Eng/Wom 279: Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy: Helva and her decision.: "As we read in The Ship Who Sang, I found it very interesting that Helva decided not to stay on the Courviki planet. After thinking and discu..."
This Blog is a response to the blog above :)
I actually wrote a blog post earlier that address that problem, that I would like to reference: http://adeepinsight.blogspot.com/2010/12/are-we-attached-to-our-bodies.html
I don't feel that it was that "if there was no ship, there would be no story" as the reason that Helva didn't make the change on the Courviki planet. As, truly, the story would follow Helva during her change and afterwards.
I think it, again, has to do with the familiarity of us to our own bodies. It's a bit scary to imagine ourseleves in another body, because we have been in ours for so long. After a bit of though, I'm sure that we could make that change if we wanted to, and we wouldn't have a problem with it. If you've ever read Stephanie Meyer's The Host, it tackles that issue pretty well. Where it tells the story of aliens that adapt and take over a body who becomes their host (see the tie in to the title? :))
Eventually, as we live longer, we're going to have to start replacing our body with prosthetic parts (we already are today, infact.) Who knows, one day, we may have to replace our whole body. It may be the time to start mental detaching ourselves from our body, so that we can cope with it when the time comes.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Are Women in Sci-fi and Fantasy Novels Always Set to Be Outcast?
This is a topic that I am struggling with in my final essay that I'm writing. After some research and thought, it seems that in all of the novels we've read, and many of the novels I've read, that strong women characters are ALWAYS outcast from society.
Katsa -- Outcast because of her grace
Princess from Deerskin -- Outcast because her parents ignore her AND later because she choses to be
Nell -- Outcast because she's a girl and because of her income level
Helva -- Largely outcast from main points in society because she's a brain ship
The alien from bloodchild I can't remember the name of - Outcast because of her race and because is of another society
So, as you can see, the strong women in the stories that we have read in class are normally outcast from society. If you look at other novels, strong women characters are also outcast. If you know of any novels where there is a strong women character who isn't outcast in some way, please leave a comment so I can look it up :) And it has to be sci-fi and fantasy!
It worries me a bit though how sci-fi and fantasy women are still outcast as women in our society are gaining better rights and status. These genres tend to be reflective of our world. So, if they're not changing in the novels, what does that say about our society today? Something worrying to think about :/
Katsa -- Outcast because of her grace
Princess from Deerskin -- Outcast because her parents ignore her AND later because she choses to be
Nell -- Outcast because she's a girl and because of her income level
Helva -- Largely outcast from main points in society because she's a brain ship
The alien from bloodchild I can't remember the name of - Outcast because of her race and because is of another society
So, as you can see, the strong women in the stories that we have read in class are normally outcast from society. If you look at other novels, strong women characters are also outcast. If you know of any novels where there is a strong women character who isn't outcast in some way, please leave a comment so I can look it up :) And it has to be sci-fi and fantasy!
It worries me a bit though how sci-fi and fantasy women are still outcast as women in our society are gaining better rights and status. These genres tend to be reflective of our world. So, if they're not changing in the novels, what does that say about our society today? Something worrying to think about :/
Are We Attached To Our Bodies?
There is a point in the Ship Who Sang where Helva asserts that her ship IS her body. (Note: We talked about this in class on Tuesday, and this is me getting around to writing about it ;)) This got me to thinking, why are we attached to our bodies? Sure, they're the shell that we inhabit, but I feel that we are similar to Helva, where that isn't what really makes us and that we have something put inside our body that is truly us.
So, for this blogs sake, let us assume that I am right that that is what we are made up of. Something inside of our body. So, what is it that attaches us to our body if that's not really us? After some thought, I think I've decided that it is familarity that makes us so attached to our bodies. Just as Helva has (almost) always had her ship body, and has become very attached to it, we have always had our human body, and this is the reason why we are attached to it. It does make me think though, how do people with some type of deformity feel about their bodies? Are they attached to these deformities because they've always had them?
