{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/4733", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 4733, "subject": "Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "messages": 45, "voices": 17, "first": "2006-10-17T20:32:57+00:00", "last": "2006-10-23T06:21:14+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<19ee41770610171332h3c56cd21h91172dd9465fb362@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Jack Redelfs", "address": "jackredelfs at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-17T20:32:57+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Vis-a-vis \"The Death of Doctor Island,\" webster.com gives one\ndefinition of offensive thusly: \"giving painful or unpleasant sensations.\"\nSo, it appears that a work can be deemed offensive without any\nquestion of the authors personal motivations or opinions." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's just that Wolfe seems to be really fond of including misogynist\ncharacters and situations in his stories." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think that's simply his brutal realism. I never read an author who was\nless interested in easy escapes and happy endings. His characters\nsuffer, and they suffer a lot. Look at history and the world around you.\nIs misogyny the exception or the rule in human relations? The bad\nguys do very bad things to women, and they usually get away with it.\n\nThis view of the world is cognizant with Wolfe's catholicism. The\ndevil rules the world of flesh, and God rules the world of spirit.\nIt makes his stories more gripping and his more characters more\nreal. When I read about characters that float through life as though\nin a cloud, without any pain, I wonder \"why should I care?\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "<200610171750.25563.ddjones@riddlemaster.org>", "from": { "name": "Daniel D Jones", "address": "ddjones at riddlemaster.org" }, "date": "2006-10-17T21:50:25+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<19ee41770610171332h3c56cd21h91172dd9465fb362@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tuesday 17 October 2006 16:32, Jack Redelfs wrote:\nVis-a-vis \"The Death of Doctor Island,\" webster.com gives one\ndefinition of offensive thusly: \"giving painful or unpleasant sensations.\"\nSo, it appears that a work can be deemed offensive without any\nquestion of the authors personal motivations or opinions." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It seems to me that there is an unavoidable connotation of disapproval and an \nassociated blame or culpability when one describes an action (or the result \nof an action) as offensive." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It's just that Wolfe seems to be really fond of including misogynist\ncharacters and situations in his stories." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think that's simply his brutal realism. I never read an author who was\nless interested in easy escapes and happy endings. His characters\nsuffer, and they suffer a lot. Look at history and the world around you.\nIs misogyny the exception or the rule in human relations? The bad\nguys do very bad things to women, and they usually get away with it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Agreed. The reader is supposed to be offended by the actions of certain \ncharacters or the environment in which some characters are immersed. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This view of the world is cognizant with Wolfe's catholicism. The\ndevil rules the world of flesh, and God rules the world of spirit.\nIt makes his stories more gripping and his more characters more\nreal. When I read about characters that float through life as though\nin a cloud, without any pain, I wonder \"why should I care?\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Agreed again. Literature is driven by conflict. It's one of it's most \nfundamental characteristics. Without conflict, you don't have a story. \nWolfe is simply very good at creating powerful, visceral conflicts that \naffect our most primitive emotions. " } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370610171515s4d7aceb1l4cabb8c8cbd744f0@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-17T22:15:25+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<200610171750.25563.ddjones@riddlemaster.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "A distinction here.\n\nMost kinds of stories, and certainly the kind Wolfe writes,\nneed to have people in them who do bad things -- even\nunambiguously, horribly bad things.\n\nThe question in my mind is what attitude the writer takes\ntoward those things. NOT, I hasten to say, the narrator, but\nthe writer, including the writer's handpuppet, the Narrative\nVoice. Does the text dwell lovingly on the details of each new\natrocity (as does, say, Clive Barker; but then, Barker is\nwriting horror when he does this)? Is it described in a\nclinical and detached manner?\n\nSome ways of approaching an action in a text, even when\nthe narrator speaks disapprovingly of that act, bespeak\nanother attitude on the part of the writer. Orson Scott\nCard's constant fantasies about the torture, death, and\ncastration of young boys eventually led me to be unable\nto read him anymore, not because I have any particular\nreason to believe that Scott wants to torture, kill, and\ncastrate young boys, but because I grew too conscious\nof the blatant way in which he was using that particular\ntactic to manipulate my emotions. (It didn't help that I've\nseen him speak at length about how deliberately he does\nit.)\n\nThen there's the narrator in certain kinds of porn (often\nthe most sadistic) who constantly bewails the terrible\nthings happening to the female \"protagonist:\" the\n\"Justine\" syndrome.\n\nI'm not suggesting that Wolfe falls into either of these\ncategories.\n\nI AM saying that I have come to find the sheer quantity\nof violence against women in his narratives disturbing,\nand I think it needs further thinking-about by people who\nunderstand this sort of thing better than I do." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\nTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open\nsewer and die.\n - Mel Brooks" } ] }, { "message_id": "<19ee41770610171552g375ea2bdi83cd94265c0ef8d8@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Jack Redelfs", "address": "jackredelfs at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-17T22:52:57+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370610171515s4d7aceb1l4cabb8c8cbd744f0@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Some ways of approaching an action in a\ntext, even when the narrator speaks\ndisapprovingly of that act, bespeak\nanother attitude on the part of the writer." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm not sure I agree with is, or rather, yes, I agree with it but\ninterpreting an author's \"Narrative Voice\" seems like a very\ncontentious and subjective thing.\n\nI've read more Gene Wolfe books than any other author, and Card\ncomes in second, he's not my second favorite SF author, just very\nconsistent (he's somewhere in the range of #11-20).You're right that\nCard has a sadistic streak, but I think you overstate your case, especially\nin regards to castration. I'm having a tough time recalling any castrations\n\nin the novels. Maybe it was in his short fiction, most of it written quite\nearly.\nMaybe you've mostly read his early stuff, like _Hart's Hope_, _Treason_,\nand _The Worthing Chronicles_? He got a lot \"softer\" as he aged,\nalthough he also became a lot more inconsistent.\n\nI tend to think that part of the reason that Card and Wolfe are\noften seen as vicious, misogynistic, or misanthropic, is this:\nboth writers are heavily influenced by the Old Testament." } ] }, { "message_id": "<10610172259.AA08321@slack.com>", "from": { "name": "David DiGiacomo", "address": "david at slack.com" }, "date": "2006-10-17T22:59:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<19ee41770610171552g375ea2bdi83cd94265c0ef8d8@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's just that Wolfe seems to be really fond of including misogynist\ncharacters and situations in his stories." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What I would say is that his woman characters are often foolish or evil,\ncreating situations where misogyny is apparently justified.\n\nCompare Wolfe to Iain M. Banks, who also has a penchant for including\n\"misogynist characters and situations\" (not to mention torture) in his\nwriting, but to completely different effect.\n\nMaybe it's not fair to bring this up, but when I read \"Letters Home\" I was\nstruck by Wolfe's lack of empathy for the Korean prostitutes he encounters.\nHe was very young at the time, but it's hard not to draw a connection to\nhis later fiction." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370610171613s46a0baf9ma747446d73035926@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-17T23:13:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<19ee41770610171552g375ea2bdi83cd94265c0ef8d8@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "H'mmm. Yes, my reading of Card is all quite early -- I think\nthe last one I read was \"Wyrms.\" I'm pretty sure I remember\ncastration as theme in \"Hart's Hope\" and \"Songmaster\" --\nI may have the title there a bit off.\n\nPlease note that I do _not_ see Wolfe as vicious,\nmisanthropic, or misogynistic; I've read most of his books\nmultiple times. It's just that I see something specific\nthat bothers me." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\nTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open\nsewer and die.\n - Mel Brooks" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6.2.5.6.2.20061018105935.04972058@ukg.co.uk>", "from": { "name": "Mo Holkar / UKG", "address": "lists at ukg.co.uk" }, "date": "2006-10-18T10:28:13+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370610171515s4d7aceb1l4cabb8c8cbd744f0@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 23:15 17/10/2006, Dan'l wrote:\nI AM saying that I have come to find the sheer quantity of violence \nagainst women in his narratives disturbing, and I think it needs \nfurther thinking-about by people who understand this sort of thing \nbetter than I do." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I am not such a person, unfortunately... but I think it's interesting \nto compare Wolfe in this respect with another of my favourite SF \nwriters, Philip Dick. In much of Dick's mature work there's this \nrecurrent figure of the beautiful woman with long, dark hair who \nmaliciously betrays the love of the protagonist. You don't have to be \na psychoanalyst to suspect that Dick had some particular neurosis he \nwas exercising there, particularly when you note that he formed \nunhappy marriages with a number of women also fitting that \ndescription. Positive images of women to put alongside these negative \nones are very rare -- so I think it's fair to describe this writing \nas having a misogynistic trait, albeit a fairly tightly-focused one.\n\nThe handling of women in Wolfe's writing seems to me to be more \nbroadly negative. He is quite capable of creating positive women \ncharacters, but he seems rarely to choose to do so. Instead his women \ncharacters often seem to be defined by their status as one kind or \nanother of sexual object. While I think it's dangerous to impute \nopinions and beliefs to a writer on the basis of what they write, you \ndo have to wonder what's going through his mind as he's composing \nsome of the passages.\n\nI know very few women who enjoy reading Wolfe, which is a pity but \nnot really a surprise.\n\nMo" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061018121409.37012.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Fred Kiesche", "address": "godel2escher2bach at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-18T12:14:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<6.2.5.6.2.20061018105935.04972058@ukg.co.uk>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Greetings:\n\nOn several recent threads.\n\nStories aren't always happy. Stories don't always tell\nus what we already know or feel comfortable with. So,\nWolfe is just practicing his craft.\n\nAuthor's don't always equal their stories.\n\nAnd...to quote from The Master, Himself:\n\n\"Read. No matter what you may long to believe, you\ncannot become a writer without tens of thousands of\nhours of reading. You cannot please the master until\nyou have been a master and know what is pleasing.\"\n\nSo, hmmmm, maybe he has detected a msogynist streak in\nliterature, and, therefore, by extension, in society\noverall?\n\nAs for Mr. Twain, he lived in a different era. He may\nhave reflected some of the attributes of that era.\nHowever, I cannot think of somebody who wrote such a\nwonderful book as \"Huckleberry Finn\" with such a\nwonderfully sympathetic character as Jim, as a true\nracist.\n\n(Oddly enough, one champion of the anti-slavery\nmovement lived on his property in CT.)\n\n\n\n Fred Kiesche (FPK3)\n \n My books are water; those of great geniuses are wine. Everybody drinks water. (Mark Twain, \"Notebook\")\nOver 7,000 postings served! See The Eternal Golden Braid (http://theeternalgoldenbraid.blogspot.com/ ).\n\n \n " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-18T12:35:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061018121409.37012.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'll chime in by suggesting that there is a continuum here, as for most \nhuman characteristics. I suggest the poles of the continuum are not \nmisogyny and reality but rather misogyny and chivalry. On one end there are \nmen who fear and/or loathe women, on the other end are men who feel women \ndeserve a higher degree of respect, protection and caring than men (yes, \nsorry, Dan'l I'm accusing you of being a gentleman). I'm not sure it is \naccurate to call the middle \"realism\". And I'm not sure each person has a \nlot of choice on where they fall on the scale.\n\nI notice the discussion has focused solely on Wolfe's treatment of women \nrather than an objective comparison of whether he treats his female \ncharacters worse than his male characters. It would seem there are other \nchivalrous gentlemen in the room. Are there any thoughts on whether Wolfe \ntreats his male characters better than women? (and no fair using \nquantitative measures, Wolfe makes it clear he identifies strongly with his \nprotagonists so naturally they will mostly be men).\n\nAs for most human continuums (continua) of values, it can be uncomfortable \nwhen one person is placed in close contact with someone else who resides a \ngreat distance away on the continuum. I think we can all agree Wolfe is \nwriting from his heart and his deeper feelings about women are expressed. \nDan'ls expressed view was also heartfelt and I take his use of the term \n\"misogynist\" to be a recognition of the distance between himself and Wolfe \non this issue, not a flat condemnation.\n\nDaniel D. Jones raises an important question: Is Wolfe's \"misogyny\" \npresented in a way which is meant to inspire outrage in a reader, or a \nrecognition of how things \"really\" are? I think people are disagreeing on \nthis.\n\nMo's observation that few women seem to become Wolfe fanatics is germaine. \nThere was an Alice who appeared on this list in its early days and I think I \nremember a complaint or two about Wolfe's presentation of women from her. \nThis suggests to me that Wolfe is not so successful if he is trying to \ninspire outrage or empathy in regard to women's issues. I don't think he is \ntrying to.\n\nJack's observation of connection between identification with the Old \nTestament and mysogyny was interesting. While the Middle East is generally \nknown for being \"misogynist\" on the scale (regardless of faith) the early \ndays of Christianity and Roman Catholicism show an even stronger vein, in my \nestimation. In researching some of Wolfe's saint names I was really struck \nby how many of the early female saints were canonized for virtues of \nvirginity, chastity, fighting off sexual advances, dressing as a man to \navoid sex, etc.\n\nLastly, I'll note again that it seems to me that Wolfe is writing from his \nheart and I suspect few of his devoted readers would sign a petition \nrequesting he change his attitude.\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<68A2F81C-B9A7-4168-B6C7-3A8201F2A19A@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Matthew King", "address": "automatthew at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-18T15:22:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370610171613s46a0baf9ma747446d73035926@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Oct 17, 2006, at 6:13 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nH'mmm. Yes, my reading of Card is all quite early -- I think\nthe last one I read was \"Wyrms.\" I'm pretty sure I remember\ncastration as theme in \"Hart's Hope\" and \"Songmaster\" --\nI may have the title there a bit off." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In _Songmaster_ you might say the main character is psychologically \ncastrated: part of the training of the Songbirds is a conditioning \nagainst orgasm, resulting in some sort of violent, painful reaction. \nThe confused young man who initiates a sexual encounter with the \nSongbird is physically castrated (and IIRC, lobotomized) as a \npunishment.\n\nCastration is a punishment offered in _Hart's Hope_, but I don't \nrecall it being thematic in any way. \n " } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370610181106q5d4dd180uccb42658ae54b9aa@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-18T18:06:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<6.2.5.6.2.20061018105935.04972058@ukg.co.uk>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/18/06, Mo Holkar / UKG wrote:\nI am not such a person, unfortunately... but I think it's interesting\nto compare Wolfe in this respect with another of my favourite SF\nwriters, Philip Dick. In much of Dick's mature work there's this\nrecurrent figure of the beautiful woman with long, dark hair who\nmaliciously betrays the love of the protagonist. You don't have\nto be a psychoanalyst to suspect that Dick had some particular\nneurosis he was exercising there, particularly when you note that\nhe formed unhappy marriages with a number of women also\nfitting that description." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "For what it's worth, Dick himself eventually decided that the\nimage of \"the dark-haired woman\" in his writing was all about\nhis twin sister, who died shortly after birth." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Positive images of women to put alongside these negative\nones are very rare -- so I think it's fair to describe this writing\nas having a misogynistic trait, albeit a fairly tightly-focused one." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Positive images of women in Dick? H'mmm. I think most of his\ncharacters, male and female, are \"positive,\" just not \"heroic.\" If\nyou'd said this about, say, Barry Malzberg, now..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The handling of women in Wolfe's writing seems to me to be more\nbroadly negative. He is quite capable of creating positive women\ncharacters, but he seems rarely to choose to do so. Instead his\nwomen characters often seem to be defined by their status as one\nkind or another of sexual object. While I think it's dangerous to\nimpute opinions and beliefs to a writer on the basis of what they\nwrite, you do have to wonder what's going through his mind as he's\ncomposing some of the passages." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yep. That's totally the direction I'm heading in these days." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\nTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open\nsewer and die.\n - Mel Brooks" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370610181117r7902fa0y3329e6e2722524c8@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-18T18:17:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Point of order." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/18/06, b sharp wrote:\nI think we can all agree Wolfe is\nwriting from his heart and his deeper feelings about women are expressed.\nDan'ls expressed view was also heartfelt and I take his use of the term\n\"misogynist\" to be a recognition of the distance between himself and Wolfe\non this issue, not a flat condemnation." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I did not use the term \"misogynist\" except once, and that was to\nspecifically state that I did NOT consider Wolfe one. I believe it\nwas David who brought the term in -- specifically, he spoke of\n\"blatant misogyny\" in regards to certain themes (which I DO find\ndisturbing; make no mistake) in Wolfe's oeuvre.