One good thing about blogging is that, if you forget a point, you can just post about it later. In Epilogue I, the British Grand Admiral thinks that the Yanks:
"...did appear to have a thumb on the enemy's pulse this time. God alone knew how; perhaps they had a suave, sinister master-spy like the ones Buchan wrote about."
(Would Buchan have written The Thirty Nine Steps in timeline (B)?)
Of course we are invited to contrast a Buchan master-spy with Stirling's heroine. This is a measure of social and literary change over the past century. See "Buchan, le Carre and Grisham," here.
That recently, hero married heroine and remarried only if heroine died. Then Dominic Flandry and James Bond had a different heroine in every installment. Now Stirling's sinister master-spy is a heroine in a homosexual relationship. What will they think of next?
5 comments:
Though of course while behavior does change, it doesn't change as much as what people say does; there were plenty of gay people around in 1917, this one or the Black Chamber's timeline. Which makes the interesting point that you have to filter the public discourse of any period as far as you can; there are always things that are 'unmentionable', but they change.
If all you have is what people can say in public, you're missing things.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
And it's a sign of the perversity of our times that it's becoming unmentionable to criticize homosexuality!
Sean
Sean: well, I disapprove of any form of social-pressure censorship, but really, that's like criticizing blue eyes -- it doesn't make much sense.
Bodily organs naturally selected for one function can be used for another. Opposable thumbs used for grasping branches can be used to write poetry and play musical instruments. Eating need no longer be for mere survival but has become a social activity and shared pleasure. Sex is the means of reproduction but also a shared physical pleasure and part of a personal relationship.
Kaor, Mr. Stiring and Paul!
Mr. Stirling: I agree, but unfortunately, Political Correctness is forcing that kind of censorship on many of us.
Paul: I agree, with the caveat that all of these things can be abused or misused, including sex. I simply do not agree that ALL forms of sexual activity, such as homosexuality, are RIGHT. Yes, I'm speaking from premises an agnostic would not agree with. One such premise being my belief, as a Catholic, that humans are more than merely naked apes.
Sean
Post a Comment