So, for this blogs sake, let us assume that I am right that that is what we are made up of. Something inside of our body. So, what is it that attaches us to our body if that's not really us? After some thought, I think I've decided that it is familarity that makes us so attached to our bodies. Just as Helva has (almost) always had her ship body, and has become very attached to it, we have always had our human body, and this is the reason why we are attached to it. It does make me think though, how do people with some type of deformity feel about their bodies? Are they attached to these deformities because they've always had them?
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Eilis' Thoughts: Mixed Feelings
Eilis' Thoughts: Mixed Feelings: "As I finished the book I had very mixed feelings about it. While I was happy for Helva who seemed to have found a brawn she is compati..."
My response is to the latter half of the blog post that I have linked, which mentions the mourning of the ships.
It would be incredibly hard to condition anyone on how to deal with loss of a loved one. Once you lose a love one close to you, especially your partner or a parent, there comes a point where you'll feel like everything is over. However, usually, people will be able to cope with it. Although they will never be able to forget this person and they will ALWAYS be sad about it in some way. The problem with saying that someone should be able to be conditioned to mourn is that mourning is an incredibly personal experience and that no one does it in the same way. For instance, some people try to forget the pain, others celebrate their lives, and others cannot forget the loved one and will always remember them.
Also, you need to remember the Central isn't flawless. There is a point in the book, where Hevla visits the planet where the religion celebrates death, that Helva is talking about how some of Centrals conditioning is flawed. For instance, she comments on the Brawns (whom I forget the name of at the moment) conditioning to not allow her be conditioned again -- which is why they were not able to condition her to not kill herself. You need to remember the Central has NOT perfected their methods of conditioning :) I'm sure it is something that they've thought of, but just haven't found a solution for.
My response is to the latter half of the blog post that I have linked, which mentions the mourning of the ships.
It would be incredibly hard to condition anyone on how to deal with loss of a loved one. Once you lose a love one close to you, especially your partner or a parent, there comes a point where you'll feel like everything is over. However, usually, people will be able to cope with it. Although they will never be able to forget this person and they will ALWAYS be sad about it in some way. The problem with saying that someone should be able to be conditioned to mourn is that mourning is an incredibly personal experience and that no one does it in the same way. For instance, some people try to forget the pain, others celebrate their lives, and others cannot forget the loved one and will always remember them.
Also, you need to remember the Central isn't flawless. There is a point in the book, where Hevla visits the planet where the religion celebrates death, that Helva is talking about how some of Centrals conditioning is flawed. For instance, she comments on the Brawns (whom I forget the name of at the moment) conditioning to not allow her be conditioned again -- which is why they were not able to condition her to not kill herself. You need to remember the Central has NOT perfected their methods of conditioning :) I'm sure it is something that they've thought of, but just haven't found a solution for.
English 279: I wonder how important physical touch is for a per...
This blog is a response to:
English 279: I wonder how important physical touch is for a per...: "I wonder how important physical touch is for a person mentally and physically. I guess being a very touchy person myself it is hard to..."
I'm responding to this blog of a very personal level. The above blog post refers to the Ship Who Sang, and how she cannot physically touch people, because, for all means, her body is literally a ship. Sure, she can "experience" touch, but, it's not really with her body, and thus, it is not satisfying. We can see this when she thanks a woman for crying for her.'
Anyway, I wanted to go out and state that physical touch is EXTREMELY important for intimacy. I have been in a long distance relationship for around 4 years now, and I can tell you that there is something lost when you don't have that physical touch aspect. Even being able to give a hug to someone, look them in the eyes, or the rest a hand on their should allows a special form of intimacy that cannot be reached without touch. When that touch is lost, there's a sort of need for it. And while it's possible to cope and find other ways to try to replace that, eventually, it ends up making your relationship suffer. This is why it is recommended to LDR couples to see each other every other weekend usually. It allows them to keep this intimacy. I also cannot imagine never having physical touch. Only having it occasionally it hard enough but, I think it's built into the body to NEED it. So...never having it, must be unimaginable. The only thing that must be stopping Helva from destroying herself with this knowledge is her conditioning.
