"To hell with any sentimental guff about cultural autonomy, Schuster reflected. This is one society that ought to be kicked apart."
-Poul Anderson, "The Three-Cornered Wheel" IN Anderson, The Van Rijn Method (Riverdale, NY, 2009), pp. 199-261 AT 111, p. 225.
Thus, Schuster is not a respecter of Non-Interference.
One aspect of this society that Schuster wants to kick apart is that:
"...the Consecrates were in direct touch with God." (ibid.)
A Krishna devotee once told me, "Our spiritual master is in direct contact with God and it is just endless bliss..."
The spiritual complacency was frightening. If there is a God, is anyone in direct touch with him? Schuster, if Orthodox, believes that the prophets were. Being not only Jewish but also a canny Master Merchant, Schuster will subvert the Ivanhoan theocracy not by challenging theism but by introducing the Kabbalah. The resulting confusion and dissension will no doubt lead to some Ivanhoans questioning and rejecting theism, whether or not Schuster had intended this outcome.
3 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
It was the Pharaohnic stagnation of Larsum which I thought most objectionable. The civilization there had become ossified, resistant to learning from outsiders after thousands of years.
And "non-interference" is an impossibility! The most gentle, cautious, and benign of contacts by one culture with another will inevitably cause changes, major or minor.
And I do believe some are granted direct contact with God. Such as how some of the saints were "visited" by Christ.
Sean
It's the theocracy he objects to, not the belief in a unique relationship with God.
Dear Mr. Stirling,
I agree. I see "Pharaohnic stagnation" was unclear. I should have said something like this: "Martin Schuster disliked the theocracy ruling Larsum."
Sean
Post a Comment