\n\n(Nor am I at all clear on why you accuse me of being a gentleman,\nbased on this coinscription; nor, for that matter, of why it would be\nsomething I should consider an \"accusation,\" as opposed, to, say,\na \"compliment.\")" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\nTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open\nsewer and die.\n - Mel Brooks" } ] }, { "message_id": "<200610181650.27508.ddjones@riddlemaster.org>", "from": { "name": "Daniel D Jones", "address": "ddjones at riddlemaster.org" }, "date": "2006-10-18T20:50:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wednesday 18 October 2006 08:35, b sharp wrote:\nDaniel D. Jones raises an important question: Is Wolfe's \"misogyny\"\npresented in a way which is meant to inspire outrage in a reader, or a\nrecognition of how things \"really\" are? I think people are disagreeing on\nthis.\n\nMo's observation that few women seem to become Wolfe fanatics is germaine.\nThere was an Alice who appeared on this list in its early days and I think\nI remember a complaint or two about Wolfe's presentation of women from her.\nThis suggests to me that Wolfe is not so successful if he is trying to\ninspire outrage or empathy in regard to women's issues. I don't think he\nis trying to." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To tie this into another recent thread, does it matter what his intent is? \nThe story stands or falls on its own merits, not the author's intent. If \nintent does matter, then, while Wolfe may not be attempting to inspire \noutrage or emapathy, I don't think he's trying to encourage or praise \nmisogyny either.\n\nIn the particular story DoDrI, I don't think misogyny was a theme of the story \nso much as was the value of human beings, regardless of gender. Behaviorism \nand similar theories which treated human beings as machine-like automatons \nwere in vogue at the time the story was written. I'd strongly suspect that \nthis is more relevant to interpreting the story than is the treatment of \nwomen." } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061018210850.51566.qmail@web39501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "timothy fletcher", "address": "ss4vegita_2000 at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-18T21:08:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "First, I don't know if this is acceptable to others here, but I've always seen Wolfe's somewhat narrow and negative portrayal of women as a part of his being so ingrained in revisiting old science fiction cliches (I can't figure out how to do accents). In a lot of old science fiction and fantasy, at least that I've read, female characters are shallow and seem to be more of a outlet for the protagonist's sexual adventures and companionship needs than a realistic person. That may seem a narrow view of science fiction, but I think it's at least somewhat valid. In Lord of the Rings, for instance, the women are almost completely background characters (with some mild exceptions that were brought more to the foreground in the films). As someone said, he obviously is capable of creating deep and complex female characters, which makes me think he purposely does not, especially since I have seen him in interviews so heavily enforce the importance of characterization. \n \n Second, and this is slightly off topic, but a response to b. sharp's statement:\nJack's observation of connection between identification with the Old \nTestament and mysogyny was interesting. While the Middle East is generally \nknown for being \"misogynist\" on the scale (regardless of faith) the early \ndays of Christianity and Roman Catholicism show an even stronger vein, in my \nestimation. In researching some of Wolfe's saint names I was really struck \nby how many of the early female saints were canonized for virtues of \nvirginity, chastity, fighting off sexual advances, dressing as a man to \navoid sex, etc.\nIf I may respectfully disagree (if you are saying, as it seems to me, that early Christianity was in some way misogynystic), having some background in the study of early christianity (2 relevent B.A.'s), early Christianity was a haven to women. In fact, there is some evidence that early Christianity actually raised the role of women. They were treated more as human beings. This is discussed in Stark's Rise of Christianity, I believe, but I've even seen it in some fundamentalist histories. I agree about the early female saints, but I'm not sure that's much sign of misogyny since chastity was important for both early males and females (interestingly enough, from what I remember, some early vains of gnosticism (well, some scholars would disagree in calling it true gnosticism), and possibly some later, believed that since the spirit was good and the body evil, and the spirit more important than flesh, they were free to follow there own sexual desires to the fullest, which is\n something Paul disputes in I Corinthians).\n\nOK, you can flame me now." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4536EE57.5010609@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2006-10-19T03:17:43+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061018121409.37012.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Fred Kiesche wrote:\nAs for Mr. Twain, he lived in a different era. He may\nhave reflected some of the attributes of that era.\nHowever, I cannot think of somebody who wrote such a\nwonderful book as \"Huckleberry Finn\" with such a\nwonderfully sympathetic character as Jim, as a true\nracist." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Twain had no problem with black people; he paid for more than one to \nattend college, among other philanthropies. However, he had little use \nfor Indians, other than as the unsympathetic villain, Injun Joe in _The \nAdventures of Tom Sawyer_." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061019070338.23101.qmail@web32407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "don doggett", "address": "kingwukong at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-19T07:03:38+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370610171515s4d7aceb1l4cabb8c8cbd744f0@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\n\nI AM saying that I have come to find the sheer\nquantity\nof violence against women in his narratives\ndisturbing," }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "But not one iota as disturbing as the true acts of\nviolence against women perpetuated daily in the world.\nHeck man, two women were killed by abusive\nspouses/boyfriends within a year on the street I lived\non as a teenager on and I've called the cops twice on\na neighbor who was beating up his girlfriend just this\nyear. It's definitely a literary obsession of Wolfe's\nbut that's a writer's job, to push and then push\nharder. Good for Wolfe for disturbing you, and better\nfor you for being disturbed. Perhaps too, there is a\nmisidentification of chauvanism with misogyny? Just\nthinking out loud.\n\nDon" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061019074020.49199.qmail@web32102.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Nicholas Gevers", "address": "vermoulian at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-19T07:40:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061019070338.23101.qmail@web32407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It'll be interesting to see what people think of\nWolfe's main female character in *Soldier of Sidon*,\nthe \"singing girl\" Myt'sereu, who is prone to drinking\nand promiscuity. There's also a new Wolfe story, \"Six" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From Atlantis\", which takes a number of shots at" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Robert E. Howard's treatment of women; whether Wolfe\nis being ironic or not is up to the reader to decide.\n\n--Nick Gevers.\n\n\n\t\t" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6.2.5.6.2.20061019095815.02fb1420@ukg.co.uk>", "from": { "name": "Mo Holkar / UKG", "address": "lists at ukg.co.uk" }, "date": "2006-10-19T09:08:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370610181106q5d4dd180uccb42658ae54b9aa@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 19:06 18/10/2006, Dan'l wrote:\nFor what it's worth, Dick himself eventually decided that the image \nof \"the dark-haired woman\" in his writing was all about his twin \nsister, who died shortly after birth." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Mmm... I've never found that a psychologically convincing explanation \nfor this particular aspect of his writing (although clearly the \nmissing-twin theme does emerge elsewhere). It seems to me that Dick \nshied away from confronting the influence of his relationship with \nhis rather domineering mother.\n\nBut maybe it's wrong of me to feel it's OK to psychoanalyse Dick \nbecause he's not around any more, when I'd be reluctant to examine \nWolfe the same way ;-)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Positive images of women to put alongside these negative > ones \nare very rare -- so I think it's fair to describe this writing > as \nhaving a misogynistic trait, albeit a fairly tightly-focused one." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Positive images of women in Dick? H'mmm. I think most of his \ncharacters, male and female, are \"positive,\" just not \"heroic.\" If \nyou'd said this about, say, Barry Malzberg, now..." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Sure, you're quite right. I was using a lazy shorthand of implication \n-- meant to say something like \"images of women engaging positively \nwith the male protagonist\", as contrasted to the dark-haired woman's \nactivities.\n\nMo\n\n\n\n===================================================\nLive dirt, up a sidetrack carted, is a putrid evil.\n=================================================== " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-19T17:35:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<6.2.5.6.2.20061019095815.02fb1420@ukg.co.uk>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I did not use the term \"misogynist\" except once, and that was to \nspecifically state that I did NOT >consider Wolfe one. I believe it was \nDavid who brought the term in -- specifically, he spoke of\n\"blatant misogyny\" in regards to certain themes (which I DO find \ndisturbing; make no mistake) in >Wolfe's oeuvre. (Nor am I at all clear on \nwhy you accuse me of being a gentleman, based on this >coinscription; nor, \nfor that matter, of why it would be something I should consider >an \n\"accusation,\" as opposed, to, say,a \"compliment.