h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Della, what Le Guin books have you tried reading? She has a very wide range and there are some that I haven't been able to read yet (because of her style in them).

I haven't read any Janet Frame either. That doesn't make her boring however, it just means that I don't find her style easy to read. I thoroughly enjoyed the film adaptation of Angel at my Table so I know it's not the content.

If you don't like something I agree you are under no obligation to read it. However writing off an entire author's work as boring is like someone calling you fundamentalist because of a particular view that you have that they don't like. It seems disrespectful.

Adelaide/Della/Adele/whatever-she's-called-this-week wrote: "I am... neither right wing or fundamentalist, BTW"

Your opinions and methods of expressing them on this site suggest the opposite is true on both counts.

Here's a question to which I invite answers:

Would it be acceptable, *artistically*, for a black author to write a novel or series of novels in which the villains were stereotyped whites?

Would it be acceptable *artistically*, for an oriental author to thus stereotype westerners? How about a sub-continental Asian?

Here's another poser for you: books are a relatively minor influence on mainstream culture today. Television and film are more influential.

List high profile action films of the last decade or two in which the hero and/or sidekick is WHITE and the villain is BLACK.

Now list the ones where the opposite is the case.

For item 1, I'm thinking "Demolition Man". And then I'm stumped.
For item 2, I don't have the time or space.

No point to this, just an observation.

H.
Oink.

Star Trek having black characters in was seen as massively important and influential at the time. The woman who played Uhura was planning to leave the series until Martin Luther King wrote to her and asked her to stay. She was percieved as that important in terms of the Civial Rights movement.

Ben: >>Which raises an interesting question, namely: to what extent is the sexism in LoTR, (and indeed Swallows and Amazons) unwitting reportage?<<

Well I think that people write what they know or are aware of. If one is not aware of sexism it's hard to not write gender bias in one's work. Ditto racism etc.

There were people of Tolkein's time both writing about sexism, and writing work that attempted to present women more fully. I assume that this is true for racism, classism etc. So what is it about the rest that made it so difficult?

I think people unintentionally write bias because the issue is usually invisible to most people except the class being biased against.



>>It should not be forgotten that Star Trek broke ground in the 1960s for its (comparatively) non-sexist and non-racist stance<<

I was looking at the Star Trek video covers before in the vid shop. I haven't seen the new Star Trek "Enterprise", but it was interesting to look at the cover http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B00005UPPS.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Lots of white guys was my first impression (and this was probably a surprise compared to the likes of Voyager, which is lots of white gals). But, oh look, there is a woman or two at the back there, and an asian and a black man or is it vulcan?

I'm guessing that Hoo and some others here will think this is irrelevant. Myself, I think it bears further investigation (especially in relation to what Le Guin was saying in the above quote). Probably what I want to say most is that this isn't a reflection of early Federation stafffing policy so much as it's a refelction of 2Oth century American popular culture

I will be interested to see to what extent the content is similar.

>>>
Would it be acceptable, *artistically*, for a black author to write a novel or series of novels in which the villains were stereotyped whites?
Would it be acceptable *artistically*, for an oriental author to thus stereotype westerners? How about a sub-continental Asian?<<<


hmm, I can't see the point *artistically* in writing stereotypes at all.

>>Isnt it quite explicit that the people of Geds island have brown skin. Also in the third book (my vague memory of the story might be a bit out here) but didnt the priciple charater comment on ged having brown skin?<<

FB it is referred to, but I can't remember where this first happens. Rather I would say that it is _implicit_ in the book.


I just hauled out my copy and the cover has a very ethnically vague looking Ged on the front. I'm sure they worked really hard at that.

>>List high profile action films of the last decade or two in which the hero and/or sidekick is WHITE and the villain is BLACK.
Now list the ones where the opposite is the case.

For item 1, I'm thinking "Demolition Man". And then I'm stumped.
For item 2, I don't have the time or space.
<<

That's confusing. I haven't seen Demolition Man, and I can't tell from your post which are meant to be items 1 and 2.

Are you saying that the heros are all black and the villians all white? Or the other way round?

The senior staff of The Enterprise consists of:

Captain Jonathan Archer - White human male
Lieutenant Malcolm Reed - White human male
Commander Charles "Trip" Tucker - White human male
Subcommander T'Pol - White Vulcan female
Ensign Hoshi Sato - Oriental human female
Ensign Travis Mayweather - Black human male
Doctor Phlox (CMO)- Pinky/browny can't remember what species male

So 42% of the senior staff are white human males.
28% are female
14% are black
28% are non-white
28% are non-human
42% were not born on Earth

Hoo is saying that Demolition Man is the only recent film he can think of off-hand where the hero is white and the villan black.

To a certain extent one can add Total Recall.

It beats me! He claimed to have overcome Tolkien's sexism, by allowing Eowyn to go and fight, and by strengthening the parts women played. This was sheer stupid self-promotion - he actually turned both Eowyn and Arwen into sappy limpid-eyed drips, pining for the manly Aragorn! Eowyn is a pathetic wimp right from when we first see her, casting poisoned glances at Grima, and not (as she does in the book) standing up to him at all. Then in swoops Aragorn, to rescue her from Grima's unwanted attentions! In the film she's just a weeping wet dishcloth, who casts longing glances at Aragorn, standing on a windswept height, she sees him approach, because she'd gone outside to emote. Very romantic. Very American.
Arwen is just a Valley Girl, honestly. It's a typically American touch to have Aragorn played by a man in his late 40s, and Arwen by a 19 year old. The Arwen of the book is 3000 years old, and has a strong will and great wisdom. Film Arwen defies Elrond to be with Aragorn, and comes across as a petulant grounded sitcom daughter! Jackson took credit for that, implying that the book kept her and Eowyn offstage most of the time! (No doubt he trusts that most of the people he's aiming the films at (the CGI abd battle loving 19-25 year old male, judging by the 3rd movie) haven't read the books.
There are other women left out completely, a woman healer in Gondor, Tom Bombadil's woman friend, other female elves, hobbits (aside from Rosie Cotton, seen in Sam's memories.) (Mind you, the Yellow Booted One is left out altogether and I can see why.)
I do not like Peter Jackson! Maybe you can tell... He is a self publicising and unpleasant little nerk.
I like the films, but consider them quite separate from the books. They're not so much the film of LotR but "based on a book by JRR Tolkien", as all the Star Trek series since TNG are said to be in the opening credits "based on a concept by Gene Roddenberry. Gene's vision of a future free of sexism, racism and war is gone.

>>Gene's vision of a future free of sexism, racism and war is gone.<<

I kind of understand the idea that Roddenberry was trying to not be sexist, but isn't James T Kirk one of the most sexist characters anyway?


I never like Eowyn in the book btw. Too much angst and glory (wanting to be the son). Although the battle with the Nazgul seemed to be the making of her.

<< However writing off an entire author's work as boring is like someone calling you fundamentalist because of a particular view that you have that they don't like. It seems disrespectful.>>

I've tried with le Guin, I really have. I tried reading the Earthsea works,and others(the first of hers I read was something called 'The Word for World is Forest'.)
Heaps of people call me a fundamentalist. That's sad, and IMO silly. Not to mention massively intolerant, and I have to say it, there ain't a lot of tolerance of differing views on h2g2...
I don't like Anne McCaffrey either, and I've read a wide sample - I tell you, I don't write anyone off on the basis of only one work. So, what does that make me? (I note that Hoo took the fullest (expected) advantage of the opening you gave him... )

Thanks for the stats Kerr. I am looking forward to seeing the actual vid.


As for H.'s question - how about Star Wars?

Della, did you try the Earthsea books or the SF? I have given up on her SF, and the 'Orsinian Tales' are too mannered for me but I for one find Earthsea has some profoud ideas in it.

>> Isnt it quite explicit that the people of Geds island have brown skin.

Like I said, 'shame to me'. In my defence I read the first of them when I was about 10 and I was raised in rural England, where 'brown' meant 'tanned'. But all in all, 'shame to me', because I certainly have read them enough since.

B

Hoo, to quote someone else on another thread tonight "don't be a pig." I am sick and tired of trying to prove to you what I am or am not. Your mind is tightly closed on that subject.

Err, the Emperor is about as white as you can get!

Fair one Ben...

Still my difficulty in remembering the names of the charaters has made me think about re-reading the books.

Just as soon as I finish Gormanghast....

Sorry, that was in response to Kin's question.

Della I don't think we need another rendition of your "I am so opressed thing"

If you don't like what Hoo has to say ignore him, if you rise to the bait then that is what he is looking for.

>> (I note that Hoo took the fullest (expected) advantage of the opening you gave him... ) <<

Well H. would be one of the more intellectually fundamentalist people on the site, and he really dislikes you.... *shrug*


I think that point I was making was that it seems valid to me to dislike a writer's work (even all of it), but to write it off as boring on the basis of that is being unfairly judgemental (as opposed to having good judgement). I know you don't like people doing this to you, so I am surprised that you do it too.

But then I know you read Ron Hubbard, and I can't stand the man, so I should probably shut up now.