SF-LOVERS Digest           Tuesday, 12 Jan 1993        Volume 18 : Issue 25
 
Today's Topics:
 
                Books - Brust & The Gripping Hand (9 msgs)
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Date: 12 Jan 93 08:43:46 GMT
From: dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: The Viscount of Adrilankha
 
Brust's sequel to "The Phoenix Guards" has been turned in - "The Viscount
of Adrilankha".  (Actually, from what I understand, the sequel to TPG is
"Five Hundred Years After" - I still say it ought to be either 170 years or
20 decades, which tells of Adron's Oops, so Viscount will probably be
third.  It needn't be last - there are lots more three-musketeer titles to
plunder.)
 
Now who would the Viscount be?  I take it that Khaavren corresponds to
Dartagnan, that Tazendra corresponds to Porthos, and that the Viscount is
the son of either Pel or Aerich, which corresponds to Athos.  But I can't
decide which; both have Athos-type backgrounds and Aramis-type behavior.
Or am I missing something obvious?
 
Dani Zweig
dani@netcom.com
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 09:50:21 GMT
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: The Gripping Hand
 
dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>BECKS@TAUNIVM.TAU.AC.IL (Sara Beck) writes:
>>It also had yet another example of Niven's quite extraordinary misogyny.
>>...if EVERY alien species this writer can find in his imagination has
>>either profoundly defective females, great threats in child-bearing, or
>>both...
 >
> Many of Niven's 'known space' species have unintelligent females, true.
> It's quite a leap, though, to call Mote "another example
> of...extraordinary misogyny" because it features hermaphroditic aliens
> who can't control their population.
 
Which was not the argument - the argument was that there existed a trend
which Mote prolonged, not that the book alone establishes that trend.  If
somebody refuses to get up in the bus so an elderly person can sit down,
that would simply be unpolite.  If it was a Boer activist refusing a seat
to a black South African, there might be something else behind it, even
though this could happen to everybody.
 
Now, personally, I'm not convinced the trend she refers to in Niven's work
exists, but arguing that a book is not an outrageously obvious example does
not prove that it is no example at all.  Go dig up races in Niven's work
that dispute the trend.  I seem to remember that the puppeteers are a
counterexample.
 
> I have the impression that if the book had contained undotted i's you
> would have identified them as evidence of the authors' profound contempt
> for the English language.
 
If Niven had been repeatedly arguing in previous books for removing English
classes from school and substituting Spanish or whatever instead, such a
conclusion might indeed be justified.  As it is, he didn't, so your analogy
does not hold, because it does not address the question of whether there's
some pattern behind the undotted i's that's repeated in other works.
 
Markus Stumptner
University of Technology Vienna
Paniglg. 16, A-1040
Vienna, Austria
mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
...mcsun!vexpert!mst
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 15:18:24 GMT
From: ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: THE GRIPPING HAND by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle
 
Alexandra_Haropulos.ADFMcLean_CSD@XEROX.COM writes:
> I'm afraid I don't understand the reference to "Heinleinesque speeches
> about sex and morality" and "1950's sexual mores" in the same breath.
 
By "Heinleinesque," I meant "in the style of Heinlein," not "matching in
content the speeches in Heinlein's novels."  In other words, characters
spend a lot of time lecturing each other about their beliefs on sex and
morality (which may or may not be the author's) while the story sort of
stands around in the corner waiting for its turn to do something.  This is
the equivalent of the scientist in many old pulp stories lecturing his
companions on how his latest invention works.  I no not think this is the
optimal way to inform the reader of the science (in the later) or of the
beliefs of the characters (in the latter).
 
Evelyn C. Leeper
+1 908 957 2070
att!mtgzy!ecl
ecl@mtgzy.att.com
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:43:23 GMT
From: kasprj@isaac.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: THE GRIPPING HAND by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle
 
ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>w95_cook@wums.wustl.edu writes:
>> I mean, certainly the culture of the novel was very male-centered, but a
>> reason is given for the regression of society in this fashion.  Namely,
>> the protection of the fertile woman in a society where there are merely
>> several thousand individuals on an entire planet!  Personally, I find
>> this to be a very likely shift in culture given the circumstances.
>
> A couple of people have mentioned this.  Maybe this is spelled out in
> MOTE, but if it was in TGH I missed it.  Had it been spelled out, some of
> my objections would have been withdrawn.
 
 In Niven's _N-Space_ collection, there's an essay entitled "The Making of
_The Mote in God's Eye_" which details most of the assumptions that Niven
and Pournelle used to set up the background to the stories. If you want
justifications (or lack thereof depending on your PCness), that's the place
to look.
 
> One of the things I look for in a novel is some indication of what came
> before - why the society, the characters, and the philosophies are what
> they are.  I didn't find that here, and if one must read the previous
> novel to find it, then this should have been issued as part of a set and
> not a stand-alone.
 
 Sounds like a matter of personal taste to me.
 
