For recent blog comments by SM Stirling, see here.
The sub-genre of military sf is not my preferred reading. I value sf for new horizons and cosmic perspectives, not for high tech replays of World War II. However, good sf writers, notably Poul Anderson and SM Stirling, write good military sf - or maybe sometimes "good naval sf," if we transfer marine terminology to space combat: spaceships have Captains; space fleets have Admirals etc.
Clearly, Robert Heinlein approves of the society that he describes in Starship Troopers. Equally clearly, SM Stirling cannot possibly approve of what he describes in the Draka History! However - like Alan Moore depicting in merciless detail what a superhero-turned-villain would do to London -, Stirling is prepared to follow a fictional premise all the way to its horrific conclusion. Moore looks beyond London to a Golden Age whereas I suspect that Stirling's continuing series delves deeper into the Draka darkness.
We know from Marching Through Georgia that the Draka enslave populations and plan world conquest. In Under The Yoke (New York, 1989), they treat prisoners of war dishonorably. It is frankly sickening. I cannot bring myself to describe in detail what they do. Avoiding details, defeated enemy leaders are not respected but paraded, derided and shot. The Draka deliberately eschew any humane values.
Security Strategos Vashon, remembering such a victory spectacle, reflects:
"...that had been a good time. A time to be at one with the Race, when they could relax from the long years of grinding effort and feel the pride of a great accomplishment. Limitless vistas of power and possibility opening out before them..." (p. 55)
Sounds good? Sure, if our "Race" is the human race and if "power" does not mean subjugation.
Vashon thinks that it is a "...self-evident lie that all men were created equal." (p. 57) We are unequal in abilities but can be equal before the law. Alfie Rouse was hanged not for murdering anyone important but for burning to death an unknown, and still unidentified, hitchhiker. The law would have treated Rouse no worse if he had assassinated the Prime Minister whereas serfs (euphemism for slaves) who attack Draka are impaled as examples.
A ten year old Citizen girl, armed with a knife, thinks that her mother should punish two uppity serfs. Her mother gives her the advice quoted in the second image. Sound, pragmatic advice to a slave-owner, no doubt. But not all Draka give orders that they know will be disobeyed. Serfs can become trusted domestic servants and friends, albeit still unsalaried and unfree. Individual compassion is possible even within an oppressive system. See Schindler.
Systematic cruelty often brings out the worst in those who climb one step up the ladder, e.g., serfs becoming security guards. That this does not have to be the case is shown by Yasmin who protects fellow serfs and deflates a bullying guard. Because she is owned by a powerful family, she can strike the guard but he cannot risk striking her back...
When the ten year old girl has become old enough to think about clothes, she also wants to buy a serf of her own with money saved from her allowance. Imagine bringing up a child to think like that! And what chance does she have of learning to think any differently? If only one global generation could be brought up free from the "muck of ages..." I believe that adults should tell children, "This is what I think but you might think differently when you have learned more." But this means that I disagree with all the parents who want their children's education to include religious instruction. And it would also be wrong for me to try to enforce my view through legislation. Intolerant secularism is no better than intolerant belief.
I have passed over two instances of torture, both enjoyed by Draka witnesses. Finnish Resistance fighters, waging all out war against the Draka invaders, call them "...the snakes..." (p. 40), a denial of their humanity - appropriate in the circumstances. We, in our timeline, do not face the Draka but do face comparable threats, even including neo-Nazis. Stirling simply presents a worst case scenario for the history that he and his readers live in.
I am too young to remember World War II but did attend three different talks by Holocaust survivor Leon Greenman, who stayed with us when he spoke at Lancaster Town Hall. Leon ended one question-and-answer session by saying, "If anyone here is a Nazi, do not do it! You will become a monster, hated by your fellow men." In the Draka timeline, some European refugees escape to Britain... (Ketlan and my daughter leafleted every afternoon showing of Schindler's List to build for the Greenman public meeting, which filled a large hall to capacity. Later, Holocaust deniers attacked and damaged Leon's house so I got my union branch to donate to his defense fund.)
In our timeline, EP Thompson wrote The Making Of The English Working Class and Eric Hobsbawm wrote The Age Of Revolution, The Age Of Capital, The Age Of Empire and The Age Of Extremes. In the Draka timeline, EP Hobsdown wrote The Age Of Domination.
A possible proofreading point: on p. 17, Andrew von Shrakenberg seems to change his name to Alfred and back again?
It is Wednesday. I am reading new works by Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman and drafting this post. As yet, I have read only a small part of Under The Yoke so there will be more posts about this novel. Stirling shows us oppressors who are credible human beings but who have become as accustomed to oppressing the serfs that outnumber them as we are to using twenty first century technology: unsettling but plausible.
Strategos Cynthia Carstairs informs Chiliarch Denford de Fourneault:
"...Security tells me there's another of those loony cults running through the factory compounds, claiming all the Draka are being spirited away by their master Satan."
-SM Stirling, Marching Through Georgia (New York, 1991), pp. 210-211.