\")" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Sorry Dan'l I had thought you used the term misogynist to decribe Wolfe's \nscenarios (not Wolfe) but it was the other Dan, Daniel D Jones in a \ndiscourse with Jeff Wilson. Accusing you of being a gentleman was my \nattempt at a wry, ironic compliment which failed miserably as do so many of \nmy attempts. That said, there are some people (a minority surely) in the \nworld who do consider the connotations associated with the term \"gentleman\" \nless than complimentary.\n\n(Thanks to Jeff Wilson for bringing up A Boy and His Dog! Couldn't be an SF \nmisogyny discussion without mentioning that one eh?)\n\nDaniel D Jones says:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In the particular story DoDrI, I don't think misogyny was a theme of the \nstory so much as was the >value of human beings, regardless of gender." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "and" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "does it matter what his intent is? The story stands or falls on its own \nmerits, not the author's >intent If intent does matter, then, while Wolfe \nmay not be attempting to inspire outrage or >emapathy, I don't think he's \ntrying to encourage or praise misogyny either." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thought experiment: How would your feelings as a reader change if the \nmurdered person in DoDrI had been a man? If Thecla's or Hunna's or \nMorwenna's torture had been done to a man? I think most would feel a little \nless bothered. Despite protestations, gender matters to almost all of us \nincluding Gene Wolfe.\n\nJack Redelfs writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In order for there to be a true appreciation for chivalry, perhaps you \nshould make it clear that >women are in great danger? Perhaps if, as an \nauthor, you shepherd your female characters from >indignities, you paint a \nrose-colored picture of the world." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, I hate to use the R word, but in reality, by any measure, at any point \nin the lifespan, males are in greater danger and are injured and killed more \noften than females. Despite this (ignoring a few radical Men's Rights \ngroups) the safety and protection of women continues to be of higher \npriority than protection of men in our society. Chivalry colors our social \noutlook so universally it is hard to see it.\n\nTolkein revels in chivalry and refuses to let female characters be \nphysically harmed (Eowyn is the dramatic exception but she had to dress as a \nman and of course she recovers). Tolkein won't even show us ugly women like \nbearded dwarf wives and female orcs. Wolfe (a fanatic Tolkein fan) chooses \nto let women come to harm and death many times. I am unabashedly interested \nin his intent as well as the effect that has on various readers.\n\n\ntimothy fletcher writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "If I may respectfully disagree (if you are saying, as it seems to me, that \nearly Christianity was in >some way misogynystic), having some background \nin the study of early christianity (2 relevent >B.A.'s), early Christianity \nwas a haven to women. In fact, there is some evidence that early \nChristianity actually raised the role of women. They were treated more as \nhuman beings. I agree >about the early female saints, but I'm not sure \nthat's much sign of misogyny since chastity was >important for both early \nmales and females." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You make a good point and I sort of covered myself by using quotation marks \naround my use of the term \"misogynistic\". I agree with Don Dogget that a \ndistinction should be made between misogyny and chauvanism, the former being \nhate of women and the latter being a form of chivalry (perverted?) in which \nwomen are protected so thoroughly they aren't allowed much freedom.\n\nHowever I can't agree with your assessment of equality in early Christian \nsociety....maybe I missed them but in my research I didn't encounter any \nmale saints who were canonized for chastity and virginity. Wouldn't a male \nvirgin deserve even more credit than a female? ;-).\n\n\nI haven't read Wizard Knight yet, but Bob Miller inspires me to do so.\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061019193612.77698.qmail@web39512.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "timothy fletcher", "address": "ss4vegita_2000 at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-19T19:36:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thought experiment: How would your feelings as a reader change if the \nmurdered person in DoDrI had been a man? If Thecla's or Hunna's or \nMorwenna's torture had been done to a man? I think most would feel a little \nless bothered. Despite protestations, gender matters to almost all of us \nincluding Gene Wolfe.\n\nThis, to me, is probably one of the most interesting points so far (though there have been a lot of interesting ones). The very fact that we're discussing this shows that people care about positive treatment and portrayal of women in literature. That may seem obvious, but I don't think it's something that would have mattered to earlier generations (and I don't just mean American generations). \n\nAs others have said, Wolfe, it seems, can create positive and sympathetic female characters, so the question is why doesn't he do so very often? It could be because he has some chauvanistic or misogynistic feelings, but it could also be to achieve some particular reaction from readers. I don't think it's impossible that he is something of a misogynist or chauvanist, but I'm not sure the evidence is clear enough on that point. He has some postitive women in his fiction, and I find it difficult to pinpoint an author's psychological state by looking at his work. I think the best evidence anyone has presented for anything resembling chavanism is the point from \"Letters from Home\" (though having little sypathy for prostitutes is something a lot of more conservative men would feel). \n\n\n\nYou make a good point and I sort of covered myself by using quotation marks \naround my use of the term \"misogynistic\". I agree with Don Dogget that a \ndistinction should be made between misogyny and chauvanism, the former being \nhate of women and the latter being a form of chivalry (perverted?) in which \nwomen are protected so thoroughly they aren't allowed much freedom.\n\nHowever I can't agree with your assessment of equality in early Christian \nsociety....maybe I missed them but in my research I didn't encounter any \nmale saints who were canonized for chastity and virginity. Wouldn't a male \nvirgin deserve even more credit than a female? ;-).\n\nI really didn't mean complete equality, and I'm sorry if it seemed I did. I mean more elevation, perhaps some form of chivalry. In Greco-Roman society women had few rights, and, like in other cultures, female babies were a burden, sometimes leading them to be \"exposed to the elements.\" Christians had a very different world-view, and they gave women a higher station. \n\nMen have never been rewarded for chastity very much by any culture. Even in modern society women are devalued for sexual activity while men are praised (this has become something of a cliche, but it's still valid, I believe). In early Christian writings, I can think of Augustine of the top of my head, men sometimes did praise and favor chastity for themselves. Earlier than Augustine, Paul in I Corinthians says it is good not to marry and that he himself chooses not to marry. Celibacy in priests is another example, though it did not develop in Christianity until the second or third century.\n\n \t\t" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061019194813.82482.qmail@web39509.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "timothy fletcher", "address": "ss4vegita_2000 at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-19T19:48:13+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061019193612.77698.qmail@web39512.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this discussion is being too narrow. There are a lot of fantasy and science fiction authors, especially modern ones, who portray violence against women. Off the top of my head I can think of the most extreme, Goodkind and Martin. I know that Goodkind is barely considered literary, and Martin perhaps less so than Wolfe, but if we are psychoanalyzing authors by their works, those two would have to hate women exceedingly more than Wolfe himself. Tolkien would have to find them uninteresting and ignore them. And what about female authors? Should we look at more female authors and decide whether they hate men? I find \"The Yellow Wallpaper\" suspect. \n\n \t\t" } ] }, { "message_id": "<19ee41770610191520j44d67dd2m794c34e01f13419c@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Jack Redelfs", "address": "jackredelfs at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-19T22:20:14+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061019194813.82482.qmail@web39509.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "any point in the lifespan, males are in greater danger and are\ninjured and killed more often than females." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Men are risk-takers; they are more prone to injure themselves\nand other men. Irrelevant." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "the safety and protection of women continues to be of\nhigher priority than protection of men in our society. Chivalry\ncolors our social outlook so universally it is hard to see it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I heartily disagree.\nWhat do you mean by \"our society?\" The US? North\nAmerica and western Europe? Your own social sphere?\nBecause I just don't see it." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Bob Miller", "address": "bob_bageera at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T00:23:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) The Chivalrous Society?", "in_reply_to": "<19ee41770610191520j44d67dd2m794c34e01f13419c@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "the safety and protection of women continues to be of\nhigher priority than protection of men in our society. Chivalry\ncolors our social outlook so universally it is hard to see it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I heartily disagree.