Of Nicholas van Rijn's trade pioneer crew, neither David Falkayn nor Chee Lan but maybe Adzel because of his meditation and studiousness.
Of James Blish's magicians: none. (A book with nothing but villains!)
Of Alan Moore's Watchmen: Doctor Manhattan.
Of Neil Gaiman's Endless: Destiny.
Of SM Stirling's five American time travellers, Mark, who says:
"'I'm really not good at the nonverbal stuff, you know.'"
-To Turn The Tide, CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO, p. 337.
Paula, who has been dropping hints, has to spell out that, when she suggests going to bed, she means together - a woman who realizes the need to take the initiative.
(We are just about to go to our daughter's place for Fathers' Day.)
18 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And I identify with, or better put, admire: Nicholas van Rijn, Dominic Flandry, Gratillonius, Anson Guthrie. And Artorius in Stirling's Antonine books. But the socially hapless Mark is amusing!
Ad astra! Sean
I admire, e.g., Artorius, without identifying with him. I cannot combine his academic work with his military experience.
Kaor, Paul!
But it should be possible to vicariously appreciate his military experience.
Ad astra! Sean
Paul: he always -wanted- to be a historian; he ended up at West Point due to family tradition.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Artorius was also motivated by loyalty to the US, that it was right to serve it.
Ad astra! Sean
The difference between me and Artorius is that I would not let any family tradition pressurize me into attending a military academy.
Paul: yeah, but you weren't raised on a ranch in West Texas, with the -presumption- that you would.
Right. I don't know how I would respond if I had had a completely different upbringing but then that would have made me a different person and this person here now identifies with some fictional characters more than with others.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Meaning the culture of a ranching/rural family would encourage many members to do stints in the armed forces? I can see that!
I've also read that Roman emperors tended to prefer recruits for the legions to come from either the families of ex-legionaries or the rural population. Because rural men were considered stronger and tougher than urbanites.
Ad astra! Sean
I'm somewhat more socially ept* than Mark, but I still identify with him a bit on that count. OTOH since I have made a point most of my life to get some sort of exercise every day or two, I would not be with Mark & Paula in the wagon on the way to the Sextus' estate, so in that way I identify with the other 3 time travellers more.
Then there are qualities or abilities I don't have but would admire to some extent. Getting fluent in a 2nd (or 3rd) language is something I never achieved, so the ability of all 5 to learn Latin and some to learn Greek is impressive to me. Getting competent at unarmed combat is another thing I find impressive partly because I haven't done so myself.
*(Join the Society for the Restoration of Lost Positives. Together we will gruntle and shevel the world.)
Sean: considering the infection rate among urbanites, rural people generally were healthier. OTOH, they had less resistance to infection.
Kaor, Jim and Mr. Stirling!
Jim: At my age and post-cervical myopathy, I would need that wagon all the way!
Mr. Stirling: It all comes down to tradeoffs, the Emperors needing to decide which combination of factors works out better as regards recruits for the legions.
Ad astra! Sean
Also, urbanites were more politically aware.
Kapr, Mr. Stirling!
Unfortunately, the legions eventually learned the art of meddling in politics, just think of the chaos of the Third Century Crisis.
I recall you writing in your Antonine books that one advantage of the drastic expansion of the Empire was that meant placing the legions less temptingly close to the center of power.
Ad astra! Sean
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: Yeah. If you were six months march from Rome...
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
That would help. Even better would be legionary commanders acquiring a bone deep conviction they should not meddle in politics, that their duty was to obey the Emperor and the civil authorities.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: the problem was that often the heirs to Emperors were visible disasters. Romans emphasized personal faults; they didn't see that -institutional- problems were worse.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I agree, too many Imperial heirs were deeply flawed. And the Romans didn't grasp how dangerous institutional problems were.
Rome had become a monarchy but lacked the laws, customs, and traditions enabling stable monarchies to mitigate/correct such weaknesses. But Artorius was hoping to bring about such improvements for Rome.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment