hawkwing_lb: (Aveline is not amused)
My first real internet slapfight. It feels like a coming-of-age. Or perhaps a baptism by fire.

The comments at SH have broken 125. I never expected a response of this magnitude, but since it's occurred, I think it's worth a moment's consideration. (Also, I am procrastinating on my conference paper.) Out of the response a number of interesting questions have arisen, which may be roughly grouped into two opposing views of legitimacy.

The first group raises the following questions:

1. Who may "legitimately" review what sorts of books?

2. Whether passion, hyperbole, and angry rhetoric invalidate legitimate critique.


This latter argument is most often referred to as the tone argument (Why you gotta be so angry, baby?) and followers of various race- and feminism-related internet discussions will recall its frequent use is as a silencing and/or derailing technique - the discussion is often derailed into considerations of tone and politeness alone, rather than addressing the substance of the argument. Too, adherents of the tone argument frequently question the legitimacy of the anger/passion itself, denying that there may be a long-running pattern which gives both rise and reason to it.

The first group's questions are not, I think, critical. But the second group's ones trouble me.

The second group asks this:

1. Whether some books are more inherently "worthy" of critical review than others.

2. What constitutes such a book?

3. (Implied.) And why?


This is a question SFF as a genre and a community should, perhaps, consider asking. Books by men are reviewed more frequently than books by women; reviews and "buzz" affect what's considered for awards, and what's brought onto the horizon of people's attention. Criticism also serves a purpose in pointing out problematic trends in entertainment: the acceptance of social privilege, for example, as a normal and unmarked state troubles me about the books I read - not while I'm reading them, but after, when I cast my mind back. (Too, the marginalisation of female agency is a large part of why I can't wholeheartedly enjoy some of the epic fantasy (and other high fantasy) that I read; and the prevalence - the normalisation - of violence, particularly sexual violence, in the grim/dark mode irritates me excessively.)




I've collected a few links for posterity.

Comments at SH

Fantasy Book Critic

The OF Blog

The Hysterical Hamster

towersofgrey

ETA: Google Alerts has, somewhat tardily, brought me more links:

http://wisb.blogspot.com/2012/01/bad-bully-reviewer-manifesto-or-why.html

http://adrianfaulkner.com/2012/01/14/dear-genre-bullying-reviews-are-very-uncomely/

http://iansales.com/2012/01/16/how-to-write-a-good-review/

http://requireshate.wordpress.com/2012/01/16/calm-the-fuck-down-fanficyasfftie-in-fiction-is-not-serious-business/

http://chamberfour.com/2012/01/17/the-weeks-best-book-reviews-11712/

http://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/criticism-in-sff-and-ya/#comments

http://pauljessup.com/2012/01/17/strange-horizons-and-the-tear-down-of-a-terrible-book/

http://corabuhlert.com/2012/01/21/gender-and-review-bias-2012-edition/

http://corabuhlert.com/2012/01/22/more-on-the-reviews-dust-up/

http://garethrees.org/2012/01/28/critics/

Greekish

Aug. 30th, 2009 11:35 pm
hawkwing_lb: (Prentiss disguised in Arthur's hall)
I have been thinking, since I read Xenophon's Anabasis, of how close the Greeks lived to those who were not Greeks. (I refuse to call them barbarians, because that merely feeds into Hellenist chauvinism.)

One of the things one forgets, when one reads 'classical' - or traditional, at least - histories of the Greeks is that the histories of Athens and Attica, Sparta and the Peleponnese, do not provide anything like a full picture of the Greek world. I forget how many city-states called themselves Greek after the Peleponnesian war, but it's something on the order of hundreds.

And these cities - some of them not even large enough to call city-states, really - occupied the islands, the Ionian coast of Asia Minor, where most of them spent time under the authority of Persian satraps and alongside Persian modes of living, and the coast of the Dardanelles and Black Sea. And this is interesting, because the Anabasis made it clear that along the Black Sea and up into Thrace, the Greek communities lived very close to non-Greek communities, at war or at peace with them depending on the season and who was passing through.

And it occured to me, you know - I don't think I've seen this sort of set-up done well in fiction, have I? Fantasy does feudaloid, medievaloid, and imperial, standard, and a couple of other permutations (mostly Chinese and/or Norse related, that I can think of) if you're lucky. But I am trying to think of sort of interestingly Greekish fantasy, and coming up blank.

Anyone?

Greekish

Aug. 30th, 2009 11:35 pm
hawkwing_lb: (Prentiss disguised in Arthur's hall)
I have been thinking, since I read Xenophon's Anabasis, of how close the Greeks lived to those who were not Greeks. (I refuse to call them barbarians, because that merely feeds into Hellenist chauvinism.)

One of the things one forgets, when one reads 'classical' - or traditional, at least - histories of the Greeks is that the histories of Athens and Attica, Sparta and the Peleponnese, do not provide anything like a full picture of the Greek world. I forget how many city-states called themselves Greek after the Peleponnesian war, but it's something on the order of hundreds.