 I haven't read _The Gripping Hand_ yet, but I re-read _Mote_ this summer
to warm up. I think they did a very good job of explaining the background
of Empire society. There was no real mystery as to why the society acted
the way it did, and for those who are curious about more details, as I
said, you can read the essay in _N-Space_.
 
 As for TGH, I think that Niven and Pournelle were deliberately aiming at a
restricted audience of fans of theirs who'd read the first book and would
jump at the sequel. This guarantees a certain minimum number of sales but,
it also guarantees a certain maximum number of sales. Niven, at least, is
well aware of this concept, having written about it in his essays on the
"Science Fiction Country Club", so I would assume that they knew exactly
what they were doing by setting up the book so that _Mote_ is a necessary
prelude. Is this a bad thing, in and of itself? Perhaps. But it's their
book.  If you don't like it, you don't have to read it. Certainly no one
would ever accuse Niven and Pournelle of trying to please everyone.
 
Jim Kasprzak
RPI
Troy, NY, USA
kasprj@rpi.edu
kasprzak@mts.rpi.edu
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:51:59 GMT
From: matt@physics2.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: The Gripping Hand
 
BECKS@TAUNIVM.TAU.AC.IL (Sara Beck) writes:
> It also had yet another example of Niven's quite extraordinary misogyny,
> which I don't think has been mentioned on the net.  If a writer comes up
> with ONE alien species in which the females are non-sentient or
> non-intelligent, or in which the process of reproduction is fraught with
> catastrophic threats and dangers, one can say that it doesn't make sense
> scientifically but hey, neither does FTL travel, and this is what SF
> does. But if EVERY alien species this writer can find in his imagination
> has either profoundly defective females, great threats in child-bearing,
> or both, phrases like "deep-seated authorial neurosis" begin to come to
> mind.
 
Niven certainly has invented several alien species where the females are
non-sentient (and also at least one where the males are non-sentient), but
the aliens in The Mote in God's Eye are not one of those species.  I don't
want to go into details (some people haven't read the book), but I just
don't see it there.
 
What Niven has tried to do, in my opinion, is to create aliens that are
recognizably different from humans, both in biology and in behavior; often,
they reproduce very differently than we do.  (That's only reasonable.
Mammals, earthworms, and spiders all have sexual reproduction, but it
certainly doesn't take the same form in every species!  There's no reason
to think that an alien species that reproduces sexually would be more
similar to us than to earthworms.)
 
Of course, I think you could make a case for seeing sexism in the book's
portrayal of the *human* characters, but that's another matter...
 
Matthew Austern
(510) 644-2618
austern@lbl.bitnet
matt@physics.berkeley.edu
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:02:17 GMT
From: kasprj@isaac.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: The Gripping Hand
 
BECKS@TAUNIVM.TAU.AC.IL (Sara Beck) writes:
> The appearance of the sequel to "The Mote in God's Eye" rouses me to
> comment on the original. Since I don't want to ruin anyone's reading
> pleasure nor to attract needless flames, I will start by saying that
> loyal fans of Niven and Pournelle may not want to read this.  OK?
 
I consider myself warned.
 
> "The Mote.." was a thoroughly mean-spirited book.
 
Oh my. Let's see how well you can back up this accusation.
 
> It was a good example of anti-semitism according to the strictly
> linguistic, or Bobby Fischer, definition, namely it was offensive and
> demeaning to Jews and Arabs alike.
 
 Oh, give me a break. Unless my memory fails me, there weren't any Jewish
characters in the book who were developed thoroughly enough to paint any
sort of offensive picture. Unless you're saying that that in itself is
anti-semetic?
 
 Horace Hussein Bury was a slimy individual who just happened to be an
Arab. Hey, welcome to the world of multiculturalism! If he'd been Greek,
would you argue that the book was offensive and demeaning to Greeks?
 
> It also had yet another example of Niven's quite extraordinary misogyny,
> which I don't think has been mentioned on the net.
 
 You must not have been here for very long.
 
> If a writer comes up with ONE alien species in which the females are
> non-sentient or non-intelligent, or in which the process of reproduction
> is fraught with catastrophic threats and dangers, one can say that it
> doesn't make sense scientifically but hey, neither does FTL travel, and
> this is what SF does.
 
 Or you can say that it DOES make sense scientifically, because it happens
quite often in the real world. Read a book on reproductive biology and look
at how many species have non-politically-correct methods of reproduction.
Really, someone should do something about those spiders. A clear case of
feminism taken much too far. And I'm sure you don't want to hear about the
male walruses and their harems.
 
> But if EVERY alien species this writer can find in his imagination has
> either profoundly defective females, great threats in child-bearing, or
> both, phrases like "deep-seated authorial neurosis" begin to come to
> mind.
 
 Hm, phrases like "good extrapolation from terrestrial biology" come to
_my_ mind. I don't know about Niven's psychological state, but if I were
somewhat mean-spirited myself, I might wonder about why _you_ are so
profoundly offended by species which don't reproduce in the same manner as
humans. Not that I would ever do this, mind you.
 
