicals swishing around in our wetware that are evolved to drive behaviors that are now mostly obsolete. Our minds are also very good at self-justification and revising their memories, so I imagine that if she stays with him, he'll have soothed out his own qualms about the situation in short order.

It seems to me that this condition will produce a new society that is biologically the same species but with a different social order that would make it very interesting to use as a counterpoint for understanding human psychology and social behavior on a much deeper level.

I thought the story did an interesting and gradual reveal that held my attention, though I felt that it was trying to convey a tension between options that I didn't really feel. This facility sounds amazing in every respect. To the patients living there, they have the opportunity to pursue whatever makes them happy and to live a long life, and I think they'll probably be happier than your average person on the balance, and it seemed like they had a fair amount of free will within the facility--his mother was an extreme case by everything we could see. To the matron of the facility, she knows that she is making all of their lives better and has a lot of freewill for herself--most of her effect happens just by her being there--it sounded like his mother's behavior only needed to be monitored so closely because of the brain damage and the interruption to her routines. To society as a whole, this facility is hugely beneficial both by helping have an example to the population about how the condition doesn't have to be a death sentence and also as a source of technological innovation.

The main downside I see is that it seems that the matron is socially isolated by her nature. She can never interact directly with peers because there is an inborn hostility with other matrons. Her patients can't be peers because in her presence they are subordinates--she can be friendly and converse with them of course but there can never be any illusion that they are on the same level, they can't disagree with her. Even over the phone I doubt she'll love talking to other matrons, though they can get by in that situation. She can stay with her fiancee if she wants to--she can get some comfort and sexual release from the relationship at least, but I'd think it would be constantly troubling to realize that your husband has no choice but to be your husband, though I suppose it might also be reassuring to know that he will always be there for you.

jkjones21 · **Reply #21 on:** February 10, 2015, 06:36:46 PM

Quote from: Bruce Arthurs on February 09, 2015, 05:13:14 PM

Quote from: jkjones21 on February 08, 2015, 01:53:55 AM
Loved the story, and definitely got the autism vibe as well. I was a little saddened by the explanation of DGD's origins, simply because it mirrors so closely the misinformation that just won't fucking die about autism being linked to vaccination. Obviously Butler couldn't have foreseen that particular travesty, but it sours the autism comparison for me slightly simply because I imagine anti-vaxxers running with the story's concept as some kind of horrific tale about the cost of lifesaving medical technology.

I'm pretty sure the parallel Butler had in mind was the Thalidomide tragedy in the late 50's, when a new prescription sedative turned out to cause horrifying birth defects when taken by pregnant women who also had a vitamin-B deficiency. Thousands of children were born with truncated or missing arms and legs, most in Europe. It would have been a HUGE news story when Butler was a young teen; I was a pre-teen about that time, and remember the reports pretty clearly.

(In the US, a minor official at the FDA, Frances Oldham Kelsey, refused to approve sales of the drug in the US without further testing, despite intense pressure from pharmaceutical companies. Because of her, only 17 "thalidomide babies" were born in the US, rather than the thousands in West Germany and other countries. She later received a Presidential medal for her caution.)

That really helps with the context. Thanks!

InfiniteMonkey · **Reply #22 on:** February 11, 2015, 05:43:53 AM

I read this shortly after it first came out, and DGD scared the crap out of me.

Father Beast · **Reply #23 on:** February 11, 2015, 11:29:47 AM

Quote from: Unblinking on February 10, 2015, 05:16:49 PM

It seems to me that this condition will produce a new society that is biologically the same species but with a different social order that would make it very interesting to use as a counterpoint for understanding human psychology and social behavior on a much deeper level.

If the causes of the condition are clearly defined (which it seems that they are: Every child born to a cancer recoverer after their treatment, every child born with a positive parent), then the children born with this condition will fall off rapidly with each generation. The society that the story characters are experiencing is about as populous as it's going to get. This society will become a footnote in history, a disease that has been overcome, long before they get their feet under them as an independent society.

Varda · **Reply #24 on:** February 11, 2015, 12:39:19 PM

Quote from: Father Beast on February 11, 2015, 11:29:47 AM

Quote from: Unblinking on February 10, 2015, 05:16:49 PM

It seems to me that this condition will produce a new society that is biologically the same species but with a different social order that would make it very interesting to use as a counterpoint for understanding human psychology and social behavior on a much deeper level.