So many of the Draka have gone to war that they must have been spirited away... Carstairs contemptuously refers to a "loony cult" but the factory serfs are deliberately isolated and kept in ignorance. Consequently, they can explain external events only by recourse to superstition: an appalling regime but one that the Draka must now maintain for their own survival.
5 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I agree, good SF writers can also write good military SF, if they choose. We see Poul Anderson doing that in ENSIGN FLANDRY. I can see why military SF is not your favorite branch of the genre, but I'm glad good writers like S.M. Stirling can still make it interesting for you.
Hmmm, you did not like or agree with the kind of society we see in STARSHIP TROOPER? Why so?
Yes, I agree, it's a GOOD thing that in Anglo/American law a man who murders the Prime Minister, King/Queen, or President is punished in no worse a way than if he had murdered a vagabond.
And the bit about the Draka mother telling her daughter never to give orders you know will not be obeyed reminds me of how the Draka, unlike the Nazis or Communists, were COMPETENT tyrants.
I know there are Neo- Nazis, but at least in the US, they tend to belong to vicious but harmless sects which are highly unlikely to ever be more than small groups of embittered losers. MY view is that fanatical Muslims organized into jihadist groups, parties, terrorist networks, or outright de facto "caliphates" like the Islamic State in Syria/Iraq are far more dangerous than Neo-Nazis, adherents of a failed and discredited ideology.
I checked my copy of UNDER THE YOKE. Yes, page 17 erroneously has "Alfred" instead of "Andrew." Future reprints should correct that.
And, I certainly see why the factory serfs mentioned on pages 210-11 of MARCHING THROUGH GEORGIA would consider Satan the Lord and Master of the Draka!
But, what interested me was Strategos Cynthia Carstairs so easily using such BIBLICAL metaphors as "making bricks without straws." A sign of how, despite hating and fearing Christianity, many Draka found it natural to use Scriptural metaphors.
Sean
Sean,
I do not say here that I dislike the society in STARSHIP TROOPERS but you can read between the lines well enough. Two points: the franchise is limited and flogging is used in the armed forces.
Biblical metaphors are embedded, often not even recognized.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
In candor, I found much to respect in Heinlein's STARSHIP TROOPERS. Nor do I think limiting the franchise to those who have done some kind of service to the Terran Federation necessarily a bad idea. Heinlein's point, if you have worked or risked your life for the franchise, then you are likely to value it, is worth thinking about.
And the same applies to the use of corporal punishment. I don't think it's necessarily bad if many criminal offenses, civil or military, are punished by LIMITED forms of corporal punishment. I read of how Heinlein himself said it should be used only after a convict had been medically certified as being able to endure it. Is five lashes, say, really worse than doing six months in prison for grabbing a lady's purse?
As you will recall from my "Crime and Punishment in the Terran Empire" article, I too have discussed such matters with Poul Anderson. He too leaned towards accepting the LIMITED use of corporal punishment for many offenses (with the Heinleinian proviso about a convict being able to endure it). And we see occasional mention of a device called the "nerve lash" being used as a punishmenbt in Anderson's Terran Empire stories.
One argument Poul Anderson used in favor of corporal punishment was that in cases of miscarriages of justice it would be possible to compensate persons wrongly convicted to five or ten lashes. But it would not be truly possible to compensate persons who lost years of their lives in prison due to being wrongly convicted.
Sean
Sean,
I think that: all corporal punishment is barbaric; a doctor confirming that a man is fit enough to be assaulted would be grossly abusing his profession; our ancestors campaigned for the extension of the franchise and to limit it in any way would be socially regressive; recent events in Britain demonstrate that people in general value and exercise their vote when they have reason to believe that it will make a difference - otherwise, many become apathetic.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Respectfully, I still disagree. I see nothing wrong, per se, with LIMITED corporal punishment being used for some crimes. I think the best way I can argue for this is by quoting what Poul Anderson wrote to me in his letter of November 19, 1988: "One of the many startlingly sensible proposals the late Robert Heinlein made--this one, as far as I know, only in conversation--was to revive corporal punishment for a great many offenses. It would be quick, which is itself a deterrent to the common type of human creature that can't imagine anything as far ahead as next week. It would be free from unintended side effects, such as homosexual rape in prisons. It would cost very little. In cases of miscarriage of justice, compensation would be possible, whereas there is no way to pay a man back for years wrongfully lost in prison. It would be equal; fines, and even prison, hurt some more than others, and hurt certain people scarcely at all, whereas a lashing is pretty much the same to everybody. He added that it should be given only after physical examination showed it safe for the subject, and should be administered by a machine." While it is true that Anderson does not explicitly say he advocates what I quoted, I think he was leaning to agreeing with Robert Heinlein.
I also disagree with what you said about the dr "abusing" his profession. He was not acting here as the judge, jury, or the officer enforcing the sentence of lashing. He was only asked if a person convicted to say, 7 lashes, was physically able to endure that sentence.
Of course I'm glad many in the UK value the franchise. However, it is a well known fact that many, many people in the US don't bother to vote. And I personally know persons who have never registered to vote or vote. Such apathetic persons don't seem to care how the nation is run. I am sure the UK has its share of such persons!
Sean
Post a Comment