davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)


The Disabled People Destroy SF Kickstarter*, to produce a disability-themed special issue of Uncanny magazine, is up and running here and well on its way to meeting the initial funding goal (about 80% funded with 29 days to go).

And the first of their personal essays on disability and SF is up here, a good piece on Mental Health/neurodiversity** getting in the way of growing up to be the SF protagonist you dreamed of, that the genre allows you to be, so sitting down and setting to work to change the genre to allow for protagonists with MH/neurodiversity. I'm so glad the first piece talks about MH/neurodiversity and invisible disability, as they're the most invisible/most often cured of SFnal disabilities.
 

* If you aren't familiar with the 'x' People Destroy series, it has already done POC Destroy SF and Queers Destroy SF to significant success. I was initially a little disconcerted it's swapped magazines for the disability issue, from Lightspeed to Uncanny, but the editors of Uncanny have a disabled child and they've assembled a solid team of disabled editors for the special issue, so my worries seem unfounded.

** The author talks about a bipolar diagnosis, but then settles on neurodiversity as their preferred community label. It's a view I have some sympathy with, though it can confuse people about non-MH related neurodiversity.
 

davidgillon: Dina Meyer as Oracle, sitting a manual chair in front of a clock face (Wheelchair)

There's a thread trying to analyse where the Sad Puppies and the rest of SF/F fandom stand over here. I've been kibbitzing around the edge of it for a couple of days, because I've always thought the Puppies were likely to be problematical when it came to pushing for disability equality in SF/F, and particularly for getting rid of cure narratives. I just didn't realise how much of a problem.

Yesterday I picked up a particular point in the Puppy spokesperson's opening statement, because it seemed to be especially problematical for harassment and access policies, outlined how I thought it was an issue for me as a disabled person, and asked her to clarify if I was interpreting her position correctly and if that was part of the Puppy platform.

She hasn't replied. But Brad Torgerson, the whole Puppy movement's leader, has. And oh boy do I have a problem with what he says!

You can read the full thread at the link above, but I'm excerpting my point, the disability part of Torgerson's reply (for an Army CWO he's got a good line in bleating victimhood I don't need to recycle), and my reply.


Me: Hi, Stephanie S

I'm interested in your statement in the original post around "non-falsifiable accusations of racism/sexism/homophobia/etc." When most of the SF/F that addresses disability wants to cure me of being me, I'm sure you can see how the way I'm addressed might be important to me. I've been insulted in the street too many times for being disabled in public, but it's the calls to eradicate people like me that really hurt, and the only place I see them being treated as a positive representation of disabled people is in SF/F, in response to stories with a cure narrative.

It really doesn't take much research to find that whole hordes of disabled people are actively opposed to the idea that we want to be cured (and it's worse cousin that it should be imposed on us, a view that actually made it into the Conservative Manifesto in the recent UK election). Deaf, Neurodiverse*, followers of the Social Model of Disability, many born-disabled, we all find the cure narrative hostile to us, for many of us it isn't tantamount to hate speech, it is hate speech. And if it's hate speech, then clearly it's ableism.

*Autism seems to be a particular draw for cure narratives, particularly problematical given both the vociferous opposition to calls for a cure from autistic self-advocates and the attempts to deny autistic people a voice of their own by people claiming to speak for them (full disclosure: I'm certainly Neurodiverse and have been told by a psychologist I'm likely somewhere in the vicinity of the Autism Spectrum).

But that's not a widely held view among non-disabled people (see not bothering to do the research). So that brings us back to "non-falsifiable accusations of racism/sexism/homophobia/etc." If I say that a story that calls for curing people of being autistic (which David Weber did in one of the more recent Honor Harrington books, even claiming it as evidence of the good guys superior medical ethics) is not just problematic, but is engaged in ableism and hate speech (even if inadvertent) then isn't that an example of the 'non-falsifiable' claims you say are a problem?

I've quoted it elsewhere here already, but UK law enforcement works on a hate speech/hate incident/hate crime definition that foregrounds the perception of the victim:
"A hate incident is:‘Any non-crime incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person, as being motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s age, disability, gender identity, race, religion / belief or sexual orientation’"

When I'm attacked for being me, I'm the only person who can tell you how much damage it did to me. Anyone who tries to tell me whether it did or did not damage me is treating me as a child, who doesn't know their own experience (and being treated as a child is a particularly problematical form of disability hate categorised under the name infantilisation).