And these cities - some of them not even large enough to call city-states, really - occupied the islands, the Ionian coast of Asia Minor, where most of them spent time under the authority of Persian satraps and alongside Persian modes of living, and the coast of the Dardanelles and Black Sea. And this is interesting, because the Anabasis made it clear that along the Black Sea and up into Thrace, the Greek communities lived very close to non-Greek communities, at war or at peace with them depending on the season and who was passing through.

And it occured to me, you know - I don't think I've seen this sort of set-up done well in fiction, have I? Fantasy does feudaloid, medievaloid, and imperial, standard, and a couple of other permutations (mostly Chinese and/or Norse related, that I can think of) if you're lucky. But I am trying to think of sort of interestingly Greekish fantasy, and coming up blank.

Anyone?
hawkwing_lb: (Garcia)
So, here's a thought I had while trudging through my reams of notes and books by people you've never heard of: an academic history book is like science fiction.

No, really. It is.

I assume anyone reading this journal has cracked the spine of a history book more than once. Probably, you're aware of the distinctions between the ones directed at a scholarly audience, and the ones directed more broadly. Popular (or introductory: although the handful of Actual Textbooks I have had the misfortune to encounter have all been written in the most graceless style and prose) books are careful not to give you more information than you can expect to digest: they simplify, sometimes appallingly, and very often they fail to engage with the fundamental arguments that inform modern scholarship at anything more than the most superficial level.

Books for a scholarly audience, on the other hand…

Not so very long ago, I read Marcus Rediker's Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea, a history of the maritime world between 1700 and 1750. It's a very solid work of history, but I came to it cold, with no background in the area, and found myself in the midst of an ongoing conversation which was clearly engaging not only with its subject, but with other work done in the field, and so I feel damn sure that I lost half of what that book was saying through not being able to follow the references.

A couple of days ago, I was reading a chapter from - oh, it must have been The Villages of Roman Britain, a tiny wee book, no more than fifty pages long. But it assumed a level of knowledge and engagement in the conversation - familiarity with, at least, Wacher's work on the towns and "small towns" of Roman Britain, and the Iron Age background, and how that informs scholarly discussion of villages and agriculture and "villas", and why the terms in inverted commas are in inverted commas. And I had sufficient level of knowledge to follow the conversation, if not, quite, to make my own points.

And so it occurred to me that history is like science fiction. There are books that throw you in the deep end, to sink or to swim, to follow a bewildering array of connections and references and terms and characters, concerned with a world that is entirely alien. To follow academic history in its native environment requires many of the same reading protocols one uses to infer sense and meaning in the background of a science fiction or fantasy novel: the ability to fill in the gaps with inference and extrapolation; to read meaning into widely-scattered signs and symbols, and crack one's brain open to attempt to understand alien ways of looking at the world.

And there are books that downplay the strangeness, and go steadily forward, neither inspired nor disappointing, but lacking a certain depth and scope.

So this is the extent of my thought. Yours?
hawkwing_lb: (Garcia)
So, here's a thought I had while trudging through my reams of notes and books by people you've never heard of: an academic history book is like science fiction.

No, really. It is.

I assume anyone reading this journal has cracked the spine of a history book more than once. Probably, you're aware of the distinctions between the ones directed at a scholarly audience, and the ones directed more broadly. Popular (or introductory: although the handful of Actual Textbooks I have had the misfortune to encounter have all been written in the most graceless style and prose) books are careful not to give you more information than you can expect to digest: they simplify, sometimes appallingly, and very often they fail to engage with the fundamental arguments that inform modern scholarship at anything more than the most superficial level.

Books for a scholarly audience, on the other hand…

Not so very long ago, I read Marcus Rediker's Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea, a history of the maritime world between 1700 and 1750. It's a very solid work of history, but I came to it cold, with no background in the area, and found myself in the midst of an ongoing conversation which was clearly engaging not only with its subject, but with other work done in the field, and so I feel damn sure that I lost half of what that book was saying through not being able to follow the references.

A couple of days ago, I was reading a chapter from - oh, it must have been The Villages of Roman Britain, a tiny wee book, no more than fifty pages long. But it assumed a level of knowledge and engagement in the conversation - familiarity with, at least, Wacher's work on the towns and "small towns" of Roman Britain, and the Iron Age background, and how that informs scholarly discussion of villages and agriculture and "villas", and why the terms in inverted commas are in inverted commas. And I had sufficient level of knowledge to follow the conversation, if not, quite, to make my own points.

And so it occurred to me that history is like science fiction. There are books that throw you in the deep end, to sink or to swim, to follow a bewildering array of connections and references and terms and characters, concerned with a world that is entirely alien. To follow academic history in its native environment requires many of the same reading protocols one uses to infer sense and meaning in the background of a science fiction or fantasy novel: the ability to fill in the gaps with inference and extrapolation; to read meaning into widely-scattered signs and symbols, and crack one's brain open to attempt to understand alien ways of looking at the world.

And there are books that downplay the strangeness, and go steadily forward, neither inspired nor disappointing, but lacking a certain depth and scope.

So this is the extent of my thought. Yours?

Profile

hawkwing_lb: (Default)
hawkwing_lb

November 2021

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 28th, 2025 01:44 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios