|
Ccs posted:What the orogenes are put through in the series is terrible, but the nature of their powers raises questions that have awkward answers. Would you live near an orogene knowing that if their self control was less than perfect they could kill you? Not because of malice but because of a mistake. It would result in, at they very least, policies of control to minimize loss of life, and as killer crane noted, Where's the line between oppression and control at that point? So what I'm getting here is that some oppression is OK if you think it's justified because you're really scared of the oppressed group. To which you say "but they are dangerous!" which is also what people oppressing minority groups everywhere say. You're OK with some level of oppression happening to orogenes based on their powers as written. It's not really an awkward answer, but it might be an awkward thing for you to learn about yourself. quote:Or, y'know, if it was US-esque it might just result in a lot of dead people every year and everyone would shrug and say they can't do anything because of whatever the fantasy world equivalent of the Second Amendment is. I mean, gun nuts literally believe they're being oppressed by having their guns taken away, and as you've previously argued there's no moral difference between something being true and what someone believes is true. That's actually not what I've argued, and this has been a very enlightening thing for you to say, because it makes it clear you don't understand a lot of what we're talking about here. I've argued that in real world oppression, the oppressor class believes that they are justified in doing a bad thing because they think the danger of not doing so is real. Gun control isn't oppression. What you've described with gun control is a (mostly) non-oppressed class that is being regulated for things they have a choice in. In fact, gun control is used in action to oppress minorities because of what white people believe to be a legitimate fear of criminality among PoC.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
If black people actually were of lower intelligence and violent nature, and we had proof(and historically we had "proof" that everyone agreed was real), it would still not be OK to oppress them. Same for "savage" indigenous people and "greedy" jews whatever justifications. It doesn't matter if you think it's materially justified, because oppression is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 01:07
|
|
|
Goddamn you really want to twist my words to make it sound like I condone oppression. The issue is the oppressed wizard trope makes deadly magic powers into part of the characters identity. It conflates them and a weapon into one entity. It's a dehumanizing trope that doesn't map to any real models of oppression. Gun control is oppression if the person is also the gun. (Think of the Iron Giant. If he had stayed on earth there would be some controls over how he was able to be deployed.) These ten reasons I posted earlier is also a reason why the trope does a terrible job at modeling real world oppression. None of this lines up with why or how oppression happens. If the book is just trying to tell a story about these super powered people and what happens to them, fine. But I don't think it's just doing that. It wants to comment on the nature of oppression and why it happens. And it fails in these ten ways: quote:1- a person will be punished for their difference unless they can exploit their difference in some way, and magic is always exploitable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 01:29
|
|
|
Ccs posted:Goddamn you really want to twist my words to make it sound like I condone oppression. The issue is the oppressed wizard trope makes deadly magic powers into part of the characters identity. It conflates them and a weapon into one entity. It's a dehumanizing trope that doesn't map to any real models of oppression. You are condoning oppression, in magical instances. If orogenes existed in the real world, you're condoning their oppression. They don't. They exist in the book, where they are explicitly, in text(not subtext) oppressed. Which you don't like because in that case you support it. I'm not twisting any words, this is what you've said. FWIW, I do not believe you support real world oppression of minority groups. I'm not secretly implying you're a racist. I'm pointing out the flaws in your conceptualization. quote:Gun control is oppression if the person is also the gun. Yes, and it would not be OK to oppress GunPeople if that were the case and they were real. Their oppression would still be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 01:33
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:What you've described with gun control is a (mostly) non-oppressed class that is being regulated for things they have a choice in. But they believe that taking away their guns is oppressing them because it violates an inalienable right they think is enshrined in the constitution. If we're in an Avatar-esque fantasy world and there's the ability to take people's magic powers away, is that okay (control) or not (oppression)? Is the weapon they're born with too much a part of their personhood to be removed? This is part of why the trope fails. It changes the context so much that the metaphor breaks. And thus it doesn't help us understand the nature of real world oppression and why it happens (along with those other 9 reasons.) A lot of other people have explored these problems in series like Attack on Titan: quote:Anti-Semitism, like any form of predjudice, has no logical root. By making Eldians former conquerors and genetic “freaks” of nature, Isayama provides a plausible rationality to something that should have none. It's the oppressed wizards trope providing that plausible rationality that makes number 5 on the list the most pernicious of the 10 ways that the trope fails to model real world oppression. Ccs fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Apr 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 01:52
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:I'm arguing that they don't symbolize marginalized groups. I'm arguing that they are literally a marginalized group. There are no separate vehicle and tenor here. There is no need to read them symbolically at all. I said a while ago that I was just looking at subtext in the story. Yeah, in the story they literally are a marginalized group, and they literally have superpowers, and they're literally marginalized because of their superpowers. To drag up old Ayn, she's not just literally writing a story about people being oppressed for being really good at trains. I don't like to just examine surface level story. If I can't apply a story to real world, or if I'm being told not to (cause it's only a story, bro) then it's a bad story to me. PeterWeller posted:I agree that the oppressed wizard trope is flawed and implausible because it fundamentally mistakes the power dynamics behind oppression. Yeah, that's all I'm really talking about, and what disappointed me about the story. It's a big flaw that's not resolved in an otherwise great series. killer crane fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Apr 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 02:07
|
|
|
Ccs posted:But they believe that taking away their guns is oppressing them because it violates an inalienable right they think is enshrined in the constitution. Yes, sometimes oppressor groups pretend to be the oppressed. This isn't an especially useful point to make. Especially when gun control is used by the same group to literally oppress real world oppressed groups. This was a really terrible choice to go with here. quote:If we're in an Avatar-esque fantasy world and there's the ability to take people's magic powers away, is that okay (control) or not (oppression)? Is the weapon they're born with too much a part of their personhood to be removed? That's oppression yes, and akin to forced sterilization. It's a bad thing OP
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 02:11
|
|
|
Y'all need to define when control becomes oppression, cause that point seems to be one of the issues here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 02:16
|
|
|
killer crane posted:Y'all need to define when control becomes oppression, cause that point seems to be one of the issues here. There's no universal definition but for me it's when you hurt, damage, or treat unjustly someone for things they were born with, like ethnicity, skin color, rock magic, orientation etc. In the US, gun owners are often the same group as those who oppress everyone else. That's because, in practice, gun control mostly exists as a way to oppress the same groups who are already being oppressed, and is mostly ineffective against those in the oppressor group. Guns are also not something you're born with, except maybe in Texas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 02:26
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:I agree that the oppressed wizard trope is flawed and implausible because it fundamentally mistakes the power dynamics behind oppression. If we can all agree on this then that’s good, cause that’s what I’ve been trying to get at by continuously calling out aspects of the trope.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 02:31
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:There's no universal definition but for me it's when you hurt, damage, or treat unjustly someone for things they were born with, like ethnicity, skin color, rock magic, orientation etc. How about folks being born into extreme wealth? They had no control over they. Removing their wealth is a damage to them, especially seen by them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 02:42
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:That's because, in practice, gun control mostly exists as a way to oppress the same groups who are already being oppressed, and is mostly ineffective against those in the oppressor group. Wait are we talking about the fantasy universe or in reality? Cause that’s a pretty insane hot take about gun control, considering it’s efficacy in places it’s been instituted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 03:11
|
|
|
Ccs posted:Wait are we talking about the fantasy universe or in reality? Cause that’s a pretty insane hot take about gun control, considering it’s efficacy in places it’s been instituted. American gun control laws were largely implemented when black Americans began to arm themselves. The goddamn NRA supported it, even, because it wasn't really about guns themselves so much as it was about preventing the Black Panther Party from lawfully carrying them. I want to say it was called the Mulberry Act? Something like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 04:03
|
|
|
Khizan posted:American gun control laws were largely implemented when black Americans began to arm themselves. The goddamn NRA supported it, even, because it wasn't really about guns themselves so much as it was about preventing the Black Panther Party from lawfully carrying them. I want to say it was called the Mulberry Act? Something like that. Ah okay I thought we were taking generally. There’s definitely a difference in how open carry laws are applied based on race. Anyway my mistake. I’ll get back to echoing this as my main point and hoping we can all agree on it: The oppressed wizard trope is flawed and implausible because it fundamentally mistakes the power dynamics behind oppression
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 04:11
|
|
|
I don't agree with that, because specific kinds of individual advantage don't cleanly translate to social and political power. Suggesting that it only 'wotks' when wizards are oppressing muggles seems more problematic to me, as a silly nazi reader will smugly nod to himself that his kind deserve to rule just like the fantasy wizards. Maybe we should just give up on metaphor. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:I don't agree with that, because specific kinds of individual advantage don't cleanly translate to social and political power. It's more that if you're trying to explore how and why oppression happens and the trait you use to separate out your oppressed group is magic, and said magic can stand in for any rare exploitable resource or trait, it causes issues. In most settings, wizard's magic would give them significant leverage. I agree that it's not a clean translation. Power in the real world is more complicated. But because magic is so important in most fantasy books, wizards are likely to have a group identity much like an age, religious, or class group. But this won’t make them oppressed. Instead, it would mean concentrating all the wizard's power, giving them even more ability to act in their own self-interest. We already have an example of this in real life: rich people. The upper class is a distinct group from everyone else, but that doesn’t lead to poor people oppressing them. Instead, the rich are dishearteningly good at advocating for their own class interests. So if someone is already predisposed to revere the rich and powerful they will probably identify with the wizards. People attuned to class struggle will be instantly suspicious, and a writer can use that to their advantage. I'll give Broken Earth some credit here in that the Guardians are basically a different form of wizard empowered by the evil earth, the most wizardly wizard of them all. So if we want to read this as a wizard oppressing other wizards story it could work. Other franchises, like Attack on Titan or Dragon Age, don't have that dynamic in play though and you're just left with the incoherent metaphor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 05:15
|
|
|
killer crane posted:How about folks being born into extreme wealth? They had no control over they. Removing their wealth is a damage to them, especially seen by them. You're not born wealthy as a part of your being, it's a possession you gain after birth just like a gun. And oppression isn't just "I don't like something". However if you want to be really tiresome about this, if wealth was magically part of your being, and something that people were being oppressed for, like for instance being physically and psychologically abused by 4000 year old supercops and raped and whatnot, then yes that oppression would also be bad. Treating people badly is bad. Even if you are somewhat OK with it. Ccs posted:Wait are we talking about the fantasy universe or in reality? Cause that’s a pretty insane hot take about gun control, considering it’s efficacy in places it’s been instituted. In the US? Yes that's a pretty accurate take. The current US gun culture is pretty ridiculous but it's also predominately catered to the people who in power as oppressors(ie white males). 2nd Amendment purism isn't for nonwhites, ask Philando Castille.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 05:43
|
|
|
You also have to remember that the series posits that they have been saving the world countless times over by stopping further cataclysmic events from happening. If we’re looking at it from a logical perspective, they’ve stopped human society from being wiped out multiple times which is certainly something that can’t be said for guns and a reason why that analogy breaks down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 08:23
|
|
|
Much like every other piece of media where "oppressed minority" is crossed with "fantastic and dangerous magical powers" it makes a nice power fantasy for oppressed people (nothing wrong with that (but also remember that virtually anyone might consider themselves an "oppressed group" and identify with them)) but becomes ridiculous if you try and use it as a metaphor for something happening in the real world. I read the 5th Season trilogy and I liked it, but I felt like she kind of said everything she had/needed to say in the first book, and the other two weren't nearly as good. Jaxyon posted:You are condoning oppression, in magical instances. New thread title pls
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 10:22
|
|
|
Ccs posted:I'll give Broken Earth some credit here in that the Guardians are basically a different form of wizard empowered by the evil earth, the most wizardly wizard of them all. So if we want to read this as a wizard oppressing other wizards story it could work. Other franchises, like Attack on Titan or Dragon Age, don't have that dynamic in play though and you're just left with the incoherent metaphor. Don't forget the Stone Eaters and what they were doing off-screen that Essun found out about near the end of the series.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 11:12