Jim Kasprzak
RPI
Troy, NY, USA
kasprj@rpi.edu
kasprzak@mts.rpi.edu
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:47:50 GMT
From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: THE GRIPPING HAND by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle
 
Alexandra_Haropulos.ADFMcLean_CSD@XEROX.COM writes:
> My problem with Niven/Pournelle, as evidenced in LUCIFER'S HAMMER and
> MOTE IN GOD'S EYE, is that they always manage to torture or
> torture/murder women in these books with a little too much loving detail.
> I believe I will take a miss on THE GRIPPING HAND.
 
  I disagree.  Having read ALL of Niven/Pournelle's collaborations and
quite a bit of Pournelle's solo work, I come to the conclusion that
EVERYBODY tends to buy the farm in messy fashion.  Men, women, and family
pets.  The Grim Reaper is not sexist, nor do they seem to write it that
way.
 
Jim Miller
Texas A&M University
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:57:20 GMT
From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: The Gripping Hand
 
BECKS@TAUNIVM.TAU.AC.IL writes:
> The appearance of the sequel to "The Mote in God's Eye" rouses me to
> comment on the original. Since I don't want to ruin anyone's reading
> pleasure nor to attract needless flames, I will start by saying that
> loyal fans of Niven and Pournelle may not want to read this.  OK?
>
> "The Mote.." was a thoroughly mean-spirited book.  It did have certain
> points of pathological interest. It was a good example of anti-semitism
> according to the strictly linguistic, or Bobby Fischer, definition,
> namely it was offensive and demeaning to Jews and Arabs alike.
 
 I don't see this.  Certainly it was not pervasive.  If you wish to
consider that the use of Horace Bury was an example of anti-semitism, I
think you take things much to far.  Neither Judaism or Islam was
criticized, Jews as a people were not attacked and considered inferior, nor
were Arabs.  Bury, though a scoundrel, was obviously a very intelligent
man.
 
> It also had yet another example of Niven's quite extraordinary misogyny,
> which I don't think has been mentioned on the net.  If a
 
  Well, having read very little of Niven alone, I can't comment to this.  I
can't say I've seen it in his collaborative works with Pournelle or Barnes,
though.
 
Jim Miller
Texas A&M University
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:48:08 GMT
From: wdw@math2.sma.usna.navy.MIL (Wm. Douglas Withers)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: THE GRIPPING HAND by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle
 
ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>...characters spend a lot of time lecturing each other about their beliefs
>on sex and morality (which may or may not be the author's) while the story
>sort of stands around in the corner waiting for its turn to do something.
>This is the equivalent of the scientist in many old pulp stories lecturing
>his companions on how his latest invention works.  I no not think this is
>the optimal way to inform the reader of the science (in the later) or of
>the beliefs of the characters (in the latter).
 
These passages may have a purpose beyond informing the reader of the
characters' beliefs.  Some people actually enjoy reading discussions of
ideas.  Such discussions may be written well, or written poorly, but it's
no sin to have them there.
 
Els Withers
wdw@math2.sma.usna.navy.mil
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 8 Jan 93 21:44:45 GMT
From: jroberts@morpheus.uwaterloo.ca (J. P. Robertson)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-written@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: The Gripping Hand
 
mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:
> Now, personally, I'm not convinced the trend she refers to in Niven's
> work exists, but arguing that a book is not an outrageously obvious
> example does not prove that it is no example at all.  Go dig up races in
> Niven's work that dispute the trend.  I seem to remember that the
> puppeteers are a counterexample.
 
O.K.  The obvious species to consider are the Kzinti and the Puppeteers.
The Kzinti evolved with both species sentient, however the males of the
species chose to breed in such a fashion that the females became
unintelligent.  [I can't recall where this tidbit came from, though it
might be from Man-Kzin Wars, which might not be canon.]  One must decide
for oneself how this reflects on the author, but the point is the
"impossible evolution" arguement does not hold.
 
Puppeteers reproduce in a rather complex fashion, as I recall.  I think it
was in Ringworld Engineers we learn that there are three sexes, one of
which is non-sentient.  Call the two sentients male and female.  The female
somehow implants an egg in the non-sentient, which is then fertilized by
the male.  I would suggest that this is a rather improbable method of
reproduction, but would not call it misogynistic.
 
Niven has had plenty of female characters who are not "stupid", or
otherwise inferior to his male characters.  Off the top of my head is the
main female in "Inconstant Moon", who caught on faster than the male, from
whose viewpoint the story was told.  Teela Brown was far from helpless,
though her luckiness may be a special case.  The female characters in Dream
Park were just as "effective" as the men, both in the sense of the story
itself, and the game they were playing.
 
Larry Niven is NOT a feminist author, but neither is he a misogynist
author.  IMHO, I would rather read him than any so-called feminist author,
and people who would criticize him in this fashion have a chip on their
shoulders.
 
Jeff Robertson
4B Systems Design Engineering
University of Waterloo
 
------------------------------
 
End of SF-LOVERS Digest
***********************