English 279: I wonder how important physical touch is for a per...: "I wonder how important physical touch is for a person mentally and physically. I guess being a very touchy person myself it is hard to..."
I'm responding to this blog of a very personal level. The above blog post refers to the Ship Who Sang, and how she cannot physically touch people, because, for all means, her body is literally a ship. Sure, she can "experience" touch, but, it's not really with her body, and thus, it is not satisfying. We can see this when she thanks a woman for crying for her.'
Anyway, I wanted to go out and state that physical touch is EXTREMELY important for intimacy. I have been in a long distance relationship for around 4 years now, and I can tell you that there is something lost when you don't have that physical touch aspect. Even being able to give a hug to someone, look them in the eyes, or the rest a hand on their should allows a special form of intimacy that cannot be reached without touch. When that touch is lost, there's a sort of need for it. And while it's possible to cope and find other ways to try to replace that, eventually, it ends up making your relationship suffer. This is why it is recommended to LDR couples to see each other every other weekend usually. It allows them to keep this intimacy. I also cannot imagine never having physical touch. Only having it occasionally it hard enough but, I think it's built into the body to NEED it. So...never having it, must be unimaginable. The only thing that must be stopping Helva from destroying herself with this knowledge is her conditioning.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Women in Literature: Star Trek
Women in Literature: Star Trek: "I would like to first say that I HATE Star Trek!! So Data, what is his role? I know that he saved the captain and then the captain went back..."
----------------------------
I am writing a response to the blog post that I linked above. Ignoring the "I hate Star Trek" part, as that's not important, but talking about women's roles in star trek, as well as the important of Data.
To clarify, Data began to have human feelings to an emotional implantation (I believe.) This is important because it is emotions that really make us human. By him having emotion, he can really understand what it means to be human and why the Borg need to be fought -- as well as why his other crew members are important. Without these emotions, to be honest, he would work off of what is logical. And sometimes, saving everyone on board a ship isn't logical.
As to why Lily is always running from the battle, what reason does she have not to? She's not trained in combat, at all. If you came acrossed a battle happening, and you had no training, wouldn't your natural response be to scream and run? I'm pretty sure mine would. I think it's important to think about these things before we immediately declare gender as the reason for something, because there are other factors as well. I hate to say this, but sometimes, it feels as if the gender card is thrown around way too often, and the same with racism. If we really want to promote health gender in society, then we need to stop declaring it so freely without reason.
----------------------------
I am writing a response to the blog post that I linked above. Ignoring the "I hate Star Trek" part, as that's not important, but talking about women's roles in star trek, as well as the important of Data.
To clarify, Data began to have human feelings to an emotional implantation (I believe.) This is important because it is emotions that really make us human. By him having emotion, he can really understand what it means to be human and why the Borg need to be fought -- as well as why his other crew members are important. Without these emotions, to be honest, he would work off of what is logical. And sometimes, saving everyone on board a ship isn't logical.
As to why Lily is always running from the battle, what reason does she have not to? She's not trained in combat, at all. If you came acrossed a battle happening, and you had no training, wouldn't your natural response be to scream and run? I'm pretty sure mine would. I think it's important to think about these things before we immediately declare gender as the reason for something, because there are other factors as well. I hate to say this, but sometimes, it feels as if the gender card is thrown around way too often, and the same with racism. If we really want to promote health gender in society, then we need to stop declaring it so freely without reason.
Lily and StarTrek
I had the opportunity to finish the movie last night, and it again brought me back to something that the speaker had said in our class. She spoke about how they didn't mention Lily to the historians when they got back, thus keeping the women in their society to a lower post and not correcting one of the social problems of the past. However, I have to question if this is truely their motivation.
The Borg go back into the past to stop an event that has happened once already -- first contact. And they do this to disrupt the future and beat them in a fight without (theoretically) having to fight them at all -- until the Enterprise follows. Now, theoretically, the Borg can do this again sometime in the future -- as the Borg still exist in the future Star Trek episodes (I think. I haven't seen very many. I know. Shame on me.)
If the Borg have done this once, why wouldn't they do it again? If the Enterprise had Lily written down in history books, instead of the Borg focusing on stopping the doctor from launching his space ship, instead, all they'd need to do is kill Lily. And, from watching some of the scenes in the movie, such as the ballroom (?) one, it seems as if they were pretty close -- if they had noticed them.
Hell, if you've seen the new Star Trek movie, time is played with there as well. Although in that movie it creates a seperate dimension, it's very similar to what the Borg did.
Lily's role is too large in the future of the Earth, and I believe that by not having historians correct what happened, they are working to protect her, instead of it being an issue of social and gender issues.
The Borg go back into the past to stop an event that has happened once already -- first contact. And they do this to disrupt the future and beat them in a fight without (theoretically) having to fight them at all -- until the Enterprise follows. Now, theoretically, the Borg can do this again sometime in the future -- as the Borg still exist in the future Star Trek episodes (I think. I haven't seen very many. I know. Shame on me.)
If the Borg have done this once, why wouldn't they do it again? If the Enterprise had Lily written down in history books, instead of the Borg focusing on stopping the doctor from launching his space ship, instead, all they'd need to do is kill Lily. And, from watching some of the scenes in the movie, such as the ballroom (?) one, it seems as if they were pretty close -- if they had noticed them.
Hell, if you've seen the new Star Trek movie, time is played with there as well. Although in that movie it creates a seperate dimension, it's very similar to what the Borg did.
Lily's role is too large in the future of the Earth, and I believe that by not having historians correct what happened, they are working to protect her, instead of it being an issue of social and gender issues.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
What Makes Something Human?
After taking a look at Star Trek, and reflecting back on the speaker from last week, I had started to think about what really makes us human. Is it the way that we act? How we look? The way our body is put together?
When I first started thinking about it, I had focused on that maybe it was the fact that we were living and that machines are dead. However, when it came to looking at cyborgs, this argument was incredibly null. Due to the cyborg nature of being half organic and half construction, it doesn't work to say something is half human -- at least for this argument.
I then decided that maybe it is how we look. If something has the appearance of being human, is it human? Think about it. We instantly recognize another human by the way that we look, and this is also how we perceive cyborgs as being human for this reason. However, if someone becomes disfigured and starts to look less human, does that make them any less human?
This led me finally to one more belief. What if it is our emotional responses that make us human? Both humans and cyborgs have emotion. And without emotion, we consider them something less than human. But, even if a machine starts to show emotion -- we think of them as human. Think of the child from AI as an example. I firmly believe that it is emotion that makes us feel like something is :Human". Even the emotion of the Queen from Predator make us feel for her.
Something that is important to think about as we move further into the course...
When I first started thinking about it, I had focused on that maybe it was the fact that we were living and that machines are dead. However, when it came to looking at cyborgs, this argument was incredibly null. Due to the cyborg nature of being half organic and half construction, it doesn't work to say something is half human -- at least for this argument.
I then decided that maybe it is how we look. If something has the appearance of being human, is it human? Think about it. We instantly recognize another human by the way that we look, and this is also how we perceive cyborgs as being human for this reason. However, if someone becomes disfigured and starts to look less human, does that make them any less human?
This led me finally to one more belief. What if it is our emotional responses that make us human? Both humans and cyborgs have emotion. And without emotion, we consider them something less than human. But, even if a machine starts to show emotion -- we think of them as human. Think of the child from AI as an example. I firmly believe that it is emotion that makes us feel like something is :Human". Even the emotion of the Queen from Predator make us feel for her.
Something that is important to think about as we move further into the course...
Thursday, October 14, 2010
The Significance of BitterBlue
After our class today, I wanted to talk about the significance of BitterBlue in Graceling. I'm highly under the impression that her name is not to be taken literally, although, with her mother's name (Ashen), I could see where that would go. She's bitter and blue, because her mother is dead. And her mother is Ashen, for obvious reasons.
However, the point I was trying to make in class is that the names are all tied to the Leinard culture. I had started my point by talking about Po, and how his name, in the book, is taken from the Po tree. After a bit of research, I also found out that both Bitterblue and Ashen are also plant names. While this could just be a coincidence, I do not believe so.
If you take a look at the Leinards, they seem to be what our culture would consider as holding tribal influences. They decorate their bodies with body art, wear excessive jewelry that has meaning, and are very intune with their natural surroundings. This could very well mean that their names are also used to connect them to their natural surrounds.
I would imagine that Ashen's naming of the child as BitterBlue was a way to get her to hold onto her past culture. When the immigrants started coming to the USA, they had named their children American names, because they wanted to them to be American. However, in Graceling, it seems to me that the Leinards are the strongest of the kingdons, and then they wouldn't want to abandon their past culture.
However, the point I was trying to make in class is that the names are all tied to the Leinard culture. I had started my point by talking about Po, and how his name, in the book, is taken from the Po tree. After a bit of research, I also found out that both Bitterblue and Ashen are also plant names. While this could just be a coincidence, I do not believe so.
If you take a look at the Leinards, they seem to be what our culture would consider as holding tribal influences. They decorate their bodies with body art, wear excessive jewelry that has meaning, and are very intune with their natural surroundings. This could very well mean that their names are also used to connect them to their natural surrounds.
I would imagine that Ashen's naming of the child as BitterBlue was a way to get her to hold onto her past culture. When the immigrants started coming to the USA, they had named their children American names, because they wanted to them to be American. However, in Graceling, it seems to me that the Leinards are the strongest of the kingdons, and then they wouldn't want to abandon their past culture.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Buffy's Anger
I want to write my first blog post on the article Elycae Rae Helford's "'My Emotions Give Me Power': The Containment of Girls' Anger in Buffy".
In the article, Ms. Helford often speaks about how Buffy is quite angry, and in the sign of having to harness this anger often diffuses it with her humor. During the episode we watched in class, I didn't see any signs of this behavior, and I have also never seem Buffy the Vampire Slayer before, so my view may be one-sided on the matter.
During the episode, it felt as if Buffy wasn't channeling anger and diffusing it with humor. On the contrary, when her boyfriend (the vamp) broke up with her, she sulked in a corner and was pissed at everyone. She latter channeled this into a positive motivation to give everyone a good night.
Additionally, Ms. Helford seems to think that Buffy has anger because she is a social outcast. This is incredibly far from the truth, as I believe it. Instead she is angry that she is locked into a destiny that she cannot get away from. She is forced to kill, which, no matter how evil the source, killing has a traumatic experience on humans. Buffy is quite similar to the story Graceling in this aspect.
In the article, Ms. Helford often speaks about how Buffy is quite angry, and in the sign of having to harness this anger often diffuses it with her humor. During the episode we watched in class, I didn't see any signs of this behavior, and I have also never seem Buffy the Vampire Slayer before, so my view may be one-sided on the matter.
During the episode, it felt as if Buffy wasn't channeling anger and diffusing it with humor. On the contrary, when her boyfriend (the vamp) broke up with her, she sulked in a corner and was pissed at everyone. She latter channeled this into a positive motivation to give everyone a good night.
Additionally, Ms. Helford seems to think that Buffy has anger because she is a social outcast. This is incredibly far from the truth, as I believe it. Instead she is angry that she is locked into a destiny that she cannot get away from. She is forced to kill, which, no matter how evil the source, killing has a traumatic experience on humans. Buffy is quite similar to the story Graceling in this aspect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)