"In an anonymous essay titled 'The Progress of Fiction as an Art', which appeared in the Westminster Review in 1853, the author...argued that art, like technology, progresses from more primitive to more sophisticated forms, and 'a scientific and somewhat sceptical age has no longer the power of believing in the marvels which delighted our ruder ancestors." (Cambridge Companion to Fantasy Literature edited by Edward James and Farah Mendlesohn)
So, according to this, previous to the 18th century fiction with fantastical elements was realistic because people believed in the fantastic. Later it didn't work anymore because only 'rubes' and 'primitives' believed in the fantastic. This viewpoint still holds much credence today in Anglo-American literary fiction - the modernists.
I find this insistence that fiction reflect our view of reality very interesting. Why is that so important? Can't fantasy literature - literature that doesn't reflect our view of reality - still convey other kinds of truth - emotional, moral, human? And what the heck's wrong with a little escapism anyway?
Sunday, August 31, 2014
A Rose from Old Terra by Don Sakers
A Rose from Old Terra
Don Sakers
2007
Speed-of-C Productions
Series: Scattered Worlds
www.scatteredworlds.com
Source: ILL - Red Wing Public Library. I heard about it sometime during my online peregrinations.
Reason I got it: Librarians in Space. I'm a librarian by vocation and avocation, and I'm also a science fiction aficionado. Mix the two, and I'll for darn sure at least give it a try. From the dedication, it looks like the author is/was a librarian as well.
Thoughts:
This book worked for me. I'd recommend and will be looking for other books in the series.
It's multiple points of view were deftly handled, and the characters felt like real people, even when you didn't get much more than a glimpse of them. They had motivations and their emotional stories made sense.
Sakers made good use of the slow reveal for a number of underlying plot points, which made for a shift in perspective at points in the story.
I enjoyed his method of avoiding excessive exposition by inserting page long primary source documents - interviews, advertisements, government announcements, etc. to explain points outside of the narrative while adding flavor to the world building. I tend to enjoy these types of interjections; they appeal to the information junkie in me.
I almost thoroughly approved of his gender politics; practically speaking, there weren't any. Women and men were just people. I didn't see any gender assigned roles, and members of both genders had agency, took action based on personal motivations and ethics, and propelled the plot (and plotting!) forward. The "almost" comes in in one pivotal scene near the end of the book. Now, I don't necessarily disagree with the author's overall point in the scene or the emotional reality of the character's crisis. However, the author could have written the dialog more carefully so it didn't echo the age-old sexist dilemma of career vs. man, and almost always choosing the man, because they wouldn't be happy otherwise. I don't think that's really what's going on in this story, but the phrase "It's you I want, not the Library" ripped me right out of the climactic moment and into sexism-fatigue.
The world-building was really good. The history and societies were intriguing, the technology simple enough to be mostly background and only rise to the top when needed for the plot, and the aliens interesting. Sakers' style made a fairly detailed universe seem everyday and simple, and yet complete
Don Sakers
2007
Speed-of-C Productions
Series: Scattered Worlds
www.scatteredworlds.com
Source: ILL - Red Wing Public Library. I heard about it sometime during my online peregrinations.
Reason I got it: Librarians in Space. I'm a librarian by vocation and avocation, and I'm also a science fiction aficionado. Mix the two, and I'll for darn sure at least give it a try. From the dedication, it looks like the author is/was a librarian as well.
Thoughts:
This book worked for me. I'd recommend and will be looking for other books in the series.
It's multiple points of view were deftly handled, and the characters felt like real people, even when you didn't get much more than a glimpse of them. They had motivations and their emotional stories made sense.
Sakers made good use of the slow reveal for a number of underlying plot points, which made for a shift in perspective at points in the story.
I enjoyed his method of avoiding excessive exposition by inserting page long primary source documents - interviews, advertisements, government announcements, etc. to explain points outside of the narrative while adding flavor to the world building. I tend to enjoy these types of interjections; they appeal to the information junkie in me.
I almost thoroughly approved of his gender politics; practically speaking, there weren't any. Women and men were just people. I didn't see any gender assigned roles, and members of both genders had agency, took action based on personal motivations and ethics, and propelled the plot (and plotting!) forward. The "almost" comes in in one pivotal scene near the end of the book. Now, I don't necessarily disagree with the author's overall point in the scene or the emotional reality of the character's crisis. However, the author could have written the dialog more carefully so it didn't echo the age-old sexist dilemma of career vs. man, and almost always choosing the man, because they wouldn't be happy otherwise. I don't think that's really what's going on in this story, but the phrase "It's you I want, not the Library" ripped me right out of the climactic moment and into sexism-fatigue.
The world-building was really good. The history and societies were intriguing, the technology simple enough to be mostly background and only rise to the top when needed for the plot, and the aliens interesting. Sakers' style made a fairly detailed universe seem everyday and simple, and yet complete
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)