Catherine Nemeth
asked
Lois McMaster Bujold:
Generally since the higher a person’s status the more they are able to get away with, was Ezar’s concern over Serg mostly about erratic and destructive decision making rather than his “personal hobbies” or was he concerned Serg would eventually move on to Vor women, causing a Vor revolt? Is there even a concept of human rights or are any rights seen only in the lord/subject relationship? And would that evolve?
Lois McMaster Bujold
Mostly Ezar was concerned over Serg's poor political nous, on all levels including the personal. "The personal is political" and all that.
There are quite a lot of rights variously embedded in the peculiar Barrayaran version of a feudal system, running in all directions like a network. Since everyone has some place in the net, at least in theory, human rights and feudal rights aren't really separable in this legal conception.
Keep in mind, "rights" are a shared fiction (Terry Pratchett had some cogent comments on that) which will last only while enough people with enough power believe they will, and are willing to work to make it so. In that, the Barrayaran system is not substantively different from any other.
Ta, L.
Mostly Ezar was concerned over Serg's poor political nous, on all levels including the personal. "The personal is political" and all that.
There are quite a lot of rights variously embedded in the peculiar Barrayaran version of a feudal system, running in all directions like a network. Since everyone has some place in the net, at least in theory, human rights and feudal rights aren't really separable in this legal conception.
Keep in mind, "rights" are a shared fiction (Terry Pratchett had some cogent comments on that) which will last only while enough people with enough power believe they will, and are willing to work to make it so. In that, the Barrayaran system is not substantively different from any other.
Ta, L.
More Answered Questions
Marti Dolata
asked
Lois McMaster Bujold:
I just read in Jo Walton's review of Falling Free that it was originally going to be the first volume of a trilogy. If this is true, would you care to comment on why that didn't happen, and what you had planned for the rest of the trilogy? This is not a plea for "more of the same", just a curiousity about what might have been. I've been a fan since the 80s and have been pretty happy about reading whatever write
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more