\nWhat do you mean by \"our society?\" The US? North\nAmerica and western Europe? Your own social sphere?\nBecause I just don't see it.\n\nWell, I do know the reflexive courtesy I consider synonymous with chivalry \nthat some show women is usually quite appreciated. At my age I only get \nsmiles of thankyou and deference due to that age and I appreciate those.\n\nWhile we have a much much less chivalrous societal base now than before ~ \n1975, it is true that we have many customs that are based on that code. For \nexample, the USMarineC does not, as a policy, put owmen in combat positions. \n On the other hand as eminent a sociologist as Dr. Greeley has stated in \nprint that one of the effects of \"women's lib\" seems to be a major blow to \nchivalry (# of rapes and date rapes on campus up dramatically over the past \nfew decades?).\n\nTo be clear on my own part, \"all morality comes from women and children \nfirst\" --RAH and he meant into the lifeboat first, is the base of my own \nbehavior. Besides, either the smile or view of some walking away makes my \neyes feel better." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "david.duffy at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2006-10-20T01:05:56+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061019070338.23101.qmail@web32407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This has been gone over a number of times in the last few years, here and\nelsewhere. The attitudes and actions of the characters in his books are\nalways completely consonant with the worlds they live in, and those worlds\nare usually classical or medieval in spirit (perhaps Augustinian) and\ndetail. To me, he captures those times pretty accurately. And in most of\nthose times, the status of women was as he portrays it. Similarly, his\nmale central characters often represent the virtues, whether classical\n(which are masculine virtues I would think) or theological. One can then\nonly ask why someone may wish to write about those settings, and his essay\non Tolkein may answer that.\n\nWolfe has Dorcas say that thoughts are noblest and greatest when the world\nis at its hardest, and also the converse. So, he always puts his\ncharacters through the wringer.\n\nI think the book that seldom gets enough discussion is _Peace_, in that it\nis (presumably) closer to the life that Gene Wolfe and his parents and\ngrandparents live/lived. I think Olivia's portrait is psychologically\nconvincing. I also think the speech (in the doctor's surgery, isn't it)\nabout the ideal life being the now dying agrarian lifestyle is probably\nhow the author feels (cf _My Antonia_). It is also in keeping with\nCatholic ideas of around that time (late 19th-early 20th C) of the good\nlife.\n\nDavid Duffy." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T02:33:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Jack Redelfs takes me to task responding to my post: any point in the \nlifespan, males are in greater danger and are injured and killed more often \nthan females.\nWith-" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Men are risk-takers; they are more prone to injure themselves and other \nmen. Irrelevant." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Men remain in greater danger throughout their lives than women, that is my \npoint, regardless of the source of that danger. Perhaps you are suggesting \nit is irrelevant since men deserve their danger because they (as a species?) \nput danger on themselves? I won't accuse you of misandry? misoandry? since \nI think society as a whole tends to agree with the sentiment that men \ndeserve what they get. (there are biological arguments for why that system \nwas originally set up by females, but..nevermind, nevermind, lol).\n\nJack responds to my: the safety and protection of women continues to be of \nhigher priority than protection of men in our society. Chivalry colors our \nsocial outlook so universally it is hard to see it.\nWith-" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I heartily disagree. What do you mean by \"our society?\" The US? North \nAmerica and western >Europe? Your own social sphere? Because I just don't \nsee it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, I did say it is hard to see. Actually I deleted a lot of qualifiers \nfrom that post on WHICH society I meant and regarding exceptions like female \ninfanticide in rural India and China and female genital mutilation in \nanimist Africa, fearing that was drifting too far from Wolfe (it probably \nis). I'll go out on a limb to guess that no tribal peoples of Africa or \nAsia subscribe to this list and extend the definition of \"our society\" to \nmean the general cultural milieu of anyone reading this.\n\nTo help Jack or others to see what I'm saying, I'll borrow from Bob Miller \nand ask if you are adamantly in favor of putting women on the front line of \nthe battlefield. I'll also ask if you were on the Titanic if you would \ndemand an equal chance as any woman to be first in the lifeboat. If the \nanswer is no to either question I'd ask why. And timidly suggest the answer \nis....chivalry? For what other reason (again won't get into biology) can we \nas a society consider men to be more expendable than women?\n\nokay, back to Wolfe.\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<83AD2E63-39ED-43E0-8DDF-27991602176A@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Adam Thornton", "address": "adam at io.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T02:51:14+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Oct 19, 2006, at 7:33 PM, b sharp wrote:\n And timidly suggest the answer\nis....chivalry? For what other reason (again won't get into \nbiology) can we\nas a society consider men to be more expendable than women?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Chivalry *is* biology.\n\nOne guy can impregnate thousands of women. A woman can bear a \nlifetime maximum of, what, maybe 20 or 30 children?\n\nAdam" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370610192107p5f44e3f7ra5e82251f3b6389c@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T04:07:13+00:00", "subject": "(urth) The Chivalrous Society?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/19/06, Bob Miller wrote:\n On the other hand as eminent a sociologist as Dr.\nGreeley has stated in print that one of the effects of\n\"women's lib\" seems to be a major blow to chivalry\n(# of rapes and date rapes on campus up dramatically\nover the past few decades?)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thank you for that question mark, because that\n\"up dramatically\" is definitely in question. It is\nclear that at least _part_ of that increase is due\nto increased _reporting_ -- one of the effects of\nfeminism/\"women's lib\"/whatever you want to call\nit is that women aren't afraid to point the finger when\nthey're raped." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\nTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open\nsewer and die.\n - Mel Brooks" } ] }, { "message_id": "<45385258.8090007@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T04:36:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "b sharp wrote:\n(Thanks to Jeff Wilson for bringing up A Boy and His Dog! Couldn't be an SF \nmisogyny discussion without mentioning that one eh?)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you check the quotations, David Duffy brought it up; I just did a \nlittle deconstruction on it." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<45385823.30404@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T05:01:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<83AD2E63-39ED-43E0-8DDF-27991602176A@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Adam Thornton wrote:\nOn Oct 19, 2006, at 7:33 PM, b sharp wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " And timidly suggest the answer\nis....chivalry? For what other reason (again won't get into \nbiology) can we\nas a society consider men to be more expendable than women?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Chivalry *is* biology.\n\nOne guy can impregnate thousands of women. A woman can bear a \nlifetime maximum of, what, maybe 20 or 30 children?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'll bite: Why protect one woman and her children if there are thousands \nmore for you to knock up?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<7D7C247C-37D3-4BA9-B9AF-0999600E1A72@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Adam Thornton", "address": "adam at io.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T05:51:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<45385823.30404@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Oct 19, 2006, at 10:01 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nAdam Thornton wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Oct 19, 2006, at 7:33 PM, b sharp wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": " And timidly suggest the answer\nis....chivalry? For what other reason (again won't get into\nbiology) can we\nas a society consider men to be more expendable than women?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Chivalry *is* biology.\nOne guy can impregnate thousands of women. A woman can bear a\nlifetime maximum of, what, maybe 20 or 30 children?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll bite: Why protect one woman and her children if there are \nthousands\nmore for you to knock up?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Uh, cause there are going to be approximately equal numbers of men \nand women after a couple of generations anyway. If there are plenty \nof women left then having plenty of men around will take care of \nitself. If there aren't, then the population will remain small.\n\nIn short: males are expendable.\n\nAdam" } ] }, { "message_id": "<200610200741.54973.ddjones@riddlemaster.org>", "from": { "name": "Daniel D Jones", "address": "ddjones at riddlemaster.org" }, "date": "2006-10-20T11:41:54+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<45385823.30404@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Friday 20 October 2006 01:01, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nAdam Thornton wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Oct 19, 2006, at 7:33 PM, b sharp wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": " And timidly suggest the answer\nis....chivalry? For what other reason (again won't get into\nbiology) can we\nas a society consider men to be more expendable than women?