If the causes of the condition are clearly defined (which it seems that they are: Every child born to a cancer recoverer after their treatment, every child born with a positive parent), then the children born with this condition will fall off rapidly with each generation. The society that the story characters are experiencing is about as populous as it's going to get. This society will become a footnote in history, a disease that has been overcome, long before they get their feet under them as an independent society.

That's not the case at all, though. Natural selection doesn't work quite like that, and especially not in human populations. There are plenty of conditions (even very severe ones) that are both genetic and persist in the general population long after their etiology is known. And that's especially true of diseases that don't hit until after reproductive age. Unless there is a sustained, society-wide attempt to eliminate them through forced sterilization and eugenics, people with disabilities (even really scary ones) can and will choose to have children, and the genes will persist. I might point to Huntington's Disease as a good example of this. It's both a REALLY scary heritable disease that might cause you to choose not to have children, and one that isn't going anywhere, in the sense we're not banning anyone from reproducing.

Whether the DGDs will be able to build a separate society in time is another matter, and perhaps has less to do with genetic pressures and more with their relative power in society, and whether lawmakers and others in power are persuaded to see DGD as a difference rather than a disease. There are parallels here to the conversations surrounding both d/Deafness (is Deafness, in a Deaf Culture sense, better treated as a disability, or a linguistic/cultural difference, or something of both?) and neurotypicality (is Asperger's a disorder in need of a cure, or a less common but perfectly healthy neurological variance?).

matweller · **Reply #25 on:** February 11, 2015, 01:13:14 PM

Quote from: Varda on February 11, 2015, 12:39:19 PM

Quote from: Father Beast on February 11, 2015, 11:29:47 AM
Quote from: Unblinking on February 10, 2015, 05:16:49 PM

It seems to me that this condition will produce a new society that is biologically the same species but with a different social order that would make it very interesting to use as a counterpoint for understanding human psychology and social behavior on a much deeper level.

If the causes of the condition are clearly defined (which it seems that they are: Every child born to a cancer recoverer after their treatment, every child born with a positive parent), then the children born with this condition will fall off rapidly with each generation. The society that the story characters are experiencing is about as populous as it's going to get. This society will become a footnote in history, a disease that has been overcome, long before they get their feet under them as an independent society.

That's not the case at all, though. Natural selection doesn't work quite like that, and especially not in human populations. There are plenty of conditions (even very severe ones) that are both genetic and persist in the general population long after their etiology is known. And that's especially true of diseases that don't hit until after reproductive age. Unless there is a sustained, society-wide attempt to eliminate them through forced sterilization and eugenics, people with disabilities (even really scary ones) can and will choose to have children, and the genes will persist. I might point to Huntington's Disease as a good example of this. It's both a REALLY scary heritable disease that might cause you to choose not to have children, and one that isn't going anywhere, in the sense we're not banning anyone from reproducing.

Whether the DGDs will be able to build a separate society in time is another matter, and perhaps has less to do with genetic pressures and more with their relative power in society, and whether lawmakers and others in power are persuaded to see DGD as a difference rather than a disease. There are parallels here to the conversations surrounding both d/Deafness (is Deafness, in a Deaf Culture sense, better treated as a disability, or a linguistic/cultural difference, or something of both?) and neurotypicality (is Asperger's a disorder in need of a cure, or a less common but perfectly healthy neurological variance?).

Agreed. One unfortunate (in terms of genetic advancement, anyway) side effect of the current state of societal evolution is that we've transcended natural selection and actively made many aspects of it socially taboo if not outright illegal.

Although, I guess it's true that "two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left." Maybe keeping DGDs leads to a race of hyper-intelligent, OCD cannibals perfect for extended missions on generation ships since you wouldn't have to bring as much food or process as much waste and you don't have to spend resources normally required for the 50-year decline of a homo-sapiens' life

Sorry, I really need to get in the habit of more than 3 hours' sleep per night...

Varda · **Reply #26 on:** February 11, 2015, 01:34:18 PM

Quote from: matweller on February 11, 2015, 01:13:14 PM

Agreed. One unfortunate (in terms of genetic advancement, anyway) side effect of the current state of societal evolution is that we've transcended natural selection and actively made many aspects of it socially taboo if not outright illegal.

