----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Date stephend999@yahoo.co.uk
recommend "The Handmaids Tale," which makes a good case for the rather sinister similarities between the hardcore left and the hardcore right.
I am intrigued by this. I've read the Handmaids Tale a few times now and I don't see it myself. I'm not disagreeing with you but I'd be interested in how you come to this reading.
OK. Through the flashback sequences to Offred's childhood and her indoctrination, we learn that her mother, the hardcore radical-feminist, actually had a very similar vision of utopia to that put forward by the hardcore radical Christians-- an image of women working together, away from the men, to develop a sisterhood for the raising of children, etc. Both sides also take similar stances on prostitution, adultery, etc. The indoctrination techniques in the story are actually startlingly similar to those used in feminist consciousness-raising groups as well. Basically one of the points Atwood seems to be making is that there are sinister similarities between the hardliners on both fronts, and raising the question of whether a feminist utopia would have been better than (or even different from) the Christian one shown in the book.
Neither am I as is painfully obvious ! Let me reprhase what I said. Primitive (I use the word very loosely) societies can be dangerous.
So can civilised ones. We take our lives in our hands any time we cross the street.
Life is often cheaper than in technological situations.
Erm, not true-- when you're in a tribe of thirty people in the Kalahari, it's a lot less easy to view your fellows' lives casually than when you live in a great big anonymous city.
t is not an illegitimate
manouvre for a writer of science fiction to utilise such societies in his or her work as long as the device is not over exploited.
Yes, but is it right for the writer to stereotype them? Contrast Chris Boucher's more mature take on a similar situation in the Doctor Who story "Face of Evil"
Taking females as plunder is (I think) fairly well documented in tribal warfare.
Actually, recent studies have suggested that it's been overreported; initially by colonial explorers looking for an excuse to take over the land from the locals (under the guise of protecting the poor innocent women), and later on by certain anthropologists with overly macho ideas about hunter-gatherers. It does tend to feature a lot in a certain sort of early European war saga, but again the current thinking is that this has less to do with reality and more to do with the ego of the writer :-).
I don't doubt it's been over reported, nor that it has been used for propaganda purposes. I would be surprised if it never happened though
Yes, but not often, and its continued appearance in pulp TV sci-fi propagates the notion that it was a common occurrance.
fertility of the primitives is declining so a
female
would be a valued commodity.
Actually, that depends too. Witness female abandonment in parts of China; in a generation or two, their fertility will be seriously impaired by the excess of males, but this doesn't stop families abandoning surplus daughters in favour of sons.
I'd be very surprised if daughters don't suddenly shoot up in value when scarcity becomes acute.
Yes, but to judge by what Elynne said elsewhere, it isn't always that pleasant for women when they do.
five minutes. The point I wanted to make was that it was not unreasonable for Meegat's civilisation to interpret the remnants of their science in religious terms. As I've said, cargo cults are well documented.
Yes, but remember, one of the reasons the cargo cults gained such sway in New Guinea etc. was because the colonialists made damn sure the locals didn't get much chance to find out how things really worked. Just because a society, or part of a society, initially treats science with religious awe doesn't mean they can't figure out how it works later on. Meegat continues to view technology with awe, even when she's had a pretty good look at how it works-- and as other people have said, it's a bit odd that nobody in her society thought of flicking a switch to see what happens.
To pick up on Neil's Haggard metaphors, neither do Quatermain et al.-- they wander into Rhodesia (sic) in search of gold. Similarly, the colonialist endeavour had a lot less to do with invasions, and more to do with looking for resources of various sorts. In Canada, for instance, the French and English didn't come charging in, gun down the natives and take their land-- they sent in a few people to get involved in the fur trade, then a few more, then a few more. That doesn't make Deliverance any less colonialist.
It's an inexact parallel to put it mildly. Avon and co. don't exactly engage in a sustained campaign of commercial penetration. They go there to rescue two strangers and come back to rescue Jenna. At no point are they looking for resources.
Neither were Alan Quatermain and company. They were looking either for a one-off shot at some treasure, a bit of excitement, or both.
It's a bit amazing that a story as pernicious as Deliverance has taken 23 years for it to be taken down.
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com