Matthew Vickery, President of the Parliament of Man on Avalon
Liaw of The Tarns, Wyvan of the High Khruath of Avalon
Ferune of Mistwood, First Marchwarden of the Lauran System
Daniel Holm, Second Marchwarden
Liaw discloses, confidentially because this is a deathpride matter for the choths concerned, that three choths had refused to support the latest defence measures but yielded when the Wyvans threatened to call Oherran against them.
A choth's possessions can be a single stretch of land or sea but can also be scattered. For a second time, we are given an implausible sounding list of the possible diversity of choths:
"Tradition determined what constituted a choth, though this was a tradition which slowly changed itself, as every living usage must. Tribe, anarchism, despotism, loose federation, theocracy, clan, extended family, corporation, on and on through concepts for which there are no human words, a choth ran itself." (p. 53)
United action is difficult but this is where Khruaths come in but we in this household are about to set out on a walk.
12 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Why do you find that variety of different kinds of choths so implausible? Given how Ythrians are described that kind of variety made sense to me.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Variety, yes. A list exactly corresponding to several very specific human social formations less so.
There are a couple of passages in THE PEOPLE... that I must reread and maybe post about.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I can't agree with this insistence you place on nom-human races being absolutely and totally different from mankind. If such species are that different from ours then no communication of interaction with them would be possible. Communication requires having some mutually understandable things in common. And that includes analogous or understandable socio/political systems. That would be even more likely if such races evolved on more or less terrrestroid planets.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Despotism and theocracy at least seem wrong for Ythrians.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I disagree because because the stories make it plain Ythrians are not perfect and flawless, meaning I can conceive of some choths being despotic.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Ythrians, unless wing-clipped, can fly away from unacceptable situations. They can colonize Oronesia and found single-household choths.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Yes, but when I recall how many people in real history have loyally served even the most monstrous despotisms, I am not so sure all Ythrians in a despotic choth would just fly away in disgruntlement. We should try to make sense of the evidence found in Anderson's stories, not ignore the inconvenient bits.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
We don't ignore any inconvenient bits! None of the choths that we are shown fit in with some of the categories on Anderson's two lists.
I am inclined to say that neither the Old nor the New Faith looks as if it would lend itself to theocracy but I have to desist there. Human history shows that religions are adept at twisting themselves around into their opposites. Questions about religious doctrines can be settled neither empirically nor rationally so adherents are free to disagree dogmatically. Can scripture be interpreted to support monarchism? Yes. Can it be interpreted to support republicanism? Yes. So the sects disagree without any resolution.
Paul.
"Ythrians, unless wing-clipped, can fly away from unacceptable situations."
Pre-agriculture, humans could more readily walk away from unacceptable situations than humans could later when other tribes occupying adjacent land would kill you or push you back into the land ruled by a government you consider tyrannical. The generally more crowded conditions post-agriculture made a difference.
Kaor, Paul and Jim!
Paul: We don't see choths fitting all the descriptions in that list by Anderson because it was not necessary for his purposes in THE PEOPLE OF THE WIND. If there were scores or even hundreds of choths on Avalon it would not be practical to see more than a few of them.
Nonetheless Anderson still included "despotisms" on that list, which makes me conclude some choths were indeed despotic. I also think that could be understood as a hint from Anderson that readers should not get too entranced by the Ythrians, that they could be just as bad as anyone else. All merely mortal and imperfect beings and their equally kludgy institutions need to be regarded warily and skeptically.
Old and New Faith Ythriabns are not theocratic, but Islam is theocratic. The ideal is for all Muslims to be ruled by a caliph, in a theocratic merging of Mosque and State. Aycharaych seem to have been inspired by Islam when he tried to trigger a jihad on Aeneas in THE DAY OF THEIR RETURN, so the Empire would be "convulsed and shattered."
I disagree with your comments about religion. In Greco-Roman paganism part of being a good citizen of a Greek city state or the Roman Empire included being willing to sacrifice to the pagan gods or the "genius" of the Emperor. Refusing to do so, as Jews and Christians did, meant they were bad people who could rightly be punished.*
Catholic Christianity believes doctrinal controversies can be definitively resolved when, after debate and controversy, the Church invokes her authority to speak infallibly on such questions. Schismatics and heretics who obstinately refuse to accept such judgements are expelled.
Jim: Yes, but pre-agriculture there simply wasn't much scope for tyranny, not if all that was available for a despot was his family. No objection to the rest of what you wrote.
Ad astra! Sean
Kaor, Paul!
I forgot my asterisk comment: "*The Romans did make some concessions to the Jews, exempting them from sacrificing to pagan gods or the "geniuis" of the Emperor. Instead, while the Temple lasted, the Jewish priests sacrificed to God "for" the Emperor and Rome."
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Interesting that there are many choths completely different from the few that we see. I think that all choths accept Khruaths, Wyvans and deathpride.
The church had to claim infallibility because that was the only way to contain disagreements which eventually broke out anyway. At the Reformation, religious and political issues were hopelessly entangled. The rising merchant class needed a different form of Christianity from the feudal aristocracy. Ecclesiastical splits became inevitable, even necessary.
Paul.
Post a Comment