Although, I guess it's true that "two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left." Maybe keeping DGDs leads to a race of hyper-intelligent, OCD cannibals perfect for extended missions on generation ships since you wouldn't have to bring as much food or process as much waste and you don't have to spend resources normally required for the 50-year decline of a homo-sapiens' life

Sorry, I really need to get in the habit of more than 3 hours' sleep per night...

I wouldn't call forced sterilization and eugenics "natural" selection at all--quite to the contrary, it's short sighted evolutionarily speaking (not to mention inhumane, but I think we already agree on that!). There's actually a very good evolutionary reason to keep these gene variants floating around: we never know when they might suddenly become advantageous for adaptation. The generation ship thing is a good example of how humans might consciously put this difference to use, but maybe a better one for naturally occurring selection is Sickle Cell Anemia. It can be dangerous for people with the trait, but actually makes them resistant to malaria in parts of the world where that's a problem. And, in fact, this genetic variant is more common in ethnicities hailing from historically malaria-plagued parts of the world. So a seemingly disadvantageous trait lingers, and maybe that's a good thing. All we need is one giant disease to roll through the population where people with Huntington's, or DGD, are resistant, and suddenly natural selection comes into play and those with the gene variant are now the "fittest". The genetic junk drawer has surprising uses and all.

Zelda · **Reply #27 on:** February 11, 2015, 11:31:31 PM

Quote from: matweller on February 11, 2015, 01:13:14 PM

Agreed. One unfortunate (in terms of genetic advancement, anyway) side effect of the current state of societal evolution is that we've transcended natural selection and actively made many aspects of it socially taboo if not outright illegal.

Although, I guess it's true that "two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left." Maybe keeping DGDs leads to a race of hyper-intelligent, OCD cannibals perfect for extended missions on generation ships since you wouldn't have to bring as much food or process as much waste and you don't have to spend resources normally required for the 50-year decline of a homo-sapiens' life

Sorry, I really need to get in the habit of more than 3 hours' sleep per night...

I disagree. The only thing that natural selection selects for is the ability to survive in an environment that hasn't been altered by human activity. There are many people who would not have lived to reproduce in that kind of an environment who have made valuable contributions to humanity. It would be a shame to lose whatever portion of their genetic material contributed to their accomplishments. Stephen Hawking is the most obvious example.

I'm not sure DGD would alter our society significantly. Several current cancer treatments have the side effect of making the patient sterile. The idea of not having children after cancer treatment would not be new even though the decision not to have children would be a voluntary one.

Father Beast · **Reply #28 on:** February 12, 2015, 02:17:30 AM

Quote from: Varda on February 11, 2015, 12:39:19 PM

Unless there is a sustained, society-wide attempt to eliminate them through forced sterilization and eugenics, people with disabilities (even really scary ones) can and will choose to have children, and the genes will persist. I might point to Huntington's Disease as a good example of this. It's both a REALLY scary heritable disease that might cause you to choose not to have children, and one that isn't going anywhere, in the sense we're not banning anyone from reproducing.

I'm not Familiar with Huntington's disease. Is that one where every child of a person who gets the disease will also get it? If not, then yes, people cling to hope that their child will be beat the odds. The difference between "might get it", and "will get it" is quite a big one when deciding to reproduce.

Zelda · **Reply #29 on:** February 12, 2015, 07:30:35 AM

Quote from: Father Beast on February 12, 2015, 02:17:30 AM

Quote from: Varda on February 11, 2015, 12:39:19 PM

Unless there is a sustained, society-wide attempt to eliminate them through forced sterilization and eugenics, people with disabilities (even really scary ones) can and will choose to have children, and the genes will persist. I might point to Huntington's Disease as a good example of this. It's both a REALLY scary heritable disease that might cause you to choose not to have children, and one that isn't going anywhere, in the sense we're not banning anyone from reproducing.

I'm not Familiar with Huntington's disease. Is that one where every child of a person who gets the disease will also get it? If not, then yes, people cling to hope that their child will be beat the odds. The difference between "might get it", and "will get it" is quite a big one when deciding to reproduce.

Unlike most genetic diseases the gene for Huntington's disease is a dominant gene. Natural selection doesn't work to weed it out because the symptoms of Huntington's don't appear until middle-age, after the typical person has already had children. Each child of a person who develops Huntington's has a 50% chance of having the gene which causes the disease. This also means, everyone who has the Huntington's gene has a parent who developed Huntington's. Because of that people who have the gene learn a lot about how the disease progresses and all of the unpleasantness it involves (their siblings who don't have the gene learn the same thing of course). It falls into the category of "might get it."

Varda · **Reply #30 on:** February 12, 2015, 11:31:22 AM

Excellent point, Zelda--thanks for the definition! Father Beast, I think I misread your original comment--I thought you meant if the gene is heritable at all, but you mean traits passed down and exhibited at a 100% rate, like perhaps some of the disorders you get with X chromosome-dominant genes. I'm having a tough time thinking of an example right now.

But yes, you're correct, that sort of genetic disorder would present a much more pessimistic outlook on reproduction. You'd probably see the disease drop low in time, but still not fall off completely for a long while, simply because of a combination of "hope springs eternal" and "accidents happen". I know a family with a heritable (not 100%, but 50/50) kidney disorder over many generations, and it's interesting to hear them talk about it. You'll hear them say things like, "Who knows? Maybe medicine will have advanced by the time my baby is old enough to get symptoms" and also, "Miracles can happen; it's in God's hands" and general attitudes that reflect the pressure/desire to have children outweighs the probable knowledge of what the quality of life might be if the child gets it. I suppose when it comes to children, decision-making isn't always driven by practicality (and with things like rape, not even always voluntary, of course).

Unblinking · **Reply #31 on:** February 12, 2015, 02:56:10 PM

Given the social structure laid out in the story, I see no reason to think that the presence of DGD are going to die out in the future. As the story goes on, the actually-stable DGD-colonies are spreading as new double-DGD matrons arise and take responsibility. That means that there are going to be more and more stable enclaves of DGD men and women who can live happy and functional lives in their isolated communities. With that, unless there is a blanket sterilization in effect, it's inevitable that some of those residents will have kids with each other, and each of the girls among these kids will have potential to be matrons to lead their own communities. I think that the biggest issue there will be that the relative isolation of the DGD enclaves will cause a huge uprise in the number of matrons and in the next generation there will be too many. Since matrons can't coexist with each other, for the colonies to function well there should be only one mature matron in each and if so much of the next generation has the potential to be matrons, and the excess matrons will probably have to leave the colony either voluntarily or by forced exile to live in the general population in order to keep the peace (alternatively, they could systematically duel each other to the death, and maybe that would be the most likely solution in some past centuries but doesn't seem likely here).

The imbalance between men and women might kill any great chance of the colonies existing in isolation past the 2nd generation, but I think that it's very likely that by that time the condition will be much better understood through studies (some conducted by researchers who are themselves DGD) and storytelling, and most of its contemporaries will take it for granted as a part of life rather than a new horrible armageddon brought on by playing God as some people no doubt think at the time of this story. Even for those who don't fully accept DGD folks as being different rather than broken, the innovative leaps that will emerge from the DGD colonies will prove their value even in a coldly economic sense. I think that after that time the colonies will still exist, but they'll no longer need to be the rigid clinical structures that they are in the time of the story--and that the residents will be able to come in and out at will as if it were a housing complex rather than a treatment facility. The matrons will go out and mix with the general population to avoid sparking inter-matron conflict, and will live their lives as regular people do. I expect by that time there might be ways to better predict or dampen down the violent outbreaks (something like anti-schizophrenic medication perhaps) so that these matrons can at least be reasonably certain that they won't violently attack the ones they love.

So I think DGD folks are here to stay, but that as each generation passes their exact role in society will change.

matweller · **Reply #32 on:** February 14, 2015, 05:38:14 AM

Quote from: Varda on February 11, 2015, 01:34:18 PM

Quote from: matweller on February 11, 2015, 01:13:14 PM
Agreed. One unfortunate (in terms of genetic advancement, anyway) side effect of the current state of societal evolution is that we've transcended natural selection and actively made many aspects of it socially taboo if not outright illegal.

Although, I guess it's true that "two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left." Maybe keeping DGDs leads to a race of hyper-intelligent, OCD cannibals perfect for extended missions on generation ships since you wouldn't have to bring as much food or process as much waste and you don't have to spend resources normally required for the 50-year decline of a homo-sapiens' life

Sorry, I really need to get in the habit of more than 3 hours' sleep per night...