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:You're not born wealthy as a part of your being, it's a possession you gain after birth just like a gun. I asked at what point control becomes oppression, and your said when you're treated poorly for something you're born with. I gave you an example of people born with something they feel oppressed for, and now you're both saying that doesn't count, but also would be oppression in extreme harsh treatment, but it's still not valid, and you still didn't really answer at what point control becomes oppression for the wealthy. Also is religion an valid reason to oppress someone? It's a belief given to you, or one your chose after birth, so it doesn't pass the litmus test of intrinsic quality one's born with to define oppression. At what point does controlling someone's religious freedoms cross into oppression?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 13:29
|
|
|
killer crane posted:I asked at what point control becomes oppression, and your said when you're treated poorly for something you're born with. I gave you an example of people born with something they feel oppressed for, and now you're both saying that doesn't count, but also would be oppression in extreme harsh treatment, but it's still not valid, and you still didn't really answer at what point control becomes oppression for the wealthy. The wealthy literally cannot be oppressed except by those even more wealthy (because they own and pay the theoretical control mechanisms to increase their own wealth at amounts/rates that should provoke an immediate response, but they have a choke hold on society now, at least in the US). quote:Also is religion an valid reason to oppress someone? It's a belief given to you, or one your chose after birth, so it doesn't pass the litmus test of intrinsic quality one's born with to define oppression. At what point does controlling someone's religious freedoms cross into oppression? No. Your religious beliefs are almost entirely determined by where you are born/raised, even for those that reject the beliefs of their parents. Also oppression in the modern day involving religion is vastly more likely to be members of one religion oppressing "everybody else". See the current trend of passing anti-trans laws around the US at the state level (to say nothing of the voter suppression laws motivated by religion-based racism).
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 14:19
|
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:The wealthy literally cannot be oppressed except by those even more wealthy Like how oppression flows from power, not to it... Like how magic wizards with power being oppressed by the masses is a stupid aspect to a story about oppression, and problematic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 15:04
|
|
|
The Moon Monster posted:Much like every other piece of media where "oppressed minority" is crossed with "fantastic and dangerous magical powers" it makes a nice power fantasy for oppressed people (nothing wrong with that (but also remember that virtually anyone might consider themselves an "oppressed group" and identify with them)) but becomes ridiculous if you try and use it as a metaphor for something happening in the real world. Yeah. I get it can work as a power fantasy, but it can also make people who actually are part of a marginalized group feel uncomfortable, as is the case with Attack on Titan. The people who can transform into titans are all Eldians, a Jewish-coded ethnic group. While the series makes explicitly clear that oppression against the Eldians is wrong and the impetus for a lot (all?) of the violence that happens during the series, having the ethnic group be able to transform into giant monsters is a real bad look. To quote a Jewish reader of AoT: "Anti-Semitism, like any form of predjudice, has no logical root. By making Eldians former conquerors and genetic “freaks” of nature, Isayama provides a plausible rationality to something that should have none. He didn’t have to make Eldians analogous to Jews for us to understand them as victims, and I – like many others – would have felt far more comfortable if he didn’t, to be honest." Ccs fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Apr 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 15:06
|
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:No. Your religious beliefs are almost entirely determined by where you are born/raised, even for those that reject the beliefs of their parents. What belief doesn't this apply to? Why not gun culture? What we buy/do/think it's always determined by the society we're born into. What controls can society put on anyone then, and not have it be oppression? biracial bear for uncut posted:
That sure is a spicy take. I have some folks in literal internment camps I'd like you to meet. Like, I get that people do oppress in the name of religion, but, Jesus, that's super dismissive of oppressed people. Again, when does control become oppression? It doesn't cross that line when you control something someone is born with, so when? killer crane fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Apr 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 15:18
|
|
|
