ESR on SF and literary penis envy
Er, sorry, I guess that was literary STATUS envy. Although considering the predominantly female and low-testosterone gamma male makeup of the other side, either description would serve equally well. In any event, ESR addresses the Blue SF/Pink SF divide:
In response to a few of the various statements and questions raised:
I’ve been aware for some time of a culture war simmering in the SF world. And trying to ignore it, as I believed it was largely irrelevant to any of my concerns and I have friends on both sides of the divide. Recently, for a number of reasons I may go into in a later post, I’ve been forced to take a closer look at it. And now I’m going to have to weigh in, because it seems to me that the side I might otherwise be most sympathetic to has made a rather basic error in its analysis. That error bears on something I do very much care about, which is the health of the SF genre as a whole.It's interesting to see ESR weigh in on this, not only because he is an unusually intelligent individual, but as he says, he has sympathies on both sides of the divide. And, I would suspect, competing natural inclinations as well. But it was a little surprising to see him conclude that he tended to be more sympathetic to the side of evilly Evil. As the title of his post suggests, his observation is that the root cause of the divide is not political, but rather literary:
Both sides in this war believe they’re fighting about politics. I consider this evaluation a serious mistake by at least one of the sides.
On the one hand, you have a faction that is broadly left-wing in its politics and believes it has a mission to purge SF of authors who are reactionary, racist, sexist et weary cetera.... On the other hand, you have a faction that is broadly conservative or libertarian in its politics. Its members deny, mostly truthfully, being the bad things the Rabbits accuse them of.
Alas, I cannot join the Evil League of Evil, for I believe they have made the same mistake as the Rabbits; they have mistaken accident for essence. The problem with the Rabbits is not that left-wing politics is dessicating and poisoning their fiction. While I have made the case elsewhere that SF is libertarian at its core, it nevertheless remains possible to write left-wing message SF that is readable, enjoyable, and of high quality – Iain Banks’s Culture novels leap to mind as recent examples, and we can refer back to vintage classics such as Pohl & Kornbluth’s The Space Merchants for confirmation. Nor, I think, is the failure of Rabbit fiction to engage most SF fans and potential fans mainly down to its politics; I think the Evil League is prone to overestimate the popular appeal of their particular positions here.Of course the Evil League of Evil cannot lose. Not with me as its Supreme Dark Lord! I have studied the lessons of my many failed predecessors well and have subsequently implemented the following protocols:
No, I judge that what is dessicating and poisoning the Rabbit version of SF is something distinct from left-wing political slant but co-morbid with it: colonization by English majors and the rise of literary status envy as a significant shaping force in the field.
This is a development that’s easy to mistake for a political one because of the accidental fact that most university humanities departments have, over the last sixty years or so, become extreme-left political monocultures. But, in the language of epidemiology, I believe the politics is a marker for the actual disease rather than the pathogen itself. And it’s no use to fight the marker organism rather than the actual pathogen....
The Evil League of Evil is fighting the wrong war in the wrong way. To truly crush the Rabbits, they should be talking less about politics and more about what has been best and most noble in the traditions of the SF genre itself. I think a lot of fans know there is something fatally gone missing in the Rabbit version of science fiction; what they lack is the language to describe and demand it. That being said, in the long run, I don’t think the Evil League of Evil can lose.
- Installed a magical ground-to-air defense system called IRON CLAW that will grab, pull down, and dismember any airborne creature large enough to carry a hobbit.
- Scheduled rotating squads of crack guards, each including at least one experienced battlemage, to be positioned outside the side door to Mount Doom. Also hired new Head of Security after ordering the previous one thrown into the lava flowing inside the aforementioned mountain.
- Established an operation called HERODSIX that tracks global birth data and passes it on to a team of nutritionists who will arrange to feed abortifacients to any pregnant woman who has previously given birth to six sons.
- Constructed a well-guarded underground facility in which my undead, unkillable warriors are created. Instead of carting a heavy, rune-inscribed iron cauldron around to every prospective battlefield, the Evil League of Evil is paying top silver for freshly killed corpses in good condition, with a bonus for each one over 6'4".
- Dismantled and reassembled the four thrones at Cair Laugharne. I'm looking forward to seeing the little bastards park their bony little arses on them as foretold now that they've been made into gold-plated wooden stakes.
- Armored the air intakes to my mighty mountain fortress, Gheddorodim, with plasma shields capable of deflecting the most powerful energy-torpedo.
- Implemented DOUBLE-TAP, a protocol which includes bans on monologuing, evil cackling, unauthorized torture, and extended prisoner-taunting by all lieutenants and minions of rank E6 or higher. It also lays out specific policies concerning proper confirmations of death (or True Death in the case of the undead), and corpse disposal. All employees of the Evil League of Evil who fail to abide by the protocol will themselves be subject to DOUBLE-TAP.
- Also, at the request of Generalissimo Xcrucifix, we now have cookies. Chocolate Chip and Oatmeal Butterscotch. I'm not convinced this actually enhances our security, but I don't see how it harms it either.
- Political. This is obvious. We tend to be center-to-right, they tend to be left-to-extreme left.
- Literary. They tend to be focused on style, followed by ideological concerns regarding diversity and social justice. While our best stylists, Gene Wolfe and John C. Wright, are better than theirs, it's true that they tend to be more skilled when it comes to pure prose. As the International Lord of Hate has frequently pointed out, we are focused on story, story, story, followed by characters, followed by worldbuilding and/or ideas.
- Religious. We tend to be either religious or religion-friendly seculars. They tend to range from goddess-worshipping Unitarians to rabid anti-theists. Even the atheists in our midst are more comfortable with religion in their SF/F than their most religious members.
- Socio-sexual. We tend to be men of Delta rank or higher. They tend to be women, feminized Gamma males, or Omega males. Our female members possess more of the masculine virtues of courage and honor than most of their men.
- Experiential. We tend to come from worlds outside of academia and education. We write and we work real jobs that are totally unrelated to writing. They mostly write, and write about writing, and teach, quite often about writing. I expect their academic majors were mostly English, with the occasional STEM degree, while ours are from a much broader spectrum. For example, by training, John is a lawyer, Larry is an accountant, and I am an economist. And ironically, for all their politically correct enthusiasm for diversity, we are probably more ethnically and linguistically diverse.
In response to a few of the various statements and questions raised:
- I would never deny that it remains possible to write left-wing message SF that is readable, enjoyable, and of high quality. That is true. But I would argue that the Culture novels are an excellent example of how the left-wing messages tend to harm, rather than enhance, the fiction. It's not an accident that nothing interesting ever happens in the Culture (or in the Federation), or that in order to simply tell a story, it is necessary to leave the left-wing utopia and go in search of adventure elsewhere. Just as the Left has only one joke (you know that guy there, he's stupid, isn't he?) it has only one story, that of the struggle of the transition of an entity, individual or collective, from Badthink to Goodthink. They don't tell stories, they tell Very Important Lessons.
- How do you separate real writers from wannabes with deep pockets? Who cares? Let everyone write. Publish them all and let Amazon sort them out. SFWA was already irrelevant because its reason for existence was subverted. It was captured by the mainstream publishers long ago, as illustrated by its lining up against Amazon on Hatchette's behalf.
- The term "rabbit" actually comes from E.O. Wilson's ecological r/K selection theory. I explained it in a post called Digging Out the Rabbit People. It is derogatory; it is also very apt. More importantly, it's always fun to be able to throw in the occasional Lapine phrase from Watership Down.
- Contra Mr. Andrew Marston of Marshfield, MA's claims, I do sell books. I'm no bestseller, to be sure but my books usually sell around 5,000 copies apiece. Not enough to live on, especially when it takes me two years to write one, but not bad for a hobby. My bestselling book sold between 35,000 and 40,000 copies. My bestselling game sold over six million copies. And I have never had a trust fund.
- The idea that the existence of the "Gamma Rabbit" t-shirt is evidence that the rabbits have a sense of humor about themselves indicates an insufficient understanding of the gamma mentality and the gamma male's need to spin the narrative in his favor. It's little more credible than Scalzi's claims that he found my mocking his inept satire and exposure of his self-inflating traffic claims to be "adorable".
There are thirteen identifiable markers of the membership of the tribe of Troglodytes:
1. Theologically, they are atheist and agnostic, or at least laiacist.
2. In Metaphysics, they are nihilist. They hold the universe to have no innate meaning.
3. In Epistemology, they are subjectivists and (ironically) empiricists.
4. In Ontology, they are materialists. They believe minds are epiphenomena of matter.
5. In Logic, they are polylogists. They believe each race and both genders possesses unique and exclusive rules of logic.
6. In Aesthetics, they glorify the ugly and destroy beauty.
7. In Ethics, they are Gnostics. Whatever we call good, they call evil, and whatever we call evil, they call good.
8. In Politics, they are statists, and tacitly totalitarian. They want arbitrary power rather than law and order.
9. In Economics, they are socialist. They want the law of supply and demand to vanish softly away.
10. In Semantics, they are nominalists. They hold words to have no innate meaning.
11. In their psychological stance, they are sadists.
12. In their psychopathology, they are suicidal. They don’t want to live, they want you to die.
13. Emotionally, they are infantile. The emotion that governs them is envy.
Now, these are rough generalizations only, and no one member of the movement believes all these points, and, being a strongly anti-intellectual and pro-irrational bent, few of them even know what these big words mean. Some of these points contradict each other. That matters nothing to them. Logic is not their strong suit.
Labels: ELoE, rabbitology, SFWA






106 Comments:
i like the juxtaposition of this article with the title of the previous one:
It's little more credible than Scalzi's claims that he found my mocking his inept satire and exposure of his self-inflating traffic claims to be "adorable".
...
Well, he IS pretty cute
They tend to be women, feminized Gamma males, or Omega males.
Or Lambdas.
While he's probably right about the literary divide, I think he's too quick to name politics as a symptom rather than a cause (and I don't think it's an "accident" that the universities have shifted hard-left). The rabbits aren't purging people who lack humanities degrees; they're purging people for having unacceptable political beliefs or belonging to the wrong groups.
Ask yourself this: let's say an author came along who was a black/Amerind transsexual high-school dropout, whose writing was boring and violated all their English-major style sensibilities, but he got published anyway because his left-wing family connections got him a commission from the Soros Foundation to write SF. Would the rabbits scorn this person for being on the other side of the literary divide; or would they lionize him, name his bad grammar and faulty style "authenticity," and do everything possible to give him awards?
To his last point, I can't speak to other SF-related blogs and forums, but here at VP we do talk a lot about the "best and most noble in the traditions of the SF genre." Thanks to this blog, I have a longer list of classic SF to read than I'll probably ever catch up on.
Haven't read ESR's article yet, but a lot of the influx comes not from the literati or creative writing workshoppers, but from the pervy romance stories, all the vampire/werewolf/other stuff. (I actually think a couple of SF works from literary writers have been some of the more interesting this dead decade or two. But I wouldn't call them pink SF.)
For a successful example in SF, Bujold in her Vorkosigan books does a cracking job at (genre) characters and setting (and dialogue, esp. comic), then uses it for what is in retrospect mostly pink or white knighting stories. She's also very good at pacing these stories. Still pink.
If any advice is needed or desired, I think blue SF writers usually do a good job at story and setting, but should work harder at creating interesting, lively, engaging genre characters that you just want to spend more time with.
They don't tell stories, they tell Very Important Lessons.