I wouldn't call forced sterilization and eugenics "natural" selection at all--quite to the contrary, it's short sighted evolutionarily speaking (not to mention inhumane, but I think we already agree on that!). There's actually a very good evolutionary reason to keep these gene variants floating around: we never know when they might suddenly become advantageous for adaptation. The generation ship thing is a good example of how humans might consciously put this difference to use, but maybe a better one for naturally occurring selection is Sickle Cell Anemia. It can be dangerous for people with the trait, but actually makes them resistant to malaria in parts of the world where that's a problem. And, in fact, this genetic variant is more common in ethnicities hailing from historically malaria-plagued parts of the world. So a seemingly disadvantageous trait lingers, and maybe that's a good thing. All we need is one giant disease to roll through the population where people with Huntington's, or DGD, are resistant, and suddenly natural selection comes into play and those with the gene variant are now the "fittest". The genetic junk drawer has surprising uses and all.

I was thinking more in terms of genetic diseases/errors where a baby would not live to be born or would only live a short time after birth under natural conditions, but we intervene and they live severely mentally and physically debilitated lives and also sometimes reproduce. I'm not saying I have the answer or that I even lean one way or another, I'm simply suggesting that scientifically-speaking there are compelling arguments to be made on both sides. Eugenics is obviously objectionable when selecting for sex or hair color or dominant hand, but it gets to be more of a gray area in terms of spina bifida or harlequin ichthyosis.

adrianh · **Reply #33 on:** February 14, 2015, 09:08:29 AM

I'll join in the general "Butler FTW" chorus. This is one of my faves of her short stories so congrats to the EP folk on successfully acquiring it.

Something that I don't think's been mentioned so far was the reading - which I thought was excellent. Amanda did a great job of subtly communicating the emotional state of the lead characters. Well done.

RDNinja · **Reply #34 on:** February 19, 2015, 10:43:04 PM

Maybe it says more about me, but I saw almost a Christian allegory in the dilemma at the end. The boyfriend was faced with the choice of either becoming a sort of slave, but to a master that loved him and would care for him, or remaining "free" but destined to self-destruction.

Fenrix · **Reply #35 on:** February 22, 2015, 04:02:15 PM

Lots of great layers on this one - everyone's going to be able to unpack something from this and derive a different personal message. I can see the evolution of this into biopunk. It reminds me strongly of the social changes in Goonan's Nanotech Quartet caused by bio- and nano-engineering adding hive-like pheromone communications to humanity.

Quote from: Unblinking on February 12, 2015, 02:56:10 PM

Given the social structure laid out in the story, I see no reason to think that the presence of DGD are going to die out in the future. As the story goes on, the actually-stable DGD-colonies are spreading as new double-DGD matrons arise and take responsibility. That means that there are going to be more and more stable enclaves of DGD men and women who can live happy and functional lives in their isolated communities. With that, unless there is a blanket sterilization in effect, it's inevitable that some of those residents will have kids with each other, and each of the girls among these kids will have potential to be matrons to lead their own communities. I think that the biggest issue there will be that the relative isolation of the DGD enclaves will cause a huge uprise in the number of matrons and in the next generation there will be too many. Since matrons can't coexist with each other, for the colonies to function well there should be only one mature matron in each and if so much of the next generation has the potential to be matrons, and the excess matrons will probably have to leave the colony either voluntarily or by forced exile to live in the general population in order to keep the peace (alternatively, they could systematically duel each other to the death, and maybe that would be the most likely solution in some past centuries but doesn't seem likely here).

They could help the balance by having more smaller groups (like the protagonist's group dorm).

MCWagner · **Reply #36 on:** February 24, 2015, 03:58:15 AM

Note: disagreement ahead.

I'm afraid I had a very different reaction to this particular story, one rooted in noting the apparent connections to both Autism and schizophrenia. It is entirely possible that these connections were completely coincidental and unintentional by the author. I certainly mean no offense to the author if these are coincidental. However the details were close enough (and date from a time when these ideas were rampant... and a time when I was a subscriber to Omni and read this on it's original published date) to cause extremely unfortunate associations in my mind, which prevented me from enjoying the story.