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Chivalry *is* biology.\n\nOne guy can impregnate thousands of women. A woman can bear a\nlifetime maximum of, what, maybe 20 or 30 children?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll bite: Why protect one woman and her children if there are thousands\nmore for you to knock up?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There weren't thousands more. Our biology was defined through thousands of \nyears of living in small tribes where survival of the self and of the tribe \nwas constantly in question. The environment we've lived in since the rise of \ncivilization has had little effect on our biology. It's an eyeblink on the \nevolutionary time scale.\n\nIn a small tribe, if most of the men get killed, the few remaining can serve \nto produce just as large a next generation as if nothing had happened. If \nmost of the women get killed, the tribe is almost certainly dead." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T15:03:47+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<200610200741.54973.ddjones@riddlemaster.org>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'll follow up on Jeff's, Adam's and Daniel's biological posts to note with \nevil irony that\nthe European and Islamic codes of chivalry which extend such great \nprotection to females (and their purity) can be seen as the product of \nbarbarian cultures, hell-bent on warfare, global expansion and maximum \npopulation growth and tacit or open polygamy (polygyny).\n\nIn contrast, the female infanticide found in China and India was the product \nof mature, peaceful civilizations interested in population control, \nmonogamy, balance and harmony. (all this being historical argument based on \npre- modern birth control time periods and surely subject to much dissent \nand hackle raising ;-)).\n\nThe topic of protecting females from war reminds me..., Hmph writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I seem to remember rather liking the female soldier in, is it the third or \nthe fourth part of TBotNS? I forgot her name and don't have time to look it \nup now. Also, wasn't there a >sympathetic female sailor in TUotNS?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I can't think of a female soldier in BotNS, but the female sailor is surely \nGunny, whose younger version goes by Burgundofora. I guess both are \nsympathetic characters though they both betray Severian, one in a minor way, \none in a major way." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4538EECC.5060900@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T15:44:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061019194813.82482.qmail@web39509.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "timothy fletcher wrote:\nI think this discussion is being too narrow. There are a lot of fantasy \nand science fiction authors, especially modern ones, who portray \nviolence against women. Off the top of my head I can think of the most \nextreme, Goodkind and Martin. I know that Goodkind is barely considered \nliterary, and Martin perhaps less so than Wolfe, but if we are \npsychoanalyzing authors by their works, those two would have to hate \nwomen exceedingly more than Wolfe himself. Tolkien would have to find \nthem uninteresting and ignore them. And what about female authors? \nShould we look at more female authors and decide whether they hate men? \nI find \"The Yellow Wallpaper\" suspect." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It's not quanity of violence against women, it's the moral context. Is \nit presented as a crime? spoils of war? just desserts? pretext to \narranged marriage? harmless fun?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<003901c6f45e$c8f96ad0$4d34290a@bluelnk.net>", "from": { "name": "Dave Lebling", "address": "dlebling at hyraxes.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T15:45:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I can't think of a female soldier in BotNS" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would assume he's thinking of Foila, who is indeed a sympathetic and\nlikable character, a soldier recovering from wounds(?) in the Pelerines'\nhospice. (She's the prize in the story-telling contest, but turns the tables\non the contestants by entering and winning.) This is in _Citadel of the\nAutarch_.\n\n-- Dave Lebling, aka vizcacha" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061020183800.75720.qmail@web39507.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "timothy fletcher", "address": "ss4vegita_2000 at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T18:38:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<4538EECC.5060900@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, that post was meant to be mostly humorous, hence the \"Yellow Wallpaper\" comment, but I would say there is some validity to it. Moral context is truly important, but if you constantly write about rape and mistreatment of women over and over again, then there would seem to be some kind of over-infatuation going on. Goodkind really does that more than Martin. I haven't read him since high school, but I remember some kind of violence (usually sexual in nature) against women at least 5 or 6 times in a book, probably varying from book to book. That could just be my own memory. I think the argument with Wolfe is similar. He could and does write about other characters being mistreated or lacking depth, but he nearly consistently does so with women, with only a couple of exceptions. I think that's pretty much what the argument is, and I've seen little regarding moral context, since only a couple of people have pointed to actual examples (most of the ones I think people have\n mentioned are exceptions. That's not a slight against you at all, just an observation of the entire discussion)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Jeff Wilson wrote: timothy fletcher wrote:\nI think this discussion is being too narrow. There are a lot of fantasy \nand science fiction authors, especially modern ones, who portray \nviolence against women. Off the top of my head I can think of the most \nextreme, Goodkind and Martin. I know that Goodkind is barely considered \nliterary, and Martin perhaps less so than Wolfe, but if we are \npsychoanalyzing authors by their works, those two would have to hate \nwomen exceedingly more than Wolfe himself. Tolkien would have to find \nthem uninteresting and ignore them. And what about female authors? \nShould we look at more female authors and decide whether they hate men? \nI find \"The Yellow Wallpaper\" suspect." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It's not quanity of violence against women, it's the moral context. Is \nit presented as a crime? spoils of war? just desserts? pretext to \narranged marriage? harmless fun?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\n< http://www.io.com/~jwilson >" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T19:03:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061020183800.75720.qmail@web39507.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Dave Lebling writes regarding the female soldier:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I would assume he's thinking of Foila, who is indeed a sympathetic and \nlikable character, a soldier >recovering from wounds(?) in the Pelerines' \nhospice. (She's the prize in the story-telling contest, >but turns the \ntables on the contestants by entering and winning.) This is in _Citadel of \nthe\nAutarch_." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Oooh how could I not think of Foila. Yes, she is likable enough to dispel \naccusations Wolfe can't develop an admirable female character...But then \nagain, we last see her critically wounded, probably dying,....hm....\n\n-bsharp\n(p.s. forgot Vulcan neck pinch in my list of 60's pop references in my last \npost)" } ] }, { "message_id": "<200610201756.00556.ddjones@riddlemaster.org>", "from": { "name": "Daniel D Jones", "address": "ddjones at riddlemaster.org" }, "date": "2006-10-20T21:56:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061020183800.75720.qmail@web39507.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Friday 20 October 2006 14:38, timothy fletcher wrote:\nWell, that post was meant to be mostly humorous, hence the \"Yellow\nWallpaper\" comment, but I would say there is some validity to it. Moral\ncontext is truly important, but if you constantly write about rape and\nmistreatment of women over and over again, then there would seem to be some\nkind of over-infatuation going on. Goodkind really does that more than\nMartin. I haven't read him since high school, but I remember some kind of\nviolence (usually sexual in nature) against women at least 5 or 6 times in\na book, probably varying from book to book. That could just be my own\nmemory. I think the argument with Wolfe is similar. He could and does write\nabout other characters being mistreated or lacking depth, but he nearly\nconsistently does so with women, with only a couple of exceptions. I think\nthat's pretty much what the argument is, and I've seen little regarding\nmoral context, since only a couple of people have pointed to actual\nexamples (most of the ones I think people have mentioned are exceptions.\nThat's not a slight against you at all, just an observation of the entire\ndiscussion)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "For what it's worth, it could also mean that Wolfe finds violence against \nwomen particularly horrifying. An author's purpose is to impact and move the \nreader. As such, it's natural that they choose powerful, emotional scenes to \ndo that. If Wolfe finds women in dire straits to be particularly powerful, \nhe may assume that his reader does as well and intentionally include such \nscenes because he finds them repulsive rather than attractive." } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061020221823.52662.qmail@web39502.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "timothy fletcher", "address": "ss4vegita_2000 at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T22:18:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist Or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<200610201756.00556.ddjones@riddlemaster.