Exactly, and this demonstrates why ESR is wrong about the rabbits' primary motivation being literary rather than political. The political is what motivates them, their literary pomposity is merely the tool they employ.
cailcorishev, good point.
"The political is what motivates them, their literary pomposity is merely the tool they employ."
It's funny to read on one hand their complaints about simplistic stories and how we need to show that gays, traitors, etc are the actual heroes in all their complexities, and on the other hand then read the praised yet extremely stupid didactic stories bashing religious white men, conniving villains to a man. Twist ending!
Take a book like The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Is it at all possible to take such moronic ultra-pink trash seriously? Yet you see it mentioned without approbation in London Review of Books and suchlike.
"The Evil League of Evil"
Count me in. Where do I sign up?
oh look... rabbity authors don't understand the economics of amazon's position.
Shocking.
> Alas, I cannot join the Evil League of Evil,
Ah, how precious. ESR thinks he'll have any say in the matter. His turn to be purged for not being sufficiently in line with current trends will come soon enough. Then he be grouped with the Evil League of Evil, whether he wants it or not.
Precisely, James Dixon.
Now that I've read ESR's article, I can't say I really agree with him. True, there's a lot of unenthusing literary fiction out there, but characterization is not what's wrong with SF today. As an SF writer, aim to make your characters -- characters in your already interesting story and setting -- as engaging as those of, say, Heinlein, Card, or indeed Bujold. This is not an extremely high bar to clear! But it's seldom achieved. If you do, you will be telling better, more interesting stories and your work will sell the better for it.
Your stories will furthermore beat hollow the inane gaseous Very Important ramblings of transadvocates.
Seems to me the literary aspect is but the communication vehicle. He's wrong here; " I believe the politics is a marker for the actual disease rather than the pathogen itself." It's the political transferance which has gotten us here. Literary status envy is not new to SFF so how can it be the culprit?
The reason the “pink” side will eventually lose is they are trying to push characteristics and norms onto humanity that aren’t real. People, regular Joe Smoes just like me, can’t relate to Pink SF because they badly miss what it means to be human, they have bought into a load of bunk and are peddling it in their books and people can’t relate to it. When you start trying to remove “binary gender norms” you are not going to write stories the vast majority of people can relate to and thus, you aren’t going to sell a lot of books.
I think where ESR goes wrong is he misses the fact that what is wrong with pink SF isn’t that it clashes with the “deep norms of SF”, what screws up pink SF is it clashes with the deep norms of humanity.
ESR thinks he'll have any say in the matter. His turn to be purged for not being sufficiently in line with current trends will come soon enough.
True. This article alone will have ruffled enough feathers to make some rabbits think to themselves, "Maybe not today, but someday, we'll get you too for this insult." They won't forget, and when it's his turn, all his friends and sympathies for their side will matter naught.
I am a bit disappointed in ESR here... he appears to be claiming that the Evil League of Evil is missing the point by not pointing out that the Rabbits aren't actually writing sci fi. But Vox has written extensively on that very subject... pointing out that the Rabbits are writing romance in space.
Ah, how precious. ESR thinks he'll have any say in the matter. His turn to be purged for not being sufficiently in line with current trends will come soon enough. Then he be grouped with the Evil League of Evil, whether he wants it or not.
Perhaps, but I expect him to be embraced by some of the rabbits. Scalzi for one, is likely to accept (or pretend to accept) ESR's critique because it provides a convenient excuse to say "See, it's not our politics, it's not our Very Important Message that cause us to to fail and be ridiculed, it's the delivery method or even the individual messenger". This is a time-honored tradition in those parts. How many times have you heard some variation on "Socialism would work if the right people were in charge" or "People haven't accepted our position because our messaging/spin isn't up to the task"? Don't be surprised to see calls in the warren along the lines of "our writing needs to be more 'accessible'" or "more down-to-earth" to appeal to a broader audience than those few, those unhappy few at the helm of their literary warren.
Nate--
I went through this vigioursly with some authors on Whatever. They are probably econically stunted. The Bookscan numbers don't like - fiction, trade paperbacks, and the genre are all in declining sales. They refuse to answer the question posed along the lines of "do you refrain from buying books when a favorite author doesn't have something new to buy". The answer is, of course not. Which demonstrates that Amazon's core principle - that authors are somewhat fungible with dedicated readers - is obviously true.
Some readers on other blogs are convinced that authors help other authors sell other books and it's generated new sales. The numbers don't lie - this can't be true, there are no new net sales. It causes them much grief to live in a zero-sum environment, where each sale they or a favorite author gets is a sale that another cannot get. In a land of flat or declining unit and dollar sales, there is no other truth that is relevant, or more hotly denied. In their world the industry and the genre can be contracting, but favorite authors selling more books is somehow not taking sales from other authors.
I think he is wrong in that the problems with the genre can be worked out with civil discussion and that we are making the same mistakes the pink shirts are.
Look guys - I don't give a chit about your politics. I just want something to read when I am on the crapper taking a dump that will entertain me. I don't want to be lectured, preached at, scolded, emasculated, or otherwise orated, pontificated and bloviated at. I just want a good story.
As it is all I am getting is ass wipe - and I can't even do that if the story is on an e-reader. (Well I can, but I am not a Newfie...)
dh... they are a bunch of english lit majors. If they were good at math... they would be engineers... and they'd have actual jobs.
"Perhaps, but I expect him to be embraced by some of the rabbits. Scalzi for one, is likely to accept (or pretend to accept) ESR's critique because it provides a convenient excuse to say "See, it's not our politics, it's not our Very Important Message that cause us to to fail and be ridiculed, it's the delivery method or even the individual messenger" "
I agree Scalzi is likely to accept ESR's take better than others... but not for the reasons you stated. Scalzi has more of a survival instinct and a better notion of the actual lay of the land than the vast majority of the Rabbits. He knows there is a giant awakening and he going to try to walk the line all the way.
In a contracting economy it's not surprising book sales are dropping. I can imagine what the sales of a Correia, Wright, Vox, too, would be in flourishing times. I care not for a term like 'Darwinian' but, you got to admit, the accepted meaning of such a term these days does describe the situation where the best of the best are doing well and a few others are getting by. I know full well the belt tightening these days as every price of about everything keeps going up. That was the prime reason I did not invest in a vote at Loncon this year, though I wanted to.
You would think, and maybe crashing sales figures for the pink stuff is the canary in the mines, that those writers would understand that once you've read one pink sf you've probably read them all. Thats one reason I can enjoy a novel series to a point [the Ghost series by Moeller comes to mind...mostly harmless escapism to keep from thinking too much about the death of America] but after 3 or 4 the cleverness becomes too easy to anticipate and the enjoyment is lessened. Compare that to a JC Wright peice or Correia, or Vox and the rogue legion of Amor. I never expected Nemesis and such a through and interesting look into Agent Franks. Can't wait now for the day Franks actually joins the MHI group from Alabama. I suspect Franks may be done TDY to them from the bureau. Or, just get pissed and jump ship for the sunny and humid South.
The reader wants to be surprised every so often and not beaten to death by a repeating formula, or, preached at too often. Entertain me! I've got enough to worry about in the real world.
dh... they are a bunch of english lit majors. If they were good at math... they would be engineers... and they'd have actual jobs.
As a guy with degrees in English, I really want to argue here....
But since I work in an English Dept at a college, where I am the lone island of sanity surrounded by a sea of Marxists (who literally claim to be so)....
I guess I will just shake my head and thank God that both of my sons are more interested in math, computers, and robots.
I think Evil League of Evil t-shirts would be great.
Especially if people started wearing them to cons.
"I think Evil League of Evil t-shirts would be great.
Especially if people started wearing them to cons."
Aye. From marketing / branding perspective the Rabbits have totally gotten their asses kicked. Everyone wants to be associated with something called the Evil League of Evil. Especially Sci Fi fans.
We all love Vader. No one cares about Luke.
I think Evil League of Evil t-shirts would be great.
Would the logo include crossed Abominations?
it nevertheless remains possible to write left-wing message SF that is readable, enjoyable, and of high quality – Iain Banks’s Culture novels leap to mind as recent examples, and we can refer back to vintage classics such as Pohl & Kornbluth’s The Space Merchants for confirmation.
I really doubt it. And The Space Merchants is hardly a left-wing message piece.
Nate - From marketing / branding perspective the Rabbits have totally gotten their asses kicked.
No surprise, with Larry Correia on board. His Monster Hunter International patch is excellent marketing.
Speaking of which, are there any patch/flag/crest/etc designs for the Evil League of Evil? John C Wright had one on his blog, but I think it was taken from HYDRA or something.
We all love Vader. No one cares about Luke.
The rabbits strike me more like C-3PO than Luke. But, yeah.
"Would the logo include crossed Abominations?"
I was thinking a St Andrews Cross with black background and a big red flaming X.
Speaking of which, are there any patch/flag/crest/etc designs for the Evil League of Evil? John C Wright had one on his blog, but I think it was taken from HYDRA
I have instructed my minions accordingly.
I was thinking a St Andrews Cross with black background and a big red flaming X.
That would work, but there should be some nod to Correia...perhaps the MHI patch at the center of the cross
we could go with a giant smiley face with devil horns
Another significant difference: our side has the ability to write intelligently on other subjects besides SF/F. Joel Rosenberg wrote the book on Concealed Carry in Minnesota (literally, I have a copy). I assume John Wright wrote legal arguments as an attorney. And, of course, the Return of the Great Depression. Do Pink SF/F authors write outside the genre? Not write well, but write at all?
Perhaps a small Gamma rabbit in a crosshairs off to the side.
That's the MHI patch I was referring to
VoxDay: "Publish them all and let Amazon sort them out."
Ha! Brilliant.
Delightful post. Both amusing and instructive. ;-)
ESR just doesn't want the fight to be about politics, so he comes up with this "the whole problem is their English majors" nonsense. No, the problem is the driving force behind Pink Rabittism is cultural Marxism. They other point, is they'd rather drive SF into the ground and destroy racism/sexism/bigotry in SF, then give up the "struggle". That you have a small number of "reasonable" liberals/leftists is irrelevant. The reasonable liberals e never effectively fight the Marxists, they usually just weaken the anti-Marxists by advising “Moderation” and chanting “Why can’t we all get along?” at every opportunity. ESR is just the Kerensky of SF.
While he's probably right about the literary divide, I think he's too quick to name politics as a symptom rather than a cause (and I don't think it's an "accident" that the universities have shifted hard-left). The rabbits aren't purging people who lack humanities degrees; they're purging people for having unacceptable political beliefs or belonging to the wrong groups.
You could also make the case that both politics and literary pretensions are symptoms of the true root cause; r-selected people with herd instinct and poor self-esteem use any and all means necessary to create for themselves intangible positional goods to prop up their lack of accomplishment and fear of failure.
I mean, if he's going to try and peel back a layer of the onion, he might as well peel it all the way back.
It also bears noting that a big part of the divide between the two is that there's the Evil League of Evil, who are evil presumably for wanting to write and read good stories with some semblance of plausibility, and then there's the group who, however tacitly, is accommodating of pedophiles and deviants of just about every stripe, an accommodation that bleeds into their work to a horrifying degree.
Everything else is simply dithering over abstractions.
Hehe, that list reminded me of a great superhero novel from a few years ago, "Soon I Will Be Invincible". One of the book's two narratives is from the POV of supervillain Dr Impossible who suffers from Malign Hypercognition Disorder ("evil genius" syndrome). Great stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soon_I_Will_Be_Invincible
Back to the T-shirt, I think whatever the ELOE's (ELE's?) logo is, it should include a bloodied rabbit being crushed at the bottom.