In talking about 'non-falsifiable' incidents of hate speech, are you actually saying we as individual victims don't get to say if we are victims or not? And are you saying that is part of the Puppy platform?

Torgerson:

Disability is not an identity. Nor is it a lifestyle. Disability is a predicament. Ask any disabled veteran if (s)he'd prefer going back to life prior to the bullet/bomb/accident, and you'll get a resounding, "YES!" I've written about people with disabilities. The main character of my award-winning novelette "Outbound" is a paraplegic who finds his skills advantageous in a zero-gee environment. Of course, when technology gives him the use of his legs (something he's never had before in his whole life) he takes it all in stride. Pun thoroughly intended. Again, disability is not an identity, and it is not a lifestyle. It's a predicament. That doesn't shame or diminish the disabled. It recognizes the truth of their existence. A compassionate society can still be compassionate, without losing sight of the gravity of the actual situation. This is why whole medical industries remain mobilized to find solutions to various disabilities, both physical and mental.

Me:
Wow, the arch-Puppy himself. I'm honoured. Actually, no I'm not, because your point erases the preferences of huge numbers of disabled people.

I identify as a disabled person, as a disability rights activist, as a repeated victim of disability hate speech, disability hate incidents, and yes, disability hate crimes. Who are you to tell me disability is not an identity?

"Disability is a predicament." Nope, I'm Neurodiverse, I'm quite sure being me is not a predicament. And the Neurodiversity movement as a whole is adamant you don't get to call it a predicament. It's who we are.

I'm also a wheelchair user, pretty sure that's not a predicament either. I had a huge grin on my face this afternoon because the new chair's so much better. Better than the old one, better than walking. Now not every disabled person is going to agree with that. But ask them which they prefer, no chair, or a chair? Wheelchairs are incredibly liberating, but the normie population, who can't be arsed to do the research to see what we actually think, persist in thinking a wheelchair is a tragedy. The disability that leads to you being a wheelchair user may, or may not, be something you consider a negative, the chair itself is a positive on top of that.

"disability is not an identity, and it is not a lifestyle. It's a predicament. That doesn't shame or diminish the disabled. It recognizes the truth of their existence."

Contemptuous much? You get to judge what our existence is worth, we don't? Ask the Neurodiverse community, ask the Deaf Community, ask any follower of the Social Model of Disability, ask many born-disabled people, all of whom consider their disability a fundamental part of their identity and in no way a negative, nor 'a predicament'. And before you do that, go away and review what I said upthread about infantilisation as a particularly pernicious form of disability hate that denies disabled people the right to be treated as adults with our own opinions, and our own identity.

"A compassionate society can still be compassionate, without losing sight of the gravity of the actual situation"

I don't want your compassion. I want you to look me in the eye and tell me you accept me as your equal just the way I am, and that you accept my right to identify myself any way I damned well please.

And do the damned research! Huge swathes of disabled people consider disability to be a core and inseparable part of their identity and want no part of any cure. It's not even as if it hasn't been all over fandom in the past month with the SF Signal/Amy Sterling Casil/"We Are All Disabled" fiasco!


Wow! Just wow. I don't know if he took umbrage for me taking on cure narratives seeing as he admits above to having written one, or if he has a particular problem with people who don't accept disability as some kind of victimhood, or if I'm running into some odd corner of his LDS theology, or what.

But what I do know is that he doesn't get to indulge himself in infantilising me by telling me that my disability is not my identity, and then to victimise me.

I'll undoubtedly blog about it when it's had time to sink in, but for now, colour me furious and flabbergasted.

davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)

I picked up on Ellen Oh's Dear White Writers a couple of days late, so missed most of the unpleasantness. I agree with what she's saying, we as white writers shouldn't be suddenly writing non-white protagonists just to jump on the diversity band-wagon. But as a diverse writer who happens to be white, being exhorted not to write diverse protagonists is a bit problematical.

