Escape Artists
Escape Pod => Episode Comments => Topic started by: eytanz on February 28, 2014, 12:33:05 PM
-
EP437: A Rose for Ecclesiastes (http://escapepod.org/2014/02/28/ep437-rose-ecclesiastes/)
by Roger Zelazny (http://www.amazon.com/Roger-Zelazny/e/B000APXZHK/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&linkCode=ur2&qid=1393566444&sr=8-1&tag=matweller-20)
Read by Pete Milan (http://www.petemilan.com/)
This story was first published by Mercury Press, 1963
--
I was busy translating one of my Madrigals Macabre into Martian on the morning I was found acceptable. The intercom had buzzed briefly, and I dropped my pencil and flipped on the toggle in a single motion.
“Mister G,” piped Morton’s youthful contralto, “the old man says I should ‘get hold of that damned conceited rhymer’ right away, and send him to his cabin.–Since there’s only one damned conceited rhymer . . .”
“Let not ambition mock thy useful toil,” I cut him off.
So, the Martians had finally made up their minds! I knocked an inch and a half of ash from a smouldering butt, and took my first drag since I had lit it. The entire month’s anticipation tried hard to crowd itself into the moment, but could not quite make it. I was frightened to walk those forty feet and hear Emory say the words I already knew he would say; and that feeling elbowed the other one into the background.
So I finished the stanza I was translating before I got up.
It took only a moment to reach Emory’s door. I knocked thrice and opened it, just as he growled, “Come in.”
“You wanted to see me?” I sat down quickly to save him the trouble of offering me a seat.
“That was fast. What did you do, run?”
I regarded his paternal discontent:
Little fatty flecks beneath pale eyes, thinning hair, and an Irish nose; a voice a decibel louder than anyone else’s . . .
Hamlet to Claudius: “I was working.”
“Hah!” he snorted. “Come off it. No one’s ever seen you do any of that stuff.”
I shrugged my shoulders and started to rise.
“If that’s what you called me down here–”
“Sit down!”
(http://escapepod.org/wp-images/podcast-mini4.gif) Listen to this week’s Escape Pod! (http://traffic.libsyn.com/escapepod/EP437_ARoseforEcclesiastes.mp3)
-
One of my all-time favorite stories. Can't wait to listen to it.
-
The story was awesome. Literally, as in inspiring of awe. An astoundingly good story, and well delivered by the reader.
My only complaints are nerdy ones:
1) Why oh why did it have to be Earth and Mars? I know there is a long tradition of this, and it saves on set-up. But it makes the biology ludicrously implausible (we know human evolved on Earth, we know humans didn't colonize Mars, and every scenario you concoct to explain away these difficulties just causes new problems), and it risks making ludicrous the part where the poet can so freely interact with his hosts and especially the long chase scene and the tumble down the hillside. It would have been better to have two long-lost human interstellar colonies interacting, though perhaps this might have made the surprise less when the couple was first sexually and then genetically compatible. Still, who was greatly surprised, given the groundwork laid?
2) I can't help wondering what happened to the poet's research materials, that he clearly didn't bring back with him to the ship (given that he stumbled back on foot).
-
ZELAZNY!!!!!
Looking forward to this one! :)
-
I thought it was sexist and boring. A "romance" between a (white) human man (who is contemptuous of Betty and other human women) and a one-dimensional, "exotically beautiful", alien who is inexplicably attracted to him and still strangely submissive even though she supposedly comes from a matriarchal society? No thanks. Even the eventual explanation of Braxa's motivation as her "duty" is still ridiculous and unbelievable, and playing again into exactly the sort of cliche that gives space opera a bad name. It's a shame, because I was really looking forward to an interesting story about xenolinguistics until he started fixating on her nipples.
-
I thought it was sexist and boring. A "romance" between a (white) human man (who is contemptuous of Betty and other human women) and a one-dimensional, "exotically beautiful", alien who is inexplicably attracted to him and still strangely submissive even though she supposedly comes from a matriarchal society? No thanks. Even the eventual explanation of Braxa's motivation as her "duty" is still ridiculous and unbelievable, and playing again into exactly the sort of cliche that gives space opera a bad name. It's a shame, because I was really looking forward to an interesting story about xenolinguistics until he started fixating on her nipples.
I have to agree, I loved the Amber novels as a teenager, this story makes me wonder if rereading them now I'd see problems too.
For me the point where I really lost it... was when our genius linguist poet, just happens to know enough martial arts to take down the 7 foot tall martian. Really?
-
And the moral of the story is, Thank Locar for cigarettes.
-
I'm going to respectfully disagree that this story was sexist. While it's true that the main character is sexist, that's deliberate, and a part of the overarching themes of this brilliant and subtle story.
This is the tale of the Great White Male Savior (a la Avatar or Dances with Wolves) completely subverted and stood on its head. From the get-go, it's clear to me that Gallinger is not a nice guy, and that we don't have to like him. He's so brash and arrogant that even all the other humans can't stand him. He (and the other humans) initially approach Martian culture and society with an attitude of cultural imperialism and condescension, treating them as if they are primitive and inferior to Earth culture. And yes, Gallinger's attitude toward the matriarchal Martian women is sexist and patronizing, especially initially. But the key to this story is that everything Gallinger believes and assumes is wrong, wrong, wrong.
He believes that Earth culture is superior to primitive Martian culture, only to discover that Martian society is astonishingly ancient and rich, and that Martians themselves are biologically superior in that they have incredible life spans and are therefore able to accomplish far more artistically than Earth people are.
He thinks he's a genius for figuring out the sterility problem, and pontificates on how he's going to expose this truth for all the researchers of Earth who failed to put it together, but never considers that only the Martian men might be sterile.
He rushes out into the desert to save Braxa in a stereotypical gesture of gendered romantic gallantry, only to find that she doesn't love him and never did, and only slept with him on orders. To add insult to injury, Braxa isn't even pleased about the fulfillment of the prophecy and that her child is saved from death, as she never believed the prophecy herself.
He mocks their religion, only to find out that in doing so, he fulfilled a religious prophecy and only strengthened the religion in the end.
He criticizes the Martians for their fatalism and nihilistic attitudes, and then attempts suicide himself.
Gallinger thinks he's a great poet and hero who is acting upon this story, but in the end he's just a pawn of fate and all the people around him. Nothing he loves or believes in pans out. The Martians get a happy resolution to their story, but Gallinger can't even die when he wants to. Gallinger is exactly like the force-grown rose: it looks beautiful and full of significance at a glance, but everything about it was cultivated or engineered artificially, and is less remarkable than it seems.
-
While I think there are some elements of subversion of the White Savior trope here, they're so subtle that if I wasn't desperately looking for them I wouldn't have seen them. Significant parts of it are just played straight. The Martians wait for somebody from another planet to come and save their culture. Part of it is the (implausible) breeding scenario, but then there's the scene where he saves them from their philosophical death by preaching from the Bible. That part pretty much came off exactly the way Gallinger wanted it to. They saw that his culture had kept going even after some dude was really pessimistic and it inspired them to do the same. What? I could get behind it if this story was more obviously comedic, but if it's a satire I don't think it's a very entertaining one.
-
While I think there are some elements of subversion of the White Savior trope here, they're so subtle that if I wasn't desperately looking for them I wouldn't have seen them. Significant parts of it are just played straight. The Martians wait for somebody from another planet to come and save their culture. Part of it is the (implausible) breeding scenario, but then there's the scene where he saves them from their philosophical death by preaching from the Bible. That part pretty much came off exactly the way Gallinger wanted it to. They saw that his culture had kept going even after some dude was really pessimistic and it inspired them to do the same. What? I could get behind it if this story was more obviously comedic, but if it's a satire I don't think it's a very entertaining one.
Well, not exactly. They gave up on the pessimism because they had a prophecy about a righteous scoffer who would come and mock the teachings of Locar. It was the fulfillment of their Martian prophecy and not the content of Gallinger's message that persuaded them. He thought that by preaching a message to undermine religion, he could get them to set it aside and move forward with a new way of life, but instead he ended up reinforcing their faith in their religion. From the Martian perspective, he's just sort of adorable in a, "God's place for you is to be the guy who mocks religion, but we all know that God made you do it" sort of way. It's clever because while it appears even to Gallinger at first that humans are saving their species, you could also say that the off-world species are just pawns of the Martian gods brought there to serve the Martians and their purposes. It flips cultural imperialism on its head, because all of Gallinger's self-aggrandizing amounts to nothing, and he gets no moral victory in the end from either the humans or the Martians.
I do agree with you that this story is subtle, though. It's one of the reasons it's considered one of Zelazny's finest. Personally, I found it to be a strength of the story instead of a weakness. There are layers upon layers over what seems like a simple story. But I can see if you're looking for lighter fare that this one wouldn't scratch that itch, so I certainly respect that this story isn't for everyone. :)
-
He had me at "sacred scoffer." Okay, that was almost at the end, but the protag is unpleasant and nothing happening up to that point was really working for me. It was the "sacred scoffer" line that pieced it all together for me and tied it up with a nice bow.
-
I thought it was sexist and boring. A "romance" between a (white) human man (who is contemptuous of Betty and other human women) and a one-dimensional, "exotically beautiful", alien who is inexplicably attracted to him and still strangely submissive even though she supposedly comes from a matriarchal society? No thanks. Even the eventual explanation of Braxa's motivation as her "duty" is still ridiculous and unbelievable, and playing again into exactly the sort of cliche that gives space opera a bad name. It's a shame, because I was really looking forward to an interesting story about xenolinguistics until he started fixating on her nipples.
My impression was very similar to skeletondragon's.
Maybe it attempted to subvert the tropes, but IMO it didn't do so effectively. I was so bored with the character and annoyed with everything he said or did that I was mostly just checking the time to see when it would be over and saying "there's seriously still a half hour left?" The attempted suicide at the end was certainly a change instead of "living happily ever after and keeping a pretty little native wife" but to me that felt like an exaggerated affectation of the poet being all sensitive and stuff. To me it read as no different than a less-than-spectacular story picked at a random from a 50s SF magazine.
In the end, though, the moral of the story is that you can save a civilization by having casual sex with someone who pretends to like you.
-
I think I was somewhat turned against the story before I even started listening to it, when I looked at my player and it said the episode was an hour and thirty-seven minutes long. I realize this is petty, but I have a lot of listening to keep up with, and a finite amount of time, and the longer a story is, the more I have difficulty not having the attitude that I'm listening to it to get it over with, rather than to enjoy the story.
And then, disliking the protagonist (despite - or maybe because of? - the fact that it was pretty obvious I was supposed to) didn't start me off well on the actual story. With all that negativity to begin with, it's hard for me to be fair to the story. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it.
I can see bringing in a story of this length and vintage for a landmark like episode 500, but not as a regular episode. I really wish EP had serialized this into two or even three episodes. There is a precedent (http://podcastle.org/2012/07/10/podcastle-216-ali-baba-and-the-forty-thieves-part-1/), close at hand (http://podcastle.org/2012/07/17/podcastle-217-ali-baba-and-the-forty-thieves-part-2/).
This is the first episode, since I became an Escape Pod listener, where I gave up on listening and went to the website to read it instead, to save time. When I go back to my MP3 player, I'll listen to Alasdair's thoughts on the story - maybe they'll help me appreciate it more (Varda's certainly did), even if I don't end up liking it better.
-
I'm definitely in Varda's camp here.
It really started off for me as - yikes, an old story that is considered a classic because back in the 50's this was cutting edge, but now is dated and really a bit uncomfortable (the way it is when you are 12 and your Dad tells you and your friends a dirty joke). But the protagonist being a douche clued me in a bit and maybe because I hate douche-y main characters, I saw more the events as him being an idiot versus a saviour.
In the end, though, the moral of the story is that you can save a civilization by having casual sex with someone who pretends to like you.
That is so sadly reductive. First off, it's not even true. The civilization will be radically changed if only because every child will be a half-breed or at least the first generation (it depends on how fast super-duper Earth science can cure the Martian sterility - which I also saw as a dig - like how everyone seemed ot think science will cure all of mankind's ills).
Second, think about the implications. For a human reaction, just look back at the end of WW2, and what how people treated children with German fathers and not-German mothers. There's a lot of baggage there - in a sci-fi context, it's like a whole generations of Spocks.
I don't want this post to get too big, so I'll stop here with one last reply
...they're so subtle that if I wasn't desperately looking for them I wouldn't have seen them.
I'm not sure what the measure of "desperately" is, but subtle means that they don't hit you over the head - that some looking is needed. It is a fine line, I know, but prefer stories that assume some intelligence rather than those that feel the need to "shout" their point to make sure it came across.
-
I can see bringing in a story of this length and vintage for a landmark like episode 500, but not as a regular episode. I really wish EP had serialized this into two or even three episodes. There is a precedent (http://podcastle.org/2012/07/10/podcastle-216-ali-baba-and-the-forty-thieves-part-1/), close at hand (http://podcastle.org/2012/07/17/podcastle-217-ali-baba-and-the-forty-thieves-part-2/).
I dunno, Wilson. It's true we (PC) split that particular story up, but we've also run some pretty looooooooooong stories that we haven't split up (and we run vintage pieces pretty regularly that aren't landmark episodes). Personally, I tend to prefer stories that aren't split up, but most people know I'm long-winded by nature :)
-
This is a story where I particularly appreciate the discussion afterwards, you guys have really increased my understanding of the story. I can see both sides of the discussion, and am glad to have seen both presented because it definitely deepens my reading of it. To be honest, it was so long that I listened in three different segments; when I do this I often end up much less involved in the story. When it ended my feelings were in the realm of "well, that was a thing that I listened to..."
-
Gallinger thinks he's a great poet and hero who is acting upon this story, but in the end he's just a pawn of fate and all the people around him. Nothing he loves or believes in pans out. The Martians get a happy resolution to their story, but Gallinger can't even die when he wants to. Gallinger is exactly like the force-grown rose: it looks beautiful and full of significance at a glance, but everything about it was cultivated or engineered artificially, and is less remarkable than it seems.
I think Varda is right on point with the analysis of Gallinger. For all his bravado and expertise, Gallinger has great difficulty seeing himself as a bit player in a larger narrative. Despite his being in the highest percentile rankings of humanity, his "sermon" only provokes a vote from the matriarchal Martian elders. When he is rejected by his Martian lover, he falls prey to despair common to the common human.
For me, the key to understanding the story and its meaning comes from the reference to Ecclesiastes in the title. The swing from an analysis of everything to finding everything meaningless follows the arc of Ecclesiastes. Gallinger is the "Preacher/Teacher" even though he rejected the "calling/vocation" put on him by his fundamentalist father. He uses his intellect to isolate and distance people from himself. Maybe this is out of both a sense of superiority and insecurity. He could be continuing to try and distance himself from his childhood. The crisis of identity that flows from seeing yourself become the very thing you rejected can lead to great despair. Further, finding you are a minor prophet in a much larger prophetic tradition, can push one deeper still. Things could indeed seem meaningless.
On a personal note, I found the story to be a literary delight. Having been raised in a religious environment similar to Gallinger's, I understood the weight he must have felt as well as the desire to find his own identity separate from the one in which he was raised. I too studied theology and followed the path set out for me by my parents. Eventually, I found my way to another field of scholarship confident that I could make contributions of greater value in my chosen field. As I have gotten older, I too find myself revisiting the role my parents had articulated for me. Fortunately, I have not come to the conclusion that everything is meaningless.
“Meaningless! Meaningless!” says the Gallinger.
“Everything is meaningless!”
Not only was the Gallinger wise, but he also imparted knowledge to the people. He pondered and searched out and set in order many proverbs. The Gallinger searched to find just the right words, and what he wrote was upright and true.
The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.
Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.
Now all has been heard;
here is the conclusion of the matter:
Fear Locar and keep his commandments,
for this is the duty of all mankind.
For Locar will bring every deed into judgment,
including every hidden thing,
whether it is good or evil.
-
I am glad you ran this because I read another sci fi story about deciphering an alien language in the last several years and discussion of this story came up. I was meaning to read this story eventually. That said, I did not enjoy it at all and oh God, it dragged on and on.
Gallinger is a ass from the get go and although it's obvious we are supposed to think him so, it did not help me enjoy the story. I am not fond of poetry or flowery descriptions either so again here's another story that is just not meant for me to like.
I do get the that the author is playing with the trope of the human-like martian alien civilization and human breathable air and everything that was already known false before this story was published. Frankly my interest was most piqued by the Captain's story of his lost Asian non-wife and children. (That's a tragic story by a potentially likable character.) It just makes me sad that, like equality for women, 1960s science fiction authors couldn't see those social attitudes were going to change completely before humans ever make it to Mars. That is what dates the story most for me - well that a the cigarette smoking. The authors couldn't envision that was going to go away either.
-
This is a story where I particularly appreciate the discussion afterwards, you guys have really increased my understanding of the story. I can see both sides of the discussion, and am glad to have seen both presented because it definitely deepens my reading of it. To be honest, it was so long that I listened in three different segments; when I do this I often end up much less involved in the story. When it ended my feelings were in the realm of "well, that was a thing that I listened to..."
This sums up my thoughts pretty well. As I only have a twenty minute commute, I, too, listened to this in segments, which kept me from getting very grounded in the tale. But the discussion here in the forums is awesome.
I have a hard time relating to people who have everything work out for them just as they planned. Now, as Varda pointed out, in the end nothing worked out the way Gallinger planned, which I was pleased to see, but throughout the whole--very long--story, everything went according to plan. He deciphered the language, got the girl, took down the behemoth (c'mon), and solved the great mystery. No challenges throughout the tale. Which I get was kind of the point, since it all came crashing down at the end. But by then it was too little, too late.
What I did love about this story was the language. I'm not one for flowery language and tons of metaphor, especially in my own writing, but I continually found myself reveling in Zalazny's words. His descriptions, though overdone in many places, were absolutely beautiful in ways that I forgot language can do. So props there.
-
In the end, though, the moral of the story is that you can save a civilization by having casual sex with someone who pretends to like you.
That is so sadly reductive. First off, it's not even true.
Although i didn't care for the story in general, my one-line summary of the story's moral was intentionally reductive with the intent to elicit a chuckle, not actually meant as a serious summary of what message the story was meant to convey. I'm not claiming the joke was hilarious, but it was meant to be a joke.
I think I was somewhat turned against the story before I even started listening to it, when I looked at my player and it said the episode was an hour and thirty-seven minutes long. I realize this is petty, but I have a lot of listening to keep up with, and a finite amount of time, and the longer a story is, the more I have difficulty not having the attitude that I'm listening to it to get it over with, rather than to enjoy the story.
I hear you. A very long stories got a pretty big hurdle for me to like it. This was like 4 commutes. That means that with it getting chopped into smaller pieces it's harder to keep momentum of interest, and I'm looking for the story to raise the bar to really be worth that block of time. Although for me, splitting it into multiple episodes wouldn't really change any of that. That just generally comes from my general distaste for novelette and novella formats--they alternately seem to be trying to be novels that aren't quite complex enough, or short stories that weren't trimmed for fluff.
-
Weighing in again regarding the continued disapproval of the length of the episode. While I too listened in several sessions, I did appreciate the way the story took time to develop its characters and storyline. The depth of the treatment of Gallinger's background gave him believability for me. Despite an early dislike for his arrogance, I came to understand him better as the story went on. Understanding wunderkind psychology has had a number of goes in science fiction. I appreciated the author's efforts to make the boy genius complex. Shorter stories sometimes leave the reader/listener to posit the background and motives of the characters. There was much to ponder and consider in how the characters were presented in this longer story.
-
To be fair, we have more entire episodes under 25 minutes than over an hour. You're welcome to pass on it on the length alone, but there are many folks who will be thrilled to have a longer episode too. We have one longish one and one very long one coming up in the near future, the rest should be acceptable for everyone with smaller mouths.
<3
-
I thought it was sexist and boring. A "romance" between a (white) human man (who is contemptuous of Betty and other human women) and a one-dimensional, "exotically beautiful", alien who is inexplicably attracted to him and still strangely submissive even though she supposedly comes from a matriarchal society? No thanks. Even the eventual explanation of Braxa's motivation as her "duty" is still ridiculous and unbelievable, and playing again into exactly the sort of cliche that gives space opera a bad name. It's a shame, because I was really looking forward to an interesting story about xenolinguistics until he started fixating on her nipples.
My impression was very similar to skeletondragon's.
Maybe it attempted to subvert the tropes, but IMO it didn't do so effectively. I was so bored with the character and annoyed with everything he said or did that I was mostly just checking the time to see when it would be over and saying "there's seriously still a half hour left?" The attempted suicide at the end was certainly a change instead of "living happily ever after and keeping a pretty little native wife" but to me that felt like an exaggerated affectation of the poet being all sensitive and stuff. To me it read as no different than a less-than-spectacular story picked at a random from a 50s SF magazine.
In the end, though, the moral of the story is that you can save a civilization by having casual sex with someone who pretends to like you.
Unfortunately, I have to agree with you two.
I wanted to like it for the lyrical use of language and the alien culture, but in the end, the aliens weren't alien enough, and the whole idea of the narrator being the prophesied savior with the magic seed that would save the hot women of Mars grated on me. His attempted suicide didn't ring true for me. I didn't feel that desperation. Instead it just was something else that happened.
Overall, while I appreciate the skill with which the words were woven, I didn't like what they came together to create.
-
I don't think it is accurate to say that this story subverts the tropes of the genre to which it belongs. What I think of as subversion of a trope is when the story is such that you would expect X to happen and then instead of X, Y happens. Sometimes this serves to call attention to something problematic in the orginal trope. Other times it's just a cheap gimmick--subverting tropes doesn't inherently make a better story.
I don't think this story subverts the conventions of the planetary romance genre to which it belongs. The only part that is arguably a subversion is that the beautiful Martian princess doesn't actually fall in love with the protagonist. But even there, she has sex with him and his healing seed becomes key to the finish of the story. The fact that the protagonist is a guy who doesn't get along with other people definitely doesn't subvert expectations for the genre. And there are cases of tropes played laughably straight. Our western hero has to fight the huge native champion--oh, did I not mention his Judo experience gained when he studied In The Orient?
But the fact that it doesn't subvert the tropes doesn't necessarily mean that it endorses them. This is a story that is very conscious of the genre it is in. The fact that it is set on Mars with humans there when the story was written a a time when people knew full well it looked nothing like what Edgar Rice Burroughs imagined is a very major hint that this story is not meant to be taken at face value. I don't think this story does or intends to truly indict the colonialist and sexist fantasy that underlies the planetary romance genre, and to the extent that it uses those genre tropes I can certainly understand not liking it.
That said, I like the story, myself. I think it is a fitting capstone and send off to a genre that was important to the early days of SF and that we don't see much anymore--for a variety of good reasons. It has a strong protagonist and very good prose. I think Zelazny is of a time, not so much in terms of point of view but in terms of what kind of fiction he's immersed in and responding to. For that reason, the story reads differently today. I'm reminded of some of the works of Gene Wolfe, who's Book of the New Sun series does to the dying earth heroic fantasy genre what this story does to planetary romance. Both works are both situated within and on some level transcendent of their genres, using a pulpy framework to tell some pretty sophisticated stories.
I also have no problem with the length-I have regularly listened to podcasts that go longer than this episode and I think great stories are paramount--and there is a large but finite numbe of great stories that are exactly 30-45 minutes, or whatever the core EP length is.
-
I loved the story, and I loved the reading. I'm glad you ran it, and I'm glad you ran it as one long episode. I also sometimes dread longer episodes, but if this case it was definitely worth my investment. (Btw, this is not just for audio - I have to force myself through long stories in F&SF, too.)
I can, in retrospect, see the concerns about sexism. To me, it reads a lot like the other Zelazny works I've read - the attitude toward women registers, but doesn't ruin it for me like e.g. Heinlein.
I loved the language play and the references to just about everything in every culture in history.
When we got to the ridiculous scene where he vanquished a 7 foot tall Martian with a move he invented himself (really? Sounds like a jump front snap kick, buddy) - that's when I thought maybe this character is an intentional lampoon of Sherlock Holmes. The arrogance, the intelligence, and even the substance abuse - it all fits.
-
This illustrates the disparity between good fiction and great fiction. Zelazny is clearly a guy that has refined his craft and execution to the highest level, thus the many awards and accolades. Great narration and production value on this one too. These are the types of stories that will bring subscribers to EA.
-
This comment thread is bothering me. I think it is important to take a story in its place and time, and not try to apply the morality and bias of today to something that was written 50 years ago. Its a slippery slope (though we are clearly well into the slide on many fronts in our society) to damning every piece of literature, historical figure, or idea that came before us because they lack today's level of so called enlightenment.
I really enjoyed this. It was well written and delivered. Zelazny has an unbelievable ability to use the English language in beautiful and creative ways, and I found the story exciting and interesting and I thought it was great escapist fun for 1.5 hours.
-
This comment thread is bothering me. I think it is important to take a story in its place and time, and not try to apply the morality and bias of today to something that was written 50 years ago. Its a slippery slope (though we are clearly well into the slide on many fronts in our society) to damning every piece of literature, historical figure, or idea that came before us because they lack today's level of so called enlightenment.
I see it as a positive and important thing to apply our consciences to everything we read, even (and perhaps especially) historical writing. While I was in the camp that loved this story, and thought that perhaps Zelazney was making use of an obviously morally deficient character to make a bigger point, I have no qualms with my fellow forumites who felt bothered enough by elements like the sexism of the main character for it to lessen their enjoyment and their opinion of the piece.