In the world of Autism there has been more than the fair share of quackery employed to separate desperate parents from their money. As I have a family member who works deeply within the academic and educational side of that world, I spent the better part of two decades hearing about each fad and trend as it came up. While "exorcisms" (-autism is a demonic possession-) tended to grab the press attention, there was also the scientifically unsound and medically extremely dangerous "chelation therapy" (-autism is caused by heavy metal poisoning-), the absurd pop-psychology of "rebirthing" (-re-experiencing birth will fix the autistic-), the heartbreakingly manipulative "facilitated communication"(-autistic children have the souls of poets, they just need someone to hold their hands over the typewriter-), and an entire spectrum of drastic and ludicrous "nutritive treatments" (-autism is an extension of an exotic form of celiac disease and is all caused by insecticides/impurities/wheat gluten-). While the disease in the story seems unmistakably tied to autism through a kind of sci-fi extrapolation (self-harm becomes outright mutilation, social dysfunction exacerbated to a lack of recognition of other people, repetitious behavior, a touch of echolalia, etc.), the treatments in the story struck me as unacceptably close to several of these quack treatments. The "bland food" to tamp down on the DGD symptoms is almost exactly the crazy nutritionist's arguments. Moreover, the "gather them all together among their own kind and they become a kind of utopic artistic commune" both reflects the emotion behind "facilitated communication," and works directly contrary to most progressive thought about work with the autistic, all of which encourages and directs towards inclusion in social and educational frameworks of the world at large. Inclusion programs at every educational level have made great strides in helping even severely autistic students to participate in their world.

I am overjoyed that the world in general has mostly accepted that there is no connection between immunizations (specifically the mercury-containing preservative thimerosol) and the advent of autism in children. However a glut of fictional stories and some largely true stories concentrating on extremely exceptional individuals (the 'splinter skills' evident in Rain Man are real, but extremely rare) have begun romanticizing the disorder in extremely unhelpful and misleading ways. Of course the more abusive, archaic ways of dealing with the mentally ill were harmful and dehumanizing. However, the particulars being promoted here appear to be based on irresponsible outdated pop-culture quackery and overly romantic notions of mental illness that would be almost as disastrous outside of a fantasy world as the anti-vaccination crowd. ("Almost" in that mostly only the patients would be hurt.)

I had a similar reaction to the apparent parallel to treatment of people with schizophrenia, though the connection is less clearly defined. (This may just be that I don't have the close familiarity with that subject as I did with the other.) I have seen more than a few assertions (both in fiction and stated as fact) about schizophrenia that suggest the disorder is only exacerbated by medical interference, and those individuals, when left alone, become charming "eccentric aunt" types. As I have a close family member that has struggled with severe paranoid schizophrenia for many years, I can attest that going un-medicated is a condition neither enjoyable nor safe for either the subject or the people around them. It is no magic bullet for their condition. (One aspect of some paranoid schizophrenia is that when they are properly balanced on medication, they frequently don't feel like taking it, and when they're not on it, they become convinced their medication is a conspiracy to kill them.)

Again, I mean no offense to the author or other readers, but my reaction to it was so strong, and so contrary to the prevailing commentary, that I wanted to speak up.

Unblinking · **Reply #37 on:** February 24, 2015, 06:11:11 PM

Quote from: MCWagner on February 24, 2015, 03:58:15 AM

Again, I mean no offense to the author or other readers, but my reaction to it was so strong, and so contrary to the prevailing commentary, that I wanted to speak up.

And thanks for speaking up. I didn't have the prior knowledge of all the different angles on autism taken in the past, being mostly only aware of the current iteration of the supposed vaccination cause. I can definitely see how having that knowledge would interfere with enjoyment of the story on several levels, and gives a lot of food for thought about the themes.

Max e^{i pi} · **Reply #38 on:** February 24, 2015, 07:32:24 PM

Quote from: eytanz on February 03, 2015, 03:06:28 PM

The pre-intro section of every EP episode in ages shifts from one speaker to the next. I've been meaning to bring this up for ages but I keep forgetting, so thanks for doing so!

I always thought Mat did it on purpose.
Because he can.

matweller · **Reply #39 on:** February 25, 2015, 04:54:57 AM

Quote from: Max e^{i pi} on February 24, 2015, 07:32:24 PM

Quote from: eytanz on February 03, 2015, 03:06:28 PM
The pre-intro section of every EP episode in ages shifts from one speaker to the next. I've been meaning to bring this up for ages but I keep forgetting, so thanks for doing so!

I always thought Mat did it on purpose.
Because he can.

QFT

Devoted135 · **Reply #40 on:** March 03, 2015, 02:29:06 AM

To be honest, I must have had my blinders on because I didn't particularly notice any parallels with autism or schizophrenia while listening, though looking back they certainly are there. I think this helped my enjoyment of the story.