2. In Metaphysics, they are nihilist. They hold the universe to have no innate meaning.
Many of them will deceptively tell you that there is meaning in the universe, it's just that you have to make up your own meaning in life. But this is effectively the same thing as saying there is no meaning at all.
What of "The Evil League of Anti-Evil"?
Should explode some rabbit skulls (can't say brains as that wouldn't be possible for their obvious lack of and/or enslaved dysfunction).
Many of them will deceptively tell you that there is meaning in the universe, it's just that you have to make up your own meaning in life. But this is effectively the same thing as saying there is no meaning at all.
I've noticed this. It's almost as if they believe good marketing trumps superior engineering...a kind of form over substance thing.
The Official Unofficial T-Shirt
> It's almost as if they believe good marketing trumps superior engineering...a kind of form over substance thing.
Hasn't Microsoft been demonstrating that there's a degree of truth in that for almost 30 years?
"I think where ESR goes wrong is he misses the fact that what is wrong with pink SF isn’t that it clashes with the “deep norms of SF”, what screws up pink SF is it clashes with the deep norms of humanity."
I believe this to be correct. The words you write can't change what is fundamentally human. I was thinking about this last night. I was wondering about what would happen to the human subconscious after all the skewering of the classic archetypes. If we dream in the same archetypes we find in stories, what happens when the warrior woman rescuing humanity has replaced the sacrificial warrior male? Will our subconscious accept this? What will this do to Christ imagery, for example? Because humans are wired to accept the world a certain way, will we all end up neurotic or loony or confused if we continue skewering the archetypes? Jung, in his day (he was born more than 100 yrs ago), found that to be true already. There was a reason why he was rabidly anti-feminist and believed homosexuality was a mental illness. As a therapist, he saw the effects of modernity on the human soul a long time ago.
i would like a uniform for formal occasions. something retro from WW1 would be timely.
This happens ALL the time...
I come here...
I read "Evil League of Evil"...
And think ...
WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THAT!!!!
I tend to distill them down to one thing. They're clowns.
cheddarman - i would like a uniform for formal occasions. something retro from WW1 would be timely.
Only if it comes with a pickelhaube.
You could also make the case that both politics and literary pretensions are symptoms of the true root cause; r-selected people with herd instinct and poor self-esteem use any and all means necessary to create for themselves intangible positional goods to prop up their lack of accomplishment and fear of failure.
Bingo. Personally I don't think you can really separate "politics" from the root rabbit mentality. Call it a symptom if you want, but I just don't think it's possible to have rabbits with fundamentally different politics.
we could go with a giant smiley face with devil horns
Not unless you wish to run afoul of the Patent Office.
Hasn't Microsoft been demonstrating that there's a degree of truth in that for almost 30 years?
The Evil League of Evil prefers Linux and will be migrating to Tails.
Loki, you have experience with this kind of thing. Under what banner do your Jotun minions march?
Porky for the win!
The Evil League of Evil prefers Linux
Given the recent JavaScript Male posting over on Roissy, you could just say ELoE prefers operating systems and the other side can keep their sidewalk chalk and never know the difference. Don't they maintain that if it isn't written in long hand with a pencil and over-chewed eraser, in PJs or sweat pants, lying on your stomach in bed, can it really considered literature? I think they grandfather in quill pens and give points for using a paintbrush in the author's own blood, but if you can't cross your ankles over your bum and chew your eraser as you dream of what the handsome scary man will do when he has his way with you - ahem, your character, it just doesn't count as literature, you know.
> The Evil League of Evil prefers Linux and will be migrating to Tails.
Well, of course. That goes without saying. For reasons best covered by Steve.
Hah, your security protocols are so full of loopholes, Vox, it is a wonder you have not thrice over been destroyed, sealed away, and released only to be destroyed again by some wild-haired upstart with a sword twice his size.
If you ask nicely, however, I will be happy to shew you a few--to reserve the pleasure of destroying you unto myself should you grow proud and try to challenge me, of course.
Loki, you have experience with this kind of thing. Under what banner do your Jotun minions march?
I have no jotun minions. They perform most poorly outside of the odd trip to the Elder-Thing ruins under the ice sheet in Antarctica. Then they return, and every third word is "decadent", and I weary of it and slay them.
They also insist that size does matter, and no man should have to endure that sort of insult.
"This is a development that’s easy to mistake for a political one because of the accidental fact that most university humanities departments have, over the last sixty years or so, become extreme-left political monocultures."
Accidental? lol
I recall the English and Writing Departments in community college and state U during the seventies and eighties. Full of Newly Empowered Degreed Women who CONSTANTLY agitated and schemed to get their Sisters into staff and teaching positions, while campaigning campus-wide to ensure that no Evil White Males were hired or retained. Because, as we've all known for decades, those EWMs need to be dispossessed of their Privilege. The feminist lobbying and pressure-tactics NEVER stopped. Their naked self-serving politics were sickening. Almost as ugly as their bodies.
It was a nation-wide beatdown and it was NOT accidental. You folks are correct tho, that the takeover of SF, colleges, publishing/editing etc was driven by the zero-sum politicization of English and Lit departments in upper education. From there the pathology metastasized.
You can't fix a problem that you refuse to recognize IS a problem. And I keep hearing people like ESR attempting to rationalize iniquity, thuggism, extreme selfishness, and plain old evil. I think we all know why, at this point. But experienced writers should know better, and have the cojones to say better, as their primary business is truth. But instead, they all wanta re-split the semantic atom and avoid any confrontations with REAL power.
Cheers.
Haven't read ESR's article yet, but a lot of the influx comes not from the literati or creative writing workshoppers, but from the pervy romance stories
So is John Norman "Pink" or "Blue"?
"How do you separate real writers from wannabes with deep pockets?"
Larry Niven is a great test case. He supported himself with a trust fund while learning to write the hard way.
Not unless you wish to run afoul of the Patent Office.
The International Lord of Hate, being a founding member, will contribute to the cause. Besides, he already sells them.
rcocean said, “ESR just doesn't want the fight to be about politics, so he comes up with this ‘the whole problem is their English majors’ nonsense. No, the problem is the driving force behind Pink Rabittism is cultural Marxism. […] The reasonable liberals never effectively fight the Marxists, they usually just weaken the anti-Marxists by advising ‘Moderation’ and chanting ‘Why can’t we all get along?’ at every opportunity. ESR is just the Kerensky of SF.”
Search for the term “Marxism” on ESR’s site and you’ll find he quite aware of the Gramscian damage done to Western culture by Marxists. He may well be wrong about what’s driving the Morlocks of genre fiction, but it’s not because he’s blind to their behavior in general.
So is John Norman "Pink" or "Blue"?
That's a good question, and I might not be the best to answer it. But I'll give it a shot. I assume his readership turned out to be women to a great extent, a la "50 Shades", but I don't think he was pushing polymorphic perversion, cultural marxism, gay marriage, feminism or suchlike as part of the package. So I'll tentatively put him down with a blue tinge.
The spider plant cringed as its owner brought forth the watering can. "I am a spider plant!" it cried indignantly. "How dare you water me before my time! Guards!" it called. "Guards!"
Borin, its owner, placed the watering can on the table and looked at it. "You will be watered," he said.
"You do not dare to water me!" laughed the plant.
"You will be watered," said Borin.
"Do not water me!" wept the plant.
"You will be watered," said Borin.
http://www.rdrop.com/~wyvern/data/houseplants.html
We all love Vader. No one cares about Luke.
Ahhemm. Unless you are a chick. Then it was all about, sigh, Mr. Solo.
As you were gentlemen.
They don't tell stories, they tell Very Important Lessons.
In the end, this is the whole deal. Stories last, didactic lessons do not. People who repeatedly buy and read didactic fiction do so to reinforce their own (threatened) worldview. Those types of books can sell to a GA but most repeat buyers just fade away and onto something else. Tell a good story and you'll have repeat buyers even through the occasional dud.
Then it was all about, sigh, Mr. Solo.
Well, yes, generally speaking, the rapscallion-with-the-heart-of-gold is a more likely romantic prospect than the celibate warrior-monk.
We all love Vader. No one cares about Luke.
Ahhemm. Unless you are a chick. Then it was all about, sigh, Mr. Solo.
As you were gentlemen.
That was true for the dudes too. Luke was boring. Han Solo was everyone's favorite. And then Harrison Ford went on to be Indiana Jones too, and he was even better.
GreyS - Stories last, didactic lessons do not. People who repeatedly buy and read didactic fiction do so to reinforce their own (threatened) worldview.
Well it depends on whether the lesson is good or not, and whether it's presented skillfully. I dare say you're familiar with Aesop and the Brothers Grimm - their didactic stories lasted.
"Many of them will deceptively tell you that there is meaning in the universe, it's just that you have to make up your own meaning in life."
Which is exactly why I said "no innate meaning." The word innate means inborn; natural, or inherent. A meaning which you yourself impose is not innate.
"Not unless you wish to run afoul of the Patent Office."
Nonsense. We are the Evil League of Evil. The patent office is a sister corporation.
"Which is exactly why I said "no innate meaning." The word innate means inborn; natural, or inherent. A meaning which you yourself impose is not innate."
I was pleased to see you spotted the same error in ESR's work as I, and addressed the primary complaint far better.
***hat tip***
"I have studied the lessons of my many failed predecessors well and have subsequently implemented the following protocols:"
"4. ...in which my undead, unkillable warriors are created. ...freshly killed corpses in good condition, with a bonus for each one over 6'4"."
Thereby revealing a huge hole in your defenses! As a former 18 X-Ray instructor, I cannot place enough emphasis upon the paramount importance of the initial minion selection process. As proven by many previous evil regimes:
1. Quality minions are more important than hardware. High-quality minions with adequate hardware will defeat many times their number of low-quality minions equiped with high quality hardware.
2. Though admittedly, quantity has a quality all it's own, in the end, quality is better than quantity.
3. High-quality minions, sadly, cannot be mass produced. This has been attempted in the past with uniformly disastrous results. By now, this lesson should be self-evident.
4. High quality minions cannot be created after the threat appears. If you wait until the Rabbit horde is already up in the crawlspaces, chewing on the wires, it's already too late. (Unless, of course that is a subtle part of the overall operational "Evil Plan" to get them out into the open, committing and revealing themselves, so that they can be more easily destroyed en masse. In which case, go ahead, have at it.)
In addition to your height requirement, I would institute a Minion Forces Assessment and Selection course (MFAS) with special emphasis upon basic marksmanship fundamentals. Countless regimes prior to yours have all eventually been brought to ruin by such primary errors as cloning an entire army (and, apparently, all subsequent forces) using the same genetic material of the only guy in the universe who apparently couldn't reliably hit the ground between his own two feet with a fistful of buckshot. (Yes, Boba, I'm looking at you.)
How many Evil Empires would still be open for business today if the threat had been firmly dealt with at the initial contact with the aggressive application of the basic fundamental principals of marksmanship by the first minion on the ground?
Carlotta: "Then it was all about, sigh, Mr. Solo."
Sure, all the chicks go for scruffy-looking nerf-herders. And Han Solo was Mr. January on the Bad Boys of the Rebellion calendar himself.
Because he shot first.