Age in and of itself is not excuse enough to dismiss elements in literature that dehumanizes people. Time doesn't necessarily take the sting out, especially for readers who are already feeling weary and worn down by stuff like racism and sexism without having to choke it down when they seek relief in a good story.
-
This comment thread is bothering me. I think it is important to take a story in its place and time, and not try to apply the morality and bias of today to something that was written 50 years ago. Its a slippery slope (though we are clearly well into the slide on many fronts in our society) to damning every piece of literature, historical figure, or idea that came before us because they lack today's level of so called enlightenment.
I see it as a positive and important thing to apply our consciences to everything we read, even (and perhaps especially) historical writing. While I was in the camp that loved this story, and thought that perhaps Zelazney was making use of an obviously morally deficient character to make a bigger point, I have no qualms with my fellow forumites who felt bothered enough by elements like the sexism of the main character for it to lessen their enjoyment and their opinion of the piece.
Age in and of itself is not excuse enough to dismiss elements in literature that dehumanizes people. Time doesn't necessarily take the sting out, especially for readers who are already feeling weary and worn down by stuff like racism and sexism without having to choke it down when they seek relief in a good story.
I disagree fully. In no way am I trying to contend that we should not learn from the mistakes of the past, and I am a strong believer that we should aggressively push those that are still actively abusing basic human rights.
However, I fear a future that vilifies every step made that brought us to this point in history, because those that made that history were not as "socially evolved" as we claim ourselves to be. In addition, I can fully and completely enjoy the works of an author that has views I may not agree with (i.e. I love all of Orson Scott Card's works, and blame the lack of success on the infinitely underrated Ender's Game movie on social attacks against the creator that have nothing to do with the quality of the works).
In my world view, I refuse to let politics and social issues dictate what I should and shouldn't enjoy and I attempt to view older works through the prism of the time and place in which they were created. There are 100s of examples of works (historical and current) that I can appreciate fully that have writers, actors, directors, producers, etc that I completely disagree with and that I find repugnant on a personal level.
-
While I respect your viewpoint, I think you're speaking from a place of privilege, perhaps as someone who does not routinely have to deal with the pain caused by stories that require you to participate in your own dehumanization. I think that recognizing and calling out dehumanizing elements is an act of kindness and human compassion. Even if we choose to enjoy a story in spite of its flaws, we owe it to each other to recognize when something is hurtful and offer some empathy. I've had this conversation re: enjoying classics with objectionable elements often enough that I'll just link to a blog post I wrote about it, (http://rckjones.wordpress.com/2014/01/13/privilege-at-the-classics-cafe/) if you care to hear more about why I see it this way.
-
I read the blog post, and I think I can understand the POV, though that specific analogy is a huge stretch in my mind. To me, its near impossible to draw these lines because what is offensive or troublesome to one person may not be to another.
One of the standard references I always hear is how media in the US has a very high tolerance for violence and similar media in Europe is much more lenient on sexual content. I may be extremely offended by one, both, or none of those things, but at the end of the day no one is forcing me to eat that specific plate of crap (per your blog post). I can change the channel, put down the book, or leave the restaurant, if it is not to my taste.
Personally, I feel the bible is one of the greatest fiction works of all time (and certainly the most influential), and I don't think less of it just because there are some extremely offensive acts and ridiculous viewpoints posited by people that lived thousands of years ago. I only take offense when people try to force me to follow ridiculous (to me) rules from a bygone age that had extremely different values.
-
I may be extremely offended by one, both, or none of those things, but at the end of the day no one is forcing me to eat that specific plate of crap (per your blog post). I can change the channel, put down the book, or leave the restaurant, if it is not to my taste.
Yeah, I think this is a fair point, and I'd say people tend to do this. If the thing that's crap to you is obviously on full display on top of the plate, you'll avoid the thing that offends you (which is why we have movie ratings for stuff like violence, sexual content, and language). It's a bit harder when it comes to stuff like racism and sexism, because you don't usually get disclaimers for that. Sometimes it catches people by surprise. I just think it's best to take a stance of kindness when this does happen. Everyone is different, and has different levels of tolerance for things they find personally hurtful. So for example this story, you and I both really enjoyed this Zelazny story, while some of our fellow "diners" felt like the taste of crap prevented their enjoyment. I think it's okay. I don't know what other crap my fellow diners are having to eat in other areas of their lives, or how worn down they feel by it. They're free to say this dish wasn't their thing, just as we're free to say what we found redeeming about it.
You're right that it's subjective, and I agree that it means that sometimes people will miss out on some cool stories because they found it impossible to enjoy because of certain elements. I just think that it's not the reader's responsibility to overlook something s/he finds distasteful when it was the author who wrote in the insulting bits, although it's certainly commendable when s/he at least attempts to.
-
You're right that it's subjective, and I agree that it means that sometimes people will miss out on some cool stories because they found it impossible to enjoy because of certain elements. I just think that it's not the reader's responsibility to overlook something s/he finds distasteful when it was the author who wrote in the insulting bits, although it's certainly commendable when s/he at least attempts to.
Agreed, good discussion, thanks Varda.
-
Whew, that was an interesting thread to read through. I'll just hop in and offer forward my few cents of opinion.
On the story itself, I'll admit that it took quite a bit of warming up to. It did seem like a story that I have heard before, and not told in a particularly interesting or masterful way that would make it stand out. However, the ending was ultimately satisfying, as I was pleasantly surprised that the main character, though still the savior of the Martians, had all the joy of that achievement sucked out of him. This mainly stemmed from the fact that I found him painfully boring as the hero of this story. I actually did not view him as stand-offish or arrogant; I don't like the way he talked or thought about the Earth women working with him, but besides that, I failed to notice how he was such a terrible human being. He seemed to treat everyone professionally, and if he was proud of his work, with the information given regarding his poetic achievements, he has every right to be. In fact, I wish the story had focused more on him working and translating, finding a way to show the beauty of Mars and her culture to his people back on Earth. The "love" angle felt quite forced, in a narrative way, and, worse, boring to be privy to.
I also hated the fight scene so much. It was unnecessary and honestly, I rolled my eyes through most of it. It sucked a lot of the tension out of the climax of the story, for me at least. Also had to rewind and relisten to the scene where he jumped off of the cliff. That was weird and confusing.
I do have to give major kudos to the narrator. I loved his voice and felt like he was the only interesting thing for a good chunk of time with this piece.
As far as the length of this story, I actually like longer stories just as much as I like the little guys. I listen while I'm working, so I still get to hear it all in one solid piece, so I may be biased on that note, but I appreciate the variety and choice.
Man, feels good to post again!
-
I can change the channel, put down the book, or leave the restaurant, if it is not to my taste.
I agree with this point wholeheartedly, but let me give you two examples of how that can still be a huge impact on a person.
1. People in my family have Celiac's disease (shorthand, no wheat).
This means eating out can be tricky - many foods are just straight off limits - pasta, burgers with buns, sandwiches, etc. And foods that may seem wholly safe are not (for example chicken with rice, except the chicken is marinated in a sauce that uses flour as a thickener, or has beer as an ingredient).
So the answer is don't eat at those restaurants. Understood, but it's been a long week, and no one wants to cook or in-laws are in town and they want to go out to eat, and the number of restaurants we can go to are the same 3 we've gone to all year - oh wait the Chinese food place now uses a different soy sauce that uses barley for colour, so now it's down to 2.
2. I want to get out of the house and see a movie, but I'm not interested in violence, boobs, or a kid's movie (not true for me, I usually love boobs and bombs, and I took my daughters to see Frozen :)) This means there are maybe 4 movies a year I would go see. And the same can be said for books, radio and other entertainment.
True, these are the epitome of First World, Rich People problems, but I think it is important to point out that the answer of "just ignore it" is very easy when you are in the majority.
I am certainly not an advocate of "attending to every minor complaint", however, it serves us all to be mindful of others.
-
In the end, the past doesn't care what judgement you place on it.
Hate To Kill a Mockingbird all you want. For me, for the greater message it presents it's a classic, and I won't waste time paying lip service to the rest.
And regarding Orson Scott Card, to me it's a very different thing. I can read a classic by a dead author and if I paid any money to do so (and usually I wouldn't) I could dismiss evil contents as signs of a bygone era. I would rest securely understanding that I choose whether or not it's that way now, and the fact that I know it existed in that time is part of what makes it possible to make that choice in the present. Therefore, it has value, even if (maybe especially if) it stings. And no matter what, none of my money is going to be enjoyed by that author, so I'm not supporting the ignorant antique.
Orson Scott Card is an influential member of an active, presently oppressive hate group. Every dollar you allow him to make by purchasing his works fuels that machine. And you may be fine with that. I'm not. I read his books before I knew of his disposition. I consider them THE most important sic-fi I have ever consumed in any media. Ten years ago, I would have moved a wedding date to make sure it didn't clash with the release of an Ender movie, no matter how good it was expected to be. But now you couldn't have given me a free car to buy that ticket or to byuy another book, for that matter. I won't be part of that problem. It's like someone smoking Mexican weed and saying they had nothing to do with all the murder in Juarez. They did. They're accessories only one degree removed.
It's very different than the smiling glance you give to the ignorant parts of a piece taken from another age
-
It's very different than the smiling glance you give to the ignorant parts of a piece taken from another age
The great strength of a free and capitalist society with a strong and independent press is that you can vote with your wallet and try ideas in the court of public opinion. I just fear limiting free speech in any form. To me freedom of speech must be sacrosanct.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" --Evelyn Beatrice Hall
-
True, these are the epitome of First World, Rich People problems, but I think it is important to point out that the answer of "just ignore it" is very easy when you are in the majority.
I am certainly not an advocate of "attending to every minor complaint", however, it serves us all to be mindful of others.
This is really well-put. I think, for me, the big difference is between the decisions we each make on our own about which books/movies/etc to enjoy, and how we handle those same problematic texts while in community together. I don't need anyone to justify to me why they enjoy Orson Scott Card or Lovecraft or anything - go in peace, and have at it. But when we all come to the table together, such as here on this forum, it's important to have compassion for people who find their personal demons stirred up by problematic stories. None of us lives in a vacuum, and it's perfectly okay for someone to say they were bothered by even vintage racism/sexism/etc. In fact, I think it's important to acknowledge these elements when they appear because that's what friends do.
Therefore, it has value, even if (maybe especially if) it stings.
I hope you're not saying that people at whom the sting is directed - those who already experience racism/sexism/etc - somehow benefit from an extra helping of this stuff, because that's really not true. I do think there's some educational value to be had for people that the sting is *not* directed at, but there is nothing about vintage racism or sexism that is going to teach anyone belonging to the groups being attacked anything they don't already know from their own experiences.
To be clear, I wouldn't take books like "To Kill a Mockingbird" or "Huckleberry Finn" as examples of what I'm getting at, as these books were written to purposely critique social injustices. I mean books/stories that just take as a baseline assumption that people of color or women are inferior, and go on to build plots and characters on this basis without further thought or commentary. These books have some historical value in that we don't want to wind up right back there again, but that educational value drops down to zero if we don't point it out when we read it in a community together.
I think "A Rose for Ecclesiastes" is a great text to discuss, because I think it exists in a gray area. Is it a little bit racist, sexist, and imperialist, or is it presenting these elements so that it can subvert them? If it's trying to subvert, is it successful? I've really enjoyed all the viewpoints and discussion on this thread trying to pick out the answer to these questions. I think it's a testament to the awesomeness of the community that we can have this conversation, and have it each time a story with problematic elements comes up.
-
I looked at this one and thought "An hour and a half of story? Ain't nobody got time for that!" followed immediately by "Holy shit, Zelazny! Sit down and shut up!" Totally worth it.
Varda's first post does the analysis so succinctly that I'm not sure I can really contribute. I'm surprised that there is no discussion of xenolinguistics. Everyone seems to be too caught up on John Carter and Barsoom. How'd Zelazny do with the one critical bit of science that actually underpins the story?
-
Well, one of my complaints was that the story didn't focus on xenolinguistics nearly as much as I hoped. Thinking back on it, I remember a few comments about the Martians having high and low forms of language, no word for a kind of flowering plant, and similarity between the Martian books and Ecclesiastes. Only the latter really got expanded on, but it ended up focusing more on the general philosophy. It seemed like the story kept skirting around the subject before going back to the melodrama.
I feel like I should comment on this idea of walking out of the restaurant / putting down the book. Sure, I've done that. But I do believe that sometimes value can be found even in stories that make me uncomfortable. I'm a big fan of lots of other old scifi stories, despite annoying sexist undertones. I appreciate it a lot more when authors use scifi as a way to discuss and subvert contemporary gender norms, but I can deal with it if the science or the story are strong enough to make me stay. So sometimes I do stay, in the hope of finding something redeeming. But if I get to the end of the story and it hasn't given me a new perspective on xenolinguistics, or made me laugh, or made me think, or anything redeeming, AND it had significant elements of sexism? I'm going to criticize it for all of its failures. This doesn't limit anyone's free speech in any way. In fact, by criticizing I am exercising my right to free speech. Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism, and if we don't think critically about the past then we risk repeating it. So I think this story was a bust. Other people thought it was a brilliantly written subversion. What would a forum be if people didn't have different viewpoints?
-
It's an interesting conundrum, reading the classics today. Because yes, it is one thing to understand that the norms were different, but another to enjoy what is a blatantly insensitive narrative to modern eyes. For me that can appreciate it, but I cannot truly enjoy it, although other qualities might go a long way to alleviate. My loss?
In this case, it didn't go that far, it's well written but the story didn't really surprise me or feel in any way subversive. Perhaps because I never read much adventure novels.
I didn't mind the length by the way, if I want a story split up I use my pause button.
-
It's an interesting conundrum, reading the classics today. Because yes, it is one thing to understand that the norms were different, but another to enjoy what is a blatantly insensitive narrative to modern eyes. For me that can appreciate it, but I cannot truly enjoy it, although other qualities might go a long way to alleviate. My loss?
I've been reading a lot of Zelazny short fiction recently, and I'm pretty confident in saying that the insensitivity is an artifact of the character not the author. It's told from his skewed egocentric POV, and I don't think you're supposed to finish up liking the character.
-
I'm with those who were somewhat ambivalent about this story. The "subversive" notes some have mentioned on the forums didn't ring for me and as a result, the story left me flat.
In terms of the length, I am completely flummoxed by comments that a long story is problematic. Don't people listen to full audiobooks? How do people handle those lengths if they can't handle 1.5 hours?
-
In terms of the length, I am completely flummoxed by comments that a long story is problematic. Don't people listen to full audiobooks? How do people handle those lengths if they can't handle 1.5 hours?
It's a matter of personal taste, I'm sure. I have never listened to an audio book. Most novels are, IMO, bloated monstrosities and I generally prefer the short form because the size constraint forces the story to get to the point.
Also, because many episodes are around 30 minutes, I think that a lot of people are also accustomed to listening to a story on each commute for a medium size commute--if a story is 1.5 hours, then instead of hearing the story in 30 minute trip, it's stretched out over more than 24 hours and important details from early in the story may be forgotten because of the gaps in listening.
-
This was a good read for perspective -- http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/bad_people_great_books/
-
Agreed with @Warren and @Varda.
One element that I didn't see discussed, although I might have missed it, is that his love transforms Gallagher from an arrogant ass to someone a bit more human.