Given that, I thought it was a really interesting thought experiment about the ramifications such a side effect would have, although it seemed to me the story didn't do enough to address the question of whether people would stop taking the cancer treatment once they understood the extent of its effects. Sure it's a magic bullet, but is it worth effectively ending your family line? To me it doesn't make sense for anyone to take this drug, but this line of thought was absent from the story. Perhaps Butler felt this was outside its purview.

I really appreciated the foreshadowing of her "matron" abilities with her accidental success as the dorm mom in her apartment. This was a really nice touch!

Ariadnes-thread · **Reply #41 on:** March 03, 2015, 08:39:16 PM

MCWagner, those are all very good points and I felt a bit uncomfortable looking at the story through an autism lens for similar reasons. Ultimately, though, I think this story has some really interesting things to say about disability acceptance in society, things that seem particularly relevant to autism just because of the parallels in symptoms. You mention some of the awful, abusive autism treatments as parallel to some of the DGD treatments in the story; I saw that parallel too, but I also saw mainstream society's treatment of DGDs as similar to some of our somewhat more mainstream (but thankfully getting less so, but definitely still around) autism treatments-- a lot of autism therapy is aimed at getting autistic people to act more normal, getting them to stop not just behaviors that harm themselves or others but also completely harmless things like hand-flapping, etc.-- basically trying to stop behaviors without trying to get an understanding of the person doing all of the "behaviors". I saw a great parallel to this in the way the boyfriend's mother was treated in the regular treatment facilities, whereas the place they visit her in actually treats her as a whole person and tries to meet her needs as much as they can. Which I found to be a great parallel for treatment of people with disabilities in general; for me at least, the reason I thought of autism in particular was 1) because I am on the spectrum and therefore it's the disability community I spend the most time in and 2) because there are some parallels in the actual symptoms.

Also, I didn't get the impression that they wanted to seclude DGDs on a hippie commune or that the treatment was more successful when they were separated from society; more that separated from society is the only context in which anyone would've allowed DGDs that much freedom, so the separation was out of necessity because of societal attitudes. I got the impression that the same system would've worked in a place like the main character's house in college. Let me know if I'm wrong though; I might be forgetting some detail.

Also, re: bland food, you're right that the nutritional autism "cures" are awful quackery, but I don't really see the parallel between them and bland food. Autism by definition includes sensory sensitivities, sometimes including sensitivities to certain tastes, which is why some autistic people do prefer bland food, and it's definitely the case that less sensory overload = reduction in some of the outwardly apparent autism symptoms. It's not that they were eliminating certain categories of food, which is what these autism "treatments" tend to do (usually gluten and/or dairy), so it's not that strong a parallel IMO.

And one minor nitpick of your terminology: despite its inclusion in the DSM, autism is defined as a developmental disability, not a mental illness.

adrianh · **Reply #42 on:** March 07, 2015, 09:48:15 PM

Quote

MCWagner, those are all very good points and I felt a bit uncomfortable looking at the story through an autism lens for similar reasons. Ultimately, though, I think this story has some really interesting things to say about disability acceptance in society, things that seem particularly relevant to autism just because of the parallels in symptoms. You mention some of the awful, abusive autism treatments as parallel to some of the DGD treatments in the story; I saw that parallel too, but I also saw mainstream society's treatment of DGDs as similar to some of our somewhat more mainstream (but thankfully getting less so, but definitely still around) autism treatments

I agree. For me the stronger metaphor for mental health / non-neurotypical folk in the story was societies general reaction to DGD sufferers. Fear & bigotry.

Nobody I know personally with schizophrenia or bipolar, and very few with depression, are "out" about it because of previous reactions from work and the world in general. I've a friend who had to move house & job after his (completely medically managed for years) schizophrenia became public knowledge in his social group. I've got a few loved ones who have tales about their institutional treatment during the 80s that really aren't that different from the fictional DGD ward horror stories.

I'm in complete agreement with MCWagner that extreme non-medication happy-clappy commune stuff is nonsense, but part of the reason things like that came into existence was as a reaction to some truly appalling institutional treatment. And if some of the things I dealt with as a counsellor in the 90s are anything to go by — are all to often still extant.

Quote

Also, I didn't get the impression that they wanted to seclude DGDs on a hippie commune or that the treatment was more successful when they were separated from society; more that separated from society is the only context in which anyone would've allowed DGDs that much freedom, so the separation was out of necessity because of societal attitudes. I got the impression that the same system would've worked in a place like the main character's house in college. Let me know if I'm wrong though; I might be forgetting some detail.

I'm not sure that there is a "they" here at all. This is not general society or an external authority figure choosing to isolate the DGD folk at Dilg. This is the DGD folk themselves choosing to do so. A very different message.

For me the "scary" thing is that it's almost a speciation event. It's the creation of an "other" - which thematically fits in with a lot of Butler's other stuff (e.g. the Patternist series). Dilg is the start of something that could potentially end up like the eusocial societies in Baxter's Destiny's Children series.

Quote

Also, re: bland food, you're right that the nutritional autism "cures" are awful quackery, but I don't really see the parallel between them and bland food.

As I read the story the blandness of the special diet doesn't actually seem to be the causative factor (there's an in-story reference to "we allow more variety" in the Dilg's food prep) — I put it down to yet another indicator of the general society's lack of support for DGD sufferers. I'm thinking, for example, how rubbish gluten free used to be (or is). Or the god awful "diabetic food" that used to be around in the 80s.

Gamercow · **Reply #43 on:** March 27, 2015, 03:21:26 AM

I was wary going into this story, because when I was in college, I took a "Literature of Science Fiction" course. Octavia Butler's Xenogenesis trilogy was part of the reading for the course, about half way through. At the time, I hated those books because of a problem I had with the teacher, and that kept me from enjoying any other of Ms. Butler's works in the future.

Then I listened to this episode. This story is a masterpiece. Like was stated in the intro, this story can mean so many different things depending on how you approach it, like any masterpiece. I have been sitting here trying to come up with words to properly express how the story impacted me, but I just can't. I listened to this on a road trip, and this episode just flat out eclipsed the next two episodes for me, I barely remember what they were about and I apologize to the authors of those two stories.

Thank you for running this episode. Glad to be back listening to episodes again. I fell out of the habit when my commute went from 40 minutes to 15. Good for my car, bad for podcast listening.

Unblinking · **Reply #44 on:** March 27, 2015, 04:09:00 PM

Quote from: Gamercow on March 27, 2015, 03:21:26 AM

I was wary going into this story, because when I was in college, I took a "Literature of Science Fiction" course. Octavia Butler's Xenogenesis trilogy was part of the reading for the course, about half way through. At the time, I hated those books because of a problem I had with the teacher, and that kept me from enjoying any other of Ms. Butler's works in the future.

Then I listened to this episode. This story is a masterpiece. Like was stated in the intro, this story can mean so many different things depending on how you approach it, like any masterpiece. I have been sitting here trying to come up with words to properly express how the story impacted me, but I just can't. I listened to this on a road trip, and this episode just flat out eclipsed the next two episodes for me, I barely remember what they were about and I apologize to the authors of those two stories.

Thank you for running this episode. Glad to be back listening to episodes again. I fell out of the habit when my commute went from 40 minutes to 15. Good for my car, bad for podcast listening.

For other epic goodness, I recommend Butler's "Bloodchild" that ran on Drabblecast, as well as her novel "Wild Seed". I haven't read most of her works yet, but that is something I intend to remedy.

El Barto · **Reply #45 on:** April 13, 2015, 01:21:33 AM

I finally listened to this episode today and woowheee! It was worth the wait. Discovering that authors like Octavia Butler exist is a big reason I love listening to Escape Pod and Clarkesworld.

Reading the comments here I was surprised that so many people thought about autism. I thought about OCD and the array of self-harming aspects that range from Trichotillomania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichotillomania) to cutting ones self so severely as to cause disfigurement.

I also thought it was funny to see that plenty of people don't realize how important pheromones are to humans and how those subtle chemicals influence many of our interpersonal behaviors.

Also, I always thought Matt's intro going from ear to ear was an homage to Mr Robato. Domo arigato!

CryptoMe · **Reply #46 on:** January 14, 2016, 04:27:17 AM

Wow! what a great thread. We need like buttons here on the forums.

I absolutely loved the story because it was so rich and well written. I did not get any autism, schizophrenia, or OCD vibes, despite knowing individuals with all of those conditions (in some cases very intimately). I did get a very strong ostracism vibe and "humans fear what they do not understand" theme. I really liked the way this was addressed, as the complex issue that it is.

And the story just keeps pulling out the surprises. Wonderful! I can't believe that in all my years of reading science fiction I have never read anything by Octavia Butler before. I will definitely have to fix that situation. And thanks to all who made suggestions on just how to do that.