Poll

As I said, I will do a runoff if we have a tie.

And sorry about how it won't show at the top of the polls as #1. I cannot figure out why it was doing that to the polls last month and why it won't do it now.

I did tell it to put the most recent poll first, but it is ignoring me.

After reading The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress last year and getting very irritated by the misogyny in it, I don’t think I’ll be reading any other Heinlein anytime soon, so I’ll opt out of him here. I read and loved Babel-17 last year and I’m happy to see it getting votes, and I’ll be interested to see how people like it in this group. I’ve read and loved other Vonnegut novels, and I’ve had Sirens in my queue for a while, so I’m looking forward to that.

Anthony wrote: "After reading The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress last year and getting very irritated by the misogyny in it"

While I agree that RAH sounds misogynistic in his esp. earlier works, the funny thing is that at the time he was a progressive, like assuming women can take jobs/roles just beside men, that their sexuality shouldn't be suppressed, etc.

Though I appreciate that you are supporting women, Anthony, I am really confused by the misogyny/Heinlein remark. I realize he did not write women well, but he's just a reflection of his time, and he tried. I remember when I was in school, someone said this, I basically said this to a co-student. I didn't get it then, either.

But let me say something about the book in nominees this month,Have Space Suit—Will Travel, first. It's a juvenile (read YA) that may even have been written for the Boy Scouts of America's magazine. Lots of his stuff was. Farmer in the Sky and Time for the Stars even had Boy Scout troops in them. The main characters are (view spoiler)[ a teenage boy, a prepubescent girl that the teenage boy pretty much treats as an equal or even in charge after she proves herself, and a female-seeming alien. (hide spoiler)] So you are unlikely to be too offended by any sexism there. I suppose, in the first chapter, you might have a problem with (view spoiler)[the mom, but what teenaged boy doesn't disagree with his mom and see her in his mind just Kip sees his? (hide spoiler)] Probably lots.

But back to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. First, I admit that it is one of my "comfort" books that I retreat to in hard times. Yes, (off the top of my head) there's a comment about (view spoiler)[Manuel telling his wife, because she's his wife and they are in bed, something he shouldn't have (and he shouldn't have). And there's a comment about dark skinned women wearing black (which I thought was stupid even at the time.) (hide spoiler)] But it's just the society Heinlein was raised in shining through.
(view spoiler)[Why did he chose to make a comment about what black women would wear when he obviously had no idea? (hide spoiler)] Worldbuilding. The bit about (view spoiler)[ most women not having the muscle to handle a laser drill and the women being sent to the drill site because the men are cheered up by them being there, (hide spoiler)] are those bothering you? Because they are probably both true.

Or are you talking about (view spoiler)[the scarcity of women making them a sexual objects? And valuable, therefore not risked? Because I think that puts them in charge of a society and not a commodity. Does it bother you that they are showing off their sexuality they way they do and that the men appreciate it the way they do? (hide spoiler)] Worldbuilding.

It's worse today. In American society, we were moving away from stereotypical treatment of many things. But now, we are reversing our progress. Example: Princesses are the epitome of girl-child dreams, apparently, and I see that as a terrible regression, much worse than anything in any Heinlein book.

I know I will never change your mind about Heinlein, and he does portray women poorly, not so much in Have Space Suit—Will Travel but in others. But HE thinks he is treating them properly, not disrespectfully. I think he is just representative of his time.

A worse example--I'm in another group which is reading Dune right now and they are not just hating (view spoiler)[ the Harkonnens, who, even back then, were bad caricatures of villains with characteristics of homosexuality and being fat used as proof of evil (hide spoiler)] They are hating everyone in the book except Stilgar and Chani. They are angry, for example, because (view spoiler)[some character called Shadout Mapes a "creature" (which seems to me shorthand for the fact that she seemed strange to the newcomers) and because they didn't like the way Duke Leto looked at the Lady Jessica. (hide spoiler)] It's just worldbuilding. Maybe not the way it would be done today, but it's just worldbuilding.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just saying that we all just have to recognize that authors are the product of their times. We need to appreciate their art despite this. Otherwise, we might as well only read current bestsellers. And in particular, we have to accept characters as fitting into the overall worldbuilding. As we read older Hugo and Nebula books, we will find many writers who don't portray women and minorities as they would be portrayed today. Obviously, Lovecraft is a horrible example of early 20th century prejudice. But we should read these authors anyway and be happy that society (western society anyway) has progressed towards equality the way is has.

P.S. I am pretty indifferent to the renaming of awards. So these guys were jerks. Let's not get carried away, people. And I agree Cosby should be in jail even if only a few of the allegations are true, so please, let's not start in with that.

Discuss.

A great rant, Kate! I guess we should move it to a separate thread, titled "Aging of SFF and what do you feel about it" Will you copy-paste your post there? (if yes then use "edit post" to open the text with all links and spoilers

well, I just got told I was wrong in another group (I copied this into that group where they are reading Dune) and they referred me to this article, which I have only skimmed so far, but which might be what I was actually trying to say . . .
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertain...

As far as putting this discussion in its own thread . . . sure, if you want. Do you want to do it, or do you want me to? I won't be able to do it for a few hours. But keep what I just posted in message 6, also, if you do start the new thread now.

Relative to Moon...Mistress, there were more than a couple “jokes” about rape —including those made by a woman — that made me particularly squeamish, and I don’t think that in and of itself was an indicator of the times. I am indeed sensitive to those sorts of things in particular.

And regarding Dune, the major point I agree with is Herbert’s depiction of homosexuality as something depraved and evil, especially after learning that Herbert all but disowned his gay son.

If I'm reading that article right, I have to agree. With any work or author, you have to put it in context of the time and circumstances, and we learn nothing from avoiding or cursing them. Not only that, but Suppressing or boycotting such works or authors smacks of censorship. Should we ban Mein Kampf or should we read it as a learning experience, in the proper context? Today we read 50's and 60's books where the evildoers are Communists; we laugh and think about it as archaic, but that attitude killed millions of innocents. It was not ok that my dad rejoiced when MLK was shot, although he was a product of 40's and 50's racist America. It sure made me look at him in a different light, but he was still my dad. Every book should be a learning opportunity.

I’m not talking about banning or censoring anyone, to be clear. I am simply being responsible for the fact that i find Heinlein’s depiction of women to be problematic enough that it makes me too unhappy and uncomfortable to want to read more of his work. Regardless of the time he was writing in, there are too many books I can read that don’t make me unhappy in that particular way for me to devote time to his work.

Yeah, I get you, but there are plenty of viewpoints that would take it to that extreme. I read a lot of Heinlein in college but never read the juveniles. When I read Spacesuit earlier this year, I just found it to be like watching an old black & white episode of Leave It To Beaver. Imaginative, perhaps, but clunky and really pretty bad, even in comparison to other contemporary writers. I might read a couple of the others, but if they're the same, I feel no need to finish the series. But I'm saying that more because of the writing than the sexism; maybe I put it into context automatically, after reading about the book in preparation for reading it.

After reading this article, I am not sure that the phrase I used, "reflection of his time" was really what I meant. Or what the author of the Atlantic article thinks I meant. I certainly don't mean what the the author seems to say I do. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertain...

I certainly don't want to "make these creators irrelevant" as he claims the phrase does. I really love Heinlein and I really like Dune. I think what the last two paragraphs of the article say is perfect:

The answer is that we should still read Orwell not despite the sexism, but in part because of it. The fact that 1984 uses a Manic Pixie Dream Girl doesn't make it helplessly of its time—MPDGs show up in our contemporary culture with a wearying consistency. Being attentive to Orwell's sexism is a way to be attentive to ours; it makes 1984 more relevant, not less. For example, in the book, the ultimate triumph of totalitarianism is that Winston and Julia's love fails. You could read that as saying that all love, everywhere, is crushed by the power of the absolute state. But you could also see it as a comment on Winston and Julia's relationship, which is unreal insofar as Julia is treated as a tool for Winston's happiness, rather than a person in her own right. Sexism prevents their love affair from being a real love affair, which is why the state can break it apart. From that perspective, 1984 can be read as an analysis of how totalitarianism and sexism are intertwined—and maybe, maybe, Orwell meant to be read that way.

None of this is to deny the importance of historical context. Of course it would be silly to dismiss Jane Austen as sexist because her female characters look to men for financial security rather than leaning in to become CEOs. But one important historical context is that inequities of race, gender, and class (to name just three) have been around for a very long time, and aren't going anywhere. When creators address those issues, whether well or poorly, they are speaking to us. It's a lot more respectful to argue with them than it is to pretend we have evolved past the need for ears.

I guess I kind of feel that the author is splitting hairs when he distinguishes the phrase "product of its time" from his explanation the last two paragraphs of his piece above. But whatever--maybe it's just lazy writing. I can certainly go with the last two paragraphs and say, "Yeah!" Next time I will explain better.

Plus, I think we have gotten even worse in our sexism. Just because it's a "reverse" harem book doesn't necessarily make it more enlightened than porn with multiple women written for men. I'm not making value judgments here, I'm just saying . . .

Plus, gruesome descriptions in the writing of crime novels, etc., getting really bad sometimes. But nobody seems to complain about that in the same conversation as sexism and racism . . .

Z. let's just leave this thread here. It is probably winding up, anyway.

And Anthony. I absolutely agree with you about not bothering to read something that makes you unhappy and uncomfortable. That's pretty much how I am feeling about Who Fears Death==so probably not continuing.

Ironic that I suggested the month's theme, but the top three books I've all read. I won't hesitate to comment, but I will likely read the next three on the list that I haven't read as substitutes/buddy reads. That would be The Lathe of Heaven, The Accidental Time Machine & Flow My Tears. I also found Kesrith at the library, but I'll probably knock that out before December.

I have the accidental time machine. Whether I will have time to read it is another question as I am overcommitted for December already.

I'm sorry you didn't get any new-to-you books, Allan