The problem isn't her message per se, I get what she's trying to say and agree with it, it's that her point is applicable beyond ethnicity and her terminology wanders all over the place. Half the time she uses 'diversity' where she specifically means 'ethnicity', and that's a problem because a good two thirds of the stuff published about We Need Diverse Books makes the same mistake, and when that message is repeated often enough, it risks further excluding the non-ethnicity based diversities, and convincing people that if you are white you can't be a diverse author. Normally the core WNDB team have been pretty good about getting this right, this time Ellen Oh seems to have taken her eye off the ball, and other people are being misled by that, such as the literary agency that blogged under the title White Writers: Don't Write Diverse Books. Instead, Read Them. I challenged them on that on Twitter, they admitted it could do with clarification and they would get onto it, and did nothing (so I went to the blog and commented).

That there might be an issue with how Ellen Oh said stuff, is lost in all the sturm und drang of various white people being furious at what she said and unleashing a storm of hate at her for daring to suggest white writers might be trying to treat WNDB as a cash cow. I tried making my point on twitter, but 140 characters is a bit limiting for that kind of nuanced message, so I gave in and blogged about it tonight.

Dear Non-Diverse Writers

(I bit my tongue and refrained from addressing her "There’s a whole lot of angry people on twitter losing their collective minds")



davidgillon: Dina Meyer as Oracle, sitting a manual chair in front of a clock face (Wheelchair)

I've finally written my second blog in response to SF Signal/Amy Sterling-Casil's "We Are All Disabled" (aka the utter car-crash).

SF/F and the Politics of Disability

TLDR: Disability exists within a political context Sterling-Casil couldn't be bothered to research

Trigger warnings for discussions of Ableism/Disablism and Aktion T4.

davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)
I forgot to mention it before heading North, but BBC R4 just re-ran their radio play version of Iain M Bank's The State of the Art, which is a pretty good adaption and well worth listening to if you're a fan. It's available here until the 20th (though I'm not sure if that link will work for non-UK users).
davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)
This blew up at the start of the week, but I haven't had the energy to write about it until now.

Apparently a couple of months ago Irene Gallo, Tor's Creative Director, noted , on her own, non-company, Facebook page, how glad she was that Tor would be publishing Kameron Hurley's The Geek Feminist Revolution, and especially because it would make the Sad Puppies sadder.

Someone asked her who the Sad Puppies were, so she explained, not unreasonably that:

There are two extreme right wing to neo-Nazi groups called the Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies respectively, that are calling for the end of social justice in SF and Fantasy. They are unrepentently racist, mysogynistic and homophobic. A noisy few, but they've been able to gather some Gamersgaters around them and elect a slate of bad-to-reprehensible works on this year's Hugo Ballot.

Apparently the Puppies pitched a shitstorm about it last weekend, calling for Tor to sack Gallo. A weekend which curiously just happened to be the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America Nebula Awards weekend - that would be the same organisation that expelled Rabid Puppy guru (also noted racist, mysogynist and homophobic Neo-Nazi) Theodore Beale (aka Pox Dei, sorry Vox Day) over his use of the organisation's twitter feed to direct appalling racism towards Afro-American writer N K Jemisin**. Which would have been more of the usual really, but for how Tor responded.
 
On Monday Tor publisher Tom Doherty didn't tell the Puppies to take a flying f*ck, he disciplined Irene Gallo, for something said on her own Facebook page. Nor did he discipline her in private, in accordance with every principle of good leadership, he did it in public, through an open letter on Tor's website, throwing one of his own people to the wolves, er Puppies. Nor did he leave it at that, but he felt compelled to defend the Puppies as pro-diversity because they had some authors from diverse groups on their slates.

Do we really have to explain sub-text to the publisher of Tor? Do we really have to explain how the Puppies dressed up their slates with tokenism?

Apparently we do.

And then just to make things perfect, John C Wright, Tor author and recipient of _6_ Hugo nominations courtesy of the Puppies turned up in the comments to protest that it is a lie he is an unrepentant homophobe, and he could prove he wasn't a homophobe because {several hundred words of extremist homophobic rant deleted}.

Needless to say I'm seriously unimpressed with Tor in general, and Tom Doherty in particular.

OTOH I was impressed by Chuck Wendig's I Stand By Irene Gallo. Amongst other points he notes that Doherty said precisely nothing when Jim Frenkel's years of sexual harrassment of female fans while attending cons as a representative of Tor came out, but now he's oh so anxious  to discipline Irene Gallo in public.

The Gawker also has a reasonable summation of the clusterf*ck.

America's Largest Sci-Fi Publisher Gives in to Reactionary "Sad Puppies"


*Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk*



*In the anti-mysogynistic tradition of 'Oh, John Ringo, No!'

** As I came across it while checking links etc, Amal el Mohtar's*** complaint leading to Beale's expulsion from SFWA can be read here, be warned it has all the evidence you'll need to realise just how horrendous Beale's views are, and that calling him a neo-Nazi is only the half of it. (This is a man who calls Anders Breivik a hero, that would be the same Anders Breivik who murdered 77 people in Norway, 55 of them teenagers).

*** One more reason to like Amal el Mohtar's work :)

davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)
(Just wrote this in response to a nicely reasonable post over here defending the Sad Puppies, but then realised that with a couple of edits to make it standalone it articulated everything that I've been wanting to say about the Sad Puppies since I first came across them last year)
 
What disturbs me most about the Sad Puppies isn't so much the Hugo aspect as the contempt for other fans. Even the name is an attack on their hated 'social justice warriors'. I'm a long-time fan of military SF, I love Correia's Monster Hunter series, but that's about all we have in common, because I'm also disabled, and the hatred I've experienced just for being disabled, up to and including physical assault by passing strangers for walking while disabled (never mind the calculated hatred that destroyed my career in aerospace) together with the hatred I see routinely directed at disabled friends and acquaintances, mean that I spend my life campaigning for disability equality, and when I'm not talking about that I'm talking about the need for SF/F to get its collective head out of its ass over disability and start talking and writing about it like adults. TL:DR I'm a social justice warrior, I'm proud to be a social justice warrior, and anyone who treats me with contempt for confronting ableism/disablism in our society, and in our genre, is someone who is part of the problem, not part of the cure.

It sickened me the other night to see a Sad Puppy trying to bait TNH and Charlie Stross on Twitter by claiming that it was the Sad Puppies trying to support diversity, not everyone else, and when I challenged him on it he seemed unaware that diversity was anything but ethnicity, making clear that the only interest the Sad Puppies have in diversity is in exploiting minority groups for their own ends. Their attempt to bring in that well-known, diversity-friendly group the Gamers-gaters (you know, the ones trying to drive female voices out of gaming, the ones who hate any woman who dares to speak for themselves, or any man who dares to back them, and who show it through harassment, rape and death threats and the reckless endangerment of SWATting), goes beyond sickening into actually frightening, people are being seriously hurt by the Gamers-Gaters and there's a real chance someone will end up being killed if the SWATting continues. What on earth convinced someone in the Sad Puppy camp that injecting this hatred into SF/F fandom would be a positive step? And why haven't Correia, Torgersen et al tried to rein back this dangerous development? Or is it that they don't see 'social justice warriors' as actual people?

Fandom isn't perfect when it comes to inclusion, our genre isn't perfect when it comes to inclusion, as the fact I need to campaign on making people like myself visible in our writing shows, but fandom is better than most at inclusion, and it's trying to clean up its act in places where there have been problems in the past, by ensuring that cons are safe places for women and minority groups, by ensuring that access provisions for people like me are in place, and so on. Yet everything I see from the Sad Puppies says that they have a massive contempt for those changes, the needs that drive them, and, ultimately, for the right to equality of people like me. Sad Puppy supporters may disagree, but from where I stand the Sad Puppies seem little better than the thugs who attacked me in the street.

Squee

Mar. 31st, 2015 04:42 am
davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)
The inarticulate squeeing from my direction this afternoon was me discovering that the first seven chapters of the next Rachel Peng novel by K B Spangler are out as a free sample,

For those who don't follow the series, they're near future techno-thrillers/police procedurals, Rachel is the liaison to the Washington DC Metro PD for the Office of Advanced and Complementary Emerging Technologies, which mean she's not just a Fed, she's a Fed who's a cyborg with a quantum chip in her head that allows her to make any database anywhere sit-up and beg, gives her reception across the complete EM spectrum, near telepathy with the other OACET agents, and so on. She's also half-Chinese, gay, and blind - the only reason she isn't the Federal poster child for diversity is the fact she's blind is a secret among a handful of her friends, the chip lets her mostly pass, though she has trouble with the simplest of things - reading and faces.

The first two books in the series are Digital Divide and Maker Space and the new one is State Machine, which involves a murder at the White House and a missing maguffin (I figured out what it is very early, though the narrative hasn't quite confirmed that yet), and as a side arc that'll likely please a few people around here, three of the secondary characters are now in a poly relationship.

And of course K B Spangler also draws the A Girl and Her Fed webcomic which shares a universe with Rachel, in fact she's in the current story arc, which is interesting for letting you see the author's imagining of her.

davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)
I saw disturbing hints on the net last night (a thread on the Nielsen-Haydens' forum that had spilled over into twitter) that the US right-wingers who tried to hijack last year's Hugo voting (the self-named Sad Puppies - it's apparently supposed to show how pathetic 'social justice warriors' are) haven't just tried again (nominations are out at the weekend), but are actively trying to drag the Gamers-gaters into it. I don't like the idea of trying to politicise the Hugos to start with, but that isn't actually excluded by the current procedures so we can't object beyond saying we find it distasteful, but trying to drag in non-fans known for abusive behaviour, threats, and reckless endangerment (SWATting), strikes me as destroying what little credibility they had.

I hadn't intended buying a supporting membership this year, but if the story is accurate then I may have to just on general principle.
davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)

From the moment [personal profile] jesse_the_k suggested this there was only one book I was going to write about.

Well, actually there were two, but I'm going to write about them both for the same reason. (And this is really helpful because I've been meaning to write an essay starting with them for several months now, and this may be the kick I need to get the thing done).

My two books are both Golden Age of SF classics, Heinlein's Starship Troopers (1959) and Anne McCaffrey's The Ship Who Sang (1969) (Ship is a little late for the Golden Age label, but I'd argue it shares the same aesthetic).

I guess I encountered them both in late teens - I strongly suspect both my copies came from the bookshop at Lancaster University, so I'd be 19-20ish when I read them in around about 1982/3. My local library when I was growing up had a reasonable supply of juvenile SF, so I grew up reading Heinlein, Clarke and Norton, but it was less good on anything adult, while my small market-town home town didn't have any large bookshops (a small W H Smiths was about it), so uni was really the first chance I had for regular access to a bookshop with a reasonable selection of adult SF and I had some catching up to do. Nowadays I'd probably call Ship Who Sang YA, and you can make a case for it for the Heinlein too, which apparently was written first as YA, then re-written as more of an adult work, but has probably drifted back to being a YA as genre boundaries shift.

They were both books that seized my imagination and left a lasting impression, the Heinlein predictably as I've always been a fan of military SF, the McCaffrey less so, a heroine who's a singing spaceship? There are some shared elements of bildungsroman, but otherwise few common elements - at least as most people read them.

Starship Troopers
is the story of Johnny Rico who is recruited into the Mobile Infantry, given a suit of powered armour and a nuclear grenade launcher and goes off to fight anything non-human as a soldier for the Terran Federation. There's the requisite training segment (flogging as an approved training aid in a modern military?), followed by all-out war with the arachnoid Bugs. Scattered through this are various characters acting as glove-puppets for Heinlein in didactic mode, which isn't exactly news WRT Heinlein books, but Troopers probably takes it to an extreme not present in most of his other books. The Terran Federation has a distinctly authoritarian edge and the Heinlein glove-puppets lecture us on how the franchise and right to hold public office is only extended to those who have undertaken a term of Federal Service and why that is for the good of all (plus the usual Heinlein cult of the gun stuff). When I read Starship Troopers it was the height of the Cold War, and I fully planned on making a career in the defence industry if not the military itself, so the appeal was obvious (and I was significantly more right wing in my general politics at that age than nowadays), but even then I found the political system disturbing in ways I wasn't then able to define.

The Ship Who Sang, by contrast, is the story of Helva, who is born disabled, selected by Central Worlds for service as a shell-child and treated to limit her future growth so that she can be encased in a shell for future service as the central brain of a city or starship. She grows up in a state orphanage to become a spaceship, discovers she can sing, has adventures, finds a guy who can love her in spite of the whole spaceship thing, and heads off into the sunset with him. Not my typical fare, but I did like McCaffrey's writing and Helva is a very lovable character.

