Thursday, April 9, 2015

George R. R. Martin -- A Giant, Shackled By Dwarfs

"George R. R. Martin --

A Giant, Shackled By Dwarfs"

 © 2015

by

Jordan S. Bassior



Some people were surprised and others saddened when George R. R. Martin came out against the Sad Puppies 3 campaign to restore control of the Hugos to the fans, and expressed (some) support for the Scalzi cabal which is currently trying to control the nominations and voting.  I was not surprised, though I am still saddened, because George R. R. Martin is a great author, the sort who could succeed in the field even if the Haydens of Tor opposed him.

ASoIaF is an extremely good series, the sort of thing that will be read for pleasure a century or more later. It’s notable for the author’s grasp of the premises that (1) not all enmities can be neatly divided into good vs.evil, and also (2) nevertheless, some enemies truly are evil.

However, George R R Martin has problems being even remotely objective about anything more recent than the War of the Roses. He came into his writing career trying to avoid service in Vietnam (literally, he wrote a story, "The Hero" (1971) in part to convince his draft board that he was anti-American) and thus cast his own personal honor with the Left of that time and the political vagaries of its future.

Its future has now led him to a place where they hate his masterwork in a way which he could not have predicted, because of the shifts in the politics of the feminists which now make him “evil” for having rape in his stories (even though not having it would be to absurdly whitewash medieval warfare and undercut one of the main themes of his story, “war is hell”) and furthermore makes him automatically suspect for his race, sex and sexual orientation.

And, because he started his career with an act of semi-betrayal of his own country, one which only became okay because the Left won in the 1970’s, he can’t detach himself. I think he lives in fear that the Left will turn on him, which is sad, because he’s a giant of writing and world-building talents. Dwarfs such as Jemsin and Bradford should be in fear that he will turn on them, rather than the other way round.

Such is the way in which the crimes of one’s past may shackle one decades later, even if one apparently escaped scot-free. And the sad thing? I think the reason this shackles George R. R. Martin is that he is a good man — he understands honor, which is why he can be restrained by the awareness that if he breaks free, he will have to accept that he did something dishonorable.

The worst of it? A draft is itself against Natural Law, it was one of the ways in which America let what it to be imagined military necessity harm its own core principles. This is a delayed price we are paying for the way our own government abused the rights of Americans from 1939 through 1975, albeit in a very indirect fashion.

END.

6 comments:

  1. I don't really agree.

    First of all, I'm guessing you don't spend a lot of time on feminist SFF sites and forums? Because almost all of them are extremely positive about ASoIaF. Characters like Arya, Brienne, and Dany are like catnip to feminist genre fans, and I've also read some great defenses of characters like Cersei, Caitlyn, and Sansa. Of course, I'm sure there are a few feminists who hate the whole thing, but I'm talking about the Gawker/Feministing/Mary Sue crowd. They tend to have some issues with certain rape scenes or plot directions, and especially as aspects for the HBO adaptation, but in general the books are regarded as more positive than Tolkien.

    And that, I think, is the real problem. George R.R. Martin has a pass from the people who would crucify a newer author doing what he's doing. That makes it easy for him to see nothing wrong with the party line: he's doing it and is successful, why can't they? I don't believe he's a "giant shackled by dwarves," I think he's a giant who's perfectly happy with the dwarves because he's been around them long enough that they don't bother him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First of all, I'm guessing you don't spend a lot of time on feminist SFF sites and forums?

      You'd guess right, because I don't like going on forums where I get insulted and banned for the sin of Disagreement With Feminism (and by "feminism,," I mean whatever variant the author happens to hold). I especially don't like to be subjected to rampant sexism myself, for being male, and expected to smile and say "May I have another, Ma'am?!"

      Characters like Arya, Brienne, and Dany are like catnip to feminist genre fans, and I've also read some great defenses of characters like Cersei, Caitlyn, and Sansa.

      You'd think they would be, but what I've mostly noticed is feminist complaints about George R. R. Martin for daring to make Westeros a realistically pre-industrial civilization -- which means, male-dominated. Far too many feminists also want to be anti-industrial, which ignores the reality that it was the Industrial Revolution which historically emancipated women from the trap of male domination which began with the Agricultural Revolution and its resultant specialization of labor in a subsistence-level economy.

      They tend to have some issues with certain rape scenes or plot directions, and especially as aspects for the HBO adaptation, but in general the books are regarded as more positive than Tolkien.

      Possibly because many of the critics of Tolkien have never really read or understood Tolkien. Yes, the protagonists of The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings but those are largely because both books were inspired by Tolkien's own experience in the Great War. If you read The Silmarillion, the history of Middle-Earth is profoundly influenced by brilliant, strong-willed and often politically-powerful women, of whom the most obvious is the Lady Galadriel, survivor of the First Age and leader of the defense of the West for millennia. Luthien, who dares to venture with Beren to the court of Morgoth, that world's version of Satan, and bests him in magic, is also not exactly a shrinking little violet, either. And Eowyn, who dons armor, charges into battle, and beheads the Witch-King of Angmar, is not what I would call a helpless little flower.

      I don't believe he's a "giant shackled by dwarves," I think he's a giant who's perfectly happy with the dwarves because he's been around them long enough that they don't bother him.

      You make a very good point there.

      Delete
  2. Have made some general comments about the controversy:
    http://lorenzo-thinkingoutaloud.blogspot.com.au/2015/04/sad-puppies.html

    ReplyDelete