killer crane posted:I said a while ago that I was just looking at subtext in the story. Yeah, in the story they literally are a marginalized group, and they literally have superpowers, and they're literally marginalized because of their superpowers. Subtext is great. I don't think this discussion about the orogenes is about any real subtext to the story. As you note, we're discussing the textually actual and literal characteristics of the orogenes. We're talking about literally magical people who are literally oppressed and literally use their magic power to fight oppression. Atlas Shrugged is a really poor example for subtext here because its thousand pages cover many more industrialists, industries, artists, and inventors than just Dagny and her trains, they are not being used symbolically or metaphorically, and those pages also contain numerous speeches that spell out the novel's themes explicitly and in excruciating detail. Its failure as an enjoyable novel is because its author can't help but render every one of her dumb ideas in explicit text. With The Broken Earth trilogy, I don't think we need to dig below the surface to apply it to the real world. It's quite clear what real world issues the story is engaging with. quote:Yeah, that's all I'm really talking about, and what disappointed me about the story. It's a big flaw that's not resolved in an otherwise great series. Yeah, I think the issue isn't with failed symbolism or unintended subtext. It's with a fundamental flaw in the logic of the series' power dynamics that makes it poorly applicable to the real world. I don't think we disagree at all about what we both perceive as a flaw in the novels, just how we would characterize that flaw. Or in other words, I think this is just another semantics post from me. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:
 indeed
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 18:29
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:
Do you post to advertise Dead White Guy in all the genre threads or just the one about books by minority women? j/k almost all the genre threads are about white guys too
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 19:43
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Do you post to advertise Dead White Guy in all the genre threads or just the one about books by minority women?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 19:43
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:holy poo poo lmao gonna guess that's a no
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:gonna guess that's a no You nerds have convoluted the argument to being about people walking around with their hands made out of guns I would just like that folks put as much effort into a convoluted text that invites such discussion but sure, this is about keeping the Black Woman Writer down. (And yeah, this sort of comment also gets made when discussions of whasshisname of the magical system writing come up too.) Although we COULD discuss oppression and colonialism in pre Republic of Ireland as depicted in Ulysses as a counter example... FWIW I have read When is Black Future Month and other short stories and she is...alright. IMO she does better when its just fantasy without any attempt at Deep Social Commentary (which others have highlighted don't always stick their landings). And in this sub sub genre (if such a thing exists) I actually prefer Okorafor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 20:11
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:You nerds have convoluted the argument to being about people walking around with their hands made out of guns I would just like that folks put as much effort into a convoluted text that invites such discussion but sure, this is about keeping the Black Woman Writer down. (And yeah, this sort of comment also gets made when discussions of whasshisname of the magical system writing come up too.) Although we COULD discuss oppression and colonialism in pre Republic of Ireland as depicted in Ulysses as a counter example... Yes, dude, everybody could see 100,000 miles off that you wanted to talk about the ~literature~ your read and how it offers more depth. Yet you chose this thread to come in and make that point. Jemisin is hardly the worst or silliest author with a thread above 5 pages on this forum. But here you are. And yes, the gun hands things is incredibly stupid. I'm not the one who brought it up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:You nerds have convoluted the argument to being about people walking around with their hands made out of guns I would just like that folks put as much effort into a convoluted text that invites such discussion but sure, this is about keeping the Black Woman Writer down. (And yeah, this sort of comment also gets made when discussions of whasshisname of the magical system writing come up too.) Although we COULD discuss oppression and colonialism in pre Republic of Ireland as depicted in Ulysses as a counter example... What kinds of wizard powers does the protagonist use in Ulysses?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 20:27
|
|
|
Ugh why is this thread about Cardi B so long nobody is posting about my elevated tastes in the Neoclassical Chamber Music thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 20:49
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Yes, dude, everybody could see 100,000 miles off that you wanted to talk about the ~literature~ your read and how it offers more depth. Sorry of ~literature~ references offend, but I just wish this much effort posting happened elsewhere. quote:And yes, the gun hands things is incredibly stupid. I'm not the one who brought it up. Let's reset. I liked the story about the witch in New Orleans doing battle with the fairy that wanted to take her child. That was cool and fun straight fantasy with underrepresented people as the protog. I think that is where Jemisin's strength lies, personally. Her essay on Omelas on the other hand shows how oppression from the left can be justified and is directly countered by Brave New World central thesis. I think that there is a good point to be made that fighting injustice is a better response than abdicating responsibility, but she doesn't do so convincingly to my reading. killer crane posted:What kinds of wizard powers does the protagonist use in Ulysses? Pork kidney acquisition and consumption