And there we stayed until I happened to re-read both in the early-Noughties. I was active on Compuserve's SFLit at the time, which had a book club element, and ISTR we did both of them, probably as they were books lots of us were aware of and could easily lay our hands on, and I found my reading of both books had utterly changed. Two (maybe three) things had happened to drive that change: I'd settled into my adult politics, which I usually describe as bleeding heart liberal, I'm in general fairly well to the left of any of the major parliamentary parties on social/economic policies; and I'd become noticeably disabled and started to develop an understanding of disability politics (when precisely I became disabled is a messy question, but I started thinking of myself as disabled in the very late 80s and my politics settled on the activist setting in the early Oughties). And the third thing is that I was late to adult maturity in the neurotypical sense of things - hell I'm still working stuff out. And it was fair to say that both books now horrified me.

I now recognise Starship Troopers as a sort of forerunner to some of the more openly/clearly libertarian works of SF we see today from a clique of right-wing US authors of military SF. It's fetishization of Federal Service is probably a consequence of Heinlein being invalided out of his military career before WWII, but as I'm writing this I'm comparing it with the outright fetishization of the openly Fascist society of the Draka in S M Stirling's eponymous series (which I've been flicking through recently) and if it falls short of Fascism then it's only by degree. Starship Troopers openly says democracy belongs in the hands of military veterans and that civilians who haven't served are beneath contempt (look particularly at the characterisation of Rico's father). A lot of people criticized Paul Verhoeven's film for playing up the fascist elements in Starship Troopers, but to be honest they're there to play up (it's possible this is more apparent if you're European rather than American as America does have a distinct element of fetishizing military service and demanding it for most political figures). And then there's Heinlein's attitude to disability (and remember, invalided out): firstly we have Rico's recruiting sergeant, who is visibly a triple amputee, uniform tailored to make this clear to scare the potential recruits with what might happen to them - but he has a perfectly good set of  prosthetics to put on once he's done for the day. Beating people with the 'disability is something to be scared of' stick is particularly problematical as we campaign to try and make people treat disability as normal, so that was never going to go down well.  Then there's a comment mid-way through the book that if someone who was severely disabled, say deaf-blind, wanted to serve, then they would find them a way, probably by sticking them in a room and getting them to count the hairs on a centipede as make-work. Not only does this have echoes of locking the unpleasant crip away in the attic, but there's an underlying contempt that says severely disabled people are only good for make-work. Of course the reality is that with contemparary reasonable adjustment policies there are deaf-blind people holding down high-powered jobs, and for that matter I had a 20-odd year career doing cutting-edge defence stuff, most of that while pretty significantly disabled. All-out war against the alien hordes, which has the greatest value for society - enabling the disabled person to be a weapon scientist (or whatever), or locking them away doing make-work counting centipede hairs?

So yes, nowadays I find Starship Troopers deeply problematical.

Turning to The Ship Who Sang, as I read it now as a disabled adult I see:
  • That Central Worlds euthanizes the overwhelming majority of disabled babies
  • That it chooses a select few with high IQ to enslave as shell-children (comparisons with child soldiers seem entirely valid)
  • That those children are taken away from their parents (and that their parents willingly allow that).
  • That no effort is made to treat the children's disabilities or enable them to become normal members of society - Helva would be entirely capable of living independently at current levels of technology, never mind Central Worlds levels
  • That those children are then deliberately stunted and neutered in a way reminiscent of the worst of the Baby Ashley/Pillow Angel atrocity
  • That in an echo of Victorian and Pre-Victorian locking the cripple away in the attic those children are then deliberately locked away in shells lest any right-thinking person see them (and made life-support dependent even if they weren't)
  • That they are brainwashed to believe this is for the best, with anyone who disagrees subjected to mockery (look at the treatment and characterization of the 'do gooders' who monitor the shell children).
  • That having had their childhoods stolen they are then charged for the privilege of becoming literal cogs in the Central Worlds machine in a system of indentured servitude/debt peonage - oh hell, let's just call it what it is, slavery.
  • That having shut the crips away in the attic once by encasing them in the shells they are then shut away for a second time by encasing them in the controls of their ship/city/whatever, removing the little independent mobility they had left to them and forever barring them from going anywhere in their society - they become not so much citizens as infrastructure
  • That Helva is then sent out, with little training and some decidedly dubious choices for her 'brawn' partner as a Central Worlds troubleshooter into situations which repeatedly nearly get her killed.
  • That she is stalked in decidedly creepy fashion by her boss, and eventually decides that he's the man for her.
  • And that they all live happily ever after.

If I find Starship Troopers problematical, then I find the society of The Ship Who Sang utterly loathsome, and yet Helva is still a lovable character and it's Rico's society most contemporary readers find problematic. Both books are products of the eras in which they were written, eras in which the idea that disabled people are equal were even less understood than today, but when we read them today, we necessarily judge them with the understanding we have today, and neither fares well.
davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)
I've spent off-time while up at my folks' working on a short story I plan on submitting to Accessing the Future, the crowdfunded anthology of disability-themed SF.

They note in the submission guidelines that they're looking for intersectionality, I've definitely got that in that I have a disabled female engineer fighting for her job against a plot to unseat her by a patriarchal subordinate with a punishment for sin view of disability.

But.... I realised that just by changing three words I can imply she's non-Caucasian, which adds an additional layer of intersectionality, but not one actually related to the story. If I call her Larsen (x2) and describe her toddler as blonde, then everyone will assume Caucasian, but if I call her Ochoa (or Hernandez or whatever), and simply describe the toddler as gorgeous, then a lot of people will assume she's Hispanic.

Additional intersectionality is good, but this sort of feels like cheating. Thoughts?

(Just to complicate things, I was debating with myself on the train journey home, wondered if I could use the protagonist for any other stories, and realised that she fits a role I have mapped out for a novel concept, and her ethnicity might play a role there),



10 Novels

Sep. 3rd, 2014 11:32 pm
davidgillon: Picture of balding white male, AKA me. (Me)
I put this up on Flat-Out at the weekend, but it actually fits better here. Someone challenged me to name "ten books that have stayed with me for one reason or another throughout my life." It's an interesting challenge, but I'm going to play fast and loose with the counting.

Pride of Chanur and Foreigner, C J Cherryh
 C J Cherryh has been a favourite for as long as I've been reading her books, and one of the reasons is her detailed worldbuilding, or perhaps I should call that species building, as that's what she does best. Pride of Chanur and Foreigner share similar structures, both the starts of series, both featuring male humans dropped into an alien species which they aren't fully able to understand. Pride takes the story from the alien side, Foreigner from the human. And in both affection successfully crosses the species barrier, raising deeper questions of mores and sexuality.

Cyteen and Regenesis, C J Cherryh
 Having picked a pair of Cherryh books for what she does with aliens, a further pair for what she can do with humans. Cyteen and Regenesis deal with the death of scientific genius and political icon Arianne Emory, and the childhood of Arianne Emory 2, as her project to recreate herself in not just body, but mind as well takes form. But who killed AE1, and are they still out there, targetting AE2... All the major players are psychological manipulators, but they're about to be outwitted by their own creation.

Little Fuzzy
, H Beam Piper
 The only book I'm listing from the Golden Age, Little Fuzzy has all the strengths of pacing and concise storytelling that the best of the pulps offer, but with the addition of a sense of the environment that seems more post-80s than pre-60s. A prospector out in the wilds of a backwater planet realises there is actually an intelligent native species, a fact which will destroy the planet's economic value if it becomes known, but the entire planet is a company town, and they don't want to lose their economic prize.

Pattern Recognition, William Gibson
 A book I try to reread at least once a year, and the start of a loose trilogy (with Spook Country and Zero History) tied together by the character of Belgian billionaire and marketing genius Hubertus Bigend. This is undoubtedly a Gibson book, with all his strengths, but unlike his previous SFnal work it's a contemporary, post-911 book, with the protagonist, Cayce, having lost her father during the attack (emphasis on the 'lost', he's not confirmed dead). Cayce's thing is fashion and trends, something she is uncannily sensitive to and employed to advise on, and her passion is a series of odd, haunting, noirish film clips, the Footage, that are being released onto the net with no idea of where they came from, or who created them. Then Bigend hires Cayce to track down the origin of the Footage, but does he just want to monetize it, and does the Footage want to be found?

The Winter Market, William Gibson
 So why am I listing a short story (technically a novelette) in a list of novels? Because if you want the works that have affected me most, then this is undoubtedly one. Published in Gibson's Burning Chrome anthology, one of the most important anthologies in SF history for what it and Bruce Sterling's contemporary collection Mirrorshades did to shape the field, this is a stunning exploration of disability, death and identity, but mostly listed because 28 years on I still can't escape being haunted by Lise's 'Sometimes I like to watch'.

At the Mountains of Mourning, Lois McMaster Bujold
 Like 'The Winter Market', a list of the works that have affected me most wouldn't be complete without this short story (technically it's a novella, and published in the collection of the same name). The Miles Vorkosigan books have always had a focus on disability, Miles being disabled in a society that doesn't tolerate the Other, but in this story LMB foregrounds that even more than usual and a very young Miles takes it on himself to investigate the death of a disfigured infant, a death that exposes more of the ugly underside of Barrayaran society than Miles may have expected to find.

Memory, Lois McMaster Bujold
 Having listed a Miles Vorkosigan short story, I think I have to have a novel length one, because it takes that amount of space to see the glory that is Miles, that hyperactive runt (as Cousin Ivan designates him), at full throttle. I could as easily have picked any of the later Miles novels, but Memory is where Miles is finally forced to grow up and assume his position in Barrayaran society. Originally I loved Miles for being a disabled action hero, but Memory is where he demonstrates he can be just as compelling a hero when the action takes place in the Imperial court, or in an interrogation cell.

Ash: A Secret History, Mary Gentle
Ash has apparently just been republished in the Masterworks of Fantasy series, but it's actually very well disguised SF hidden behind the tale of the exploration of the background of an alternative Joan of Arc (the eponymous Ash) and the discovery that the fantastical elements of the story may not be as fantastical or allegorical as modern researchers have believed. Mary Gentle has been one of my favourite fantasy authors for as long as I can remember, and one of the most ambitious, which may perhaps explain why she isn't as well known as many less ambitious authors.

Cryptonomicon, Neal Stephenson
Cryptonomicon (and it's prequel trilogy The Baroque Cycle create a secret history of connections amongst the lesser known movers and shakers of the world, in Cryptonomicon's case deeply linked into Enigma, Bletchley Park, and Nazi gold. And that's only half the book, because the intertwined rest revolves around their grandchildren, trying to create an artificial currency and offshore data haven, and what happens when they run into the story of that Nazi gold. Neal Stephenson's books manage the weird combination of being both incredibly dense, and dragging you in with often breakneck pacing. 

Look to Windward and The Use of Weapons, Iain M Banks
 Iain Banks was guest of honour at LonCon3 a couple of weeks ago, even though he died last year, and he's been one of the strongest voices in British SF (and mainstream) since I first read him in my early 20s. It's difficult to pick one Banks book, I could as easily have picked, say, The Business from his mainstream works, that's another favourite, but the Culture was at the core of his work, so one late Culture novel, Look to Windward, which I think is Banks at the peak of his work, and one early, The Use of Weapons, for Banks at his early, stylistic, best, and for the image of that chair, which has stayed with me for 25 years.

Locked In and Unlocked, John Scalzi
 Putting a novel that only released a week ago in the list may seem excessive, but I've been waiting for Locked In with bated breath since reading the companion novella Unlocked a couple of months ago. It's an SF novel about disability, with a disabled protagonist, and it gets it right; that's so rare. And what's more, it goes the entire length of the novel without gendering the protagonist, which is a stunning accomplishment. But even if you don't recognise the sharp observation of the disabled condition, it's a damned good murder mystery with a logic to the crime that's deeply embedded within the milieu in which it occurs. I'll be astounded if this isn't short-listed for next year's Hugo. Unlocked, by contrast with the novel, sheds the tight focus on the crime in favour of a wide and deep investigation of the post-Haden's Syndrome World, that lets it look even more closely at the disability parallels, and it gets them even more right than in the novel (and it's free).

I make that 12 novels, 2 novellas and a novelette - close enough.

Profile

davidgillon: A pair of crutches, hanging from coat hooks, reflected in a mirror (Default)
David Gillon

March 2025

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
1617 18192021 22
2324 2526272829
3031     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 23rd, 2025 01:05 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios