China Mieville - jerk or groundbreaking pioneer?

[Heradel]

That sounds like something Jesus would say.

I try to take the middle way away from those.

My other thought is that it might just be a forum member that just didn't want to be responsible for starting something that might turn into a flamewar, but wanted to have the discussion.

[Russell Nash]

Or, again, a non-political opinion: I don't like Audrey Hepburn movies.

A political opinion: Straight men don't like Audrey Hepburn movies.

I've always had a fondness for Roman Holiday.

Breakfast at Tiffany's for me.  I know, not very creative of me, but she did the fragile flower thing so well.

[gelee]

This is kind of an old one.  Funny thing is, Mieville is my favorite example of this.  I won't say he's a prick.  I've never met the guy.  I DO think this politics are waaaaay off, but that doesn't really matter.  He's not a politician, and neither am I.  He's a writer.  You absolutley have to seperate a writer's opinions from his work, and I guess that's goes for other artists as well.  His writing is, for me at least, excellent.  So, I'll continue to support his socialist agenda by excercising my capitalist habit of giving writers money.  (haha)

[stePH]

He's a hugely talented young writer celebrated by the likes of Moorcock and Gaiman as an innovator in the fantasy genre. 

...but he calls out Tolkien.
http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=7813

Safe to say the D&D and comics he grew up on wouldn't have existed without Tolkien. 

It's a good bet that we wouldn't have had Lewis or Tolkien without William Morris before them. 


  Just sayin', yo.

[Listener]

This is kind of an old one.  Funny thing is, Mieville is my favorite example of this.  I won't say he's a prick.  I've never met the guy.  I DO think this politics are waaaaay off, but that doesn't really matter.  He's not a politician, and neither am I.  He's a writer.  You absolutley have to seperate a writer's opinions from his work, and I guess that's goes for other artists as well.  His writing is, for me at least, excellent.  So, I'll continue to support his socialist agenda by excercising my capitalist habit of giving writers money.  (haha)

Shortly after "The Scar" was published, the sci-fi radio show I used to board-op had an interview with him.  The show handled the interview very, VERY poorly (only talked to him for one segment, when I'm sure he would've talked for much longer if they'd asked him to stay through the break).  But when I called him at his hotel in (I think) LA at what, for him, was 9:45pm on a Saturday night, he was very pleasant and gracious, and when I told him I enjoyed "Perdido Street Station", he was duly appreciative.

So, maybe when he gets into talking about politics and religion he gets strident and prick-ish, but in my brief discussion with him (off-air), he seemed to be a pretty normal dude.  I think a lot of people are like that.

Example:

My friend John and I are... well... friends.  We have a lot of similar interests.  But he's a hardcore granola-eating liberal and I'm a right-leaning centrist capitalist.  We have these great chats about pop culture and weird crap on the net, but then he'll throw me an article about something the Bush Administration lied about and I'll try not to talk about it because it just leads to the same string of arguments.  Then I get huffy because I don't want to discuss politics with him, and he gets huffy because I won't discuss politics with him, which he sees as head-in-the-sand activity (which is true, to a certain extent, and I've admitted as much to him).  Then we stop talking for a few hours.

Is this too much of a tangent?  My apologies if so.

[birdless]

It's a good bet that we wouldn't have had Lewis or Tolkien without William Morris before them. 

Thanks, StePH. I'd never even heard of this guy, at least not relative to fantasy fiction. Have you read any of his fantasy stuff?

[stePH]

It's a good bet that we wouldn't have had Lewis or Tolkien without William Morris before them. 

Thanks, StePH. I'd never even heard of this guy, at least not relative to fantasy fiction. Have you read any of his fantasy stuff?

Only The Well at the World's End which I remember enjoying quite a bit.  You have to get past the archaic language though.

I have all of my father's old books, which include a fairly extensive Morris selection, so I may get to more of his stuff someday.  (After Well my father recommended Water of the Wondrous Isles.)

[gelee]

Is this too much of a tangent?  My apologies if so.

I don't think it's too far OT.  I have the same problem with my wife!  We can't really talk politics.  She's such a commie.

[Listener]

Is this too much of a tangent?  My apologies if so.

I don't think it's too far OT.  I have the same problem with my wife!  We can't really talk politics.  She's such a commie.

My wife doesn't vote, but if she did, she'd be a liberal.  However, since she doesn't vote, she's not allowed to talk politics to me.  Not like I would because we already argue enough, but still...

[Roney]

He's not a politician

Not for want of trying.  Although standing for the Socialist Alliance doesn't count as trying particularly hard. 

As an aside, I do love this forum.  Someone jumps in and starts a thread with a one-off rant seemingly tailor-made to get a good argument going between fans of High Fantasy and the New Weird, and all that results is an intelligent and cultured discussion.  After a while, someone looks up and says "Oh!  Do you think that could have been a troll?"  If only the rest of the internet were this civilized.

[birdless]

This forum has blown my away, too. It took me a while to come on over and check it out, but, man, I'm glad I finally did. It not only exceeded my expectations, it's my favorite of the forums I visit.

[Rachel Swirsky]

It's not too much of a tangent for a general conversation, but I'd like to keep this space relatively apolitical, at least for now. I'd appreciate it if people would take this vein of the conversation over to Gallimaufry, where the tangents flow freely from the tap and controversy is the name of the game.

[Rachel Swirsky]

Martin isn't really a Tolkein contemporary, is he?

[stePH]

Point fingers at Tolkien for having one dimensional villains and uninteresting evil races, sure-sure....but name one of his contemporaries who broke that standard.

Alright, I will name one. George R. R. Martin.

Contemporary?

J.R.R. Tolkien: 1892-1973, published LotR 1954-55
G.R.R. Martin: 1948-present, published his first novel in 1977.

I thought contemporaries were either roughly the same age or living at approximately the same time.


[edit]
I see Rachel Swirsky posted something similar while I was composing and researching the above 

[Audita Sum]

I thought contemporaries were either roughly the same age or living at approximately the same time.

Nguhhhh. I hate it when I think I know the meanings of words but I really don't.

[thedreameater]

Rachel,

My apologies.  No reason for me to descend to derogatory accusations; I'm all to passionate about Tolkien and my insults only colored myself in a poor light. 

Everyone else,

Neat to see this post had so much life.

I recently stumbled upon China from a series of articles where he was glorified by writers I highly respect.  The idea he was dramatically changing fantasy and breaking new ground in a "tired" genre was interesting.  The blemishes China points out in Tolkien's work stain his own, however.  I am halfway through the Scar and I've failed to escape into another world.  The profoundly creative species of New Crobuzono are old news to rpg gamers.  Perhaps not seen as often in literature, video and table top games have provided Barlowe equivalent beasts a hundred times over.  And vampires....snore.  I like what I'm reading so far and pages keep turning, but this is not the messiah our 'tired' genre 'needs'.  He's no Gaiman.

His attacks on Tolkien, I felt, were frankly unnecessary.  This fueled my disrespectful post. 

It's easy for us to judge someone from a safe third person, but a man who fought in WW1 is bound by certain cultural stereotypes of his era.  While I agree 'forgiving' him for having small feminine roles and 1 dimensional villains doesn't make it better, these flaws don't degrade the experience the same as Lovecraft's racism or Hemingway's misogyny. 

When I stated Tolkien was a king, I meant it.  Not god nor ruler of an entire world, just leader of a single content of literature.

Ultimately, China has taken a platform of slinging dirt on a magnificent creative mind.  Regardless of your personal opinion of his work, Tolkien deserves the acknowledgment as one of many founders of the genre.  Does LotR deserve the accolade greatest novel of the 20th century.....who decides these things?  More importantly, why would China care?  Wonder if he ridicules the inventor of sci-fi, Ms. Shelley, for her weak prose?

After reading all the posts and thinking about this further, the question comes to me....why the hell do I care what he thinks?  I guess it's because he's so vocal on the subject.  I truly respect his passion and talent with words and I'm fine with writers delivering messages through their work....but when you find it necessary to venomously denounce a beloved creator and use your podium to continue your political sermon.

....guess I'm alone in finding our 'savior' to be haughty and pretentious.

(Great first podcast, btw.  Congratulations and thank you!)

[thedreameater]

No problem!  Interesting dialogues are what message boards are all about.   

And yeah, I'm suspecting the OP was trolling, myself.  Too bad--they didn't get any kind of trainwreck or outrage for their efforts.  Poor thing.

While I'm far too passionate for my own good, no, my intention wasn't to flame, but discover a general consensus.  I could have chosen better words to compose my query and apologize for any offense taken.

He just seems like a jerk to me.

[thedreameater]

....one must bend the knee to the king.

That's really interesting to me because I assume that thedreameater is the citizen of a republic or a democracy, so why would they conceptualize relationships in that framework?  It's not democratic in the least, is in fact vehemently anti-democratic.  And yet it's shaping their view of how relationships should ideally be, at least in this venue, the land of writers and readers.

This analysis from the statement:

"Call out the king tho...cheap tactic to draw attention to the jerk on the soap box..."

Why did you choose to dissect the 'king' part and ignore the soap box?  Or 'call out'?  Focus this much on every phrase I 'throw down', man, I'm flattered.  Over analysis ftl.

I adore Tolkien for the world he shared with us.  Something so personal, crafted out of love, it's a delight to be able to peer into.  When I read the books as a child and today, I'm blind to the evil politics which China and so many of you can not ignore.  Middle Earth is a rich, beautiful world, certainly not fashionably hip as the current trend of urban fantasy. 

Was he flawless, surely not....are you?  Who is?  Is his work the end of literature? 

But does he deserve to be degraded and spat upon?  What makes a person viciously criticize another person?  Are the millions of people who buy Terry Goodkind books inferior because they gobble up high-fantasy-tolkein rip offs?  ...did they ask China to save them from their bungled and botched existences?

Yeah, yeah, I was crude in my initial post, and I apologize, but it's sad to see lynch mobs form so quickly.

[Chodon]

Yeah, yeah, I was crude in my initial post, and I apologize, but it's sad to see lynch mobs form so quickly.

I don't think anyone here was out to form a lynch mob.  My main question was why someone would post something so contraversial and (self-admittedly) crude as their very first post on this forum, then disappear for a couple of weeks?  If it looks like a troll and sounds like a troll and smells like a troll...well, you get the idea.

So is the question whether this Mieville guy can rip on Tolkien, or is the question if his ripping on Tolkien is justified?  The answer to the former is a certain "yes".  Everyone has the freedom to say whatever stupid comment they want.  The answer to the latter is "I don't really care because I like Tolkien's writings".  This guy is doing a good enough job making an ass of himself and us talking about it is drawing more attention to it.

[thedreameater]

Yeah, yeah, I was crude in my initial post, and I apologize, but it's sad to see lynch mobs form so quickly.

I don't think anyone here was out to form a lynch mob.  My main question was why someone would post something so contraversial and (self-admittedly) crude as their very first post on this forum, then disappear for a couple of weeks?  If it looks like a troll and sounds like a troll and smells like a troll...well, you get the idea.

So is the question whether this Mieville guy can rip on Tolkien, or is the question if his ripping on Tolkien is justified?  The answer to the former is a certain "yes".  Everyone has the freedom to say whatever stupid comment they want.  The answer to the latter is "I don't really care because I like Tolkien's writings".  This guy is doing a good enough job making an ass of himself and us talking about it is drawing more attention to it.

RL stepped in and work got busy.  Checked back today cause the podcast started up.  Despite my menacing photo, nope not a troll.  First post, I guess, cause it was important to me? 

My girlfriend, whom I love very much, hates Tolkien.  She's got a Gandulf and Aragorn cut-out, every book, and all the movie memorabilia you can reasonably own because of the movies.  She, like many, couldn't get past his Romatic prose style.  When was the last time you read Chaucer for fun?     The answer to question 1 - "yes".

It was the second question I was concerned about (and I clearly need more work on my own communication skills to clarify in a tempered, civilized way, ). 

Glad to see I'm not alone in thinking China "wasn't the most delightful fellow". 

[DKT]

Welcome back, then.  Good to know you're not a troll.  But if you think that's a lynching, you should move over to gallimaufry sometime

I recently stumbled upon China from a series of articles where he was glorified by writers I highly respect.  The idea he was dramatically changing fantasy and breaking new ground in a "tired" genre was interesting.  The blemishes China points out in Tolkien's work stain his own, however.  I am halfway through the Scar and I've failed to escape into another world.  The profoundly creative species of New Crobuzono are old news to rpg gamers.  Perhaps not seen as often in literature, video and table top games have provided Barlowe equivalent beasts a hundred times over.  And vampires....snore.  I like what I'm reading so far and pages keep turning, but this is not the messiah our 'tired' genre 'needs'.  He's no Gaiman.

...

....guess I'm alone in finding our 'savior' to be haughty and pretentious.

I love Mieville, but I think your choice of words is funny.  Savior?  I think Mieville would shun that role, very quickly.

Also, I think what you're focusing on with Mieville's writing is some of the cool, eyeball kick-type stuff, but I'm not sure it's what people/critics/authors really love about him (it might have some influence, though).  I thought the thing people dug about him (aside from the worldbuilding) was the social/political commentary, as well as the spinning genre tropes on their head (as in Un Lun Dun).  But YMMV (see Rachel Swirsky's earlier post).

His attacks on Tolkien, I felt, were frankly unnecessary.  This fueled my disrespectful post. 

It's easy for us to judge someone from a safe third person, but a man who fought in WW1 is bound by certain cultural stereotypes of his era.  While I agree 'forgiving' him for having small feminine roles and 1 dimensional villains doesn't make it better, these flaws don't degrade the experience the same as Lovecraft's racism or Hemingway's misogyny. 

Ultimately, China has taken a platform of slinging dirt on a magnificent creative mind.  Regardless of your personal opinion of his work, Tolkien deserves the acknowledgment as one of many founders of the genre.  Does LotR deserve the accolade greatest novel of the 20th century.....who decides these things?  More importantly, why would China care?  Wonder if he ridicules the inventor of sci-fi, Ms. Shelley, for her weak prose?

After reading all the posts and thinking about this further, the question comes to me....why the hell do I care what he thinks?  I guess it's because he's so vocal on the subject.  I truly respect his passion and talent with words and I'm fine with writers delivering messages through their work....but when you find it necessary to venomously denounce a beloved creator and use your podium to continue your political sermon.

It's just criticism, man.  Everyone takes it, and if you're one of the big guns, even moreso.  You don't have to agree with it.  And he's looking at it all from a socialistic/political lense.

[Heradel]

When was the last time you read Chaucer for fun? 

Last week.

No, wait... Fun?

Is that like when you have to do it or fail a class?

No?

Hm.

———

I don't think Chaucer is that bad once you really get into it and read it enough to get used to it. Norton's has some pretty good footnotes/translations, and I was going over it in class which helped a lot. I don't think you gave Chaucer as a specific example of another romantic writer, just one that's hard to read, but for anyone that doesn't know Chaucer, he's considered a father of English Lit and wrote in the 1300's. Romanticism started in the latter half of the 1700s.

[thedreameater]

Glad to see I wasn't too harsh, dealt with many fanboi forum mobs who mindlessly berate.  Glad to see this is not the case.

Hey, bought Looking for Jake and finishing up the Scar now.   It's statements like "He wrote a novel, Perdido Street Station, that single-handedly changed the rules of the fantasy genre, " that confuse me.  Probably a great book....but a lot of people thought Underworld and Matrix were inconceivably original and never heard of Vampire the Masquerade or Grant Morrison (or any half decent sci-fi)
http://www.believermag.com/issues/200504/?read=interview_mieville

His ugly criticism of Tolkien seemed unwarranted.  No Tolkien isn't the greatest writ0r evar (greatest world builder, tho) nor is high fantasy the only vein of the genre....but who asked him to spit on grandfather JRR?  Dick move and I called it as such, is all. 

[thedreameater]

I don't think you gave Chaucer as a specific example of another romantic writer, just one that's hard to read, but for anyone that doesn't know Chaucer, he's considered a father of English Lit and wrote in the 1300's. Romanticism started in the 1800s.

I used Chaucer because a - Tolkien is more of a Romantic writer than Victorian b - he said something like (rough quote here) "Yo yo, Chaucer ma boy.  Bitch ass writas after him ain't got no skills, hear meh?"

[Rachel Swirsky]

But does he deserve to be degraded and spat upon?  What makes a person viciously criticize another person?  Are the millions of people who buy Terry Goodkind books inferior because they gobble up high-fantasy-tolkein rip offs?  ...did they ask China to save them from their bungled and botched existences?

With due respect, you really need some perspective on this. Those comments of Mieville's are not degrading. They are not spitting. They're just criticism.

You're way overboard.