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:Sorry of ~literature~ references offend, but I just wish this much effort posting happened elsewhere. Literature references don't offend, but pretentiously yucking on others' yums because you think your poo poo is more deserving of discussion is boring as hell and also can be low-key racist. It's not as if Joyce hasn't been discussed heavily in academia and on the internet and 6 pages on earth benders and systemic trauma doesn't take anything away from that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 21:30
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:yucking on others' yums i thought calling racism on anyone who isn't 100% on board with Jemisin would be the worst thing you posted in this thread, but then there's this
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 21:44
|
|
|
Bonaventure posted:i thought calling racism on anyone who isn't 100% on board with Jemisin would be the worst thing you posted in this thread, but then there's this Didn't do that but I always like the frantic exaggerations whenever anyone brings up the possibility of racism being involved in something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 21:59
|
|
|
FPyat posted:I read The Ones Who Fight Back, and I don't think Jemisin actually supports killing people with corrupt knowledge. Within the rhetorical structure of the story, it looks more like the social workers are a self-evidently absurd bone thrown to people who believe that utopia must come with a hidden dark side, just as Le Guin put in the abused child without having a sensible reason why the torment would make life better for everyone else. getting back to this, which was an interesting discussion before prolonged Jaxyon posted:If people were born with guns built into their arms it still wouldn't be OK to oppress them. tangent came up. What is Jemisin saying to you through that story? In the LeGuin story, everything is perfect for everyone but the one child. Those that learn the truth don't fight back but choose to not participate. Why? This is where I think there could be a really interesting discussion on the decision to leave. They are keeping things ok for most, just choosing difficulty for themselves, and the child of course. In defending the child, they potentially ease the suffering of one but bring on the suffering of all the rest. That's quite the dilemma! IOW its the trolly problem, or Spock's solution to the Kobayashi Maru problem whichever metaphor you prefer. In NKJ's story, things are again perfect except for those that indulge in wrongthink and get zapped out of existence in front of their family. So we already have a different utopia where the suffering is more broadly distributed. This creates trauma, which the narrator had experienced for herself, and chose to channel that trauma into reinforcing that status quo to preserve utopia. In this situation, should you choose to leave, you potentially ease your own suffering AND THAT OF THOSE THAT MIGHT COME WITH YOU (i.e., your family). What does staying and fighting mean in this context? It seems that NKJ is suggesting staying and fighting means overcoming your own trauma to stamp out wrongthink? Or is the argument really that one needs to stay and fight against the social workers that are zapping people for wrongthink? And in which case...what exactly? Nothing that I recall from the story suggests an alternative (but it has been a year and a bit since I last read it). What am I overlooking? Because there has to be something I am missing otherwise this is a defense of thoughtpolice, and that can't be right, can it? I mean I can thing of a few possibilities, like how hegemony/dominant cultures are perpetuated generation to generation, but I can't recall textural support for such a reading.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
I think the intended message of Ones Who Stay is to act now, or society is just going to fall apart. Um-Helat found that out way too late, and now they have murder thought police. I think a big part of it is that Um-Helat's trauma is in the past, but says we (earth 2021) are going through the same trauma currently. "Stay" and fight where you're at, build towards the society not built in anyone suffering, but to do so you might cause suffering. It's a fine call to action but it isn't a good response to Omelas. The last few paragraphs of NKJ's story say to spread the possibility of a better world, without hate or suffering, to everyone you know, convince them; people will push back, people may even start wars and kill to prevent a just society, but that's better than rotting away from complacency... So in the end maybe causing suffering (against those who don't believe a just world is possible) now to prevent extra bad suffering later is the goal? LeGuin's story reads that to live in society you take part in suffering, and if you try to make the world better, lessen suffering, you are going to do so at a personal cost. As a response to Omelas NKJ says stay and cause the right kind of suffering to the right kind of people, because trying to not cause suffering will end up with a world destroyed by complacency. killer crane fucked around with this message at 05:09 on Apr 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 04:30
|
|