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "For what it's worth, it could also mean that Wolfe finds violence against \nwomen particularly horrifying. An author's purpose is to impact and move the \nreader. As such, it's natural that they choose powerful, emotional scenes to \ndo that. If Wolfe finds women in dire straits to be particularly powerful, \nhe may assume that his reader does as well and intentionally include such \nscenes because he finds them repulsive rather than attractive.\n\n\nThat is very much true; I will concede that. I will say, though, that it is (or seems it must be) difficult to pinpoint which is the case with some authors, which explains this discussion. Personally, I doubt Wolfe harbors any ill will or dislike toward women (Goodkind either, for that matter). I know a smattering about psychology, and could probably learn more by asking some friends (one of whom is a professional psychologist), but I've heard that in Rorschach tests and such the results are based more on patterns and types than the answers themselves.\n\n \t\t" } ] }, { "message_id": "<19ee41770610201656p165569c9vd27b12e1591532b@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Jack Redelfs", "address": "jackredelfs at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-20T23:56:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061020221823.52662.qmail@web39502.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I have been interested the discussion of evolution, but I'm not\nsure if a convincing case has been made for \"chivalry is biology.\"\nEvolution \"says\" that society can't allow men to kill fertile women\nwantonly. But evolution has no problem with men beating and\nhumiliating their wives, or raping and enslaving strangers.\nThese actions don't interfere with reproduction so evolution\nwouldn't seem to \"have an opinon\" on them.\n\nThat's an interesting side-discussion, but more closely\nregarding Wolfe and his attitudes:\n\nJeff Wilson said:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Moral context is truly important, but if you constantly write about\nrape and mistreatment of women over and over again, then there would s\nseem to be some kind of over-infatuation going on." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think that's pretty much what the argument is, and I've seen little\nregarding moral context, since only a couple of people have pointed to a\nactual examples." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Perhaps few have addressed the argument because it seems so\nabsurd on the face of it. It's so very easy to say that there are countless\nauthors, in literary and pulp fiction, that describe horrid behavior toward\nwomen in obsessive detail - what about Samuel Delany's _Dhalgren_,\nfor one example? Wolfe doesn't even come close. Someone\nalready mentioned Stephen King and Clive Barker, \"but they write\nhorror, so it's okay..\" Unlike a million counter-examples,\nmost of the rapes and tortures in Wolfe are alluded to,\nnot described in detail.\n\nI have always thought of Wolfe as one of the most humane SF\nauthors. He seems like the last SF author I would have thought\nguilty of misogyny. Although maybe he put himself at risk by\nfailing to write thinly veiled political tracts about womens' and\ngay rights (ala John Varley).\n\nIt appears that you, Jeff, are not immediately going to\ncondemn Wolfe, and I'm glad. So you ask:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's not quanity of violence against women, it's the moral\ncontext. Is it presented as a crime? spoils of war? just\ndesserts? pretext to arranged marriage? harmless fun?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm glad you are asking these questions. We could go over\nthis thing on a case by case basis, and I'd try to be openminded\nabout the possiblity that I'm wrong about Wolfe, although I'm\nnot sure I'd succeed. It's probably difficult to be objective about\nyour favorite author.\n\nIn one respect Wolfe's\nwork IS similar to horror authors like Lawrence Block and\nClive Barker. The Bad Guys quite often \"win.\"\nI won't deny that sometimes this causes me to\nfeel sick or disgusted when I'm reading Wolfe. Perhaps if\nI had a different intellectual background, I'd think\nthat Wolfe was jaded and perverse (or misogynistic?) to\nwrite like this.\n\nOr maybe he's trying to make a point: true victories are\nnot made from killing Bad Guys or saving damsels in distress.\nSure, we should try to do what we can to right the world, but if\nwe fall short, are we to despair? If we only\nrecognize temporal succes, are we not setting ourselves up\nfor failure? True victories are victories of the heart.\n\nOr, to paraprase _Lictor_,\n\"They say you are a great warrior who has\nkilled many,\" said the chief of the Island people to\nSeverian. \"I am warrior, but not great,\" said Severian.\n\"For a man is made great not by killing others, but by\nkilling parts of himself.\"\n\nOf course, this is just my own personal interpretation\nof what Wolfe is trying to say. Others have a completely\ndifferent take on it, and who's to say they're not more correct?\n\nThat's the beauty of Gene Wolfe. He doesn't hit you over the head\nwith a moral message, like many authors do (Heinlein, anone?)\nThere's no Wise Old Man to explain what lessons you \"should\"\nbe learning from this scene or that.\n\nPerhaps that's why _The Book Of The New Sun_ is beloved by\ndevout christians and confirmed atheists alike." } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061021020928.91837.qmail@web39505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "timothy fletcher", "address": "ss4vegita_2000 at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-21T02:09:28+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<19ee41770610201656p165569c9vd27b12e1591532b@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I can agree with Wolfe being loved by both atheists and devout Christians, having been both and loved Wolfe as both. \n\nThat is something I think really makes it difficult to say Wolfe is in some way against women (I'm trying to think of a way to state that and encompass everything that's been discussed, but everthing seems inadequate), that there are so many other authors that are worse. Not that other authors should be used to judge Wolfe, but I've not really heard many people call these other authors misogynists (Delany, I don't know about; I've heard people say that all homosexuals are ultimately misogynists, but I don't really buy that, per se)\n\n\nJack Redelfs wrote: I have been interested the discussion of evolution, but I'm not\n sure if a convincing case has been made for \"chivalry is biology.\"\nEvolution \"says\" that society can't allow men to kill fertile women\n wantonly. But evolution has no problem with men beating and\n humiliating their wives, or raping and enslaving strangers. \n These actions don't interfere with reproduction so evolution\n wouldn't seem to \"have an opinon\" on them.\n \n That's an interesting side-discussion, but more closely \n regarding Wolfe and his attitudes:\n \n Jeff Wilson said:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Moral context is truly important, but if you constantly write about \nrape and mistreatment of women over and over again, then there would s\nseem to be some kind of over-infatuation going on. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think that's pretty much what the argument is, and I've seen little \nregarding moral context, since only a couple of people have pointed to a\nactual examples." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \n Perhaps few have addressed the argument because it seems so\n absurd on the face of it. It's so very easy to say that there are countless\n authors, in literary and pulp fiction, that describe horrid behavior toward\n women in obsessive detail - what about Samuel Delany's _Dhalgren_,\n for one example? Wolfe doesn't even come close. Someone \n already mentioned Stephen King and Clive Barker, \"but they write \n horror, so it's okay..\" Unlike a million counter-examples, \n most of the rapes and tortures in Wolfe are alluded to, \n not described in detail.\n \n I have always thought of Wolfe as one of the most humane SF\n authors. He seems like the last SF author I would have thought\n guilty of misogyny. Although maybe he put himself at risk by\n failing to write thinly veiled political tracts about womens' and\n gay rights (ala John Varley).\n \n It appears that you, Jeff, are not immediately going to\n condemn Wolfe, and I'm glad. So you ask:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's not quanity of violence against women, it's the moral \ncontext. Is it presented as a crime? spoils of war? just \ndesserts? pretext to arranged marriage? harmless fun? " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \n I'm glad you are asking these questions. We could go over\n this thing on a case by case basis, and I'd try to be openminded\n about the possiblity that I'm wrong about Wolfe, although I'm\n not sure I'd succeed. It's probably difficult to be objective about\n your favorite author.\n \n In one respect Wolfe's\n work IS similar to horror authors like Lawrence Block and\n Clive Barker. The Bad Guys quite often \"win.\"\n I won't deny that sometimes this causes me to \n feel sick or disgusted when I'm reading Wolfe. Perhaps if \n I had a different intellectual background, I'd think \n that Wolfe was jaded and perverse (or misogynistic?) to\n write like this. \n \n Or maybe he's trying to make a point: true victories are \n not made from killing Bad Guys or saving damsels in distress. \n Sure, we should try to do what we can to right the world, but if \n we fall short, are we to despair? If we only\n recognize temporal succes, are we not setting ourselves up\n for failure? True victories are victories of the heart.\n \n Or, to paraprase _Lictor_, \n \"They say you are a great warrior who has\n killed many,\" said the chief of the Island people to \n Severian. \"I am warrior, but not great,\" said Severian.\n \"For a man is made great not by killing others, but by\n killing parts of himself.\"\n \n Of course, this is just my own personal interpretation\n of what Wolfe is trying to say. Others have a completely\n different take on it, and who's to say they're not more correct?\n \n That's the beauty of Gene Wolfe. He doesn't hit you over the head\n with a moral message, like many authors do (Heinlein, anone?)\n There's no Wise Old Man to explain what lessons you \"should\" \n be learning from this scene or that.\n \n Perhaps that's why _The Book Of The New Sun_ is beloved by\n devout christians and confirmed atheists alike.\n \n \n \n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370610211142h4567b6dcga019fb4bbd6062c6@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-21T18:42:49+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<19ee41770610201656p165569c9vd27b12e1591532b@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/20/06, Jack Redelfs wrote:\nI have been interested the discussion of evolution, but I'm not\nsure if a convincing case has been made for \"chivalry is biology.\"\nEvolution \"says\" that society can't allow men to kill fertile women\nwantonly. But evolution has no problem with men beating and\nhumiliating their wives, or raping and enslaving strangers.\nThese actions don't interfere with reproduction so evolution\nwouldn't seem to \"have an opinon\" on them." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Actually, some of these behaviors are probably favorable at\nsome level to the reproduction of the genes of those who\nperform them. Not beating wives, though; that tends to kill\nbabies. The one place it makes evolutionary sense is in\ncases of jealousy.\n\n(Note that I am not saying anything about morality here.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's so very easy to say that there are countless\nauthors, in literary and pulp fiction, that describe horrid behavior toward\nwomen in obsessive detail - what about Samuel Delany's _Dhalgren_,\nfor one example?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You must be thinking of _Hogg_, or perhaps _Equinox_ (a/k/a/_The\nTides of Lust_). Those books record the actions of some truly vile\ncharacters. _Dhalgren_, not so much. I'm stretching my brain and\nI can't think of anything in _Dhalgren_ that would support this\nstatement.\n\nI'm a bigger Delany fan than I am a Wolfe fan, but _Hogg_ is the\none Delany book that I'm pretty sure I will _never_ reread. It's the\nonly book I've ever felt unclean after reading. The titular character\nis a \"rape artist\" -- a man who rapes women for pay, to achieve\nother men's revenge.\n\nA lot of what the book is about is evil by proxy: not only Hogg\nhimself, but a lot else is going on throughout the book in which\none character performs another's evil. It's ... horrendous, in the\nmost literal sense of the word. It's a very powerful book, but it's\njust no fun to read, at _all_, on _any_ level." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Wolfe doesn't even come close. Someone\nalready mentioned Stephen King and Clive Barker, \"but they write\nhorror, so it's okay..\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That were I, and I was being somewhat ironic." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In one respect Wolfe's\nwork IS similar to horror authors like Lawrence Block and\nClive Barker. The Bad Guys quite often \"win.\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yep. But then, I would claim that a goodly percentage of\nWolfe's work partakes of the horrific." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That's the beauty of Gene Wolfe. He doesn't hit you over the head\nwith a moral message, like many authors do (Heinlein, anone?)\nThere's no Wise Old Man to explain what lessons you \"should\"\nbe learning from this scene or that." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Actually, there are passages where various characters deliver\nhomilies. Silk does it a _lot_ in LONG SUN." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\nTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open\nsewer and die.\n - Mel Brooks" } ] }, { "message_id": "<7.0.1.0.0.20061022184524.03e8c598@gmx.net>", "from": { "name": "Hmpf MacSlow", "address": "hmpf1998 at gmx.net" }, "date": "2006-10-22T16:58:06+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<20061021020928.91837.qmail@web39505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 04:09 AM 10/21/2006, you wrote:\nI can agree with Wolfe being loved by both atheists and devout \nChristians, having been both and loved Wolfe as both.\n\nThat is something I think really makes it difficult to say Wolfe is \nin some way against women (I'm trying to think of a way to state \nthat and encompass everything that's been discussed, but everthing \nseems inadequate), that there are so many other authors that are \nworse. Not that other authors should be used to judge Wolfe, but \nI've not really heard many people call these other authors \nmisogynists (Delany, I don't know about; I've heard people say that \nall homosexuals are ultimately misogynists, but I don't really buy \nthat, per se)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Isn't Delany bisexual, anyway? For a homosexual he certainly writes a \nlot about sex with women! (And about mixed threesomes.) I didn't get \nmisogynist vibes from Dhalgren. But then, it's been a while - maybe \nI've forgotten. And quite possibly my tolerance to misogyny is pretty \nhigh, due to having read predominantly very 'male' types of \nliterature for most of my life. Maybe I just sort of ignore misogyny, \nespecially in older works where I assume it was just part of the \ngeneral culture/the 'common subsconscious' that few people could \nescape. I dunno... Oddly enough, I identify as a feminist at the same time.\n\n- Hmpf (apparently not *quite* in lurking mode again)\n\n\n\n---\n\"I'm too weird to be a tourist and not weird enough to be an employee.\"\n- 'Finder' by Carla Speed McNeil " } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370610221016i7dc2c5d9gb14fd5f7d5356b56@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-10-22T17:16:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<7.0.1.0.0.20061022184524.03e8c598@gmx.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/22/06, Hmpf MacSlow wrote:\nIsn't Delany bisexual, anyway?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Delany regularly identifies himself as gay. He has had some\n\"straight experiences,\" including a long-term but ultimately\nnot-very-successful marriage to the poet Marilyn Hacker, which\n_did_ result in the birth of one child, their daughter Iva." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "For a homosexual he certainly writes a\nlot about sex with women! (And about mixed threesomes.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The \"happiest\" (or most successful, sexually) period of the\nDelany-Hacker marriage seems to have been a period when\nthey welcomed a third person into their home and bed. This\nis chronicled in different ways in Delany's memoir, _The Motion\nof Light in Water_, and Hacker's long poem, \"The Navigators.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I didn't get misogynist vibes from Dhalgren." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nor do I. Delany is as feminist as a male can be." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\nhttp://www.danehyoakes.com\nTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open\nsewer and die.\n - Mel Brooks" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20061022214443.58289.qmail@web39507.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "timothy fletcher", "address": "ss4vegita_2000 at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2006-10-22T21:44:43+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<7.0.1.0.0.20061022184524.03e8c598@gmx.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think someone else mentioned Delany as a misogynist; I was just throwing that comment out, and after I wrote it I wondered if it might sound slightly prejudice. It's just something I've heard a lot, not something I believe. I've only read Delany a little, and never a complete novel (I liked what I read, just never finished anything), so when I said I don't know about him, I really don't. I did know he is a homosexual, only because I read a little biography of him in one book (Stars in my Pocket like Grains of Sand, I believe, but could be wrong). Personally, I'm sure he thinks women are great." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Hmpf MacSlow wrote: At 04:09 AM 10/21/2006, you wrote:\nI can agree with Wolfe being loved by both atheists and devout \nChristians, having been both and loved Wolfe as both.\n\nThat is something I think really makes it difficult to say Wolfe is \nin some way against women (I'm trying to think of a way to state \nthat and encompass everything that's been discussed, but everthing \nseems inadequate), that there are so many other authors that are \nworse. Not that other authors should be used to judge Wolfe, but \nI've not really heard many people call these other authors \nmisogynists (Delany, I don't know about; I've heard people say that \nall homosexuals are ultimately misogynists, but I don't really buy \nthat, per se)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Isn't Delany bisexual, anyway? For a homosexual he certainly writes a \nlot about sex with women! (And about mixed threesomes.) I didn't get \nmisogynist vibes from Dhalgren. But then, it's been a while - maybe \nI've forgotten. And quite possibly my tolerance to misogyny is pretty \nhigh, due to having read predominantly very 'male' types of \nliterature for most of my life. Maybe I just sort of ignore misogyny, \nespecially in older works where I assume it was just part of the \ngeneral culture/the 'common subsconscious' that few people could \nescape. I dunno... Oddly enough, I identify as a feminist at the same time\n\n\n\n\n\n \t\t\t\t" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5917909A-E63E-4D2F-933D-E54555D28353@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Adam Thornton", "address": "adam at io.com" }, "date": "2006-10-23T06:21:14+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe: Misogynist or Realist?", "in_reply_to": "<7.0.1.0.0.20061022184524.03e8c598@gmx.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Oct 22, 2006, at 9:58 AM, Hmpf MacSlow wrote:\nIsn't Delany bisexual, anyway? For a homosexual he certainly writes a\nlot about sex with women! (And about mixed threesomes.) I" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "As far as I know, he's homosexual these days, although he was married \nto Marilyn Hacker for a while and certainly had sex with her at least \nenough to impregnate her (read _The Motion of Light In Water_ for \ndetails). However, I'm pretty sure he isn't a misogynist by any \nreasonable definition of the term.\n\nAdam" } ] } ] }