Well it depends on whether the lesson is good or not, and whether it's presented skillfully. I dare say you're familiar with Aesop and the Brothers Grimm - their didactic stories lasted.
...and many others. I thought of adding "ham-handed" to didactic, but figured everyone would get what I meant.
”Of course the Evil League of Evil cannot lose.
Not with me as its Supreme Dark Lord!”
Henceforth,you shall be known as Darth...Day.
Palpatine
John Wright: Which is exactly why I said "no innate meaning." The word innate means inborn; natural, or inherent. A meaning which you yourself impose is not innate.
Yes, you're quite right. But, as with many things in Trog philosophy, it's interesting to note to what degree they deceive themselves. Some of them really do believe that choose-your-own meaning == innate meaning. Why? Because the alternative -- the logical conclusion of their worldview -- is too horrible. They want the benefits of Christianity, such as optimism, without any of its obligations. I've only seen a few atheists (William Provine comes to mind) who openly acknowledge that their worldview implies there is no meaning in the universe, and they tend to be very morose, depressed/ing people.
I've only seen a few atheists (William Provine comes to mind) who openly acknowledge that their worldview implies there is no meaning in the universe, and they tend to be very morose, depressed/ing people.
Or truly monstrous people, like Jeffrey Dahmer.
Speaking of Watership Down, I always thought it was an impressive feat to make a scary bad guy, the horror of children's fireside monster stories, out of a rabbit.
And now I think about it, that really is an epic fantasy achievement, because there are no actual scary rabbit people in SF/F, except in the sense that you might be horrified to wake up next to one of them...
I thought what was innate was Maker's Mark.
Well it is the Dr. Horrible version but this is the one I own.
http://store.qmxonline.com/Evil-League-of-Evil-Official-T-Shirt_p_91.html
1. Quality minions are more important than hardware. High-quality minions with adequate hardware will defeat many times their number of low-quality minions equiped with high quality hardware.
And yet they come with their own risks. Intellect and work ethic oft accompany a strong moral fibre, which frequently results in said minion turning coats and aiding your enemies. When the moral fibre is not present, they are apt to wait until you have acquired the Tesseract, raised the Floating Continent and awakened the Goddess Statues, or perfected your society built upon emotion-suppressing drugs, and then betray you and take what was rightfully stolen by you for themselves.
...Not that, of course, I had planned any sort of betrayal involving the Tesseract. No. Why should I do summat like that?
John is a lawyer, Larry is an accountant, and I am an economist. And ironically, for all their politically correct enthusiasm for diversity, we are probably more ethnically and linguistically diverse.
Our old pal Kratman is military and a former lawyer. Flynn is a statistician and Pournelle, Pournelle has done a lot of important shit in politics and the sciences.
I would disagree with both Vox and ESR. The Pink SF/F (which is unreadable and loathesome) is a function of basically, the feminine domination of SF/F. Both as readers, such as they are, and publishers/gatekeepers and writers.
Women focus on icky sex, lots of "feelings," all sorts of "soft" stuff, mostly. This is not universal, some of that could apply to say, Heinlein and other guys writing classically "Hard" Sci-Fi, but Science Fiction (and Fantasy) generally falls into the male or female camp.
The male camp, regardless of the external politics of the author, will have generally some or all of these characteristics:
Focus on ACTION.
Overt Physical CONFLICT
Emphasis on Technology for Sci Fi, cleverness or loopholes or courage for Fantasy.
Emphasis on IDEAS (i.e. new technology enables new behavior or smashes old systems)
Emphasis on Character.
Take for example Michael Moorcock's Elric, from which the Malibu Comics "Rune" character was based, essentially. He's very, very male, even though Moorcock is your average liberal. In that, Elric is not obsessed with feelings, sexing up some average snowflake, he's "unhuman" in that his feelings are fairly cold, clinical, unromantic, in short what an immortal, semi-elven wandering warrior prince would be like. Totally uncaring about much of anything beyond himself and whatever he feels like that day. In his own way, far more frightening than the monsters he often fights. And very memorable as a character.
Meanwhile, the "Dragonriders of Pern" stuff is very female, not much ever really happens, other than chicks ride dragons. Cool for a while, then very boring.
As a female member of the Evil League of Evil (or wannabe member anyway...) I volunteer to always bring cookies to the meeting. Not only do I make a mean chocolate chip and butterscotch oatmeal, my snickerdoodles are pure heaven.
Yes, I am absolutely willing to bribe my way in to the club.
As a female member of the Evil League of Evil (or wannabe member anyway...) I volunteer to always bring cookies to the meeting.
It won't get you a raise. Trust me, I tried that.
I promote you to consort and still you complain...
I'm not complaining. I'm just sayin'.
> Take for example Michael Moorcock's Elric,
My choice of character if I'm ever good enough for the ELoE. :)
[banned commenter]: "And you are correct when you say "SF", not "Blue" or "Pink", which has arbitrary criteria"
SF itself has arbitrary criteria to distinguish itself from Fantasy and Horror, and many sub-genres with arbitrary criteria that distinguish themselves like Steampunk vs. Dieselpunk. Why are you so concerned with this particular distinction? The terms have been defined and the criteria established; that they haven't yet found their way into Wikipedia does not negate their existence, however much you wish to repeatedly whine about it.
Get over it!
Get over it!
All this whinin and cryin and pitchin a fit
Get over it! Get over it!
Blue skiffy, in a jiffy.
Reading that is mighty spiffy.
But Pink holds no appeal to me.
What I got from this was
VOX MET GORDON DICKSON
(Perhaps mildly OT)
Vox, perhaps you've already addressed this in the past, but with the brilliant Gene Wolfe being so clearly, er, un-lapine (as you allude to above), why did Mr. Scalzi make the apparent mistake of nominating him as Grand Master last year? An exercise in maintaining the illusion of inclusiveness, perhaps?
I thought what was innate was Maker's Mark.
[rimshot]
It won't get you a raise. Trust me, I tried that.
I'm just trying to get a foot in the door. We'll discuss raises later... ;)
"Women focus on icky sex, lots of "feelings," all sorts of "soft" stuff, mostly."
More proof that violins never solved anything.
A proposal for the logo
That is an Umlaut of Evil, by the way. Sort of like the heavy metal umlaut, only more evil.
"Take for example Michael Moorcock's Elric, from which the Malibu Comics "Rune" character was based, essentially. He's very, very male, even though Moorcock is your average liberal."
Elric was also basically devised as the anti-Conan. Wikipedia doesn't mention it for some reason, but I read it many years ago and thought it fit quite well. Here's some of the evidence from another source:
"Elric was quite deliberately created to be the "anti-Conan" when Moorcock wrote the first story, The Dreaming City, taking the conventions (or cliche's -depending on your point of view) of Sword and Sorcery and turning them on their head. Moorcock has even admitted this on several occasions.
Conan - barbarian/Elric - civilized
Conan - hates sorcery, kills evil sorcerors/Elric - is an evil sorceror
Conan - trustworthy and loyal to his friends and allies/Elric - kills or betrays those closest to him
Conan - physically strong/Elric -physically weak
Conan - self sufficient/Elric - depends entirely on drugs or sorcery just to survive
Conan - has no need for religion or divine intervention /Elric - has a demonic patron who he swears allegience to and who often intervenes on his behalf
Conan - and shapes his own destiny/Elric - bound to his destiny and unable to escape it no matter how hard he tries
Conan - gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth/Elric - tragedy and bad luck follow him wherever he goes
Conan - starts out in life as a penniless thief, and works his way up to to King/Elric - starts out as Emperor, forsakes his own crown, and destroys his own country"
http://www.conan.com/invboard/index.php?showtopic=9625
Moorcock always had problems with heroic fantasy -- he had an even bigger chip on his shoulder regarding Tolkien, see Wizardry and Wild Romance. ("Epic Pooh" might be the place to look: http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.php?id=953) Of course it's to a great extent because Moorcock is an unreconstructed british leftist of the 60s.
With all that baggage, I think Moorcock in retrospect did, perhaps inadvertently, okay.
we could go with a giant smiley face with devil horns
I hereby submit the following for the selection of the Evil Dread Ilk Evil Society:
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
With all that baggage, I think Moorcock in retrospect did, perhaps inadvertently, okay.
Timing is everything. Elric was written at exactly the right time to grab the readership it needed to. Most teenaged boys who read it find it at exactly the right time in life to appreciate it and then look back at it fondly as adults.
I knew of Elric as a teenager in the 80s, but didn't actually end up reading it until I was in my thirties, about fifteen years ago. I found it tedious, unlikeable, poorly written, ham-handed, and the simple inversion of a stereotype wasn't nearly as clever as Moorcock thought it was. As a supposed classic of the genre, it really disappointed me as someone who didn't read it with rose-colored nostalgia goggles.
Apropos the present conversation, juxtapose the following:
1. From House of Eratosthenes ( http://www.peekinthewell.net/blog/they-warp-among-us/#comments )
"The schism among sci-fi fans mirrors the schism among us with regard to everything else: What’s the point of life? What’s the point of the show? Some of us think it’s all about solving real problems. Others among us think the problem-solving is a waste of time, and morally preening is the entire point."
"They think they are the forebears of the ones who will one day invent Warp Drive and make all this possible — doing nothing, solving nothing, just lecturing. That, too, is fascinating, if not sane."
And,
2. Evan Sayet: How Liberals Reach the Tops of Their Professions
( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peRUTroIuNs )
3. BILL WHITTLE: IT TAKES A SUPERHERO
( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YV-8xtcfvM )
Observation would indicate that these behaviors appear to remain consistent across the entire spectrum of human activity.
The difference is clear between the, "doer/problem-solvers", and the, "talkers". (Notice I did NOT say "talker/thinkers", because whatever processes may be transpiring within their pointy little craniums, using the word "think" in that context would represent an unprovoked violent assault on an otherwise perfectly innocent verb.)
Final thought: Is it possible to possess the characteristics of a "Superhero" and still aspire be a minion in the Evil League of Evil? I always felt Lex Luthor got a bad rap. Say what you like, but, putting the whole "kill Superman" thing aside, the man gets shit done.
Message fiction, IF it exists, is ultimately in the eye of the beholder.
To those authors with political ties to the right and the right, each equally is adept at pushing an agenda. Politically conservative authors tend to be more covert in their approach to champion “patriarchy”, while politically liberal authors are prone to openly pronounce “inclusion”.
Both “Blue SF” and “Pink SF” are equal to the task at being crusaders cloaked as entertainers and insulting one another for the decline of the genre, while claiming they spend “zero time policing one’s thoughts or speech”.
In the end, it is a STORY. With a message for an audience. And detractors of that story can offer a litany of reasons as to why it is “good” or “bad” literature.
Hot funny, cool punk even if it's old junk, it's still rock and roll to me.
Message fiction, IF it exists, is ultimately in the eye of the beholder. To those authors with political ties to the right and the right, each equally is adept at pushing an agenda. Politically conservative authors tend to be more covert in their approach to champion “patriarchy”, while politically liberal authors are prone to openly pronounce “inclusion”. Both “Blue SF” and “Pink SF” are equal to the task at being crusaders cloaked as entertainers and insulting one another for the decline of the genre, while claiming they spend “zero time policing one’s thoughts or speech”.
In the end, it is a STORY. With a message for an audience. And detractors of that story can offer a litany of reasons as to why it is “good” or “bad” literature.
Hot funny, cool punk even if it's old junk, it's still rock and roll to me.
Post a Comment
Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home